Yeah! Definitely pretty exciting!
Posts made by Hannibal ad portas
RE: German Opener/Strategy (Slightly long-winded)
The road to Caucaus is paved with good intentions… And many, many dead soldiers.
In my experience, albeit limited, I have found that an assault on Caucaus results in a direct counterattack from Moscow, depleting Germany dramatically, and further, that by not reinforcing the coast line essentially means that Brittan is unchecked as they slide troops, after troops into Russia. These man stack up, behind the men Russia is already dropping, and lead to Germany being beaten back, slowly but surely by combined forces that are overwhelming.
I understand that the Brittish are capable of launching an amphibious assault, but with some foresight, such an assault can lead to the destruction of their fleet, cutting off both their ties to the mainland, as well as their reinforcement of Russia; Further, drawing men -away- from Caucaus, and -directly- threatening Moscow -leads- to the fall of Caucaus.
The Russians are forced to retreat directly to their capital for fear of it falling, while Germany can then slide in to take that southern Factory…
…So. I went ahead and gave that afforementioned strategy a try, this Sunday. Our game had several rough edges that need some definite fine tuning, but I’m happy to say it was a victory for the Axis.
I’m going to continue plugging away at it, and I’ll let you all know how it turns out!
RE: Homefield Advantage for Capitals?
Definitely sounds like a possibility.
However, then there’s the possibility that it would add to the already present problem of the old ‘Add X infantry to my capital stack’, prolonging the waiting game of capital grabbing.
Potentially it could make the game drag out, in that case.
Perhaps a defensive bonus would be appropriate, if it were to apply to a limited number of units. Such as, a +1 defensive bonus to a number of units equal to the IPC value of the territory? Half the IPC value of the territory?
Or that activating the special homefield advantage cost a number of IPCs, in effect giving the player the option of using it, -or- adding more infantry, weighing the advantages of both, but not using both?
RE: German IC
I’m inclined to agree that Germany has better things to spend their bloody-hard-won IPCs on than a factory that’s only a space, at best, closer to the action.
-However-, the notion of an IC in Anglo-Egypt has struck me several times after looking over the board. It’s a location that strategically commands the link between a Japanese Naval Reinforcement, holds the Axis-Road-Less-Traveled to Asia, maintains a presence directly in Africa-continient-of-madness, and can be reinforced from another IC capable of pumping out 6 units a turn.
I’m not sure if the benefits outweigh the cost, but it’s certainly a strong staging point, further solidifies German’s hold on ‘bonus’ IPCs, and adds some flexibility in the otherwise static German/Russian standoff.
However, I have a feeling that as soon as an IC appeared in Anglo-Egypt, it’d be a green light for the US to launch Operation: Smackdown.
RE: German Opener/Strategy (Slightly long-winded)
No, unfortunately there’s no tactical genius in me, while it is certainly a flattering notion. More likely the second option presented is the more realistic of the two; A new player with plenty of time to stare at the board, thanks to the Open Source TripleA program that’s essentially let me play myself several times and try our different approaches in the seat of each country.
The issue that I’ve naturally run into is that it’s difficult for me to surprise myself in these ‘mock games’ and I’m almost certain I’m overlooking/underplaying various aspects of each of the powers. Hence seeking advice on these forums.
That in mind, what I -am- attempting is an opening strategy that set’s Germany up into a consistently good position, and minimizes collateral damage. I’ve come to suspect that without serious steps initially, the german fleet is doomed for the scrap heap, which in turn gives Germany it’s fairly likely death-by-Isolation from Africa, and the humiliating advance of an allied Reinforced Russia, even if/when Japan threatens from the otherside.
One thing that I’ve already noticed on this opening move is that it relies on Russia withdrawing from Karelia, in favor of Western Russia which is not always the case. Further, while I believe that Western Russia is an excellent strategic position for the Russians, but it is likewise difficult for Germany to take it, and not get hit by a Russian screwfest from more angles than even Jenna Jameson could handle.
But all in all, I feel fairly comfortable giving it a shot. The advantage I see is that the British Fleet is forced into hopeless irrelevance without serious IPCs spent; IPCs that would then be taken away from securing Asia from Japan. Russia is cut off from the much required aid from the Allies. And Africa faces no immediate threat, that cannot be counterattacked against, particularly if Gibraltiar(sp?) is taken in a subsequent turn to prevent allied air strikes.
The disadvantage is that Russia faces less of an immediate threat from Germany, until it can spin up to speed from it’s African conquest; However, to counterbalance that point, I believe that Germany, regardless, cannot adequately threaten Russia without these steps as Allied reinforcement will eventually wear Germany into the ground, with or without Japanese intervention.
Lastly, as far as Transports and Japan - Yes, I should have clarified that transports serve their purpose on initial turns, and then are replaced by mainland Industrial Complexes. Often times, our allied counterparts are fond of two-timing Japan with both a Sianking and Indian complex, however I have yet to see it effectively turn into anything but a dramatically powerful mid-game Japan as a result. The time it buys Russia is usually, as I’ve seen it played, inconsequential compared to the effective 30 IPCs handed over to the Japanese in a nice little gift-wrapped Complex. Not to mention, further, these IPCs aren’t used against Germany, which I believe only strengthens the Japanese role of taking heat off Germany.
Anyway! Thankyou for the feedback, I certainly appreciate it, and I’d really like to hear some counterarguements from the individuals that voted against this strategy. I’m absolutely positive it needs refinement, and any help would be great.
RE: Favorite Unit?
I had to vote Subs. I’m aware that in all honesty they don’t have the flexibility and utility of nearly all other comparable units.
I can’t get over the satisfaction (Call it -sick- satisfaction, if you will) that is invoked upon a solid pack of subs rolling well, and wiping the floor of an attacking Navy. Particularly when the casualties invoked turned out to be some of the carriers your opponent was planning on landing his fighters on, only to have the Subs submerge, leaving little fighter monuments at the bottom of the ocean.
German Opener/Strategy (Slightly long-winded)
Hey. I’m a fairly new Axis & Allies player in a fairly new group of five, and being one to love a challenge, I’ve opted to play as an Axis player exclusively during our weekly gaming session. So far, I’ve only played Japan, but this up coming week I’ll be taking on the daunting task of giving Germany a shot. As a Japanese player, life has been great, as our United State’s realizes that initially stepping up to my navy is generally fruitless, and even after our British player reinforces his India Industrial Complex it’s rarely much of a threat to the combined might of infantry and Air Force. Germany, however, get’s systematically gutted down the middle, as KGF seems to the be Allied creed.
We play with a 10 victory city condition, with each Nation rolling a single die to receive a random advantage, Heavy Bombers can only apply their 2-hit bonus for the first round of an attack, and the total number of IPCs that can be taken from a strategic bombing run is the IPC value of the territory, regardless of the # of bombers used.
That said, I wanted to clarify a few strategic notions I’ve developed. As a new player, I understand they could be completely offbase, and could love some corrective criticism.
- A presence, however minor, in Africa is essential to tip the IPC balance which will otherwise crush the Axis players simply by the passage of time.
- Norway cannot be adequately defended in a manner that justifies the expenditure of troops necessary, vs. the 3 IPC income value - It is better to hold Karelia with a large Force posed to A) Trade/Counter-Attack, B) Press on to moscow, leaving a single infantry to avoid a Tank Blitz. Also, those 3 IPCs can easily be picked up elsewhere.
- Maintaining a carrier w/ FTRs inside of the Baltic with a moderate Subpen ensures that A) the direct route to Germany, by Sea, is a difficult road at best, B) An amphibious assault on Norway results in an -immediate- counterattack, laying waste to the allied Navy, at the expense of the German Navy. This is an acceptable loss considering it buys what Germany needs most: Time.
- The Key to the German side of fall of Moscow involves Archangel, rather than the direct route through the southern Russian Industrial Complex, because as forces build inside that territory, more and more Russian money must be diverted from their southern complex to reinforce their capital; Further, holding this location prevents allied land forces from reinforcing Moscow via Transport. Eventually, the southern Complex will fall from the threat of Archangel on their capital, and be taken swiftly through Air Force, Amphibious Mediterrainian assault, and troops in the Ukraine.
- Infantry is never a bad purchase. Especially in conjunction w/ a large Airforce, and transports rapidly shortening the distance to the ‘Front Lines’.
- Given three of the twelve victory cities are -not- capable of being reached without a Navy, building one from the start, and continuing to build it up is a necessary sacrifice to the ground battle against Russia. And while as a downside it takes tanks/infantry away from Moscow, it is further justified as it also forces the British/Americans to counterbalance w/ their fleet, depriving Russia of reinforcements.
- Pearl Harbor II is -always- a good move. The damage done, even with a counterassault from the Americans, sets them back several turns, particularly if an additional fighter from Japan is flown in to land on the Carrier.
- Transports are superior to Industrial Complexes because not only can they mobilize more forces into the Mainland, but they also leave a constant threat of invasion on Alaska, further splitting the American Juggernaut’s IPC expenditures, or at the least forcing a garrison.
- India threaten’s Caucus. Take it at all costs: It paves the road to Africa, Moscow, and deals a significant blow to the British Economy.
- An early attack on Moscow cripples the Axis. Early turns are a rush to gain grounds. Later turns involve the patient build of forces to acquire a single, sweeping victory, easily outmatching the Russian Infantry.
Our Russian Player is a man of methodical repetition: Infantry, Infantry, Infantry. He is loathe to risk his tanks, or fighters, placing value on their defensive capabilities in combination with his massive stockpiling of men. Admittedly, it is a strategy that works well for him. Afterall, even with German and Japanese men for fodder, attacking with tanks, the Axis will often be depleted of men long before he is. After his first turn, the board will generally appear as follows:
Karelia has been drained of all but one infantry. West Russia holds a commanding position with between five-seven infantry, two artillery, and two tanks. Caucus is held with seven infantry, two tanks, and two fighters. Meanwhile, he has withdrawn from east asia, stacking eight infantry up into Yakut. Sinkiang is reinforced with four russian Infantry.
As I am a fan of having the initial portion of the game statically calculated to unfold to more dependable strategy, my proposed opening German move is as follows:
Purchase: 1 AC (Defend Baltic, Land 1 FTRs at end of turn), 8 Infantry.
German Sub from SZ 8, moves to SZ 13 to engage Battleship. In addition, Fighters from Western Europe, Scandenavia, Germany, and Eastern Europe all join their sub to all but guarentee the British Battleship is destroyed. Sub soaks Battle Ship hit.
1 Art/1 Inf are loaded from Italy into Transport. Battle ship and Transport engage Destroyer, accompanied by German Bomber to once again ensure the Destroyer is removed from play without casualities (Battleship takes inconsequential hit, 50% of the time.)
Amphibious Assault of 1 Art/1 Inf are unloaded into Anglo Egypt, followed by 1 Tank/1 Inf from adajacent country. Fighters from the Balkans and Ukraine are flown in, as well, making a favorable possibility of eliminating the Allied presence in one roll.
Karelia is attacked w/ 3 Inf from Norway, 3 Inf from Belorussia, 2 Inf/1 Tank from Eastern Europe, 1 Tank each from Balkans/Ukraine, 2 Tanks from Germany and 1 Infantry Transported over by Baltic Transport.
Battleship is destroyed, generally it is traded for the sub. Net Exchange of 16 IPC difference. Result: Entirely Acceptable. Worst case, fighter is also lost, shifting to 6 IPC difference. Result: Adequate
Destroyer is destroyed, with no causalties nearly every time, completing destruction of Brittish Med Fleet. IPC gain of 12. Result: Entirely Acceptable.
Anglo Egypt is invaded, generally leaving the Axis w/ 1 Tank and 1 Artillery. Net Exchange of of 10 IPCs, in addition to destruction of British Fighter, and isolation of Indian Fleet from Counterattack. Result: Excellent.
Karelia is easily overrun, stacking a formmidable force of Tanks and Infantry, immune to Russian counterattack without serious repurcussions.
Bomber back to Germany.
3 Fighters to Western Europe from SZ 13, 1 Fighers to Germany from SZ 13 (To be placed immediately on Carrier)
Fighers from Anglo-Egypt land in Libya w/ Inf/Art advancing.
1 Infantry of Token Defense is left in Ukraine, and Belorussia. Remaining Art/Inf is withdrawn to Eastern Europe, Totalling 3 Inf/1Art.
Western Europe is stacked w/ 3 Total Fighters, 3 Tanks, 5 Infantry to prevent an over ambitious British player from launching an early D-Day.
Fighter + Carrier into Baltic.
2 Infantry into Southern Europe.
Six Infantry in Germany to be sent towards the russians.
My aim, with this opening move, is to jam my boot right up Africa’s ass, deplete the already-headed-towards-poverty-British of their naval strength, set up favorable trades for the Russians until more Infantry can be brought in their direction, and secure the northern road to Moscow, forcing them to draw forces away from Caucus. In addition, Norway is left wide open for British landing, but at the expense of their fleet.
Subsequent turns will involve at least 16 IPCs spent on navy units, preferrably Baltic Subs, or Med Transports, in addition to heavy Infantry that will gradually replace the tanks in western Europe, freeing them up to be used against the Russians. As I see it, I’ve already got an adequate Panzer force. All I need to do is trade my infantry for Russian infantry, while Japan whittles away at their economy.
Thoughts? Please, be as brutal as necessary to get your point across. I’m much more inclined to take heat on a forum, than when the actual game comes time, and my strategy falls to pieces. Thanks alot!