@Alex-Phillips said in OOB or BM3:

@AndrewAAGamer I’ll be baited. Unfortunately I think there’s a lot of arrogance displayed by some of the more serious/veteran posters like yourself, Gen. Manstein, etc. It puts me off joining any league on here. I like to post the occasional snippet, read interesting strategies, but that’s it, thanks.

With all due respect, I think you’re misunderstanding Andrew.

I’ve played with him many times and lost many times, having won against him only once when his partner made a massive mistake in the Pacific that cost the US catastrophically.

Three other times I’ve come close to beating him:

Once he and a friend took the Allies against me as the Axis in Global. I threw the script away and launched a devastating mechanized attack against Russia (which appears to be me to be the basis for Andrew’s current Axis plan, albeit with some refinement). The question, “How are we going to beat him?” was asked and the answer from Andrew was “I don’t know.” In the end, I made a bad attack and beat myself.

The next time was Anniversary again, and three players against Andrew (running the Axis by himself I believe). The US and Russia did their parts, but the guy running UK was a horrible player who liked making questionable attacks. He did not want to do anything that his partners needed. At the end, the attack on Moscow would have never happened if the UK had killed just four more German infantry.

Once he and his buddy ran Axis in Anniversary, and I was on a team with two other players. One of the players was very new and a very good player who made Russia look interesting and easy, but at the end despite the fact that Japan was beaten in the Pacific Germany took Moscow. Japan was beaten but standing (and it would have taken many more turns to crush it completely). US fighters, a whole darned stack of them, were one more turn away from Moscow and that would have ended the game definitively in favor of the Allies, with Germany having no chance of success in Europe and Japan having no chance of success in the Pacific. The new player had refused to take a UK fighter in defense of Moscow in order to keep his objective. That resulted in a 50/50 battle that could have been like 35/65 in favor of the Allies. The dice came up against the Allies. With Russia defeated, we felt there was no way to achieve victory unless we risked defeat in the Pacific.

Andrew doesn’t believe in luck. He believes in hard work and patience, and he works harder at this game than anyone else I’ve ever seen or heard of. I’ve never heard him complain about getting diced (although I have seen him lose games because his opponent got lucky with the dice). He just waits til he has the best possible chance of success for an attack. He practices constantly.

He’s proud of his skill. I don’t think that’s arrogance. He works harder than any other player I’ve ever met to improve his play. There’s a difference between pride in your effort and arrogance.

Yes, Andrew is a serious player. He’s not a better player because he’s more gifted at strategy. He’s a better player because he works harder, period to understand the mechanics of the game and how they will play out. That’s not arrogance – that’s determination.

He’s not a better player because he blames other people for his mistakes. He accepts responsibility when he makes a mistake. That’s not arrogance – that’s honesty with himself, something many, many people in the world should consider taking more of.

I’m probably a better instinctive player than Andrew, but where I come up short is determination. Me, I spend my time on city government, running a D&D game, working on a book, and learning two different languages while juggling my day job and pondering graduate school. Why does he beat me? Because he practices harder and longer. Because I’m not as patient as he is.

Playing against him has made me a better player. He has always been willing to offer advice without judgement and to help me get better. He has taught me new things about the game both with and without trying to do so.

So, with respects, reserve your judgement and get to work. When you win as much as Andrew does, you’ll have the right to decide whether or not he’s being arrogant.

No, anyone in our local area playing the Axis would have conceded long before that happened.

Marsh

Also, I have yet to actually receive a 60 IPC bid from Andrew.

“Let’s eat Grandma”

“Let’s eat, Grandma”

COMMAS SAVE LIVES.

@tchenao If you control Normany, the German battleship should have repaired in the G2 purchase phase.

Since you can’t move it into the Med unless Italy took Gibraltar on I1, it would be better to move it to sea zone 112 where it can have air cover.

Marsh

@tchenao We once play a game where the French were the most effective minor power on the board. They could do no wrong on defense. At one point my partner (who was running the French) responded to the player running Germany saying, “Two guys and a plane should be enough” with “Are you sure? They’re French.” and the other player winced visibly. The French in that game killed more German units than the UK…

Fun day!

Marsh

@oysteilo Ok, I’ve got the file. I’ll send you my first move sometime this weekend. Please be aware that my availability from day to day varies considerably and it may be more than three days before I’m able to move in some situations.

Marsh

@panther Success now as apparently I thought “of” had a capital “O” and the forums did not.

This is starting to cross over into house rules.

@Contango I might be able to attend this, but with all due respect to YG I don’t want to watch a 27 minute YouTube video instead of actually reading a rules document. Is this variant written out somewhere?

Marsh

@freh Ok, I see it now. Pretty sneaky

@freh I count 7 from Greece, so Greece with an airbase maybe or am I miscounting?

Just so are all aware, the ANZAC infantry in New Guinea is not a legal bid.

Marsh

If the US or UK has taken Norway, fighters based there can reach Germany and back to Norway without any airbase or carrier.

That being said, a full court press on Germany should include some strategic bombers for industrial bombing to help reduce some of Germany’s income that can be used to both defend Europe and strangle Russia at the same time.

Marsh

@jscam74 Yes, if he were already in the Mediterranean and your ship was alone in sea zone 91 he could clear sea zone 91 with just his planes and then leave the Med with the fleet in non-combat movement.

Marsh

@jscam74 said in Sea Zone Movement:

Another question regarding sea zone movement. My opponent took his German fleet into the Med after taking Gibraltar. If I place an American destroyer in SZ91 to force him to engage and essentially slow his movement capability, can he choose to only send his planes during combat phase to clear the SZ and then during non-combat phase move his fleet through SZ91 (and beyond - would technically still have three spaces) or since it was recently hostile is he confined to stay put until his next turn? Obviously he could also send his whole fleet into battle, but the rules are clear about his movement being done in this case. I couldn’t find anything about the scenario I raised.

All naval and air units present in the sea zone are presumed to be present for the combat. If the units remain in sea zone 91 during combat, they are presumed to have participated in the combat. So, if your opponent leaves the ships in sea zone 91 for the combat, they are in the combat and cannot move during non-combat movement.

What your opponent CAN do is move the naval units during the combat movement phase to avoid them being included in the combat. In this case the end result is the same, but when a transport is involved the end result is not the same.

This is an example of a situation where you must do non-combat movement during the combat movement phase to avoid the units being involved in combat.

Marsh

@jscam74 Funny how those 0% likely results happen a lot! The Dice Goddess is a fickle one.

@crockett36 said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):

@marshmallowofwar I guess I didn’t realize we were in a debate, but rather assumed it was a cooperative free for all that might lead to either a confirmation of standard doctrine or the discovery of innovative ideas that might change the balance of power. Thanks for your thoughts.

It’s not a debate, but part of any cooperative discussion has to be asking questions.

Nothing @AndrewAAGamer has said makes me change my opinion that in at least some circumstances DD+CC > BB. The BB only has more value when there are enough smaller units to shield it from taking the second hit. If we should be wringing every possible advantage out of the build, DD+CC gives a bit more advantage than BB.

From the perspective of supporting shore bombardment, 5 cruisers gives on average 2.5 hits while three battleships gives on average 2 hits for the same IPC cost. (However, I believe that only one support shot per loaded transport is allowed; if so that would increase the cost of the landing by at least 7IPCs.)

From the offensive/defensive perspective DD + CC gives a small edge over BB in early combat rounds (the ones that matter most) AND chance of am early second hit when the BB can only get one hit.

DD + CC puts more units on the board to allow smaller task forces to exist to cover transports.

Are cruisers overpriced? Absolutely, and the real cost should be 11 IPCs (or maybe even 10…), but I build cruisers more often than I build battleships.

@arthur-bomber-harris said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):

@crockett36 Normandy should be left completely unoccupied by the time the Allies have a sizable landing force. As you mentioned, there can be considerable devastation to any Axis force situated in that territory and it cannot be reasonably defended without diverting from the main goal of crushing Moscow or heading into the Middle East/Egypt. Normandy or Norway will fall, it just is a matter of on which round and whether the Axis will be able to retake it with a counterattack of ground units supported by planes. France is the best place to have the Axis counterstrike infantry/artillery. Mechanized units can help counterstrike from W Germany. Usually, though, a wave of UK fighters add enough defensive might to Normandy or Norway to ensure that the Axis are unable to strike back.

Agree with most of this, but as I’ve said on other threads I try not to take Normandy at all until Russia is captured (and there’s absolutely no way I would have forces sitting there waiting to be bombarded). Sometimes taking Normandy is unavoidable, but Normandy without a US factory is a much easier nut to crack than Normandy with a US factory!

Marsh

@crockett36 Nope, but neither can I read your mind. If you have additional things to modify the situation it’s helpful if you include them in your assessment.

@maddabout said in If you were Germany what would you do?:

Question when the MC gets downgraded can the capturing force upgrade it? The US has a ton of money so its kind of a moot point they can just drop 20IPC’s and still have 50IPC’s to spend.

No, only the original owner can upgrade it.

Marsh