you could screw over Japan pretty hard if you removed their starting transports
possibly the best counter-argument against taking off the units, but still its a nice Idea
Just for fun, I tried to imagine what an air-defense network would look like in the real world if it replicated the OOB rules. The result goes like this.
The network would consist of one or more AAA guns. Each gun would have an ammunition allowance of just three shells. The guns would all be tied to (and remotely operated by) a centralized fire-control system. The system would be coupled to a radar surveillance system that would track an enemy formation of planes as it arrives over the network’s territory. The network would assign a unique identification number to each plane, and would attach to each ID number an initial status code of 0 indicating that the plane it identifies has not yet been fired upon.
Now the battle begins. The network fire-control system targets one of the planes with one of the AAA guns and fires one shot. If the plane is hit, it’s detsroyed. If the plane isn’t hit, the network changes the status code of the lucky plane (identified by its unique ID number) from 0 to 1, indicating that it’s been fired on. The centralized fire-control system then orders the fired AAA gun (which now has only two shells left in its ammunition load) to stop tracking the lucky plane (in whose direction the AAA gun’s barrel is conveniently still more or less pointing) and to point itself at a completely different plane whose status code still reads 0. The firing-and-retargeting process is repeated until the first AAA gun runs out of ammunition. The network then orders a new AAA gun (if there’s more than one gun in the network) to go through the same routine, making sure that it scrupulously fires only at planes whose status code still reads 0.
This process continues until one of two things happens: the last AAA gun fires its last shell, or all the surviving planes overhead have been fired upon once and therefore now all have a status of 1. If, at the point where all the surviving planes overhead now have a status of 1, any of the AAA guns on the ground still have shells left in their ammunition supply, they are ordered to cease fire at the available targets overhead. Why they would be ordered to cease fire is beyond me. Perhaps it’s considered unsportsmanlike conduct for an entire air defense network to fire at any single enemy plane more than once. Perhaps the battle is being treated similarly to (one-half of) a pistol duel in which the two opponents – each armed with a pistol containing only one bullet – stand back to back, walk ten paces apart, turn and fire the single shot they’re allowed; if they miss, they call it a day and go home.
Or you could say, that AA guns take up space. one AAA in the game might represent one cluster of AA-Guns and one Plane ingame might represent one squadron of planes:
Then we could say that planes can “stack” on top of each other up to 3 times, whereas AA guns cant (no 3d-arrangement possible).
So now when they enter the territory, they can be shot by those aa installations.
The reason the next AA-installation can’t fire upon them is because the range of those AAguns isnt big enough to shoot at targets that much further away.
So the only reason why BOTH aa installations would fire is because the invading airforce is so big, they are spread over a bigger surface-area.
And that is why i find it quite convincing
Even though I agree with you on the raid being incredibly strong, I wish for some alternative, so the fleets are more than just a way to ensure, you can’t plan the med too much. Every game starts with this raid and mostly the dicee decide how it’s going to turn out. I desperately hope for a viable alternative, because I don’t like linear “decisions”
Sure, E. Poland will be safe for a round if you attack G1, but if you spend 2 turns on navy and remove ~20+ ground units from Europe to capture London, Russia will be able to press back into German territory anyway. (Possibly even better, since they collect their NO for at least a turn or two and Germany won’t collect theirs for the 3 they normally would with Sea Lion)
Just a normal G1 attack on Russia (no Sea Lion threat) can be fun and refreshing and put people off balance if they’re used to G2/3s or Sea Lion strats, but in my opinion is objectively inferior to a G2 DOW.
The thing is the offensive will only cost you ~5 inf. But all the tanks can retreat for a G3 Sealion. And on top of that it forces the russians hand. Sure the 5 ipc will be hard for 1-2 turns but if the UK doesn’t defend, youll go full on Sealion. If it does, or you just don’t like the numbers, those trannys should be put to good use. take Novgorod, Archangel and just push in the North. There goes your NO. OR you consolidate, having the UK out of the picture, and just push for the caucasus. Or have the italians join in and go for the caucasus.
The basic plan is, that after a Toranto attack, the RAF will be out of position ynd youll have free reign over the waters. So you can pressure Russia all you want.
IDK, if you see this opening as the allies you might be inclined to not max def London. It looks like they are gunning for Moscow. Argothair who oppose this opening even said he would probably build just 3 inf +ftr for England, and an minor IC for Egypt/Mid east. Maybe if you disguise it a bit more and buy the carrier (pretty standard), plus 1 transport and save the 7 IPCs UK might be more reckless.
Thats my reasoning too. I even thought, that maybe the allies might be inclined to roll the dice and send some scrambles or just don’t take it seriously and then boom. On the other Hand, if the UK does defend, you get your time with russia. The US shouldn’t matter so much as they can be in the med by turn 2 but not safely, and by turn 3 its too little too late. So the US and UK imho should go on as if nothing out of the ordinary has happened.
Which brings us to Japan, should they wait so the US doesn’t get into better position?
I thought that Japan must go bonkers as well. J1 attack on all the allies. Build two trn, one mIC, and start the pummeling. go take Phillipines and Kwang and so forth. If the russian was stupid enought to leave his inf up north, just go wipe em. Moskow needs the reinforcements badly. Also there will be no Russians in China, because they are needed elsewhere. Make sure the US knows you are there. Take the minors asap. Don’t feel too threatened, because If the US doesn’t go 2*atlantic, then Germany will be unstoppable.
At least that is Japan in the scenario in my head.^^
Maybe strafe Yugo (one inf from Romania) to get a bigger inf stack on Romania to sell it a bit more? […] Not sure if Germany could spare a sub for sz125?
The inf is needed in Poland. It is ridiculously essential. I think its not possible. But by leaving Bulgaria for Italy to take, they can impact the south of Russia in the same way the trannys complement in the north. Two strong flanks on either side will make for a passive russian very quick, I think.
The sub depends on the outcome of SZ111. If you can survive with two subs, then go ahead. Else I dont think so.
thanx for the input you guys.
I think I understand your point, argothair, but I think its less about the actual TUV-swing, but more about position. by occupying Poland, you make the Pripet Marches split the russian from turn 1 on, instead of him being able to consolidate.
That makes it impossible for the russians to rely on a simple inf-push-mechanic, because speed and maneuverability will be on your side. Plus the forces from Novgorod cant really afford to go south-west, because you have all them transports and scandinavians…
Sure you dont break russia with it, but you get the same outcome as with a G3 declaration and the tanks can be home in time for the “Sealion”-attack. (G3) and if the british don’t buckle up enough, you pummle them. I agree Sealion is close, but the threat is real. It’sonly close, if the english player goes all-out defense for the british isles…
The main problem I see is that if you do go sea lion, you won’t have any immediate reinforcements available for your units in Russian territory. With what you have there initially, you won’t be able to go any deeper into Russian territory,
well depends. you are gonna have a stack of 6tanks and3-4inf in Eastern Poland, they won’t be going that far, but they put some pressure on Ukraine. Ofc he will build there but its only three units. and whats left there are 6 inf and one art. Thats no joke, but only if kept together. if the russian player spreads out, or worse yet, tries to consolidate his armies by going north, he will easily be crushed with the support of a bomber or two. and novgorod is an issue too. The transporters project an awful amount of power to the north. I’m not saying go for Moskow right there. Im saying try buy time by committing some but not all ground troops. Lots of fast movers (the tanks) that can be retreated in one round to a port for invasion purposes…
and you leave the units you have there exposed to easy destruction by the Russians. The Russians will be able to build new units in Novo and Ukraine and push you back easily and you will have even less units to protect Berlin with after Sea Lion.
thats the point. I dont. The 3 inf from Poland are dead, yes. but they traded evenly, maybe even getting a hit or two in the return fires. The tanks are safe. Committing all his units at the front and his entire airforce, he has a chance of 23% of winning the battle with 0.23 Units left on average. So these units are SAFE. utterly and completely. Even a strafe doesnt hurt the tanks. And the russian “counterattack” is reduced to 14 inf, 3 art, 1 tank, 2 fig, 1 tac distributed over the new front from Novgorod to Ukraine.
And I will have traded with net gain, pushed the russians back, and won a tempo against them. I think its better to cripple the russian in advance, since its so easy. We get 20% of their western infantry for basicly nothing…
so after reading a lot in the Global-forums, I started to notice a trend of opening-move discussions.
Specifically, there seems to be some kind of consensus about operation “Sealion”: wheter or not one wants to actually go through with it, it seems beneficial to at least threaten it. So the G1 move usually consists of some version of sinking the royal navy, attacking france with ground troops and maybe Jugoslavia.
Landing one fighter in Italy, to make the English commit more material in the med, the airforce usually is all out against the RN.
But whether or not to make Sealion happen seems a much disputed question, the main cause of doubt being the russians going to town on you.
Now this is where I thought: “Why not making it preemptive and going all out hitler on the allies?”
The west is all as usual. SZ110, SZ111, maybe SZ106, Paris. But Paris wihout air and without the 3 tanks from Greater Southern Germany.
I still build AC plus 2 trannys.
But all these ground units in eastern europe doing nothing at all, it seemed kind of a waste. But what if I attacked Russia G1 too?. The natural reaction on the preparations of sealion should involve increasing pressure along the German border anyway. So why not set them back a round and also take some units down with you?
So there is 3 inf in Baltic states and 3 inf and a tac bomber in Poland. why not trade the infantry, the bomber cant reach anything else anyway.
and then there is Eastern Poland.
Only 2 inf there, but we can commit 4 infantry and 6 tanks to it. It borders 4 russian countrys, one of which is Baltic states. The remaining 3 contain 4 inf 1 art total. The counter attack on Eastern Poland therefor can consist of 4 inf, 1 art, 2 fig, 1 tac against a full force of 6 tanks and 3-4 inf(maybe lost one in original attack) which makes for a whapping 70-95% chance of all or maybe 5 tanks surviving an allout attack by the russians.
and that is committing ALL russian airforce. So the counterattack seems unprofitable.
So bottom line is:
we trade 3 german inf for 5 russian inf, we get immediate pressure on the Ukraine, therefor making the russian commit more troops to the Ukraine on defense and making the north vulnerable, projecting agression on the UK, the baltic, even Novgorod with the three transports.
I forgo taking Bulgaria for that extra defense in Eastern Poland. But then it’s go east for the infantry in europe. the 11 stack from Germany normally gives to men to western Ger, so the transports can be filled next round. Anything else needs to march towards russia.
Strategically it still forces the english to defend, since g2-3 Sealion is still not off the board, but you already have striken a blow to russia and if you dont do sealion the alternative is already well prepared.
But if Sealion comes, the germans already “gained a tempo” on them.
You’re both right, you just misinterpreted the Triple A note
It means you can’t load in the combat movement phase and then unload in the non-combat phase and that you can’t unload one ground unit in one phase and another unit from the transport in a different phase
well thank you for the swift and concise answer.
so, I still can’t use the search function of this site, and so I didn’t search up that question either, but oh how i tried^^
So I play TripleA a lot and I just noticed, that in the notes to the g40.2 map it says:
“(PE) Transports can only be loaded in 1 phase (not both), and unloaded in 1 phase (not both).”
the (PE) standing for player-enforced.
But my understanding was, that one could load and unload a transport during combat move phase.
Which one is correct?
Hello there everyone,
first time poster, long time reader
I have the boardgame for a long time now, but just recently (1-2Years ago) stumbled upon the LHTR 2.0.
Me and my flatmate play a lot of 1 on 1s and recently started to use the national advantages. Since we roll dice to determine wich ones each side is given, there is a great deal of variation during the first few turns.
in the game we currently run the advantages are:
Germany: everything but the divebombers
Japan: Tokio Express(DDs are mini trns) and double BB att.
Russia: Lend-Lease, Salvage and Russian Winter
US: Fast Carrier, mechInf and WarEco
We play without bids but russia may not attack on R1. We use the ooB-Setup.
Wether this is fair or not is not the purpose of this thread^^
I play as the Allies.
One glance at the advantages made clear: I have to start with a KGF basis. Germany hast stronger subs and the money-drain effect per sub. This can be really dangerous if unchecked in my experience. It levels out the playfield in terms of eco, or at least can do so if nothing is done.
But the Japanese had the better battleships and I really dont like engaging those in battle.
So I started R1 with a 5inf 1rt 1tank buy and positioned myself to make a push into WeRussia on R2. I retreated from the top provinces. I wanted to stand strong for the next rounds.
But for Japan not to become to much of a threat, I wnated to keep them occupied in the pacific. I reasoned, that the japan-fleet is very strong if together, but if it splits i could defeat it with an acceptable amount of losses. So I wanted to stack Singkiang, unite the GB-pacific fleet in the south, use one british fighter to destroy the japan-sub in GB1 and land it to discourage Pearl. I wanted a lot of trns for europe, so there couldnt be any money blown away for the pacific in neither GB1 nor US1.
My general strategic concept is to keep the japanese fleet pinned to Japan and start taking the lower Islands with GB OR ship units from Alaska to SovietFarEast if the south is defended; thus preventing the japs to get a good foothold on the continent. With the MechInf and Tanks I would shuck to Algeris with US and start marching the 4/4 stack towards the east, where the can flank Germany from below or go through India/Singkiang. Reinforcing this push with a factory in Singkiang and the british pumping Units to Scandinavia.
My projections were that the japanese would start to build up some more fleet to be able to maintain at least two fleets and the germans being left alone and therefor crushed by russia with some support from GB (3inf/3tanks per turn) and the occasional fighter from the us and GB.
If Germany should go landheavy in G1 i could easily swing the US forces to enforce Russia and if Germany starts with a carrier on G1 then I will have to commit more of the US fleet to the atlantic then anticipated, but it should be fine.
The problem with this however is that there is no threat to Borneo or the Phillipines and Japan can therefore at some point start ignoring the fleet buildup and just defend sz60 and everything reachable from there and go landheavy.
So basically, the strategy given this specific set of advantages should be for the allies:
try to contain the Germans and start shifting the deadzones westwards with Russia and GB.
use the pacific fleets to play cat-and-mouse with the japanese fleet. For this to work it is imperative, that the pacific fleets live for as long as possible, because as soon as the threat in the pacific drops, Japan will take Russia faster than GB+Russia will take out germany. (Since US fights japs only)
The british never have to spend a cent into the pacific, because the troops that are there are quite sufficient if managd correctly.
Well, at least in my opinion.
Do you guys have any thoughts on this? How would you try to play this specific scenario out?
Edit: “I play Allies”