Posts made by SuperbattleshipYamato

@barnee

From my experience, games, at least starting from 2.5, are compatible with newer versions, but not vice versa.

@Stucifer

Oh, you mean that. Yeah I don’t like it. Just weird.

@Stucifer

Really? I like that feature a lot. Much easier than adding each unit.

I agree it’ll be nice as an option.

@The-Janus

Your first German turn was pretty great.

I’ll note that the US actually only had an 83% chance of capturing Rome, lower than what I usually do:

I think the toughest obstacle Germany currently faces is the large number of artillery it has stuck in Moscow. Specifically, that giant stack can’t move fast enough to seize the remaining territory Germany needs to win, while there aren’t enough fast movers to accompish the task. Obviously you were doing an experiment, and I’m glad we now know what happens.

@Stucifer

Can’t seem to do it on my 2.7 version. Maybe it’s not a Mac thing?

@Stucifer

Wait, how’d you do that? Can you please teach me? Thank you!

@The-Janus

About Paris:

The French overshot by almost 2 hits in the first round of combat in your second game. Even so, however, you were still on track to have nearly a 100% chance to conquer the territory and make an IPC profit:

@SuperbattleshipYamato

February 13, 2025, is the 80th anniversary of two major events:

The Bombing of Dresden, where large amounts of Allied bombers, bombed the German city of Dresden. After the war it became controversial due to the large number of civilians killed and seemingly little military value.

The end of the Budapest Offensive, when, after being under siege for months, German and puppet Hungarian surrendered to the Red Army and their allies. The capture of Budapest probably really helped the Soviets convert Hungary into a communist puppet state after the war (alongside the Yalta Conference that concluded two days before this).

@The-Janus

Yeah, the tactical bomber-tank combo disproportionately benefits Germany.

I agree that it’s near-impossible for Germany to fight a war on 2 fronts once the US really gets into the war. In my view in your game you may have invaded the USSR too late (not sure whether that was your fault though, I didn’t look at the strength of the opposing sides, but from my experience Germany should be able to enter Soviet territory earlier than that). In Global at least most players plan for a Moscow capture of G7 or G8 I believe. Not sure whether that’s completely applicable to Europe, but that could be an explanation. I hope smarter players will respond to this question (I’m still looking for a more solid answer myself).

@AndrewAAGamer I know Europe 1940’s not your wheelhouse, but what advice do you have for Germany to capture Moscow by G7 or G8? Thank you!

@The-Janus

About the game attached:

I think you did a really great opener and your moves into the Soviet Union were probably what I would’ve done as well. Breaking out from Eastern Poland is what Cow’s G1 opener implies.

Anyhow, the AI basically handed you the game when they attacked the strict neutral.

@The-Janus

Totally agree. Fast movers are especially important in the south because they’re expected to proceed into the Middle East as the Allies can usually hold the Italians off in the Mediterranean. Cairo is as many turns away from Berlin for mechanized infantry as Moscow is for regular infanty.

@The-Janus

I agree with most of what Stucifer said. Some additional thoughts (I’m no pro, but I’ve played this game 20-30 times):

Yeah, you defijnitely tried to do a lot. Generally speaking it’s not too bad of an idea to leave Southern France for Italy (especially if you’re going after Yugoslavia), and there’s a credible argument for leaving Normandy Bordeaux. Forgoing a G1 and a sea zone 91 attack (I find that too risky) frees up enough air and naval units to hit both fleets, even with a full Allied scramble (you might need to also sacrifice the sea zone 106 attack, but the transport won’t be able to do much in the first few turns while the British consolidate their naval position).

The “Yugoslavia ping-pong” where Greater Southern Germany units retreat to Romania through Yugoslavia is really important if you’re doing a G1, especially when you’re engaging in so many high-risk battles. I’d like to leave Yugoslavia for the Italians.

Italy seems to have been played okay. I think it really helped that the Brits weren’t very aggressive in the Mediterrean on the first turn (the Italians in East Africa should generally be considered low priority-if Egypt is well defended and you’re pumping tanks and mechanized infantry in Union of South Africa they’ve got nowhere to go).

Also, what on earth were you thinking with that sea zone 102 attack on G2? The submarines off Gibraltar could’ve joined the Italians in the Mediterrean and the one in 106 could’ve joined in the attack in 118. I don’t see the logic in that 2% attack.

I’d like to share a series of solo Europe 1940 games I did:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/41133/how-to-win-as-the-axis

Files 2024-8-21 and 2024-8-22 are Sealions gone wrong, demonstrating how Germany has to strike a really fine balance if they pursue this riskier strategy. Files 2024-8-25 and 2024-8-26 are Dark Skies gone wrong. 2024-8-28 is exactly how not to do a G2-moving too slowly, allowing the Soviets to be relieved by the British and Americans. In Europe 1940 (less so for Global 1940, mainly because the Axis have such a huge advantage), speed is absolutely essential to have any chance of victory.

2024-8-29 is the most informative. Partially adapting from Cow’s G1 opener, sending most of the ground units in range to hit Paris gave a 99.5% chance of victory, with little threat from Southern France or Normandy Bordeaux. While admmitedly I didn’t hit sea zone 110 (or do the Yugoslavia ping-pong, though it wasn’t that big of a deal since moving the Greater Southern Germany units to Slovakia Hungary enabled them to engage on the Eastern Front), I was able to destroy all the British transports in range, which is what really makes the British being able to keep a navy so devastating (and clearly hindered them in subsequent rounds). For some reason, I was able to chug along with mostly mechanized infantry, enabling me to move quick enough to gobble up the IPC-rich territories in the south of the Soviet Union and the Middle East before the British built up a menacing enough force with a semi-Middle Earth strategy to halt any German advance to Egypt via a land route. I’ll admit that the main thing that made this victory possible were the Americans not going for Rome and instead opting for targets along the Atlantic, preserving Italy at a critical point. I wrote a more detailed analysis of this game in the thread itself.

Hoped this (at least kinda) helped!

@Shadowdoom286

This is for Global 1940 but I’m sure at least half of the details here apply to Europe 1940 (lots of options):

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/assets/uploads/files/1700408602301-allied-playbook-g40-collection-of-essays.pdf

@Grinchveld

👍👍

@Grinchveld

Thanks for clarifying!

@Grinchveld

I don’t quite understand.

So the losing player says “I can beat you in X number of turns as the winning side”

And if the winning player says no, they propose a lower number? What if both groups can’t find an agreement?

It’s a great idea overall. I like playing to end conditions, and this is a great way to incentivize that.

@The-Pripet-Martian

Thanks for the ideas!

@dazedwit

Pretty good, actually. Nice find.

I like how you use different colored diced tomatoes represent different values. Didn’t think of that before.

@simon33

Nice. I might take them out for a spin one day (note to self).

@The-Janus

Agreed.