The Afrika Korps

[Omega1759]

@Arthur:

Omega:  Usually a retreat to the Red Sea is accompanied by bringing over planes from India to help out.  If you can also get a bomber to Gibraltar, you have sufficient force to hit a Italy navy parked next to Egypt.  Careful ship blocking can be used to prevent Germany or Italy from capturing Gibraltar.  The moves have to be well executed, but usually they work marvelously.

If you add the bomber it does reduce the odds of a air strike disaster on the Italian fleet (only 6% odds of seeing the fleet surviving). It’s still a battle in which you can lose a number of precious planes.

You don’t worry about removing offensive potential from India? Without air, India has a lot less offensive and defensive flexibility.

A retreat to the Red sea can work, but what are the strategic advantages that a 92 merge does not accomplish?

[simon33]

@WILD:

If I don’t do Taronto,

I think that is rather like coming up with a strategy for getting out of a straight jacket. Don’t get into one in the first place!

[WILD BILL]

@simon33:

@WILD:

If I don’t do Taronto,

I think that is rather like coming up with a strategy for getting out of a straight jacket. Don’t get into one in the first place!

LOL, sometimes you don’t get a choice, they just show up and take you away to the funny farm where life is wonderful all the time……or you just get sick of the same old dance.

[simon33]

Back to the point, a Taranto with a 92 merge is possible under the right scenario. Keep the CV out, take the plane which has to land on it as a casualty but that also assumes there is fleet in SZ110 to merge with.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Back to the very original point of the Afrika Korps plan, we can assume that an I2 capture of Italy was due to either extremely good/bad dice rolls or inexperience on the side of the Allies.  It is not the result of a good general strategy that can be repeated regularly against strong opponents.

[Afrikakorps]

@Arthur:

Back to the very original point of the Afrika Korps plan, we can assume that an I2 capture of Italy was due to either extremely good/bad dice rolls or inexperience on the side of the Allies.  It is not the result of a good general strategy that can be repeated regularly against strong opponents.

The capture of Egypt by I2 was done as following. UK did not do Taranto, no Ethiopia or Tobruk but reinforced Egypt and made red sea fleet. Fighters in London attacked the lone Bismarck (full health) and bomber 2 subs in SZ106 with all atlantic ships (destroyer and cruiser). India did not sent its aircraft, the main reason could be because I sent the Japanese fleet 3 sea zones from India. The player was playing the UK for the second time so inexperience might have mattered.

I1 bought 1 Fighter and took Trans-Jordan with 4 Infantry, Alex full force and Sudan full force. Then Germany send 1 Fighter to Trans-Jordan and 1 Tactical and Fighter to Alexandria (imagine if all airforce is send) in G2. UK2 recaptures Trans-Jordan to open suez and prevent Italy from reaching oil. This takes 4 Infantry, 1 Artillery and 1 Tank out of Egypt supported by 2 Fighters and 1 Tactical that return to Egypt with 2 Infantry from Persia.

Italy then attacks Egypt with 6 Infantry, 3 Artillery, 1 Mech, 1 Tank, 3 Fighters, 1 Bomber and bombarment with Battleship and Cruiser the following turn taking Egypt.

This was the scenario and if I played myself as UK I had it done diffetently. Personally I love the boxing strategy, so no SZ92, Taranto or Red Sea but encirclement and heavy reinforcement of the Med.

However, with the Bismarck alone within RAF reach, two subs convoying your canadian coast, Germany doing a Sea Lion buy and positioning transport to take London, Japan a India buy and positioning to take India in 2 turns I guess you might expect similiar UK reactions and thus indeed a strategy to follow in next games.

Also remember my original Afrika Korps strategy is based on a G4 capture of Egypt. I got lucky but might be lucky again because of the threat I create with both Germany and Japan before the UK even starts his first turn, making him reconsider going 100%  med offense/defense.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Thanks for the details Afrika Korps.  You will need to start testing this strategy against higher quality opponents since almost anything is going to succeed against relative novices.  The top League players have several hundred games played in their lifetimes.  They very rarely make a significant blunder.  Letting Egypt fall on I2 is a massive blunder and almost any Axis strategy would succeed at that point.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

ShadowHawk, I absolutely agree that this game needs more experimentation in early stage strategies.  My point was that the testing of the new strategies need to be done against competent opponents since almost anything will work against people who have only played the game a few times.  You learn so much when you go against an opponent who has many years of experience with a wide variety of situations.  I keep getting better as I lose in League matches.  I often gain nothing when I win.

[Afrikakorps]

Sir Arthur Harris would you like to try the newest Afrika Korps strategy against me online? I have not played online before but it should not that hard to start / download right?

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Sure, Afrika Korps.  Try downloading TripleA and play a few rounds against the AI so that you are acquainted with the software and playing on a computer.  For the match, let’s used the G40 balance mod since that is the most popular and fairest version for League play.  Lots of strats work on a no-bid no-balanced game, but only a good one can work in a BM match.

[Afrikakorps]

@Arthur:

Sure, Afrika Korps.  Try downloading TripleA and play a few rounds against the AI so that you are acquainted with the software and playing on a computer.  For the match, let’s used the G40 balance mod since that is the most popular and fairest version for League play.  Lots of strats work on a no-bid no-balanced game, but only a good one can work in a BM match.

Oke let me check it out.
What is the difference with normal version?

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

The balance mod has several extra Allied objectives so they end up getting a bit more money during the game.  I think that is better than the other option of having extra units to start the game.

[WILD BILL]

Yea it seems balanced mode would sink this strat

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

I certainly would be willing to try out a strat in balance mod, bid, or no-bid/standard games.  I am far more impressed if a plan works in balance mod than in a no-bid game.  Many good strats can win ~75% of the time for a good Axis player against a good Allies player when doing a no-bid game.  That is why bids have been breaching +30 for the Allies.

[Afrikakorps]

@Arthur:

I certainly would be willing to try out a strat in balance mod, bid, or no-bid/standard games.  I am far more impressed if a plan works in balance mod than in a no-bid game.  Many good strats can win ~75% of the time for a good Axis player against a good Allies player when doing a no-bid game.  That is why bids have been breaching +30 for the Allies.

Unfortunately I have reconsidered after downloading TripleA. I am not a regular Axis and Allies player and are also not planning to do so because of time investment. Together with my father and brother we have enough fun and challenge already. We will play the newest version available but no mods or bids until we ‘break the game’ as seems the case. Another thing we do is to prefer to use the available miniatures in the box over the possible options to make with chips.

Therefore I will stay with theory crafting and trying to optimize the strategy instead of spending counltess hours online trying it out.

To be updated soon!

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Best of luck with your testing!  You will find though that the online matches, while considerably less fun than a physical board with miniatures, is far easier to find strengths and weaknesses since it is so trivial to use the battle calculator for every move.

[simon33]

@ShadowHAwk:

@Arthur:

The balance mod has several extra Allied objectives so they end up getting a bit more money during the game.  I think that is better than the other option of having extra units to start the game.

Problem is that it just makes the timer for the axis even smaller and less strats viable for the axis.
Germany is now forced into R3 with full force anything suboptimal and you lose the game, 1 round delay for any reason and axis have lost.
But since the majority likes that type of game nobody bothers thinking of alternatives. And the strategies will always be the same for the axis which force the allies into the same moves as well making every game only different because of how the dice fall.

Bids for russia make the game more balanced and allow the axis to do something different strategy wise.

Correct. That is the limitation of Balance Mod. However, I think you are overstating the case in the part that the allied responses are scripted. I still hold out that there is a suitable allied response to the G6 Moscow crush strategy.

I guess we’ll probably see if I find it by the end of the year.

I still think though that some allied moves are excessively punished in BM, mainly the Russian DOW on Japan.

[Omega1759]

@Arthur:

Best of luck with your testing!  You will find though that the online matches, while considerably less fun than a physical board with miniatures, is far easier to find strengths and weaknesses since it is so trivial to use the battle calculator for every move.

Online is much faster as well. I’ve been tempted to play the turn on the computer and mimic the movements on the board to plan purchases and combat moves.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Simon:  The Allies can generally stop or make it painful to do a G6 Moscow crush since Russia is getting a bit more income.  That little bit makes a big difference.  Here is my general gameplan when it looks like Germany is going all-out to hit Moscow:

1. Try to get a few German Planes with UK scrambles on G1 if possible.

2. Get Persia on UK1, build factory there on UK2 if possible.  Build a few faster movers on UK3 and fighters on UK4 and 5.

3. Get as many UK fighters to Moscow on UK5

4. Get the six Russians in Siberia back on R6 (makes it tough to do a G7).

5. Don’t be afraid to abandon Moscow around R7 or R8.  In BM, it is possible for the Allies to still push the Axis out of the oil fields because the Americans might be getting massive bonuses by US8.

I feel sorry for Allied players in a no-bid, no BM game since the German juggernaut is virtually impossible to stop.

[simon33]

@Arthur:

Simon:  The Allies can generally stop or make it painful to do a G6 Moscow crush since Russia is getting a bit more income.  That little bit makes a big difference.  Here is my general gameplan when it looks like Germany is going all-out to hit Moscow:

1. Try to get a few German Planes with UK scrambles on G1 if possible.

2. Get Persia on UK1, build factory there on UK2 if possible.  Build a few faster movers on UK3 and fighters on UK4 and 5.

3. Get as many UK fighters to Moscow on UK5

4. Get the six Russians in Siberia back on R6 (makes it tough to do a G7).

5. Don’t be afraid to abandon Moscow around R7 or R8.  In BM, it is possible for the Allies to still push the Axis out of the oil fields because the Americans might be getting massive bonuses by US8.

I feel sorry for Allied players in a no-bid, no BM game since the German juggernaut is virtually impossible to stop.

Hmm, you have to pre-empt the Moscow crush for point one but I have taken to nearly always scrambling G1 now for the reasons you outline.

On point two - is it really worth bypassing the Ethiopian crush to get the Persian factory one turn sooner?