This has been a very engaging thread. I like the general idea of U.K. Factories in the Middle East and have used them to varying degrees in past games.
As others have said, it really depends on what Germany does with regards to Sea Lion. Russia alone cannot stop a strong German player.
Siparo,
In the 2 table top games we played…obviously my demonstrations made me out to not be the “strong German player.” I hope that in a future game I could provide a better demonstration and maybe earn some Axis and Allies “skill” respect for whatever country I end up playing. I’m still disappointed about my Noob move of exposing my stack to a nice Russian counter attack at Bryansk when I could have stacked at Smolensk and most likely captured Moscow the following turn. I think the G42 rules about collecting the most IPCs at the end of turn 7 influenced my decision thinking too much.
Good job hosting that Nashville event…fun playing the guessing game too!
Ichabod
I actually played the Allies yesterday in a game. I have to be honest that I stopped playing AAG 40 after HBG global 39 and 36 came out. Recently I found players who play strictly AAG 40 OOB rules. I usually do the Middle Earth “cute name” but mine is a tad different, one mistake and and this plan falters…one distraction and it falters…I also turtled with Russia and agree it is not viable move
Siparo,
In the 2 table top games we played…obviously my demonstrations made me out to not be the “strong German player.” I hope that in a future game I could provide a better demonstration and maybe earn some Axis and Allies “skill” respect for whatever country I end up playing. I’m still disappointed about my Noob move of exposing my stack to a nice Russian counter attack at Bryansk when I could have stacked at Smolensk and most likely captured Moscow the following turn. I think the G42 rules about collecting the most IPCs at the end of turn 7 influenced my decision thinking too much.
Good job hosting that Nashville event…fun playing the guessing game too!
Ichabod
:evil:
@ Ichabod- My apologies for getting it wrong who I was responding to last time. There were many responses that first day and I got that one wrong. As for Cairo, all I can suggest is try it sometime. I read a lot of people replying to this thread with their opinions and I value all of them, but nobody has taken the time to test out what I’m saying. Some of the things that work best for me are things that I stumble on almost by accident. I can’t remember why or how I gave up Cairo so easily the first time but it surprised me how easy it was to get it back and thus eliminating almost all of the Italian troops in one move. It’s very rare that they have a transport after the first turn so at most they will only put 2 units in Africa and that’s only if they don’t decide to put them in Gibraltar or Greece or an island. I make a point of taking away their ability to transport troops on the first and second turns. If you wipe out Cairo on the third turn then they will only have the 2 units from Libya and the dude from Somaliland. That’s it. With your factories in Persia and SA and your transport capacity you make very short work of the Axis in Africa. The only way this doesn’t happen in my games is when Germany puts boats in the Med and that means they’ve taken units away from Russia and delay it for a few turns. Don’t take my word for it though, just give it a try.
In our most recent game of G40, my partner Germany did a 100% sea lion build (hes a new player, just learning, wanted to experiment with this).
In response, UK 1-3, was only able to build the following on 3 successive turns on South Africa
1 arty
2 mechs
1 armor
This is $18 of approx. $84 dollars available on those turns, demonstrating that only 20% of funds are available to wisely distribute around the world, when you are turtling London against the largest possible German commit (8+ TTs!)
We lost, since Russia raged, but it was still fun.
As for Cairo, all I can suggest is try it sometime. I read a lot of people replying to this thread with their opinions and I value all of them, but nobody has taken the time to test out what I’m saying. I can’t remember why or how I gave up Cairo so easily the first time but it surprised me how easy it was to get it back and thus eliminating almost all of the Italian troops in one move. � Don’t take my word for it though, just give it a try.
GHG,
My opinions are based upon game time experiences and less theorizing. I lose more games than I win…so my “points of view” aren’t as credible as others. And remember, this dynamic game is so fun for us that even discussing strategy is enjoyable. �
Cairo Debate: I remember once I made a very credible threat towards getting Cairo. I was stacked on Alexandria and the UK player evacuated Cairo the next turn. The UK player was able to get lots of stuff in position to where in the subsequent turn if I as the Axis tried to stack on Cairo, I could have ended up losing everything to include German planes. I happened to see it and therefore did not fall into that trap. Just because you give up Cairo, doesn’t mean the Axis player is going to hand to you on a silver platter all of their forces to be lost in one lone battle. The scenario described to me, “thus eliminating almost all Italian troops in one move” is not going to regularly occur against most Axis players a second time. You also mention about getting all of the way to Bessarabia with UK units and Moscow never falling. In my game experience, these are rare occurrences, and at that point, the allies already won.
When putting your strategy on the forum, I think anyone should take for granted that everyone else may not have the time nor opportunity to spend a 10-14 game just to test out someone else’s strategy to find flaws. Honestly, I get to play 1 table top game maybe once every 2-3 months. I’m going to play the strategies I think work best for me. And besides, it’s your strategy, how could I say I really played your strategy correctly? You said that sometimes you stumble upon things and learned a new strategy. Regarding Cairo, I don’t think you can count on getting the Italian units in one fell swoop game after game.
In the few games I lost Cairo, I usually got it back (in 1 game I didn’t which I lost). It slowed me down from “beefing” up “middle earth” and therefore helping Russia. I haven’t seen a value in losing Cairo let alone evacuating just for the sake of enticing some counter attack kills.
I can assure you, if I get both London and Cairo, I will most likely win, especially if you gave up Cairo the turn prior to a successful Sea Lion attack.
Now I’m theorizing…
Lets assume that my G1 purchase is 2 bombers and 1 sub (I do that purchase occasionally). I’m left with a dented battleship in SZ 110, and 1 sub in SZ 111. UK did not scramble any battles. Germany won a 50/50 battle in SZ 106 and therefore took out that extra transport from Canada. I’m not doing a J1 attack (not a fan cause it can take Sea Lion off the table). This is a likely scenario. What are you going to purchase UK1 and where is it going? Are you going to start purchasing on SA or a naval base?
In our most recent game of G40, my partner Germany did a 100% sea lion build (hes a new player, just learning, wanted to experiment with this).
In response, UK 1-3, was only able to build the following on 3 successive turns on South Africa
1 arty
2 mechs
1 armorThis is $18 of approx. $84 dollars available on those turns, demonstrating that only 20% of funds are available to wisely distribute around the world, when you are turtling London against the largest possible German commit (8+ TTs!)
We lost, since Russia raged, but it was still fun.
Did your Axis partner DOW on Russia prior to Sea Lion in order to occupy E. Poland? How soon or where did Russia stack in order to really threaten Germany?
I purchase 6 infantry and a fighter every single game as a UK player regardless of what Germany does. At some point during the game Germany will be tempted to look across the channel so I need to at least make sure that London is not an easy target if not have to defend it. On UK 2 I purchase the IC for Persia and the naval base if Germany doesn’t purchase what they need to do Sealion. That leaves 10 IPC’s that I use to purchase another fighter. If UK doesn’t have at least 3 fighters by the end of UK 2 then that’s where I place it. If they do then I place it in SA. Depending on what is going on the naval base doesn’t need to be purchased until the third turn. If Germany’s purchases give a small chance of Sealion then you can put up to 5 more infantry on London. If UK lost too much of their air power in Taranto you can place 2 more units on SA, one of which is a plane.
There is no UK strategy that is effective if you lose London.
GHG,
My preference is to play global via table top. But being a father with a 14 month old son and a husband to my wonderful wife, I can’t justify dedicating a 12-14 hour Saturday more than 1x per 2-3 months. Playing a few hours of triplea in the evening after my son is put to bed is sometimes the only way I can play. Yes, triplea isn’t the same, but it’s a good electronic version.
Amongst the triplea global 40 regulars, Sea Lion has recently become very popular again. A few months ago, I started a post called “Tan Skies” (meaning large stacks of UK fighters getting to Moscow being a problem for Germany). Players are really tired of aggressive UK strategies like your plan and lately seem to be testing the limitations of Sea Lion again. An opponent recently pulled off Sea Lion against me and it wasn’t pyrrhic (he only had to take like 2 plane hits). He declared war on Russia G2 in order to snatch E. Poland. This was easy because he positioned his ground on G1 like he was going to do Barbarossa but his forces were evenly positioned from Romania on up to Poland so the Russian player couldn’t tell if he was going to go north or south of the Pripet marshes. Grabbing E. Poland on G2 really puts Russia out of position for subsequent threats of Germany and helps to block Russia from immediately getting lots of NO bonuses. I was shocked when he bought a ton of transports G2 even though I placed the “responsible” 6 infantry / 1 fighter on London. His reasoning for still doing Sea Lion despite 6 inf/1 fig was that the US was setting itself up for a KJF strategy and he needed to slow them down. The US navy was in wrong place to where they couldn’t immediately move any ships to New Brunswick. His G1 purchase I think was 1 bomber, 1 sub, 4 infantry. The axis won this game.
Until this game, it hadn’t really occurred to me that 8 infantry / 1 artillery is a better defensive purchase. Duh… We buy the 6/1 so we get 1 useful fighter. If Germany purchases 1 transport on G1, I’m now more inclined to purchase 8 infantry/ 1 artillery for London against good opponents. I’ll still buy 6 infantry / 1 fighter if a German opponent purchased like described above. But it was rather shocking.
That’s good advice Ichabod. I’ll have to try purchasing that and then I can place that UK 2 fighter there as well assuming Germany doesn’t buy transports on G2. I find I rarely have to use those fighters anyway, they act mostly as a deterrent. Occasionally you can pick off the odd boat with them or using them for sbr if you get your bomber back there or purchase a new one sometime during the game.
Thanks for the endorsements, wish I got so many working at Sprint!
Im not trying to dismiss any idea outright. Sometimes a static plan (esp for allies) is dangerous
esp in G42 we are now challenging this idea that india is hopless by forumlating
a rescue plan via persia so J3 doesnt pull odds
a takeback plan so japan doesnt flow tanks into russia belly and get comfy
a responsive plan that lets UK get assertive/protective if japan is dumb enough to wait or focus elsewhere
buys are awesome but unlike G42, its UK3 before you can drop 1 guy on persia, iraq, or even egypt (assuming threat) so GHG plan covers UK3-7 and its a deep commit. GHG plan does accomplish the above goals if we can threaten japans control of india but alot of games are over or nearly over by turn 7 (aaa games last longer than live ones usually)
will try to watch your video when not at work
The Research and Development game that I’m in the middle of is a perfect illustration of how my strategy works. The first 8 rounds are up on my channel right now and I’m hoping to finish the game this weekend. Although there are a few house rules involved I’m still using the same strategy. It’s a long series of videos and I don’t expect people who don’t have much time on their hands to be able to sit down and watch it. For those who do though, you can see how I take what the axis gives me and that my strategy is not nearly as rigid as my OP makes it out to be. Japan has taken India in the 9th round and the UK has taken it back. It’s shaping up to be a good battle over the Middle East. Germany is on the defence and Italy is completely out of the game now. The question at this point seems to be can Germany hold out long enough for Japan to take 6 Victory Cities.
Actually I’ve never had to land a fighter on Moscow to this point. The Germans haven’t gotten close enough for me to have to do that. I am aware of that strategy though and I’m sure that some day I will have to use it if things don’t go well for Russia. Sending mechs and tanks into the Eastern Front is usually enough to stop the Germans and Italians. It’s surprising how easy it is to do the reverse can opener against them in Bessarabia and bust into the Balkans or Romania. With Russia able to build in the Ukraine, it’s a lot easier than having to march units from Berlin or Northern Italy.
You must be playing VERY weak German players. Unless that country decides to do a Sea Lion attack, there is no way that Russia can prevent them from laying siege to Moscow. Key to the German plan is buying 10 tanks/mechs in Germany on G2 and supporting the spearhead army with additional fast movers and/or additional planes purchased on G3-G5. Italy should buy a tank and mech on I1 and use their four fast movers + planes to can open as necessary.
Buying a factory in Persia on UK2 is an excellent plan since the fighters can prevent Germany from taking Moscow and slow down efforts to move into the Middle East. I am surprised that you would allow Italy to take Egypt early in the game. Germany can usually land enough planes to prevent a counterattack until Italy can handle the situation themselves.
It’s more a matter of standing up to the Germans instead of running back to Moscow and hiding behind their Mommy’s skirts. You buy a combination of infantry and offensive units (tanks, artillery) and continually counter-attack the Germans where they expose the most tanks. You hit them with everything that can reach and then they are stuck rebuilding for yet another turn, and then another. You’re hanging onto more of your money while they are getting less of it so you can continue to make those kinds of purchases. Next thing you know help has arrived on the Western Front and up from the Middle East. Those 10 tanks of yours will die as soon as they hit the border and you’ll be saying to me “What, are you crazy? You’re not supposed to be able to do that!” Then I hit the next batch of tanks that roll over the border. Try it sometime in one of your games and see how effective it can be as a deterrent against the Germans. Or don’t. It’s your choice if you think there’s no way that Russia can possibly stand up to the Germans. Hitler didn’t either.
There is a general learning curve where Germany initially struggles against Russia. Players frequently find themselves open to counter attack and sometimes see that Berlin gets captured by the Red Army. I assure you that in a non-BM game with normal dice outcomes there is absolutely nothing sane that you can do to prevent Germany from marching:
G3: Eastern Poland
G4: Belarus
R4: Russian troops must retreat to Moscow or else Italian canopers take Smolensk and German fast movers take the capitol
G5: Bryansk* sometimes a few German fighters are required to support the Italian/German stack for this critical move.
After that point the realities of the game take over. Against an aggressive Russian player who built too many artillery and didn’t obtain fighter support from other Allied players, Moscow will fall. Otherwise, I besiege the capitol and head down to the oil fields with a sub-force. I have played very aggressive Russian players who are willing to throw away large stacks of infantry to prevent Italian canopening, but that only hastens the eventual fall of Moscow. They are throwing away a bunch of units that defend as 2s in return for a few German units that attack as 1s.
You can go through the battlecalcs for each round. It isn’t too hard to figure out how big each German/Russian stack will be with the assumption that two or three German planes will be lost in the opening couple of rounds. Do the exercise and see that your ambitious plans do not hold water. I am sure that you merely have found novice opponents who misspend German money and build too much fleet, throw away the planes, or do other stupid things.
Here is the reality, Arthur.
On offence Germany can impose it’s will on Russia in part because of the Luftwaffe. After they take a Russian territory they must land in a space they had before their turn begins. Then it’s Russia’s turn to attack and now it’s Russia who has the only air power in the fight to take back a territory that the Luftwaffe had to vacate on non combat move. If you are a decent player you can position your units every turn in such a way that you can counter-attack any space on the front lines. The counter for Italy’s can opener is the UK forces you bring up from the Middle East. Italy will only get 1, maybe 2 chances to do a can opener before they are removed from the game by the UK and American Forces who target them first in my strategy. Probably only 1 when they see what is coming for Rome and they are forced to retreat back to their capital to defend it. Germany will make some headway into Russia, there’s no doubt about that. The real question is can they get to Moscow fast enough. Russia doesn’t have to hold on all game, they just have to hold on long enough for help to arrive. It’s not just about how good the player is who is controlling Germany, they roll the same dice as a novice player with no better luck. It also matters how good the Russian player is. He can’t just attack for the sake of attacking, he has to be able to determine where, when, and with how many units he should counter with. There’s an art to doing it properly. It definitely takes some practice to get it right.
Generalhandgrenade. How about you just take a game with ABH to see how it goes?
Sure!
I’ll give him a free place to stay and feed him well when he’s here. Not to sure how he feels about flying up to Northern British Columbia but he’s more than welcome.
Hey GHG, I know that you’ve been busy introducing these Middle Earth ideas, I’ve been so busy but wanting to learn more… at this point is it a legitimate power move, what are people saying in general about it, what victory tokens if any would it help capture or prevent, and most importantly… can you talk your teammates into doing it at the convention?
Thanks for the update, sorry for not reading everything through myself.
Definitely the Africa tokens, Rome, India, and French Liberation would be affected by this. I have no idea what strategy we’ll be playing having never played a game with Sired and Widowmaker.
The strategy is getting mixed reviews as they all do on A&A dot org. Everyone has their own opinions of how to play the game and they’re sure that you don’t have a clue. That’s part of the fun of being here is the debates over who’s strategy is better which inevitably turns into declaration that anyone who doesn’t play Triple A has no idea how to play the game. Some day one of them will take the time to learn and perfect my overall Allied strategy and then they will realize that it isn’t the act of playing in a league that makes a person capable of concocting an effective strategy. It’s much more about instinct, the ability to read a game, react to your opponents moves, overcome back luck with the dice, and create strategies during a game that makes you a better player than just simply memorizing other peoples strategies and copying them. There are a lot of good players in that league who have those abilities, I know because I read the game summaries once in awhile. There are also a lot of good players on this site who don’t play in the league because they love the tabletop game. I’ve even played some guys (not many) who don’t even own a computer but could give the best ones here a run for their money because they can react to anything that you throw at them.
It would be fun to have the money to tour around and play everyone in their homes and see all of the ways that they customize their spaces. I know some would say that you can do the same by joining the league and playing on the computer but that doesn’t hold the same attraction for me. I’m very much looking forward to your tournament where I can have the privilege to play against good competition and meet some of the people from here in person. It’s going to be a blast.
