Bear in mind, the land units on the transport only act on their Turn.
We need an allied playbook.
-
I agree with each of the things you are saying individually,
What I disagree with is the conclusion that buying any 1 unit idiomatically or based on a pat formula can win you the game. Even I was just espousing USA “subs subs subs” but its a “carriers first then subs then sbombers with dds mixed in” plan not just build 200 subs = u win.
-
@taamvan well of course it can be deeper than that. The first round of carriers is to support ANZAC. What the bombers do in addition to full board support is to keep Japan’s navy pretty much grouped together. Every game is different, but the key is this: keeping Japan from winning. If you can do that, and then shift to Europe/Egypt, the Allies have good chances even when Moscow falls.
In the end, Moscow will fall against a good German player. That’s really when the game begins, not ends. Keeping the Axis out of Egypt is the key. And, if the US can send planes to make the taking of Moscow more painful to Germany (and not the UK) and to clear the Med and so forth, then the UK can focus fully on Egypt. This is the key to Allied victory imho.
A bomber only costs 12 ipc’s. If you can hit a land stack in one go (say with 25 bombers) then indirectly those bombers control land. And, if you consider the costs of transporting US troops to the mideast, bombers are actually cheaper than infantry when you do the math (and more effective).
Everything counts in large amounts… :)
EDIT: Consider how far ANZAC planes can go on US carriers. US moves then ANZAC before Japan. Even more dead zones are created in the Pacific this way.
-
did you just drop a Depeche Mode quote in an Axis and Allies conversation? Bravo.
Sir, I salute you.
-
Well sometimes this is your last chance. After that, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and DizzKneeLand33 shows you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.😉
-
since when is “Eat Me/Drink Me” a red blue thing? I find the pill colors so confusing–which color pill do I take so that I can remain in the world with the tender grass fed steaks BUT THAT ALSO INCLUDES a copy of the complete works of Jean Baudrillard in audiobook format?
-
Didn’t Hitler think he could just bomb Britain into capitulation? Seems like “boots on the ground” is always necessary and US needs a shuck system in place for this. Aircraft can’t take territories and can’t defend fleets needed to bring in troops to Europe–if US leaves shucking to the Brits. Have you play tested the light skies strategy against good opponents?
-
@taamvan said in We need an allied playbook.:
since when is “Eat Me/Drink Me” a red blue thing? I find the pill colors so confusing–which color pill do I take so that I can remain in the world with the tender grass fed steaks …
is that the kirk douglas farah fawcett sci fi ? : ) The blue one that is : )
and sorry corn fed makes for tender :)
-
Economic area values:
Americas 68
Europe 62
Soviet Union 37
Africa 21
Middle East 6
China and Korea 30
Southeast Asia 13
Pac islands 20
Aus 10
=267In addition, the starting values:
SU 37
Ger 30
Jap 26
US 52
GB 28
UK 17
Italy 10
Aus 10
Fr 19
Allies=163
Axis=66
Neutrals Pro=End of turn 1: Not counting National Objectives
Ger 39-47
Rus 35-37
Jap 30-42
US 50-52
China 7-11
GB 25-31
UK 14-21
IT 10-18
Anz 10
Fr 8-13 no income
Allies=141-162
Axis=82-107End of turn 1: with National Objectives…
Ger +44-57
Rus 35-42
Jap 30-52
US 55-87
Chi 13-17
Bri 30-36
UK -19-26
Ita 20-28
Anz 10-20
Fra -Should probably do Max NOs for Axis in the Middle game …
The question is: how much do the Axis have to earn in order to be unstoppable? This wouldn’t account for the use of the pieces on the board at that moment, but the growing sense of inevitability for future rounds. Obviously greater than half or 51 percent makes sense. 134 is that number, without adding National Objectives. This also does not factor in the ebb and flow of income as territories are captured and lost every round. Grasshopper has a victory token that crystallizes this concept. I think his number is 144, though I think his includes NOs. If we assume Italy has been chased back to the continent and has 8, Germany and Japan must split the 126 between them or 63 a piece. With all of China, SE Asia, the money islands and the Philippines, Japan would earn 62. This must be the waterline for Japan. One can easily see how important it is to nibble early. The loss of Bombay has to be countered with a gain elsewhere ore immediately retaken. A doomed transport must retake an island or a territory at this crucial juncture in the game.
Germany before OB, hovers around 54. They can quickly shoot to 67 at the gates of Moscow. …got to go
-
@Guam-Solo said in We need an allied playbook.:
Didn’t Hitler think he could just bomb Britain into capitulation? Seems like “boots on the ground” is always necessary and US needs a shuck system in place for this. Aircraft can’t take territories and can’t defend fleets needed to bring in troops to Europe–if US leaves shucking to the Brits. Have you play tested the light skies strategy against good opponents?
Yes, I’ve played it right here on these boards. Been gone a few years but back playing in league, and it’s the strategy I’ve used pretty much throughout. I’m not the best league player, but I’m not the worst either…
EDIT: So, I think the playtesting has involved about 30 games so far, although I’d have to find my older games.
-
Let me go one step further. I’m not sure you guys have seen a good Germany who buys a lot of bombers. You will be so busy trying to keep up with capital ships with the USA just to shuck a few infantry that will be decimated upon landing.
OR
You can buy bombers. I mean, it makes a lot more sense in Global than you would think. This also doesn’t work for other A&A games – well, not to this extent. Bombers are also prevalent at the top levels of even classic games when you are rolling tech, but you need land units as well.
This game is different.
-
@Argothair Believe or not, I just listened to this thread in its entirety yesterday. Great compact playbook! I was in the middle of my busy season and I get more juice from creating and writing than just absorbing. Now it’s slowed down as of this week and I finally caught up. I’m trying to do something even larger and perhaps more comprehensive. Hopefully, it helps the community. One thing I haven’t gotten to and perhaps you could comment on would be strict neutrals, the Spanish beachhead, etc. Also, would you consider putting it out on Youtube or would you mind if I did on your behalf? No pressure. I want to promote Allied strategy and Allied strategic thinking. America is soooo difficult to play.
-
@crockett36 Hey there! I’m glad you like it. You are more than welcome to read or summarize my advice on YouTube as long as you give me some credit for it as part of the video – I’m not likely to be recording a YouTube video of Global advice anytime soon.
My thought about strict neutrals is that they’re there to help you punish your opponent when they do something really strange or make a mistake. If neither America nor the UK is putting anything into the Atlantic, for example, then Germany can attack Sweden and Spain while Italy attacks Turkey, and you can mostly get away with it – this can help you take Gibraltar, Egypt, Iraq, etc. without wasting a ton of money on transports. Conversely, if Germany and Italy are dropping huge stacks of infantry into France and Rome but are leaving Poland / Romania / Bulgaria / Greece wide open, and the UK has a big stack of infantry in the Middle East, and Japan has already activated Mongolia as a pro-Allied neutral by invading Amur, then you might be able to attack eastern Europe from the Middle East through Turkey – sure, Germany can walk into Spain and Sweden, but that’s not a big deal; you’re basically allowing them to keep Western Europe in exchange for a British factory in Greece and a Russian tank swarm fueled by the Spread of Communism NO that will ultimately take Berlin before Spanish infantry can reach it.
These are pretty rare scenarios, though, and of 10 games where you’re tempted to invade a strict neutral, you should probably just pass in about 9 of those 10 games and stick to more conventional strategies. The Spanish beachhead is not as exciting as it looks – you’re closer to New York, but you’re correspondingly further from Berlin; it saves you a few bucks on transports, but you lose that money by needing to fight formerly neutral infantry, and the attack as a whole doesn’t necessarily save you any time.
Of course, if your opponent is foolish enough to invade a strict neutral, go claim your prizes! It often makes sense to leave one mech hanging around somewhere near the area where your opponent might be tempted to invade strict neutrals so that you can quickly capitalize on the newly available fighting forces. Once the mech runs in there, you’ll be able to fly in air support and get a decent offensive punch. Be aware that you cannot ever activate neutrals with a plane, so even if neutrals are ‘on your side’, they are still off-limits to your planes until you move a land unit into their territories.
-
@crockett36 Am I reading this correctly, you can listen to a thread?
-
@Argothair Is the Spanish Beachhead used much by experienced players? I’ve always thought is was a poor man’s Normandy, like a fast-tracked D-day that requires less build up. It’s only been used one time in a game I’ve played in, but I saw Young Grasshopper post a pic recently where he used it. I don’t see any Youtube tutorials on this strategy by YG, GHG, DTroy, etc…
-
@Argothair Solid thoughts on the neutrals as well.
-
@Guam-Solo I’m not the world’s most experienced Global player, but I’ve never had a Spanish beachhead used against me as the Axis, and I’ve never used it as the Allies. The difference between invading Spain and invading France is that invading Spain doesn’t require an immediate Axis response – if you’re in Paris, then you just gained a victory city and you’re one move away from permanently destroying my major factory in Western Germany. If you’re in Madrid, then you just gained 2 IPCs per turn. The consequences for the Axis just really aren’t in the same league. In a sense, actually invading Madrid is just a threat to do D-Day. Whether you pre-position your troops in Canada, London, or Spain, you’re still just pre-positioning. The only reason why I would want to do the Spanish beachhead is if I can’t get control of any sea zones near Europe, and I have to keep sending in waves of suicidal transports to cope with a Dark Skies strategy.
-
I played a game once where the axis player invaded the strict neutrals so i did the beachhead and wipe germany out quickly That was fun
-
@DessertFox599 I think if England is about to be conquered defend it with infantry and fighters and start attacking German ships if your America go for Germany first always japan is too far away while putting something in the pacific for awhile
-
@Guam-Solo voice aloud reader app in play store
great stuff. -
The question is: where is the point of no return for the Axis where victory is assured? When should the American player concede? Conversely, what economic number is so low it is destined to bleed the enemy over the course of say five turns?
Suggested Topics
