@Sgt-Mclusky Unlike previous renditions of A+A I find that AA40 has so many options and paths to victory that were still playing it and seeing new strategies in my group. Granted I was late to the party with this version so I don’t have years of experience, but we do play an awful lot, and almost never see the same game twice.
Another attempt at an Allied playbook.
-
Great go at this @AldoRaine !
I have some comments/questions
- Same units have different in game value is a great point I think. Take German AA guns in Russia defending an inf or two vs american AA guns in central usa…
- You say you match Russia with bombers vs Germany? Why? I have never in a single game both more than 1 russian bomber, in most games 0. I buy a tac from time to time. two bombers = 8 inf. Hmmmm
- If anzac can send fighters to India/middle east, then yes, buy as many as you can. If not 3 fighters are enough. The rest is transports, men and subs (+1 destroyer)
- In BM syria is a great position for an airbase. One move to Moscow, and India and protects egypt sz. However, it is not easy to pull off most of the time
- Good point about middle east factories should always produce at full. I am not sure that persia is the ideal spot. It is much harder to defend Persia than say Iraq. I agree Persia is tempting early game. I think it is a weaker spot middle to late game, when Germany breaks past Rostov
- Many good points. Personally I almost always sacrifies a transport UK1 to put two men on gibraltar. If you are not carefull gibraltar will become an axis stronghold. It is costly for the axis, but also very nice for Italy and it is a pain to deal with for the allies
-
@oysteilo I didn’t catch that part about Russian bombers. Thanks for catching that. It is meant to say that I like to match Russian fights to German bombers if possible. I will make the clarification.
My thought with ANZAC and buying fighters is that, like you pointed out, you can fly them to the Middle East. There they are obviously great for defending but can also kill Italian can openers. Also, fighters are one of the few units for them that can also work on defense. Once India falls the allies need to secure both Hawaii and Sydney. If Anzac has 6-8 fighters that are parked on carriers there are multiple locations where they are 1 turn away from either location.
-
@AldoRaine said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:
Experience has EMPHATICALLY shown that the most efficient use of units for UK turn 1 involves purchasing an air base for Gibraltar and moving any navy that can reach to sea zone 92 while leaving at least 2 fighters in Gibraltar
the air base seems like a big spend on T1 w/ the UK… seems like you give the germans a real chance to take London???
-
@Aaron_the_Warmonger Even without the risk to London, as the Axis I’ve faced off against the UK stacking sz92 3 times now.
If UK doesn’t max the planes there (including a U.S. fighter) then Italy usually has assets survive (bomber and battleship or fighter).
So the BEST case scenario appears to be the UK has fighters, Italy still loses its navy but gets 2 transports instead of 1.
I think the net result is that it shifts some losses that often end up Germany’s on G2 (finishing off UK’s navy after Taranto) and pushes them onto Italy OR results in a stand off.
(might matter that as Germany I always take S. France on G1. Always)
-
@Aaron_the_Warmonger said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:
@AldoRaine said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:
Experience has EMPHATICALLY shown that the most efficient use of units for UK turn 1 involves purchasing an air base for Gibraltar and moving any navy that can reach to sea zone 92 while leaving at least 2 fighters in Gibraltar
the air base seems like a big spend on T1 w/ the UK… seems like you give the germans a real chance to take London???
It may seem so but the actuality of it is that unless there has been a sea lion buy G1,. bringing the fleet up to SZ110 as well as the planes, is enough to defend London G3.
-
of all the axis strategies, I use to fear this one the most. With a robust American respoonse, I now fear it the least. If we think in terms of setting up dance partners, normal strategy sets up a Russia/Germany waltz. Japan does a foxtrot with everyone but Russia. America must try to cut in to the European festivities, but often arrives too late.
In a Sealion, America and Germany must be paired–to Germany’s doom. It demands nearly 100 percent of resources to take it back or keep it. Thus. isn’t Russia unleashed to kick Japan out of the Asian ballroom
I’ve only played one game against a sealion. I retook London and Russia was crushing the Eastern front and retook Calcutta.
-
Just so I am clear you are suggesting a SZ 92 Stack with nothing but the SZ 98 Fleet, the SZ 91 CR and then of course scrambled fighters?
I have seen a SZ 92 stack on occasions where Germans go to light on 110 and the U.K. BB survives but never without that.
With this strategy I imagine Italy has a good chance to take Egypt And/Or Iraq. But perhaps I am wrong. I would love to hear more about this SZ92 stack and the Italian and British implications that go with it.
-
Hey crew!
I think we are still trading around some great ideas. To throw in my two cents about the original post, I’d suggest some of the following
Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting
Going KJF is much more satisfying in some ways than KGF–with KJF you stand a better chance of toppling or surprising and seriously disrupting Japan than Germany.
However, you can’t defeat Japan and while you’re suppressing Japan: Germany takes the game and so we need to prepare USA for a KGF regardless of what the Axis do or what their plan is
This dynamic means that the everything the Allies do should flow towards moscow and be in place before the culminating battleANZAC 3 planes to java (dont forget many players think you cannot land on dutch islands without capturing them that is incorrect) and then all 6 of those allied planes go to persia, then russia
You cant lose on the pac board, so ANZAC should turtle after the intial 3–includes infantry because of limited production then protect sydney.
Taranto must be done, but that costs you alot of fighters–so UK must be garrisoned starting from turn 1 and continuing all game, no exceptions (and no factories, airbases, or tank SA buys until its clearly safe and Germany is headed elsewhere). Not doing taranto makes Italy rage which is way worse over time for the UK than just dealing with them from game start
UK East wants sumatra and ethiopia but you should take persia turn 1 and do what you need to do to keep egypt safe all game (tobruk? turtle? up to you)The best KGF I’ve seen has the USA transition directly from SZ 91 to norway, then finland, building bases as we go–so at some point you’ll want to destroy the German fleet to ensure they can’t do anything about it. If Germany wastes time or flinches you will be able to go over the top and take back leningrad thats 3 factories pouring out tanks
A combination of US north and UK south rescue forces is the only thing that can prevent the income flop whether moscow dies or not
for russia, more fighters is better than armor or mech or tacticals because they dissuade the crippling stratbombings
for UK, more fighters is better than more men and ships because you go after the US and can support a US landing
realistically, USA only gets 1 wave of ground troops before the russia game is decided–do not waste 1 manFinally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*
I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill
good luck have fun boys
-
@taamvan said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:
Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*
Taamvan mode is all well and good but for experienced players it lacks the strategic depth of Balanced Mod.
-
@simon33 I could not agree more. Balanced Mod is the way to go. That pesky China rule… The only quibble with BM is that it would feel unfamiliar the first few times to those used to playing 2nd ed. Otherwise its well vetted and themey.
-
Disagree. A voice crying out in the wilderness says check out the allied playbook game.
Also I’m questioning the construction of an industrial complex in Norway. An efficient shuck, naval and air supremacy will make it wasteful. 3 US CVs, 1 Brit CV plus PAC fleet.
to the Atlantic. Make Germany cry. -
A transport round trip is, at best, 4 rounds to get 2 units. So 14 pics on 2 transports gets you 1 new unit a turn
Or
A 12ipcs minor complex is 3 of any unit a turn every turn, which would require 7 transports to accomplish the same.
The cost to benefit isnt even close.
-
@crockett36 said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:
Disagree. A voice crying out in the wilderness says check out the allied playbook game.
Also I’m questioning the construction of an industrial complex in Norway. An efficient shuck, naval and air supremacy will make it wasteful. 3 US CVs, 1 Brit CV plus PAC fleet.
to the Atlantic. Make Germany cry.Who’s building the IC in Norway? I wouldn’t really question that if USA can hold it, even for a few turns, they should be building an IC there. They can always retake it if it’s lost.
-
US would build the IC. I just know my system works around extreme mobility. And after turn five a lot of planes have to go to garrison Hawaii. That and the cost of transports, men and replacement planes for the Atlantic make your margins thin.
-
-
I like this as an opening for Rus if it’s not a G1. Threatens a lot. aggressive in a safe way.
-
-
if no g2, this has elements that keep the enemy guessing. again aggression in defense.
-
It’s better to stack Vyborg than Karelia if the German TT is in SZ112. Otherwise amphibious troops can attack - cruiser can block Vyborg.
-
I like the variation on a theme. My only question would be, do we want those amphibious troops attacking? We might. Any activity not directed toward Moscow is a win?! But I will try that next time.
Suggested Topics
