I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.
What would you have as Germany, and where?
Germany 1:
Buy(30)
Combat Moves:
SZ 106: 2 Submarines vs Transport, Destroyer
Submarine from SZ 117 to SZ 106
Submarine from SZ 118 to SZ 106
SZ 109: 2 Submarines, 3 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers, Strategic Bomber vs Transport, Destroyer Potential 3 Scrambled Fighters
Submarine from SZ 103 to SZ 109
Submarine from SZ 108 to SZ 109
Fighter from Holland to SZ 109
2 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers from W. Germany to SZ 109
Strategic From Germany to SZ 109
SZ 112: Submarine, Cruiser, Battleship vs 2 Cruisers
W. France: 4 Infantry, Artillery, Fighter, Tactical vs 2 Infantry, Armor, Fighter
France: 3 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 4 Mech, 5 Arm, Fighter, Tactical vs 7 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 2 Armor, Fighter AA Gun
Yugoslavia: 9 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 3 Armor vs 5 Infantry
Finland: Infantry from Norway
Bulgaria: Infatnry from Romania
All Aircraft to land in Holland after fight, AA Guns from W. Germany to Holland. Using an Alpha 2 map, but you can extrapolate from there, I think.
But, Jenn….If what you say was true, why in hell would they bother to make it more difficult in Alpha 3 ?
Because Larry wants it to be. /shrug. I kind of like it being more difficult, always felt it strange that London fell so easily (easy as in most of the time, not in cost effectiveness) but I also always felt it was rather a bad tactic to take.
I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.
What would you have as Germany, and where?
Miscounted the Fighter/Tactical from the Far east, so I redirected them into the French territories and called off the attack on the British destroyer. Just in case you’re wondering where it is on the above post.
Directed to OMEGA.
I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.
What would you have as Germany, and where?
Speaking of, why don’t you ever detail your moves? You always want others to detail theirs so you can sit there and pick them apart, but we never seem to get counter moves from you. Perhaps a one round build or something, but never a detailed round.
:roll:
That a fact? What is this, then?
OK, then how about this?
sz111 to sz104
1 DDsz111 to sz109
1 BBsz109 to sz92
1 DD, 1 TTsz91 to sz92
1 CAsz98 to sz92
1 CA, 1 CV, 1 tac, 1 TT (load from Alx 1 tank, form Mal 1 inf to Gib)sz98 to sz94
1 DDScotland to Gib
1 fhtMal to Gib
1 fhtI’ll not bother with everything else, unless it impacts the defense of London.
:roll:
That a fact? What is this, then?
OK, then how about this?
sz111 to sz104
1 DDsz111 to sz109
1 BBsz109 to sz92
1 DD, 1 TTsz91 to sz92
1 CAsz98 to sz92
1 CA, 1 CV, 1 tac, 1 TT (load from Alx 1 tank, form Mal 1 inf to Gib)sz98 to sz94
1 DDScotland to Gib
1 fhtMal to Gib
1 fhtI’ll not bother with everything else, unless it impacts the defense of London.
I didn’t say fact…thanks for posting something for us to pick at for a while. ^_~ Give us something to look at.
@Cmdr:
So you conceed that if the axis are dedicated, London will fall.
I conceed nothing, as you have only demonstrated desparate tactics. I will ignore future posts.
I hardly consider 70% “desperate” tactics. It is very hard to get better odds given the revised situation on the ground. I actually think it would be only slightly easier to get better odds given Alpha 2.You did not say what UK would build?
9 inf, save $1
That’s what I figured for round 1. Round 2 was 34 IPC for 9 Infantry, 1 Armor, Save 1. Round 3 was (34 - 5 IPC NO lost to Italy, -6 CRD SZ 109, -2 CRD SZ 106, assumed only Alexandria and/or Gibraltar was taken, +1 saved) 22 IPC for 6 Infantry, Artillery. Coupled with 3 Infantry, 3 Fighters mainland + fighter Malta + fighter Gibraltar + tactical SZ 98 + Infantry, Armor from Canada that gives England AT MOST:
*27 Infantry
- 1 Artillery
- 2 Armor
- 5 Fighters
- 1 Tactical Bomber
To use on attack. Where all these half dozen armors came from I have no idea. It has not been detailed. Now, it is possible someone would give up 12 infantry for 6 more armor, but I don’t see how that improves the attack on Scotland, but I do see how it decimates the defense of Lonond.Would send 2 or 3 subs and planes sink the BB in 109, preferrably 3.
Did you mean DD? Yes, 2 Submarines, 3 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers is what I typically send to kill the Destroyer/Transport in SZ 109 with 2 Submarines hitting the Destroyer/Transport in SZ 109. I send my other equipment that can reach to hit SZ 110 (to get the last destroyer and liberate my submarines from the threat of detection) and of course, something to hit SZ 112. But then, that’s when I am NOT planning on destroying any chance I have to win by conducting Operation Sea Lion.
How many subs will you have? Maybe there should be a DD with the BB in sz109 and use the cruiser to block? Or we could buy the DD?
No Sea Lion? Start with 5 Submarines, build 2 or 3 a round. Goal: Destroy England’s economy, Destroy America’s economy. USA is harder, with potentially 1 destroyer and 6 aircraft to attack any submarines in SZ 101. (Building a complex in Mexico seems to be something people wont do, so 6 is usually about all you would normally see there.)Would a destroyer and planes sink 104, that blocks the fleet on its way back to London.
Yes. With the change to Italy, the Strategic Bomber alone could clear SZ 104 opening the road for Germany as well. One of the many, MANY things I like about Alpha 3.
I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.
Then the question is how many would you build?
2 For England, 1 for Canada, 1 for Africa, 10 for America, 5 in reserve off the coast of Gibraltar, 3 in SZ 105. Total: 22 Submarines, I start with 5, in a perfect world, that means I need 17 more. In a realistic world, I probably need 20 more due to casualties on Round 1.Responses in red.
Not sure why I bother, if you didn’t read the other thread who’s to say you’ll read this. I’ll detail where those UK armor came from.
1 is from Alexandria, came by trn from the med to UK. 1 is purchased UK2 because we invaded Iraq, giving UK enough money to purchase 9 inf 1 arm. I think the one from Canada came on UK3? Jim knows better because he was the one using that battlemap thingy, so half of us had no idea what his moves were.
As for the assertion that Sealion was not a requirement to win the game in Alpha2. I totally agree with you. I don’t understand why people were so against the option of invasion? It meant taking a huge risk, a land campaign in Russia G2 has a better chance of victory on the continent. Not sure why the simple fix wasn’t to just allow Russia to declare on Germany if London falls.
Not sure why I bother, if you didn’t read the other thread who’s to say you’ll read this. I’ll detail where those UK armor came from.
1 is from Alexandria, came by trn from the med to UK. 1 is purchased UK2 because we invaded Iraq, giving UK enough money to purchase 9 inf 1 arm. I think the one from Canada came on UK3? Jim knows better because he was the one using that battlemap thingy, so half of us had no idea what his moves were.
As for the assertion that Sealion was not a requirement to win the game in Alpha2. I totally agree with you. I don’t understand why people were so against the option of invasion? It meant taking a huge risk, a land campaign in Russia G2 has a better chance of victory on the continent. Not sure why the simple fix wasn’t to just allow Russia to declare on Germany if London falls.
How are you getting the Alexandria one out without being murdered by the German fleet before you get there?
You can get one from Canada to England, I detailed that one already. Transport from SZ 109 to SZ 106. Next round, Transport from SZ 106 to SZ 109 land Infantry, Armor in England.
So you are bringing the Transport from SZ 39 to SZ 80 to land troops in Iraq and C. Persia to get a few more IPC out of England? Doesn’t that leave India too weak to stop Japan? Figured you needed those IPC from the DEI. (I assume the transport hits C. Persia first, then helps to get Iraq the next round, because I think you said the SZ 98 transport books it for Gibraltar and hopes the Germans dont crush it and anything it comes with, right?)
I am not against allowing people to do Sea Lion. I actually dont mind if my opponents do it to me (win or lose the defense) because I feel, (in my opinion, I think, etc) that it is a bad move, it costs too much than you get for it in Alpha 2. In Alpha 3 it’s just worse for Germany, no objective, more defending units, etc.
I just wanted to demonstrate it was possible even with the changes to the rules. Hell, people are now talking about not even bothering to defend England at all and going for a complex in Egypt. That should make it easier to take England out.
I would rather lose India than London, but yes that armor comes via the Med. If you want to see how that fleet survives the Germ/Italian response, READ THE THREAD.
Also I don’t buy a CV for India, I build ground troops their first 2 rounds before even thinking of other builds.
@mantlefan:
@Cmdr:
So you conceed that if the axis are dedicated, London will fall. That’s all I have been saying this whole time. I never claimed it was a good idea.
As I have asked before, what is the point of doing that?
How exactly is proving that Sealion is possible (while ignoring whether or not it is a good idea if Germany wants to WIN) NOT a waste of time?
1) It was claimed that sea lion was not possible anymore. Not necessarily by you or not by you, but it has been claimed.
2) It was stated that the aa guns in England were too powerful.
3) No one really asked if it was a GOOD idea, they only asked if it was possible.
Debating the possibility is not the same as endorsing something as a good idea. I can debate the merits of polygamy and not endorse the practice myself. (In fact, I did debate it in my ethics class.)
Showing that Sea Lion is still possible also debunks the statement that the axis only have one path now and that choices were removed. (Which is nonsense really, there’s still KAF, KAnF, KInF, KRF and KukF).
Jimmy,
I dont buy a CV for India either, but I do move the one from SZ 98. And I buy ground troops for like the first 3 rounds, probably 4…depending on how many destroyers I need to block the Japanese…
14 BAT-BUGGERING PAGES LATER!!! :-D
Anyone playing the game to achieve one sole objective, Like getting a German sub to circumnavigate the board to the detriment to EVERYTHING else is not seriously trying playing the game, or really trying to do anything of mention. Taking London to the detrimente of everything else Germany has the option to is a waste of a game and is certianly not worth reading theough 14 PAGES of (seriously Jen you would owe me like 2 hours of time if I wasnt at work right now) There are two many consideration in this game, and claiming to ignore all of them to achieve a taking of London, you might as well not even be playing the game. I think it all depends on the players choice, which option suits them more, and buying transports and a AC arent bad moves, as you can turn thoes things on Russia just as easily.
Jim010, thank you :-)
You’re welcome.
I am willing to examine realistic tactics (something you would actually play) but think it would now need a new thread. And we would need to look at only 1 opening at a time.
I feel as though I have tainted the whole purpose of this thread with my reckless and unintelligently worded title. If I were asked by the heavily active participants to remove the topic all together…. I would in a second (considering it’s “useless” to discuss such a thing). That said, I will be sure to read a dictionary the next time I want to start a thread. Still… my “title” hammered out 14 pages, so… it can’t be all that useless. I mean its not like some of the “Kill America First” threads on this site hold much water.
@Young:
One of my favorite strategies is in danger of becoming extinct. Never in the history of all the world stage A&A games has Germany even considered, let alone attempted capturing London until Global 1940 came around.
I would just like to say that this statement is extremely silly.
@Young:
One of my favorite strategies is in danger of becoming extinct. Never in the history of all the world stage A&A games has Germany even considered, let alone attempted capturing London until Global 1940 came around.
I would just like to say that this statement is extremely silly.
Ya, I get it…. please refer to post #209. I said the comment you quoted, because I have played a ton of A&A classic and had never seen a German landing on England. I guess I didn’t consider the other franchises that I haven’t played.
Does anyone else other than me, feel like they need a university degree to post on this thread?
You’re welcome.
I am willing to examine realistic tactics (something you would actually play) but think it would now need a new thread. And we would need to look at only 1 opening at a time.
I have noted a number of inconsistencies with alot of proposed battles, mainly that the margin of victory is very small, Thank you for detailing the math behind all of your moves. I really dont usually buy into these all or nothing gambits, atleast not in the opening turns. I was wondering if you could tell me how your statistics would change if the UK fighter in Normandy began the game in London instead. I ask because that is how I usually set-up the board as I play more to history and historically the RAF had been completely pulled out of France after Dunkirk (atleast to a degree that wouldnt warrent a playing piece).
Grasshopper, dont be so hard on yourself, I really dont think the title was badly worded, all that has happened is what normally happens when one perosn makes claims and another demands clarification, who knew how good some members of this community are at the ol’ flim-flam :wink:
It’d be nice if people stopped attacking each other in this thread. It’s probably against forum rules or something. At the very least, it’s bad manners.
@Young:
Does anyone else other than me, feel like they need a university degree to post on this thread?
Yes, sometimes you feel like you need a degree in history.
