Alpha +3 Observations

[Gargantua]

Well I picked apart Jen’s post about Allied and Axis IPC counts….  if that’s baiting…  what are we doing here?

[Jennifer]

@Gargantua:

Well I picked apart Jen’s post about Allied and Axis IPC counts….  if that’s baiting…  what are we doing here?

I dont know.  I didn’t do it.  I try not to delete entire posts unless it is literally nothing but slander and trolling with absolutely nothing redeaming about it.  That is exceptionally rare on the most part.  If it is part trolling, I’ll go in and delete the parts that are trolling and send a PM to the person to let them know what I did.  I always PM the person if I do something to their posts, the stealth deletions by Switch still grate in my craw.

[Jennifer]

Yes, Russia can do this, as can Germany when America and England invade France.  I fail to see how Russia being able to purchase 6 or 7 guys for Moscow defense while Japan is bringing in 3 or 4 more tanks a round and Germany is bringing in 19 infantry and tanks each round.  (3 Infantry Novgorod, 3 Infantry S. Ukraine, 3 Infatnry N. Ukraine + tanks speed up from Germany proper.)

Very simply, Russia CANNOT survive the focused efforts of Germany, Italy and Japan because it takes the Americans 7 rounds to even GET to Russia.  4 Rounds of Neutrality + 1 Round to get to Quebec’s Naval base, 1 round to get to London’s naval base and 1 round to land reinforcements in Arkhangelsk/Karelia/Novgorod/Nentesia.  Landing in England or Norway is irrelevant, the naval base is in London, not Norway.

German units can get from Germany to Moscow in 1 round.  1 Strategic Bomber moves from Germany to Russia and lands in Bryansk.  2 Rounds for Fighters/Tactical Bombers.  3 Rounds for Armor.  So the real goal is to get all the infantry you need for the attack and get them in position by round 3, or they wont have time to get to Russia before it falls.

[Noll]

Germany and Italy needs to involve part of their IPCs in defending against UK and then US. That’s why they can’t commit all their IPCs to Russia.
Even if you don’t do sealion, you too admitted you like to buy submarines and bomb raid London. That’s quite an IPC investment Jennifer, so the whole point of the thread is that Germany doesn’t have that big advantage you think they have.

Russia will instead invest all their economy in defending their land, Germany can’t do that, cause they have to deal with other powers. Same can be said with Italy. How are you supposed to help Germany if you get your entire fleet crushed UK1 ?

[Jennifer]

Noll:

All Italy needs are 14-20 IPC sent to Russia.  We’re really only talking about 3-5 Infantry and a Tank to pop a territory closer to Moscow and allow the Germans to reinforce it.  That gives Germany the OPTION to move their aircraft over to defend as well.  I say OPTION because Germany also has the OPTION to leave them in range of any British fleet that might suddenly appear.

Other than an initial investment for a carrier, Germany is sending all of their resources at Russia.  I am not holding anything back.  (Planes can zoom over as soon as they are needed, so leaving them behind in W. Germany is not really holding them back.)  Italy is working on Africa and then once England can actually do anything to Europe, reinforcing France to stop them.

America, as we have already outlined, is useless until Round 6 at the absolute earliest and are the easiest to slow down if you wanted too. (Because England cannot open the route for them, so a destroyer WILL block America where as it might not block England.)  If you really wanted too.  I do not think you do, but if you do, you can.

As for submarines, if you are going that route, you need 4 submarines total.  You start with 5, so this should not be an impossibility.  You want 3 or 4 in SZ 109, 1 in SZ 106 and if you went 3 in SZ 109, the the last one can go off the gold coast of Africa in that convoy zone.  Will they be killed?  Eventually.  But that’s not something to worry about for quite some time, at least 3 or 4 rounds, probably 6 or 7 rounds and at that point, you’re already in position to start three hitting the Russians in Moscow.

[Jennifer]

Mantle:

When you go to war you outline your objectives, then figure out a way to attain them.

Germany’s objectives (in order):

1. Get Paris
2. Get Novgorod
3. Get Volgograd
4. Get Muskva
5. Get Cairo

How do you attain this?

You can either go slow and get the three minors as outlined, or go quickly and fore go the complexes and make a hard push for Muskva.  I am not certain which path is correct, but I know that by round 5 Germany should be in prime position to have 3 minor complexes in Russia.  If they cannot attain that goal, they are probably moving too slow and the Americans will become a problem before Muskva falls.  IMHO.

The math holds, the game board situation holds and the rules hold.  If Russia cannot be taken in short order (prior to round 10) than either your opponent is more skilled than you are, or you made a fundamental flaw in your strategy or you got diced.

[JamesAleman]

Did I read this right? AAguns have effectively been nerfed?

Let me get this right. You get to fire 3 times per aagun, but you are maxed out on rolls by the number of aircraft correct?

So unless you buy and build stacks of aaguns, it takes 2 aaguns to give you a likely hit on 1 air unit?

As an added bonus, the air units can now destroy the aaguns and thus have no fear later rounds?

Riddle me this:

Whats to stop the US from building bombers only, obtain a stack of 15 bombers and start clearing land units?
Once you have 15 bombers, you will clear 10 units a combat round on average:) Imagine what one UK transport and 1 inf can do, if the US clears all the land units that can counter attack in Europe.

Typically, 1 old fashioned aa gun prevented this approach, 15 bombers would lose 2-3 plus land unit hits and the aagun never goes away.

15 bombers gives you 10 hits a round-enough to clear a factory’s builds. Continue with a round 2 and you clear the factories aaguns. This is sub par, however you just cleared 30 IPCs for 36….US has the money to burn. Imagine Germany trying to build units in Russia only to see their reinforcements cleared in the rear by US bomber forces.

Never bomb factories in mass, directly assault the land units built out of those factories; aaguns are worthless in Alpha 3 now (they have to spend 10-12 ipcs-are they 5 or 6 ipcs each?-to kill one bomber a turn and now they can be destroyed by the bombers themselves…bonus). Plus bombing factories kills potential units and is capped, bombing units: kill units and their current position (turn is wasted) and is unlimited.

So: At 52 IPCs the US can build 4.3 bombers a turn while neutral….in 3 rounds (13+1starting), you have an air force able to clear stacks of 10 when you enter war, using your newly built bombers as replacements to fuel the fire. In addition, not desirable, but you can defend key areas with the bombers as casualties for London in a pinch.

If you get that force, and supplement it with starting navy or you build 3 bombers a round and other pieces, you should be ok in Europe…Now Japan is another story, maybe you still have to hit them first and only do bombers when Germany leaves London alive.

Italy and Germany could never build a navy:
15 bombers=10 navy hits
carrier, 2 fighters, Battleship, Cruiser, 3 Destroyers, 3 transports-a reasonable Italian fleet.
1 combat round: Italy hits 4 times, US hits 10 combat ends
Italy lost 113 IPC’s, US 48 IPC’s or 60 if they hit 5 times.

In reality, US can amass only 14 bombers by turn 3 (start with 1, build 13)

To clear Japan’s starting fleet, 2 BB, 3 carriers, 6 ftrs, 2 cruisers, 4 destroyers= 22 hits you would need 21 bombers and 2 combat rounds:
US 21 units= 14 hits, Japan 17 units/22 hit taking to die = 9 hits
US 12 units = 8 hits, Japan 8 units = 6 hits

Total bombers lost=9+6=15=180 ipcs for Japan’s 204…21 is the minimum size you would need and that assumes 6 hits instead of 5 round 2 for Japan’s 8 units.

You could use that force in China to clear Japan’s land units (or air units when they land away from a stack of 14 or more) if they hide their fleet.

Is this crazy?

[Peck]

For USA to sustain a bomber campaign they will need to purchase consistent replacements.  This would drain their economy to the point of only being able to fight on one side of the board.  The bombers also need a place to land and it’s hard to take territory without land units.  If I were axis and saw USA doing this I would have a heyday.

[Jennifer]

On the surface that makes sense, but why wouldn’t your opponent start leaving some fighters behind to murder your bombers?

And yes, AA Guns were nerfed heavily, so that they made more sense to have mutliple stacks to save England from falling so easily.  (Not easy, easily.)  I love it though.  I slaughter the Russians with my German guns.  They either risk losing a precious plane, use tanks to reclaim land or give it up to me forever!

[chuck1809]

Has anyone tried this to help out Russia?

On the first turn of Ger invasion of Russia, UK flies 1-2 fighters to Leningrad or Archangel (if somehow Ger took Len.). If Japan goes after Russia, UK India (helped by the Aussies) starts pounding away at Japs Southern Pacific tt’s. Should this not impeed Japan and boost India’s strength? And can not the UK forces in India actually move to help in Russia? Yes I know Russia loses their NO, but who cares when its traded for a plane or 2 each turn. Once America comes in, they can also help shift units to Russia, even to SFE tt’s to offset Japan (US builds factory and NB on Alaska).
Doesn’t this seem viable as I have read here that Russia will last at least until R8?

[JamesAleman]

@Peck:

For USA to sustain a bomber campaign they will need to purchase consistent replacements.  This would drain their economy to the point of only being able to fight on one side of the board.  The bombers also need a place to land and it’s hard to take territory without land units.  If I were axis and saw USA doing this I would have a heyday.

I have devised a method for using the Pacific as your approach to Russia and thus German units with a sustained US bomber campaign.

I have coined this process: “Multi-theater” production. Here are the nuts and bolts. US starting assets deploy in the Pacific, using a patented process inspired by online opponents, This bomber force can operate “multi-theaterly” when based in China. Seeing early action turn 8 versus Germany if my plan holds true. I believe USSR even helping China, with all 3 axis on them, can hold until turn 10.

I developed a method for placing 9 bomber, 5 fighters, and 1 tactical bomber in China on turn 4. The bombers can be used as early as turn 5 against Germany, but I intend to use them until turn 7 to curtail Japanese expansion. This concept is to give the Chinese units “teeth”. By clearing any counter attack force Japan can wield, China can march to its borders using US bombers as casualties. This assures a constant “supply” route from WUSA to Moscow. Once in Moscow: 15 bombers/fighter/tacicals clear German supply lines (stacks of 10 or less) advancing towards Moscow. Only his large stacks will be immune. Picture USSR receiving 6 US bombers a round plus their builds, and these US bombers clearing all nearby German occupied Russian factories without a large defense stack.

This method can be shut down by an early DOW against the U.S. by Japan.

Using your starting fleet, starting air, and 3 rounds of Bomber builds, I created a situation that intimidates me as a former Japanese Player on US turn 4.

The test game is here, I am still looking for an Axis player to test (either A2 or A3 rules will be fine): (if someone steps up to test this with me I am at a disadvantage by spelling out my intent, however I will proceed anyway, if it holds with the enemy knowing your plans, it should prove sound)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24753.new#new

I intend to support my above post with this trial game. One game will not be definitive, but it should prove the concept feasible or non-feasible.

To Jen: regarding my earlier post. Do I understand the rule correctly, USSR fighters may only be shot at 3 times regardless of the number of German AA guns present. They are capped at 3 shots per gun AND capped at the total number of enemy planes….thus 3 USSR air would only be shot at 3 times independent of the number of defensive aaguns.

Edit: I will also credit whoever tests this concept with me, as I credited my opponent when I crafted “Operation Hollywood” for Revised back in the day. If this approach works, I’ll give it a name. I’ll likely not build 6 bombers a round, but will probably commit to 4 so I can build in the Atlantic as well.

[Ruanek]

@JamesAleman:

To Jen: regarding my earlier post. Do I understand the rule correctly, USSR fighters may only be shot at 3 times regardless of the number of German AA guns present. They are capped at 3 shots per gun AND capped at the total number of enemy planes….thus 3 USSR air would only be shot at 3 times independent of the number of defensive aaguns.

I’m not Jen, but I can still answer.

Each AA gun essentially adds 3 to the max number of attacking planes that can be shot at.  No plane can ever be shot at more than once by AA in a round.  So if the attacker has 3 or less planes, then any more than 1 AA gun is relatively worthless (except for being taken as a casualty).

[Guest]

The AMUR rules have been refined:

Soviet/Japanese Non Aggression Pact:
If the Japanese attack any Soviet territory that is adjacent to any Mongolian territory, all Mongolian territories (Olgiy, Dzavhan, Tsagaan-Olom, Central Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, and Buyant-Uhaa) are placed under the control of the Soviet Union at the end of the Japanese Combat Move phase, in the same manner as though the Soviet Union had moved land units into a friendly neutral territory. These territories have Soviet control markers placed on them, and their standing army units are placed on the board and are controlled by the Soviet Union player from then on. This occurs regardless of the state of relations between the Soviet Union and Japan at the time of the attack, with one exception. If the Soviet Union attacks any Japanese-controlled territory bordering these Mongolian territories while Mongolia is still neutral, Mongolia will remain neutral and not ally itself with the Soviet Union.

[JamesAleman]

Here is a separate thread for this, sorry for cluttering this one. I deleted my 2 other posts.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24756.0

Also, congratulations on your turn 3 advance in the tournament Cmdr Jennifer!  :lol:

Since we are both done with our tournament games, does that mean we will face off?
I’d love a chance to match wits, I promise not to roll as well as I did in turn 1 of my tournament game  :-D
(really, I am used to being so unlucky that I am extremely conservative. I use sledge hammers to swat flies as a result, turn 1 was so unexpected I still feel bad for my opponent.)

[Jennifer]

@Ruanek:

@JamesAleman:

To Jen: regarding my earlier post. Do I understand the rule correctly, USSR fighters may only be shot at 3 times regardless of the number of German AA guns present. They are capped at 3 shots per gun AND capped at the total number of enemy planes….thus 3 USSR air would only be shot at 3 times independent of the number of defensive aaguns.

I’m not Jen, but I can still answer.

Each AA gun essentially adds 3 to the max number of attacking planes that can be shot at.  No plane can ever be shot at more than once by AA in a round.  So if the attacker has 3 or less planes, then any more than 1 AA gun is relatively worthless (except for being taken as a casualty).

Wow that was a confusing answer…correct, but hard to understand in my opinion.

Each AA Gun may shoot at up to 3 attacking aircraft.  So if you have 1 gun and the attacker brings 11 aircraft to the fight, 8 of them will never be shot at by your gun.

[Jennifer]

@JamesAleman:

Here is a separate thread for this, sorry for cluttering this one. I deleted my 2 other posts.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24756.0

Also, congratulations on your turn 3 advance in the tournament Cmdr Jennifer!  :lol:

Since we are both done with our tournament games, does that mean we will face off?
I’d love a chance to match wits, I promise not to roll as well as I did in turn 1 of my tournament game  :-D
(really, I am used to being so unlucky that I am extremely conservative. I use sledge hammers to swat flies as a result, turn 1 was so unexpected I still feel bad for my opponent.)

No.  The ladder is set, so whoever wins in the game associated with you will be your next opponent. However, if you woud like to lose a game to me before we are officially matched, I think I can oblige.  :wink:

And thanks, congradulations to yourself with your round 1 win.

[wrath3]

@Cmdr:

Spend 6 IPC to take out the Russian NO, Wrath.  A submarine in SZ 125 takes away the objective as well as a destroyer does.  It also requires the allies to send a destroyer to go kill it, instead of using only planes.

A submarine isnt a war ship according to our definition of the rules but I wont argue about that. The price of 8 ipc is still worth it.

Russia was buffed in Alpha 2 because many Axis players blew their strength on England, dedicating all of their power to taking it out and thus, not having enough to hit Russia with.  Now that England is no longer a prized posession, but more of a “well, I need one more VC to win, and it is underdefended” move, Russia is getting really easy to take out.

Dont care if russia is buffed, Germany is so much more buffed with their extra planes and units, thats why I find that theather a bit balanced.

Looking ONLY at the game board for the first 3 rounds (bringing you to Germany Round 4, Purchase New Units) one can see that the Axis are more than double Russia’s strength with more than double their income.  That means England and India need to be focused on sending reinforcements to Russia to prevent them from falling (and thus, negating the need to block SZ 125).  With the NonAggression arrangement being virtually nullified, there is no reason not to invade early and heavy with Japan and more reason TOO do it, to remove even more IPC from the Russians. 
So yes, Wrath, I agree, Barbarossa is probably the better avenue and makes Victory more assured, not assured, but more than attempting Sea Lion.    I don’t see Russia ever getting their Objectives (any of them).

If you go after russia on round 4 as germany you are to late imho, you are better off attacking round 2 (with a fake attack on yugoslavia) or on r3.