Sounds like the Allies are doing really well. The allies need a meat grinder to wear down the axis with the allies’ numerical superiority.
Stop the madness, and start the presses
-
I think I should make mention what I find off about the ideas you’ve put forward here Jen, I see it alot with people posting here, so im not just singeling you out, but now seem like an appropriate time to mention.
Years ago, when I used to play a table top games called warhammer 40,000, I had a friend that would talk about things a unit could do, as though it was something it would do, ie: a unit could move an extra D6 inches, and therefore, he would always talk as though the units movment was 6in more then it was. This belies the true nature of the unit, as you had to roll the dice, and you could get a 1. I see this basic problem comming through here as well, and in a number of other posts. You are correct in everything you say, as all these things can in fact, happen, however there is no guarntee of success. You can buy a single destroyer and transport for the Soviets and use it to kill the German sub, however you could not hit it, and get your entire Soviet artic fleet sunk. Odds would say you should win in a naval battle with 1 destroyer vs 1 sub, but that is no guarante that you will win. The Dice Gods can be a fickle and cruel, and I think most people are seeing the obvious danger in all of the scenarios you have put forward. You can do all these things, but they could also all end horribly. I think most people dont see the risk to pay off ration as being worth. Having an air fleet get wiped out while attempting to clear out Sweden because of bad dice could be a game changer. Simply because something can be done (the rules allow for it) dosnt mean it will.
I agree with your observation, and I would just like to add that everyone has different perceptions when it come to this game and how it should be played. I consider myself aggressive but cautious, however, some play the game differently than I, and would never do some of the things I do, even though it makes complete sense to me.
It’s not rare for me to look at the things Jen suggests, and know that I will not try them, as I feel it’s not parallel to my style of play. However, the questions are, how often is Jen applying her suggestions into her own games, what does that say about her style, how much does she play, Is it always online, and If she doesn’t play the way she writes, does it really matter?
I understand that Jen has been the lightning rod of many conversations on these forums and perhaps your analyzation explains a lot about that. However, maybe it’s us and not Jen that needs to change, maybe we should all accept her difference in perception the way we would want our strategies to be respected. If you have ever played in a 6 player group as I do regularly, you learn to appreciate everyone style of play, no matter how frustrated it makes you.
That said, I go back to my earlier concern, “is Jen expressing her style of play by applying the theories and strategies she writes about into her own games, or is she simply writing about unit possibilities we are all aware of, but would never accept as viable options”?
-
Clyde,
I too played Warhammer 40k. I think I lost every possible game, but I played it!
Anyway, there are two things you have to look at in Axis and Allies (and similar games.)
- What can the unit do potentially and what your opponent will do to stop it.
- What you want to do with the unit.
For instance, since Alpha +2 I have been routinely buying a destroyer for SZ 127. The only times I did not is when there was an insanely large German fleet AND (inclusive and) I had no British destroyer to move to lock the Germans into SZ 127. The idea was to have something that can pop SZ 125. (Adding a Strategic Bomber is something I do routinely as well…it’s a total of 20 IPC but if you get the NO for 4 rounds, you’ve broken even.)
Under the new Russian NO, I almost always get Ireland. I have not in one game (against JMite on the boards) but that’s due to not having a third turn with Russia in which to move into Ireland, not because it is out of reach. I have never seen Ireland “saved” from Russian Hegemony due to Axis interference.
The Med is harder. For one, you have to get a Russian guy down to Syria/Jordan/Egypt which can be tricky. Then you have to bring the American fleet in, which is easy, but not going to happen on Round 1! And then move out and take the islands. I can see this being too annoying for players to do routinely, but it’s still a valid and achievable move.
Finland/Norway is a lot harder. For one, you have to hit it just right and clear it so a minimal Russian army can take it. Not impossible, but it could get expensive.
Then there is the trifecta: Spain, Turkey and Sweeden in one game round. (England, America). Routine as well, at least hitting Spain and Turkey together is routine, it shouldnt take too much effort to also hit Sweeden.
-
I have to admit I take chances at times as a player. Many of these “off the wall” strategies backfire, but they always teach me something. I have never claimed to be a conservative gamer!
However, here’s a map of a Russian game in which I will be getting Ireland. There’s virtually nothing Germany can do (it’s their turn) that will stop it. There are 2 infantry (1 russian) and 1 aa gun in scotland and all that Germany has are 2 strategic bombers that can reach. Can those clear the zone? Theoretically, but is it worth risking 24 IPC? Probably not.
Yes, I express how I play the game. I cannot argue how someone else should play the game. And yes, men and women have different bio-chemistry so maybe you see patterns and I see options, or you see options and I see patterns? And of course, nothing in this universe happens in a vacuum. What works today might fail tomorrow. For example: Sea Lion in Alpha 2 went from “I win” to “holy hell, I’m going to get destroyed!” not to mention Jimmy’s efforts in figuring out how to abandon the world and save London. Likewise, Barbarossa was unbeatable until someone figured out how to get 30+ allied fighters to Moscow in 10 rounds and stop it!
That said, currently (and I attached a proof of concept map) Ireland WILL fall to Russia almost every round. Sure, JMite did not build a fleet for Germany, he didn’t like how fast I got to Moscow with Germany in our last game and is trying to recreate it now, but I don’t think that’s as huge a thing. For one, if Germany buys a fleet, then Russia will get stronger on the mainland.
-
@Cmdr:
Clyde,
I too played Warhammer 40k. I think I lost every possible game, but I played it!
Anyway, there are two things you have to look at in Axis and Allies (and similar games.)
- What can the unit do potentially and what your opponent will do to stop it.
- What you want to do with the unit.
For instance, since Alpha +2 I have been routinely buying a destroyer for SZ 127. The only times I did not is when there was an insanely large German fleet AND (inclusive and) I had no British destroyer to move to lock the Germans into SZ 127. The idea was to have something that can pop SZ 125. (Adding a Strategic Bomber is something I do routinely as well…it’s a total of 20 IPC but if you get the NO for 4 rounds, you’ve broken even.)
Under the new Russian NO, I almost always get Ireland. I have not in one game (against JMite on the boards) but that’s due to not having a third turn with Russia in which to move into Ireland, not because it is out of reach. I have never seen Ireland “saved” from Russian Hegemony due to Axis interference.
This is a great and interesting read, however……
-
@Cmdr:
The Med is harder. For one, you have to get a Russian guy down to Syria/Jordan/Egypt which can be tricky. Then you have to bring the American fleet in, which is easy, but not going to happen on Round 1! And then move out and take the islands. I can see this being too annoying for players to do routinely, but it’s still a valid and achievable move.
Finland/Norway is a lot harder. For one, you have to hit it just right and clear it so a minimal Russian army can take it. Not impossible, but it could get expensive.
Then there is the trifecta: Spain, Turkey and Sweeden in one game round. (England, America). Routine as well, at least hitting Spain and Turkey together is routine, it shouldnt take too much effort to also hit Sweeden.
This is just proving Clyde’s point.
-
Frankly, I don’t get how you are sparing Russian units to go out and take Ireland, let alone the Med islands with help from the US fleet. Okay, say I’m Russia. Germany has declared war on me and is pounding my troops all along the Eastern Front and in the north. They are closing in on Leningrad AND the Ukraine. So I’m going to spend some of my precious IPCs building ships and sending a guy to Ireland or through the Middle East? I think not.
-
Here is the map with Russia in control of Ireland.
Notice they also control Finland and the threat is on for Norway.
The Germans cleared the Egyptian navy out, but lost the Luftwaffe in the process. But, as I said, he was unwilling to attack the Infantry in scotland for fear of losing bombers. Now Russia is going to collect for Ireland until the end of the game, there’s no conceivable way for the Axis to take Ireland away.
-
Frankly, I don’t get how you are sparing Russian units to go out and take Ireland, let alone the Med islands with help from the US fleet. Okay, say I’m Russia. Germany has declared war on me and is pounding my troops all along the Eastern Front and in the north. They are closing in on Leningrad AND the Ukraine. So I’m going to spend some of my precious IPCs building ships and sending a guy to Ireland or through the Middle East? I think not.
He took the Ukraines. don’t care. I have Finland and Ireland that makes up the loss of income (more than makes up the loss of income!) and my destroyers are keeping SZ 125 cleared of enemy warships. Egypt has a little fleet in SZ 109 and the ability to pop out much more as needed. Lost India, but don’t care as America does not have to focus so hard on the Atlantic anymore. (Germany is down to 2 Fighters and Italy only has 1 fighter. Neither nation has fleet big enough to worry about.)
Sorry, missed some planes in Greece. Again, not as big a deal as people make it out to be.
-
Well if you get the refrence Jen, I called it the “Genestealers move 18in” syndrome. I was always reminding my friend that yes, you could wind up with 18in movment, or they could just have 7in.
I do appericate you giving evidence to show what you’re talking about, i’ve never doubted that what you said was possible, I just dont see why you would want to spend the IPCs on such things. You can do all this, but it dosnt answer the lingering question of why you would want to? I can respect that everyone plays things differently, everyone interprits rules differently, but I dont think the problem im having with this is from a lack of perspective. Like you mentioned you have to look at a units potential, but I think you also need to temper that with a grounding in a reality of whats more likely to happen. My lack of perspective on how you play keeps me from understanding how Germany is unable to hold on to Scandanavia, because i’ve never seen this be a problem in my games(and I think a German airbase in Norway that we often see in my games would effectively shut down this Ireland grabbing nonsense). The law of averages plays an important part in this game when determining strategy, but luck plays an equal if not greater part in this to averages, and your ideas seem to ignore the latter of these.
To touch upon a bit of what grasshopper mentioned, prespective is important and so is context. I have trouble understanding your perpsective on your posts Jen mostly because there is always a lack of context. To give an example in your last post you said this: @Cmdr:He took the Ukraines. don’t care. I have Finland and Ireland that makes up the loss of income (more than makes up the loss of income!) and my destroyers are keeping SZ 125 cleared of enemy warships.
This lacks the context of the situation, how did you get Finland? What is happening in Scandanavia, why cant Germany re-take it and perhapse most importantly what are you doing about the Germans in the Ukraine? With out this context this is just a statment with the same meaning as “I have axis&allies” or “I can fit 10 infantry pieces up my nose”, they might be true but why are they relevent. If I tell you a story that after a game of A&A ended I and my ally jumped up and beat up one of the axis players. This is given without much context and would leave most people to believe im some sort of aggressive violent jerk and maybe I did this because I lost when I dont give the context that the game had ended when the Japanese player had just knocked the table over(accidentily) and spilt drinks everywhere at the height of a very good game. So you can see how context makes a huge difference. :-)
-
@Vance:
The point is that you need at least a transport, a destroyer, and 1 infantry, which adds up to 18 IPCs. If you manage to pull it off and take Ireland, will you make back that 18IPCs before the game ends? USSR could spend that $18 on 6 infantry instead.
I wouldn’t need to build a Russian Destroyer, as I said in my previous post I wouldn’t have started this endevor if there wasn’t already an Allied presance in the Atlantic, UK kills the destroyer and I move the turn after that. Unless of course Germany keeps buying subs every turn to replace the one he’s continuously losing. Inwhich case Russia is tying up at least 6IPC’s a turn for the 1 time cost of 7.
I also don’t need to buy the Infantry since Russia starts with a pretty decent amount. 1 Infantry isn’t going to make or break Barbarossa.
All it takes to ‘pull it off’ is some form of cooperation between the UK and Russian players. -
@Cmdr:
Ireland: 3 IPC
Crete: 3 IPC
Sardinia: 3 IPC
Sicily: 3 IPC
Norway: 6 IPC
Finland: 5 IPC
Sweeden: 6 IPC
Moscow: 3 IPC
S. Ukraine: 2 IPC
N. Ukraine: 2 IPC
Rostov: 2 IPC
Caucasus: 2 IPC
Smolensk: 1 IPC
Karelia: 1 IPC
Novgorod: 2 IPC
Volgograd: 2 IPC
Belarus: 1 IPC
Bryansk: 1 IPC
Kazakh: 1 IPC
Tambov: 1 IPC
Vologda: 1 IPC
Arkhangelsk: 1 IPCTotal: 52 IPC in relatively easy to get and maintain territories.
Needed: 28 IPCTurkey: 5 IPC
Baltic States: 1 IPC
E. Poland: 1 IPC
Romania: 6 IPC
Hungary: 6 IPC
Poland: 6 IPC
Greece: 5 IPC
Yugoslavia: 5 IPC
Bulgaria: 5 IPC
Albania: 4 IPC
S. Germany: 7 IPC
N. Italy: 7 IPC
Holland: 6 IPC
Denmark: 5 IPC
Portugal: 4 IPC
Spain: 5 IPCTake your pick, in any case, eventually Russia is earning so much money that Germany cannot possibly beat it back at which point, the Russians start pushing the Japanese back and the Germans and hit the heartland of Europe. Once you get there you are making more money than the United States of America at which point, you get REALLY bored and start dropping Aircraft Carriers and Battleships in SZ 100 to start signalling your opponent it’s time to give up so you can play again.
Does syria count aswell then?
say italians took it, and russia reconquers it?
it’s a possible +4 then… -
No, because Syria is French not an original axis territory nor a neutral on the Europe map. Not to mention the only middle eastern territory in the list is Turkey (a NATO nation…kinda weird, but whatever.)
-
OK here is how I see it (I am no expert but whatever):
If Germany hits the UK fleet G1 (which they usually do), they will normally have a fleet parked in z112, with air cover from West Germany, maybe a carrier, and most likely a sub or two depending on what they bought and how G1 went. UK often does not have enough to take on that fleet at this stage so USSR will need to devote at least $18 worth of units to the Ireland project (1 transport, 1 destroyer, and 1 inf) because of the sub(s) (maybe a good reason to buy a sub G1).
USSR starts the game nonallied so they can move the inf to Scotland no earlier than the round when Germany declares war on them. Let’s suppose that happens G2 and USSR can try it R2, but only if they were prescient enough to make the naval investment R1 and if z111, z125, and z126 are clear or can be cleared. If they have to wait for UK to clear those zones (and Germany doesn’t subsequently unclear them), it will be R3. Notice that Germany might like to have something in z125 to deny USSR the Murmansk NO and the only way planes based in Novgorod can reach it will be if they land them in Scotland or Finland if you own it.
OK now let’s suppose it all works and Ireland is taken R3 or R4. USSR now gets an extra $3 per turn and will recoup the $18 investment in 6 rounds. Will USSR be alive R9 or R10 if that $18 was spent this way? If they are around, the USSR will finally turn a profit R10 or R11. That’s an awful long time to wait for $3…. (it’s like a friggin’ pension fund!)
RUSSIA NEEDS INFANTRY AND ARTILLERY NOW; NOT LATER.
-
Vance,
I get what you are saying. Let me try to say what I was intending to say in another way.
1) Germany goes Barbarossa, so there is no fleet buy on Round 1 (they need ground troops!). Then Russia puts a transport in the water and moves an infantry to Scotland. Total cost of this is 7 IPC since the Infantry is still used, it just ends up going to Ireland and then back to London to defend against a possible Sea Lion later. A destroyer build is ALWAYS recommended for Russia, it keeps the Germans honest about SZ 125 and doesn’t just let them park a submarine there forever and a day.
2) Germany goes Sea Lion, so you dont WANT Ireland, as it’ll fall easy. But that’s okay, since you’ll be getting Greece, Bulgaria, Albania, Romania and Hungary anyway. (Since Germany obliged you by spending 100 IPC in the water for Sea Lion, which is 100 less infantry, artillery and armor for Russia to deal with.)
-
Ahh OK. That makes sense.
-
@Vance:
Ahh OK. That makes sense.
How dose the that make sense?
I mean I can see that its a balancing act. If Germany is focusing on sealion then you know your transport fleet wouldnt sruvive in the waters near Britian so dont build it although you say dont build because Germany could then take Ireland making it a wasted effort which is also true (though you’d think the German AC in the north sea would make that obvious first).
The other scenario seems to be saying that if Germany forucses on the Soviets then build the transport…… at some point(its not really made clear), the logic being that if Germany is focusing on the eastern front then it isnt buying naval units and for some reason hasnt decimated the British fleet in the north sea. The problem is why wouldnt you take the British fleet down even if you werent doing a sealion? Also, why isnt the German player doing more to interdict the north sea and keep something up near sz125? Again, this would just seem like good policy reguardless of which greater strategy your following.
-
It makes sense because it will only work some of the time (i.e. if Germany has no navy at all). It is not a standard thing that would happen in every game.
-
@Vance:
It makes sense because it will only work some of the time (i.e. if Germany has no navy at all). It is not a standard thing that would happen in every game.
There are very few standard moves that happen every game, and the majority of those happen during the first round.
-
@Young:
@Vance:
It makes sense because it will only work some of the time (i.e. if Germany has no navy at all). It is not a standard thing that would happen in every game.
There are very few standard moves that happen every game, and the majority of those happen during the first round.
Amen. No plan survives implementation without failing at some point!
-
Back to the topic for one moment. Who believes that Larry has finalized the Global 1940 rules, and who thinks there will be more alpha changes?
Suggested Topics
