I am quite sure he didn’t:) At least in several posts he mentioned it.
@cow: First of all, thanks a lot your taking the effort and posting strategy including complete moves. I really think that there are too few people here taking that burden and real discuss and present concrete strategies and not only abstract concepts.
I tried to read the entire thread, I observed a bunch of games of Tier 1 players, I made few private games myself. I would like to make some comments and ask some questions:
- I think that your DOW1 move is really good in general. IF you DOW1 I think it is a very logic and well thought through move. Good job! I also tried it out and won, however the opponents were not representative for solid Allied play.
BTW: I have seen seththenewb making a Pearl Harbour against Gamerman in a running game (http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31508.0)
I guess he will lose it but he had really bad dices in J1 and could not capture Yunnan and the +6 for ZH is a real headache for JP. So I would be interested how the game would have gone in case Yunnan would have been rolled based on low luck.
–> I am not sure if the Pearl Harbour is better but it seems valid to me
-
I kind of disagree about your statement “The effect of J1DOW in Europe is just 23 extra IPCs thrown by US in the Atlantic”. I mean people do make bids of 10-12 because they think these IPCs are the gamechanger to equilize the game. they have more impact than the 23 US IPCs as the bid-IPS usually always make a significant impact in the first round but on the other hand it is 23 - twice the amount i the J1DOW case.
Furthermore we all know that such IPCs will be paid off with kind of an interest. The consequences of J1DOW is:
-
US could sustainably go into SZ91 with an invasion force US2
-
US could deploy bombers in UK in US2
This is creating threats which actually cost Germany money and slows them down. They will either invest in defense or they have to lose some air for clean ups which in addition prevents the air from doing other things. So especially in Europe I am convinced that US involved 1 round earlier can have a significant impact on the success rate of the Axis. How significant? I don’t know but I would say more than you state:)
-
So far you insist (and nobody disagreed so far) that any DOW3/4 is just objectively bad. While I do not clearly disagree here I am still not sure if this must be the case.
The objective disadvantage is that you allow UKPAC and ANZAC to collect more resources. But on the other side stand 20 IPCs less for US and still 10 bonus for JP and no NOs war related NOs for Anzac.
Plus - and this is my point - JP also has the option to make optimized operations against ZH (sometimes wiping out TH inf with Air only) and allows you to prepare an even more powerful and unpredictable J3 DOW.
Allweeneedislove for example even sacrificed the +10 bonus in a current game by taking FIC for the sake of building an IC 1 round earlier.
Against gamerman he even waited till Round4. the consequence was the threat to drop 14 ground supported by 16-18 Air to India forcing gamerman to leave India and offer it for free J4 (The game btw looks still good for gamerman as he is very strong in Europe that game)
Plus: Germany has 1 more round they have not to deal with any US invasion.
However in a nutshell I just state:
- Minus 20 for US
- 1 Round of silence in the Atlantic
- Even more powerful and unpredictable J3/J4 DOW
I think especially in combination with a max speed Barbarossa a late Japan DOW can indeed make sense and is afaik also played successfully be very strong players.
BUT I also have to admit that I am not sure whether:
- …they won despite the late DOW and not because of it
- … J3/J4 DOW is maybe not a plan you start the game with but a deviation because of certain unpredictable opportunities which can arise during the game.
So does everybody agree that J3/J4 DOW is just bad or are there also players believing it is a viable and successful strategy?
Cheers,
Tobias