I play against myself.
Are bombers broken? : Axis bombers lead to allied dismay.
-
not sure about 1942, I don’t have that game.
-
…I am game to play the allies zero bid. The reason for this is that “bidding” a fix does not make. If the game is hosed, its hosed…
actually bidding is the fix to balancing this game. it also helps to determine which side you will play and adds a small amount of variety as different bids will allow for different openings and strategy.
Playing the allies sucks if the Axis utilize this strat…
playing the allies sucks against any strategy if there is no bid.
-
hehe, i guess conventional, my experience has been a little better. But I agree it is weighted slightly toward the axis. Regardless, I am not sure that a bid is necessary to fix the game. To make the game fun and with variety? Sure, but that as an entirely different process. I still feel that moving units on the board, turn order, AA back to normal, etc, etc…could provide a far closer solution towards “balance.”
-
or how about letting transport act as casualties? that would definitely destroy the bomber strat…
-
Well now you’re talking about changing a big element of the game to balance a strategy that was developed. I think we should work a strategy that works with the current ruleset.
-
/agree. I am hoping someone helps me with this. IDK, JJ is currently having his way with allweneedislove. Allweneedislove is doing better than I the first time I played against this strat, but then he has the advantage of knowing what is coming. IDK, I advertised for a player to play a game so hopefully someone will pipe up.
-
Please don’t talk about wrecking naval combat by changing transports back :-P
Just fix broken AA guns
-
@Uncrustable:
Please don’t talk about wrecking naval combat by changing transports back :-P
Just fix broken AA guns
Broken how? Too good, too bad? :?
-
/agree. I am hoping someone helps me with this. IDK, JJ is currently having his way with allweneedislove. Allweneedislove is doing better than I the first time I played against this strat, but then he has the advantage of knowing what is coming. IDK, I advertised for a player to play a game so hopefully someone will pipe up.
Well, I don’t know about having my way. Europe sure looks good, Italy could have had Moscow turn 4, something I have never seen. But it is important for Germany to take it (which they did turn 5). This strategy requires extreme discipline as you have few land units to “waste”. So I am slowly building momentum. Germany’s production exploded this turn and will only rise. Italy was sacrificed for the common good, but they now stand to profit from an empty Russia. Japan ceded territory to Russia, which is why Germany was able to plunder 30 IPCs, but now Japan will push back into an unreinforced Russia. India may hold for a few more turns, but Japan is trying to keep with Bomber builds when able and this results in a slow growth in land power (with a retraction in IPCs). I will be poised to gather some “burst” IPC’s depending on allied moves. My calculations show major victories if I am able to engage the combined allied fleet in Japan or Caroline over the next two turns, but beyond that we’ll have to see. Keep an eye on India, the allied fleet, and Australia as Japan can shift radically and the German bombers deployed in Asia can open “many” doors.
The biggest struggle with this strategy (if rapid dismantling of Russia is bad) is that you must be selective with targets. The bombers strength is its concentrated firepower and range. If presented with many targets, some must be ignored (as you were probably wondering why I walked past Novgorad and chose not to take it until I plundered Moscow). If you can schedule your “raids” by pacing them out to 1 major destruction of allied units per turn, you should be ok. For example, if the Allies in the Pacific present both a fleet, a Chinese stack, and an Indian stack as bait, turn 6 Japan will have to make a difficult choice. Clearing the India stack assures them the capital, but leaves their fleet exposed to near certain destruction. If discipline fails, you will trade at greater losses. This game has shown, with the bombers, most battles fail to surpass a single round of combat. That means that my opponent is assured of missing with 30 percent of his force any given battle and thus the axis conserve an additional 30 percent of their units to keep their starting stack stable.
Note: This is just one sample game, Andy’s opponent is AWOL (must be waiting to see my game finish), and my opponent chose to focus on the factories which kept Germany’s IPCs low, but surrendered Moscow (this may occur the first time your opponent experiences the bomber strategy). However, if he had built all units in Moscow and retreated, I would have sacked the factories on turn 3 and produced 2 turns before Russia could hope to move out of its capital. Germany’s IPCs would have been about 10 IPCs higher and those 2-3 mech a turn would be on the board moving towards Moscow from Berlin.
Because this sample is so small, I am looking for 1 more game as I can handle 2 games at once. Anyone interested in starting another game to test this strategy publicly?
-
@Uncrustable:
Please don’t talk about wrecking naval combat by changing transports back :-P
Just fix broken AA guns
Broken how? Too good, too bad? :?
In my opinion, broken bad. If 1 aagun could fire at all air units as originally intended, this bomber strategy would get very expensive as their would be a reason to produce 1 or 2 aaguns a turn and place them at every junction along my march. Currently a single aagun can shoot at only 3 bombers in a mass of 12 or more, that means at best 50 percent of the time Berlin will lose a bomber. Since that aagun can be removed as a casaulty, that aagun won’t fire in any more battles, meaning if Moscow liberated the territory taken, the aagun is already gone. Before the aagun could be captured back and the German’s would again risk more air units taking it back. Since aaguns are also capped at only firing at the total number of air units present, stacking aaguns is pointless. If aaguns could fire without a top cap, then even at 3 per gun, suddenly 10 aaguns rolling 30 dice even against 12 planes would increase the 50 percent chance of losing 1 bomber to a typical loss of 5 bombers and again, you might build 1 aagun a turn or more to defend against this as these lost bombers are taken off before combat and represent 3 hits per round.
As it stands, 10 aaguns are capped at for example 15 rolls if 15 bombers are sent (the typical amount of bombers sent to remove 10 land units from the board)….they will get at best 2.5 bomber hits then they will be removed.
10 aaguns cost 50 IPCs. Instead, 10 troops should be bought, they will get 3.3 hits and save you 20 ipcs. This makes them “broken” as the cheaper infantry is better at killing air units than aaguns which only shoot when land units are attacked as structures have their own “built in”, “original” aaguns that fire at each raiding bomber.Solutions: Either return to original aaguns which were unlimited fire and not casualties, or remove the cap on firing so that 2 aaguns would get 6 rolls at 1 fighter, making them worth building in an air war. It makes sense that concentrated aaguns would hit more air units then regions without a large density of them. Suddenly 1 troop escorted by 3 aaguns would be a harder target for a couple of planes and a troop.
-
AA guns discussed in length (then in length again) here http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28725.0
My thought: AA guns are OK within their roles, are are worth more than their worth in IPCs only when knowing that you’ll be attacked by 3x or more planes per AA gun you own.
-
/agree. I am hoping someone helps me with this. IDK, JJ is currently having his way with allweneedislove. Allweneedislove is doing better than I the first time I played against this strat, but then he has the advantage of knowing what is coming. IDK, I advertised for a player to play a game so hopefully someone will pipe up.
My Saturday group is going to try this and see how it works out. We have a guy who claims Allies cannot lose at all no matter the strategy, so I’m going to try it on him.
-
Play the Axis AK_grown and rock and roll! Just stay focused on your goal.
-
/agree. I am hoping someone helps me with this. IDK, JJ is currently having his way with allweneedislove. Allweneedislove is doing better than I the first time I played against this strat, but then he has the advantage of knowing what is coming. IDK, I advertised for a player to play a game so hopefully someone will pipe up.
My Saturday group is going to try this and see how it works out. We have a guy who claims Allies cannot lose at all no matter the strategy, so I’m going to try it on him.
If you want my advice, I fell in love with a discovery Allweneedislove forced on me during our test game: Just sacrifice Italy’s Africa front.
If you survive with 1 transport bring the tank and infantry from AFrica to Yugoslavia…if 2 transports bring the mech and another infantry there.
Then produce a tank and mech turn 1. A bomber turn 2. (they need to roll a six with the UK bomber to prevent the placement of the bomber in s. Italy)
Move all the N.Italy force to Yugo turn 1 and Albania there 2 as in my test game.
Forget S. France as Germany likes the money and the factory in the Med for options.
That is enough to give you plenty of men to prevent the Russian counterattacks turn 4.
Italy turn 1 should have 4 armor: 1 in N.Italy, 1 in Yugo, 2 in Slovakia; 7-8 infantry and 2aaguns and 2artillery in Yugo(if two transports live); 1-2 mech (1 N.italy, 1 Yugo if 2 transports alive); 2ftr; 1 bomber
Turn 2: build the bomber, if able DOW Russia, move to EPL or baltic states, move other fast movers up, land 2 fighters withing range of your tanks next turn’s targets.Path ideally will be: EPL;BEL;BRY or SMO; Moscow or south… have fun. From Belarus, with 4tanks,2mech,2ftr,2bombers good luck Russia, leaving blockers in both SMO and BRY to guard your capital from Germany. Wait until the 2aaguns,8troops,and 2 artillery arrive from Yugo (turn 5or6 if needed)…lol
-
Not sure about abandoning Africa. Some of my opponents have done that recently and they have ended with 5-6 subs + more ships parked in SZ97 just convoying Italy to death. Easy after that to capture Italy/Greece/anything you fancy, and reinforce Russia from the middle-east. Putting SOME pressure in Africa and at least trying in the Med is essential for Axis IMO.
-
Not sure about abandoning Africa. Some of my opponents have done that recently and they have ended with 5-6 subs + more ships parked in SZ97 just convoying Italy to death. Easy after that to capture Italy/Greece/anything you fancy, and reinforce Russia from the middle-east. Putting SOME pressure in Africa and at least trying in the Med is essential for Axis IMO.
It normally is, I agree, but with this bomber strategy Italy’s support is vital to success and Italy can use Russian IPCs if they convoy them ;) Besides Italy doesn’t matter after they help take Moscow. That tank and mech are a world of difference in Russia turn 5. If they don’t sink the 2 transports/fleet, you can go back to Africa later turns.
-
Ok I see it. So if using the bomber strategyit’s better to just kamikaze the Tobruk stack in Egypt or perhaps gain some time by going West to Morocco?
-
What about making a house rule of putting a cap on the maximum number of bombers each country can have at any one time? Say 8 or 10 bombers. You can replace losses, but only up to the cap.
-
Again this is a houserule to defeat a strategy that was designed to use the current ruleset. It’s a new strategy, give it some time I’m sure there’s a counter.
-
Again this is a houserule to defeat a strategy that was designed to use the current ruleset. It’s a new strategy, give it some time I’m sure there’s a counter.
garantua says that the strat was used in aa50. so it is just a rehash, although, I would love to know the counter for it for that game. playin the cards close to the chest on that one. heh, leads me to believe that a counter really exists, I am just noobin it.
Suggested Topics
