one questions….what?
Most Powerful Country
-
Now is Russia going to strafe 18 inf? I don’t think so, but even if they do, fine I’m down to 12, but I have 12 more so I’m up to 24.
Yes I will. If I have 9inf 11arm 2ftrs you’d better believe I’ll hit 18inf. Round 1 I get 8 hits, Japan 6 hits. Round 2 I should hit 7times, and Japan 3-4. The end result Russia strafes Japan for 15inf, and loses only 9. Since I have shorter supply lines I should be able to repeat the feat on the next turn if the Japs aren’t careful, but at the very least it prevents them from stacking Novo/Yakut for a couple of turns.
That means if Russia has 24 IPC, they must take off 4 inf from Jap each turn just to stay even and that is neglecting the German front and the losses Russia will take in their battle with Japan
But you yourself have said this can be dealt with by shucking Allied troops into Karelia to replace the Russians that have to go against Japan.
True, but Ger has to deal with the combined effort of R, UK, US. Once you have your troops in E Can it is one turn to Fin, 1 turn to Kar. That equals the 1 turn placement by Ger and the 1 turn move to EE. Each side at 2 turns. Now it is a race for the offensive adv.
Exactly my point, shucking guys is only a defensive move, but it is not going to supply much offensive pressure on the enemy. So how do you do that? I have some very distinct means which achieve this.
Plus it is always going to take longer for reinforcements to reach the front for which ever side is on the offensive.
Yes very true which is why the paradox of buy defense when on the offense, and buy offense ie tanks when on defense holds true. Maintaining deadzones and keeping a large enemy army a space or two away is a great and cheap form of defense.
I’m looking at it as countries that need as little help as possible from their Allies to get going or survive.
And this statement is indicative of what I see wrong here. You seem to think the game is merely a defensive struggle, whereas I want to exploit the other sides defensive weaknesses.
I’m also considering which Capitals generally fall. In my opinion if Rus or Ger were the strongest then their capitals would never fall because there would be “easier/weaker” countries to take out first.
Well suppose that I was clever enough to devise a strat which enabled the Axis to sneak in and capture either Washington or London, would that necessarily force capitulation for the Allies. I think not because as you’ve mentioned longterm pressure is not possible, but as such both are easy recapturable. In fact I’ve played games where I lost London early due to a clever sea lion maneuver and still won the game. The big thing is to not lose air defending these capitals.
The only thing that keeps me from ranking the UK as high as the US or Japan, is because they really do need the US to clean up Afr, and once India, Persia, Aus and NZ are taken they are lost for good. That is minus 7 IPC. So even with WE, that only puts them at 29 IPC, still not as strong as the 30-32 the US will have.
Again you focus to much on mere production. Yes the US will outproduce, but then again I mentioned how much of their Ipcs will be lost to transportation so they will never be 100% mobilized which the UK is. Also, I think the UK can clean up Africa all by themselves, but since they lose Aust and India they will never have much more than 24-27ipcs.
By the way NZ and Persia are not lost causes for the Brits.
-
Yes I will. If I have 9inf 11arm 2ftrs you’d better believe I’ll hit 18inf. Round 1 I get 8 hits, Japan 6 hits. Round 2 I should hit 7times, and Japan 3-4. The end result Russia strafes Japan for 15inf, and loses only 9. Since I have shorter supply lines I should be able to repeat the feat on the next turn if the Japs aren’t careful, but at the very least it prevents them from stacking Novo/Yakut for a couple of turns.
Your assuming Japan is going to walk into that. Which is false.
I was merely commenting on how Japan can reinforce, I had no specific scenerio in mind. If we go back to my initial comment – Japan having 12 inf and you made a comment about strafing and just threw out the number 6 for losses, and I said I’d reinforce with my 12 new inf. That is a lot different then 15 hits!!! I’m not going to walk into that!
For your initial comment of 6 losses to be true Russia would have (roughly) 6 inf (1 hit) 8 arm (4 hits) 2 ftrs (1 hit) vs. 12 inf. You do 6, I do 4. Your successful. Now how do you go from now having 2 inf, 8 arm, 2 ftrs to 9 inf and 11 arm? It can’t be done in one turn. Even if you buy 3 arm, 3 inf, that only puts you at 5 inf, 11 arm, 2 ftrs. Now you only having 1 strafing run before you start losing tanks and I’ll trade Japanese inf for tanks all day long. You are also neglecting Kar, but we can assume the US and UK are defending that, with minimal Russia support.
But I think as Germany I can win that.Again, I’m not trying to discount Russia’s ability to hold off Japan. But we can both throw around numbers all day long to support our point because we have game experience and our ‘perfect scenerios’ (or our objective) in our head but without seeing the actual game board and how the earlier turns went down, we can each throw out numbers to support our side all day long.
It’s like the quote “everybody has a plan, until they get hit”. I can have a plan as Japan, but I also have to have the abilty to adjust to how Russia is playing.
Exactly my point, shucking guys is only a defensive move, but it is not going to supply much offensive pressure on the enemy. So how do you do that? I have some very distinct means which achieve this.
True, true, true. Depends on which side I am. If I’m the Allies and maintain the IPC adv I’ll play build up all day long. The pressure is all on the Axis to make something happen, and if they did then I’ll have to counter depending on what the board shows.
If I’m the Axis, I try to do as much damage as possible early to try and avoid the large build ups by the Allies. Germany has much of the offensive power it needs when they start and shouldn’t need large tank builds in masse to pressure the Allies. So does Japan, they have 5 ftrs, and 1 bom to start and 1 tank. They need inf for their Asian Empire.
And this statement is indicative of what I see wrong here. You seem to think the game is merely a defensive struggle, whereas I want to exploit the other sides defensive weaknesses.
Again depends on which side I am.
And no, I just think that Infantry are the best unit in the game by far.
They are quite valuable as an offensive weapon, esp if you have large stacks or just a few tanks for support. The overall value of the Infantry is unmatched in the game.Well suppose that I was clever enough to devise a strat which enabled the Axis to sneak in and capture either Washington or London, would that necessarily force capitulation for the Allies. I think not because as you’ve mentioned longterm pressure is not possible, but as such both are easy recapturable. In fact I’ve played games where I lost London early due to a clever sea lion maneuver and still won the game. The big thing is to not lose air defending these capitals.
Things like that are anomalies and not indicative of the vast majority of games. That is why I left open the cavet of KJF strats. And I’m sorry there is no good reason anybody should ever lose London or Washington prior to the fall of Moscow. That is just poor play.
Again you focus to much on mere production. Yes the US will outproduce, but then again I mentioned how much of their Ipcs will be lost to transportation so they will never be 100% mobilized which the UK is. Also, I think the UK can clean up Africa all by themselves, but since they lose Aust and India they will never have much more than 24-27ipcs.
By the way NZ and Persia are not lost causes for the Brits.
Production is the key. It is all about the numbers. That is why the Allies are so hard to beat, bid or no bid. It is hard for the Axis to get a total IPC lead and hold it. And as long as the Allies hold say a 77-70 advantage and neither side can make signifanct gains to change this then all the Allies have to do is buy inf and wait out the Axis. Eventually after a long long game the 2 inf advantage will build up and after 10 more rounds the Allies will have 20 more inf on the board and after 15 they’d have 30 more inf and so on. Eventually this destroys the Axis.
That is why, IMO, the Axis must do something early and try to put pressure on the Allies. Whether it’s hold lots of Afr, try for Cauc-Kar, or something else.
Personally, I like to try and get the Axis to 70 by rd 3, and have the IPC lead by rd 4, and hold it. Just things I shoot for, and by no means does this mean the game is won or lost if this is or isn’t achieved, just some things I like to try and shoot for.
-
UK is most powerful then japan then us , gemany and russia is weakest. Gemany or russia always fall first thats why there weakest. It unlikely the others will fall first. Usually it’s a race to see who falls first and most likely the team who loses the first capitol loses.If UK and US team up on Germany while Germany and Japan team up on Russia the allies can usually win if enough fighters go to moskow,but timing UK to take Germany the move after russia falls nets most ipc’s thats why UK is strongest.
“We shall never surrender!” :P
-
Your assuming Japan is going to walk into that. Which is false.
But if they don’t does that hurt me. Keeping Japan backed up in Yakut for a turn or two longer than usual is a good trade off I think. There are even times when Yakut can be made a deadzone as late as turn6 this way despite Japans huge numerical advantage because of what I described as Japans main problem/weakness.
Now how do you go from now having 2 inf, 8 arm, 2 ftrs to 9 inf and 11 arm? It can’t be done in one turn. Even if you buy 3 arm, 3 inf, that only puts you at 5 inf, 11 arm, 2 ftrs.
Yes I will add troops to Asia, but then again armor in Moscow can at the same time threaten Yakut as well as EEuro. Also, Russia is in no serious danger from Germany for the first three turns, unless against a PE bid. In RR or Africa bid scenario Russia has 3 turns to build a few guys for Asia along with some tanks before Germany can threaten Karelia. By which time I will add Anglo/Americans to help out no sweat.
But we can both throw around numbers all day long to support our point because we have game experience and our ‘perfect scenerios’ (or our objective) in our head but without seeing the actual game board and how the earlier turns went down, we can each throw out numbers to support our side all day long.
Yes but I’ve used this approach for Russia against people in games, and it has worked marvelously. The Japs either risk getting hit in a bad strafe or don’t move their troops along as fast as they could/should. Either way is a victory for Russia. An ancillary benefit is that the extra Russian tanks do help put more pressure on EEurope that can really scare the crap out of the germans.
If I’m the Allies and maintain the IPC adv I’ll play build up all day long. The pressure is all on the Axis to make something happen, and if they did then I’ll have to counter depending on what the board shows.
Well I’m not going to say this won’t work, or that it is terrible, but just that it can get the Allies into trouble. I’ve seen plenty of defensive axis players that will concede the Allied advantage just to wait for an opportune moment to make a M84 push which isn’t that hard to do if you know how to stretch the Axis, especially Jap forces. IMO its hard for the Allies to adequately defend all fronts at once, so either Asia, Africa, or Europe will get neglected. In this way a well time lurch by a losing player could defeat even a large Allied advantage. I also think it is not up to the Axis to make something happen, but that it is up to the Allies to defeat the Axis, with ephasis on Germany.
Germany has much of the offensive power it needs when they start and shouldn’t need large tank builds in masse to pressure the Allies. So does Japan, they have 5 ftrs, and 1 bom to start and 1 tank. They need inf for their Asian Empire.
I agree Germany doesn’t need large stacks of tanks to be successful. Once they get between 8-10 they are pretty safe. They can swing the gate against WEurope, but also maintain enough pressure on Karelia. Japan I disagree I think what they really need to do is limit Russia’s productive capability which comes on two fronts. The first is to limit their territorial size. Obviously, Sfe and Yakut are key, but Novo must be taken by Japan. The sooner the better! There are of course way to reduce the effectiveness of a Russian tank push in Asia, and it has little to do with purchasing. At least for the first few turns.
The overall value of the Infantry is unmatched in the game.
Indeed, but their is a law of diminishing returns with infantry that few are aware of, or care to be. How much offense does 30inf provide? How much more does 60inf provide. Given that it is only 5 hits but costs nearly 100ipcs this is not a good investment of resources. Personally, I like to observe a 3:1 ratio of inf to armor, and will go as low as 2:1 occasionally and with certain nations. This is because this will maximize the offensive as well as defensive potential of your armies. Consider that 60inf may not create a deadzone adjacent to where they are stationed, but that 40inf 12arm may.
They are quite valuable as an offensive weapon, esp if you have large stacks or just a few tanks for support.
No they have value as offensive weapons, but they are not valuable especially when compared to the tank.
And I’m sorry there is no good reason anybody should ever lose London or Washington prior to the fall of Moscow. That is just poor play.
Okay then I guess I suck. Well no not really. The fact is that some people will go for London in RR games because they feel they can win that way. The point I was making was that it is not a game ender by a long shot. In fact I’d prefer the germans to shoot their wad to take london for one turn because it will make it easier for me to win down the road. But like I said capturing just one capital is not necessarily a game ender whether it is Moscow or London. Wash is a little different, but not too much. Winning is more a product of taking and HOLDING territory.
Eventually after a long long game the 2 inf advantage will build up and after 10 more rounds the Allies will have 20 more inf on the board and after 15 they’d have 30 more inf and so on. Eventually this destroys the Axis.
Again this isn’t totally false, and in a Low Luck game this would likely prove true, but in dice games two things can happen. First the Axis can make a M84 lunge, and here is where the walk through the Caucausus can come into play, or the Axis can roll tech. You can complain after the fact that your opponent got HB too cheaply, but that won’t help you then. The key to victory is versatility, not stacking.
That is why, IMO, the Axis must do something early and try to put pressure on the Allies. Whether it’s hold lots of Afr, try for Cauc-Kar, or something else.
But just holding Africa is not always possible, nor does it necessarily end the game. In fact I’ve devised clever means by which to defeat the PowerAfrica bid which is not as great of a bid as many think because it mortages the present for the future, and if that future doesn’t work out too well then you’re worse of than if you’d PE’d.
Personally, I like to try and get the Axis to 70 by rd 3, and have the IPC lead by rd 4, and hold it. Just things I shoot for, and by no means does this mean the game is won or lost if this is or isn’t achieved, just some things I like to try and shoot for.
And here is why I don’t put as much emphasis on IPC production as you do. In PE bids the Axis rarely out produces the Allies, but they can if they are smart about it, take down Moscow. However, if you merely play to get an ipc advantage, which is the essence of the PowerAfrica play, a good Allied player is going to know this is what he has to prevent. So because of this I make the taking Africa from Germany my first priority.
-
I agree with DM’s analysis.
Funny how we can all look at the same board and see/describe something different as well as different possibilities.
@AgentSmith:If I have 9inf 11arm 2ftrs you’d better believe I’ll hit 18inf.
What the he// is this? The aforementioned…
@AgentSmith:…one on one(?)
I’ve never played that A&A Variant. Hmm. Lemme think.
Germany @ 32 IPCs v USSR @ 24 IPCs…not a very fair match-up. Maybe if Russia is not RR in the game…Nah!
USSR @ 24 IPCs v Japan @ 25 IPCs…now that’s more like it!
Would you recommend that variant, AgentSmith?I still want to know why you are playing an opponent(s) who cannot give you a good game? If you’ve got…
@AgentSmith:…9inf 11arm 2ftrs…
…to attack Japan with in a regular game(RR? Bid?), what in the beejeebers has Germany been doing? Playing ‘Spin the Swastika!?!’ :)
-
…to attack Japan with in a regular game(RR? Bid?), what in the beejeebers has Germany been doing? Playing ‘Spin the Swastika!?!’
Not at all. Russia starts with 7inf in Asia, and 4arm total. To get to 9inf 11arm one only needs to add 2inf 7arm which comes out to only 2 armor heavy purchases something I’ve advocated here previously. Also, you must consider that even in a RR game Germany is quite weak in Europe and that to defend WEuro in the early stages it must sap production away from the Eastern Front enabling Russia to make tank heavy purchases.
USSR @ 24 IPCs v Japan @ 25 IPCs…now that’s more like it!
Would you recommend that variant, AgentSmith?Definately a USSR advantage.
Germany @ 32 IPCs v USSR @ 24 IPCs…not a very fair match-up. Maybe if Russia is not RR in the game…Nah!
Actually quite close. German production lags behind Russia 1 turn equaling the production advantage, but I fear this too might be a USSR advantage.
I still want to know why you are playing an opponent(s) who cannot give you a good game? If you’ve got…
Well this isn’t just me that does this, but many of the best of the AAMC including a few former GOAs, and in my experience the AAMC has some of the best talent in the Axis and Allies community. This is more a matter of chosing armor over infantry which I will do to a point. Like I said I’d rather have a 3:1 inf/arm ratio than a 10:1 which is not worth much.
-
But if they don’t does that hurt me. Keeping Japan backed up in Yakut for a turn or two longer than usual is a good trade off I think. There are even times when Yakut can be made a deadzone as late as turn6 this way despite Japans huge numerical advantage because of what I described as Japans main problem/weakness.
If Japan holds up 1 extra turn or 2 in Yak, that could be a worst case for Russia because when they do more they will likely have such overwhelming force that makes strafe impossible. It is much better to lure Japan into the strafe situation you described then to have them hold up a turn and come in even stronger where stafe is not an option.
No they have value as offensive weapons, but they are not valuable especially when compared to the tank.
I disagree with this. I’m not a big fan of tanks I perfer infantry and fighters unless I’m hitting an aa-gun spot. And since I don’t build many fighters that means it is infantry, infantry, and more infantry with the occassional tank if I have the extra 2 IPC’s or I’m preparing for a big move.
Again this isn’t totally false, and in a Low Luck game this would likely prove true, but in dice games two things can happen. First the Axis can make a M84 lunge, and here is where the walk through the Caucausus can come into play, or the Axis can roll tech. You can complain after the fact that your opponent got HB too cheaply, but that won’t help you then. The key to victory is versatility, not stacking.
Of cousre the Axis CAN do this or CAN do that. Every strat has a counter and that is why I made the point about having to see the game board and how the game plays out. If they move, I can just as easily move.
Infantry are extremely versatile especially in large numbers. They are the best on defense and a good on offense in large numbers. Here’s why they are so good on offense:
Odds of 12 inf attacking2 or more hits - 62% <– the key is the ‘or more’ part, over 60% of the time you’ll get your 2 basics hits plus possibly more.
3 or more hits - 37% <-- about 40% of the time you’ll get a MINIMUM of 3 hits.
4 or more hits - 17% <-- about 20% of the time you’ll get a MINIMUM of 4 hits.I picked 12 inf cause it was easy to calculate but the numbers get better and better as you have more and more inf, because you get many more rounds out of combat and many more chances to hit.
I did also do 24 inf:
4 or more hits - 58%
5 or more hits - 37%
6 or more hits - 20%And with large stacks that build up in that reach in the 40’s-50’s, it just means you have more and more chances to hit with better odds then just having 60 inf and saying I’ll get 10 hits, there is a good chance you’ll get
about 15 hits, plus you get more and more rounds of combat and dice rolls.Shoot, I’ve got more to say but I gotta go for now.
-
Problem with attacking inf is that the variance is so big. 15 hits w/60 inf? You might as well hit 6 times (both chances arent that big btw).
-
Yeah, 15 was probably 2 hits too many. The red zone is 7 to 13 hits which comes out to the standard 10 hits.
Interestingly enough, the odds of hitting:6 or less - 10%
7 to 13 - 88%
10 to 15 - 52%
13 to 15 - 15%
More than 12 hits - 20%
More than 15 hits - 4%I just like having the inf because then they can turn around and defend at 2. I kinda think about it this way:
20 inf vs. 10 inf and 6 tanks.
If the 20 inf attack the 10 inf, 6 arm the defender will hold with about 3 arm, whereas if the 10 inf, 6 arm attack the 20 inf the defender will hold with 7 inf. No one is going to do that attack but it is just an example. Anyway you look at it the inf come out better.
You have 7 inf left over = 21 IPC vs. 3 arm = 15 IPC
You killed 16 units vs. 13 units killed
(this ignores strafes and the mobility of tanks or blitzing ability)I just don’t like large tank buys and I perfer the tank buying if I have the extra 2 IPC, or I’m planning on hitting a capital or something.
And here is why I don’t put as much emphasis on IPC production as you do. In PE bids the Axis rarely out produces the Allies, but they can if they are smart about it, take down Moscow. However, if you merely play to get an ipc advantage, which is the essence of the PowerAfrica play, a good Allied player is going to know this is what he has to prevent. So because of this I make the taking Africa from Germany my first priority.
I said with the Axis, I just use the 70 as a guide, figuring if I’m not near 70 by the end of round 3, then either Japan is going too slow, or I’m having trouble in Afr, or I’m not doing well against Russia. It is just an easy way to take stock of the game status, IMO.
Generally, as Germany I like to hit Russia hard early if possible and esp with bids. I think Africa is overated (shhhh, don’t tell anyone) esp if you have a bid. I say put the early pressure on Russia, force them to make a decision about Kar, and if they don’t pull back then hit them if you have the odds and if they do pull back at the very least you can trade Kar and claim Cauc, which is 6 IPC, making up for Afr.
-
Let me give another example.
Your example of 24 inf attacking for instance 12 inf, 6 arm. Defender will hold on average w/2 arm.
Now instaed use 14 inf, 6 arm in attack (same ipc value): attackers would win w/3 arm on average.
Both our attacking armies should win on average in defense (of course, the inf stack has higher odds).
Now if you use this principle w/Rus who can use 1 stack of arm to threaten 3 important countries at once (EEu, Yak, Sin) w/Inf in Kar and Nov and you know why a decent arm purchase by the Russians is interesting and a problem for the axis (as long as defense holds of course).
-
Definitely, don’t get me wrong, thinking about my most recent posts I may have given the impression that I never buy tanks or ignore them completely, which isn’t true.
I just tend not to buy in large numbers, and chooses to go with large inf buys and a tank here or there. For example if Russia is at 26, I’ll go 1 arm and 7 inf. I think 8-10 arm is sufficient with Russia, with one bought per rd, and Germany I usually have between 10-12, unless I think I’m winning where I may buy more.
And in your 14-6 example, I may go with 19 inf, 3 arm instead and perhaps I survive with an inf or two and 3 arm. Anyway, I get your point but I tend to usually have approx 5:1 inf to arm ratio, rather than say a 3:1.
-
This is of course country and board dependant.
-
True.
-
If Japan holds up 1 extra turn or 2 in Yak, that could be a worst case for Russia because when they do more they will likely have such overwhelming force that makes strafe impossible. It is much better to lure Japan into the strafe situation you described then to have them hold up a turn and come in even stronger where stafe is not an option.
This is silly. Keeping them far away is best because while it gives them a bigger stack when they do advance it also gives me one extra turn to prepare as well. This could mean the Russians build more armor and delay them another turn, and it could mean the allies rush troops to Karelia so that Russia can swing much of its Karelia army to Russia to create a massive deadzone. The key is time, as you’ve said time is one the Allies side so the longer you hold of the Axis the better chances the allies will have to deal with them.
I disagree with this. I’m not a big fan of tanks I perfer infantry and fighters unless I’m hitting an aa-gun spot. And since I don’t build many fighters that means it is infantry, infantry, and more infantry with the occassional tank if I have the extra 2 IPC’s or I’m preparing for a big move
And infantry are almost soley an defensive weapon, that is they need tanks. Lets say I stack Ukr with Germany a move I’ve alluded to before. Russia would need almost double the infantry the Germans put into Ukr to prevent this move. Worse yet if you didn’t have many tanks I might just fly in a Jap fighter or two to defend, but regardless to maintain the neccessary infantry advantage against Germany you would have to all but ignore Japan which isn’t wise.
And with large stacks that build up in that reach in the 40’s-50’s, it just means you have more and more chances to hit with better odds then just having 60 inf and saying I’ll get 10 hits, there is a good chance you’ll get
about 15 hits, plus you get more and more rounds of combat and dice rolls.Herein lies the flaw in this argument, infantry are not versatile. Yes you can stack infantry ad nauseum, but so can your opponent. At the same time Allied infantry stacks must fight seperately meaning a 30inf stack of Americans combined with a 60inf stack of Russians is somewhat weak if Germany has 45inf themselves since america is not strong enough to actually attempt a 1-2 punch. Also, infantry are weak because an opponent can match infantry for infantry, and even if he’s at a production disadvantage this would have to be very large for a very immediate gain to be made. For example, if Germany sends 6inf to the East each turn as compared to Russias 8 they will get outproduced, but this advantage won’t large enough to be use until several turns down the road, by which time I should be able to have diverted your attention somewhere else. The point being it is actually hard to outstack an opponent with one nation, as he possess virtually an equal ability to stack. More importantly I think its important to play so that you could defeat an opponent one on one, and without much assistant of an ally.
Problem with attacking inf is that the variance is so big. 15 hits w/60 inf? You might as well hit 6 times (both chances arent that big btw).
Good point, and I would point out the norm is actually 10, and your odds of getting +50% can’t be very good.
Yeah, 15 was probably 2 hits too many. The red zone is 7 to 13 hits which comes out to the standard 10 hits.
Yes but lets assume that you hit 7, but your defender gets a normal amount say 10-11, whereas if you assume with 10-13 hits you’ll get a good exchange with 7 you get a bad one. As Optorch said with infantry there is just too much variance.
I just like having the inf because then they can turn around and defend at 2.
And I think this says it all. You like infantry not because they ARE better but because they defend better, and of course its always better to have too much defense that too little. However, the best defense is a good offense. Playing defensively can cost you the game against a good player.
Generally, as Germany I like to hit Russia hard early if possible and esp with bids. I think Africa is overated (shhhh, don’t tell anyone) esp if you have a bid. I say put the early pressure on Russia, force them to make a decision about Kar, and if they don’t pull back then hit them if you have the odds and if they do pull back at the very least you can trade Kar and claim Cauc, which is 6 IPC, making up for Afr.
This sounds like a PE bid, and I will say that I think with PE bids you must play to win by turn 5 because after that things seem to fall apart too quickly for the Axis. IMO with a PE bid you absolutely cannot play a defensive game or you will get eaten alive.
-
This is silly. Keeping them far away is best because while it gives them a bigger stack when they do advance it also gives me one extra turn to prepare as well. This could mean the Russians build more armor and delay them another turn, and it could mean the allies rush troops to Karelia so that Russia can swing much of its Karelia army to Russia to create a massive deadzone.
Sure Russia COULD do this or COULD do that, again your assuming a whole bunch of things for Russia, I guess Russia can just manufacture whatever weapons they want and I guess Germany is doing nothing either. You keep changing the parameters midstream. The point of waiting is to sychronize the attack with Germany. Now Germany hits Karelia and Japan hits Novo, and since they waited they now have 26 inf in Novo instead of 12. Russia can’t take both. Your tanks may allow you to hit both Ger and Japan, but by attacking in the same round you negate that. It just takes some planning. Also waiting a turn can be EXTREMELY beneficial to Japan if that means you can HOLD Novo. The key is to hold it, not get there fast and then continually lose it. I’d rather wait a turn in hold, then trade for 3 or 4 turns, that to me is silly.
Good point, and I would point out the norm is actually 10, and your odds of getting +50% can’t be very good.
You actually have a 52% chance to hit more than 10.
Infantry are extremely versitile and are extremely valuable on offensive as well as defense.
The chances of hitting 7 or less is about 11%. It just isn’t going to happen with large stacks. The greater the number the less varience, that is just statistics.And I think this says it all. You like infantry not because they ARE better but because they defend better, and of course its always better to have too much defense that too little. However, the best defense is a good offense. Playing defensively can cost you the game against a good player.
Depends on which side you are.
This sounds like a PE bid, and I will say that I think with PE bids you must play to win by turn 5 because after that things seem to fall apart too quickly for the Axis. IMO with a PE bid you absolutely cannot play a defensive game or you will get eaten alive.
Definitely. If you wait too long, you lose your adv of having your extra units.
-
The point of waiting is to sychronize the attack with Germany. Now Germany hits Karelia and Japan hits Novo, and since they waited they now have 26 inf in Novo instead of 12. Russia can’t take both. Your tanks may allow you to hit both Ger and Japan, but by attacking in the same round you negate that. It just takes some planning.
We are not talking about the situation where Rus has its arm in Mos and the inf in Nov anymore, right (since the Japs wouldnt be in Sin/Yak to strike Nov b/c of the deadzone)?
This means that Rus arm is prolly in Kar so extra inf can go to Mos. If thats not enough to keep the Japs out of Nov than something has gone very wrong for the allies (only when Ger has taken Kar early -> weak Russians, but we are not talking about that I pressume, since Ger is pressuring Kar).
Im just not sure what you mean by Rus arm cant attack both……
-
I don’t know anymore. Too many what-ifs, coulda beens, and should-do’s for me. I’m done talking in circles.
And back on topic, Japan is still the strongest country in the game. :D
-
The chances of hitting 7 or less is about 11%. It just isn’t going to happen with large stacks.
No it’s going to happen about 11% of the time, and my point is that when that happens in a game you are winning big it hurts and can turn a sure win into a sure loss. My way ensures you will win all the games you should, without really exposing yourself to too much more risk.
And back on topic, Japan is still the strongest country in the game.
Back on subject you really haven’t supported your claim here. Both Torch and I have suggested that a Japanese drive no matter how strong can be slowed down by cunning Russian play, not because Russia has more Ipcs per say, but because the more they fall back the shorter their supply lines become, and the longer the Japs lines become. This in my opinion show they are not strong. To furthe offer this use betamap sometime during a game and see how long it takes for Japan to actually have a great ipc value in troops than Russia. If Russia plays well it can be a while, and I ususally subtract the value of the airforces as they only reflect the inequality at the start of the game and not during it.
-
Ugh. :roll:
OF COURSE JAPAN CAN BE STOPPED!!!
I never said they couldn’t!
Also Russia can fall, Germany can fall, lots of stuff can happen, that’s why you play the game!I stated why, IMO, Japan/US are the strongest many posts ago, so you can go back and read it if you choose to or keep ignoring it.
And I stated why supply lines don’t matter in considering which country is the strongest. You should probably go back a read that as well. Well, here’s the short version since I doubt you will. The supply line problem is true for EVERY country, especially the aggressors.
So, because a counrty is on the offensive and has longer supply lines they are weaker??? That is just stupid! So, as Germany I should let Russia take EE, so I can be stronger as Germany because the Russians have farther to go. That makes no sense!
And as Japan, from now on I’m going to let Russia take Man, Fic, and Kwa, so Japan will have the shorter supply lines and thus be the stronger country. Again, that is just stupid.
Those are tactics and strategies, that is an independent discussion then what country someone thinks is the strongest.This is not a strategy thread, and I probably should have stopped my part of the discussion long ago when you first derailed the thread, but oh well I got caught up a bit.
If Russia were so strong they wouldn’t need help from the other Allies or their Capital would never fall.
Japan is the strongest - they out produce every other country often earning 45 IPC or so, they have the largest empire by rd 4, they can tech at will, and their capital never falls, that is why they are the strongest. Period. If you don’t agree fine, so be it.
Just ask yourself why KJF’s are so hard, then you’ll have your answer. -
The supply line problem is true for EVERY country, especially the aggressors.
So, because a counrty is on the offensive and has longer supply lines they are weaker???Exactly, Japan is only on the offensive because the Allies let them be on the offensive to concentrate on Germany. Also, for any of the land based
powers should they have to go on the defensive they need only fall back, but for Japan this is not possible as Tokyo will alway be somewhat weak to take, and for this reason a clever Allied player can sneak in and take it if they get HBombers at the right time.I stated why, IMO, Japan/US are the strongest many posts ago, so you can go back and read it if you choose to or keep ignoring it.
Yeah I can read thank you, but I rejected it completely because your claim is that Japan is strong because they never have to defend, and because they can out produced Russia so quickly. Both of these I have repeatedly refuted.
And as Japan, from now on I’m going to let Russia take Man, Fic, and Kwa, so Japan will have the shorter supply lines and thus be the stronger country. Again, that is just stupid.
Is it though? I never attack Manchuria on Russia1 regardless of the bid the infantry are too important to keep Japan out of Novo and Yakut in turns 3-6 which is far more important than slowing Japan down one turn and taking out a fighter which they don’t need anyway. IMO inexperienced players place far too much emphasis on attacking Manchuria which will certainly not be a game ender, and could end up hurting Russia more than Japan.
This is not a strategy thread, and I probably should have stopped my part of the discussion long ago when you first derailed the thread, but oh well I got caught up a bit.
Again I don’t agree you illustrated perfectly why it is that Germany/Russia are stronger, and why Japan and the US are far weaker than many people think. Like I said before if Germany is losing badly it can be very hard for Japan to intervene in a way that will greatly affect the outcome of the game. Likewise can be said for the Americans. I find it is often how Russia/Uk are played that decide the Allies outcome.
If Russia were so strong they wouldn’t need help from the other Allies or their Capital would never fall.
But consider how hard it is to actually make Berlin/Moscow fall, and then think about the inequity of being double teamed by Japan and Germany. If the game were Russia versus Germany or Japan I think they could hold out a long time 30-40 turns, but that wouldn’t be a fun game would it?
Just ask yourself why KJF’s are so hard, then you’ll have your answer.
Well duh they are hard because it is difficult to get to the center of their ipc production. Even if you go after Ocenia this only reflects 8ipcs of their production, and won’t cripple them by any means. On the other hand IMO the best way to pursue a KJF is to build up an enormous Russian army and park it in Mongolia in order to make Sink,China, Yakut, and more importantly Manch deadzones. Once Manch becomes a deadzone if Russia can park this army in Manch the game may be over unless the Japs have a large enough army to hold Kwan/China/Sfe and most importantly push you out of Manchuria. Otherwise their ability to dump troops into Asia will be severely limited from there on.
Japan is the strongest - they out produce every other country often earning 45 IPC or so, they have the largest empire by rd 4, they can tech at will, and their capital never falls,
Their capital never falls because people don’t target them, and because its hard to get to. They outproduce everybody because the Allies will surrender much of Asia to them, but in my experience once it becomes 3 on 1 against Japan the game ends quickly. Unless as Torch suggests the Allies especially America screws up badly. They win because the Allies should be able to retake Africa, and tech at will which Japan cannot afford.
I would disagree that Japan can tech at will because they need to build many guys if they are to advance on Moscow, but at the same time threaten Africa, assuming the Allies retake. What I’ve seen is that if Russia plays as I’ve suggested Japan needs to concentrate on weakening Russia first, Africa second, and tech third. Because of this there is very little pie to go around when tech comes up.
Suggested Topics
