No, unfortunately there’s no tactical genius in me, while it is certainly a flattering notion. More likely the second option presented is the more realistic of the two; A new player with plenty of time to stare at the board, thanks to the Open Source TripleA program that’s essentially let me play myself several times and try our different approaches in the seat of each country.
The issue that I’ve naturally run into is that it’s difficult for me to surprise myself in these ‘mock games’ and I’m almost certain I’m overlooking/underplaying various aspects of each of the powers. Hence seeking advice on these forums. ;)
That in mind, what I -am- attempting is an opening strategy that set’s Germany up into a consistently good position, and minimizes collateral damage. I’ve come to suspect that without serious steps initially, the german fleet is doomed for the scrap heap, which in turn gives Germany it’s fairly likely death-by-Isolation from Africa, and the humiliating advance of an allied Reinforced Russia, even if/when Japan threatens from the otherside.
One thing that I’ve already noticed on this opening move is that it relies on Russia withdrawing from Karelia, in favor of Western Russia which is not always the case. Further, while I believe that Western Russia is an excellent strategic position for the Russians, but it is likewise difficult for Germany to take it, and not get hit by a Russian screwfest from more angles than even Jenna Jameson could handle.
But all in all, I feel fairly comfortable giving it a shot. The advantage I see is that the British Fleet is forced into hopeless irrelevance without serious IPCs spent; IPCs that would then be taken away from securing Asia from Japan. Russia is cut off from the much required aid from the Allies. And Africa faces no immediate threat, that cannot be counterattacked against, particularly if Gibraltiar(sp?) is taken in a subsequent turn to prevent allied air strikes.
The disadvantage is that Russia faces less of an immediate threat from Germany, until it can spin up to speed from it’s African conquest; However, to counterbalance that point, I believe that Germany, regardless, cannot adequately threaten Russia without these steps as Allied reinforcement will eventually wear Germany into the ground, with or without Japanese intervention.
Lastly, as far as Transports and Japan - Yes, I should have clarified that transports serve their purpose on initial turns, and then are replaced by mainland Industrial Complexes. Often times, our allied counterparts are fond of two-timing Japan with both a Sianking and Indian complex, however I have yet to see it effectively turn into anything but a dramatically powerful mid-game Japan as a result. The time it buys Russia is usually, as I’ve seen it played, inconsequential compared to the effective 30 IPCs handed over to the Japanese in a nice little gift-wrapped Complex. Not to mention, further, these IPCs aren’t used against Germany, which I believe only strengthens the Japanese role of taking heat off Germany.
Anyway! Thankyou for the feedback, I certainly appreciate it, and I’d really like to hear some counterarguements from the individuals that voted against this strategy. I’m absolutely positive it needs refinement, and any help would be great.
