Alternative Winning Strategy and Tactics for Central Powers

[Dukla passer]

I think it’s a good strategy,like it…about the movement of ships,can’t find something about MUST ATTACKING when you are entering the sea zone with the enemies in it…just MUST STOP.

[ColonelKurtz]

To alejsgo: On Turn 1, the thing that prevents France from consolidating transports off Canada is the remaining German subs that had the mission of sinking the British fleet on Turn 1.
To Dukla passer: you are right; I had misunderstood and thought that combat was required when enemy warships are in the same Sea Zone.

This gambit only works when A-H successfully occupies SZ 17 AND when the Allied combined navies don’t immediately react.
As I said earlier, my opponents have been unconcerned about SZ 17 until it was too late. The Germans have been forcing 3 Allied Powers to build up navies in the north Atlantic by being aggressive early on with battleships. That is a very good IPC tradeoff.

With all the moving parts, options, and player personalities, we have not had any games develop in the exact same way. This game has proved itself as very challenging for both Allies and Central Powers.

[alejsgo]

This post is deleted!

[ColonelKurtz]

Alejsgo, you are right.
I now calculate that the SZ 17 Gambit, along with the Kill France First Strategy, has maybe a 45% chance of success (downgrading from 50% earlier estimation).
Somehow, some way, there has to be a strategy for the Central Powers to have an even chance at winning.
On purchases, I have been buying approximately 1 Artillery for every 1 Infantry while in an Offensive Phase.
When the tide turns to Defense, I buy all Infantry. The exception is Fighters; I try to have enough to gain Air Supremacy on the most vital fronts.
I am now switching to a buy of 1 Artillery for every 2 Infantry, to cover casualties.
Anyone else have a purchase formula?

[alejsgo]

This post is deleted!

[Fikem84]

That is what I was trying to say earlier.  The new tournament rules open this game up a lot.  Giving the CP more options and allowing for more strategies.  Personally, I think this makes the game more competitive and fun to play…though it does detract somewhat from the WWI theme of getting bogged down and slogging it out in the trenches.  But if the game played that slow I would rarely have anyone play the games with me.

[Flashman]

Moving just one space makes the CPs too predictable. The Allies have to be playing like puddings not to be able to anticipate every CP move and use sea movement to counter it.

[ColonelKurtz]

Well, for what it is worth, I played Tournament Rules for the first time this weekend. Playing CP, had to go with Kill Russia First strategy, which worked well (CP had Economic Victory early on, and the tide turned around the 7th Round). The Sea Zone 17 Gambit was not available, because the Allies countered it early and gained domination of the Mediterranean.
Has anyone else found that early buys should be Infantry-Artillery balanced, but later buys should be 90% Infantry?

[Flashman]

Based on the assumption that you’re taking mainly infantry as casualties, yes. I tend to think and play in terms of building large artillery stacks, with enough air cover to make them effective; and just as much infantry as you need to protect the stacks. Finally, when you have an economic advantage, build a tank stack to finish the enemy off.

[Greyhawk]

Hypothetical problem for your German Fleet ideas.
Assuming the Russian player is crazy/unpredictable they can move their Baltic BattleShip into the same seazone that already contains German ships without firing on them. That move passes through two minefields so the Russian Battleship would likely be tilted. Where does the German Fleet attack? The crippled Russian battleship or the British fleet?

I though a mined sea zone was considered hostile?  Which would prevent that move.

[drsnidely]

In OOB rules mined sea zones are not hostile, but I believe they are hostile in the PTR. I’m always afraid to move that battleship through 2 mined zones though so it usually just sits there uselessly for the whole game when we play.

The problem I see with the SeaZone 17 gambit is in my games the 2 Russian cruisers always hit the Ottoman cruisers in 19, mostly because they don’t have anything else to do. That sounds be a slight advantage to Ottomans due to the mines but it never seems to work out that way.

[Muscleape]

I enjoyed the discussion. My experience is OOB rules with no Russian Revolution. Under these conditions, the Central Powers have the odds stacked against them. The only chance they have is to spend for troops on the ground not navy.

[drsnidely]

I’m not sure i agree. The only times I’ve seen the Central Powers do any good at all are when Germany spends at least a little on navy. Just enough do the Allies have to think about it.

[ColonelKurtz]

The key to victory for this game is capturing enemy capitals.
For the CP, that is a ground unit mission (extreme odds against CP capturing London or Washington).
The gambit, though, is a CP naval strategy that disrupts Allied ground defenses. Allies have a huge naval advantage.
If the CP can threaten the Atlantic, contest the Mediterranean, and cause the Allies to spend too much on naval units, the CP have a chance to win.

[Cow]

I usually win with the CP. It is just a matter of Italy, France or Russia first. Russia first is the easiest and recommended for newer CP players with Italy and then France first being for more experienced players.

I feel like I discussed how to roll each nation somewhere on here before or I did it on a youtube channel. The Central powers should not lose very often, only when you first start playing 1914 yeah it takes a bit of counting / getting used to the new rules and units / retreat options etc.

France first is the most fun and craziest, after you get France it is a pretty crazy game you got uk / usa on top, Italy under you, and Russia to your East. You have to coordinate Germany / AH very well to get a max power round 4 or round 5 attack on France, you will get France… what happens after that gets nuts.

Russia first is standard. Italy first is for the more conservative of players who do not like taking big risks, that just want to waltz right in and win and deal with the Russian bear later (EASY MODE and you probably lose this game because the otto side of the board will be full of suck). Conservative players hate using Germany + AH to defeat Russia, there is a fair amount of risk involved and in a multi coordination. - MEDIUM difficulty, with russia out of the picture the game is pretty simple. France is hardmode, it is easy to take once you learn how to buy / move and just memorize it… the game after that not so much.
~

Once you take France… people just get depressed and do not want to play you anymore. Not sure why, everyone is totally cool losing Russia, but France makes people sad.

[drsnidely]

Interesting that you say the CP should usually win.  I think most people here would say that the board is pretty heavily tilted toward the Allies.  I’m not disagreeing with you, since you have a lot more experience here than I do.  I’m just curious what the Allies are doing while you’re throwing everything you have toward France.

[Cow]

It gets pretty chaotic, Russian bear gets real, Ottos are in a stalemate, AH is backed up to his capital, I like to take Italy at the same time… USA can liberate Italy and that makes me a sad panda sometimes. AH is where things get wonky. It is primarily Germany that had to leave what is east of germany, east of germany and everything west of germany west of germany machine gunning their way  to france. It is kind of cray. The starting stuff east of Germany is generally enough to keep Russian bear enough spaces away from you long enough for you to deal with it later.