I’ve played third reich. There is both an 80s version, and a 90s version of that game. They are quite different. However, it is alot simpler and smaller than WiF. I am currently playing a game called Scorched Earth, Urals Mod in the Europa System. This game has baseunits being divisions and regiments. It playes the entire war on the eastern front. Each space is a hexagon at about 25 km accross. you usualle have about 3000 pieces on the map at any given time, when only playing the eastern front. If you play once a week, you will actually use like 8 years to play the 4 years from 41 to the end of 45.
Ramdas Vaidyanathan has a new move called "Ram's Mahatma Gambit" -
-
Thank you, LeClerc, that makes sense now. Definitely gamey, but good to be aware of next time I play Japan :)
-
Hi ItIsLeClerc and everyone following this topic:
Before i go on… I have 2 questions to all you & all the folks following this topic:
-
Do you think The Mahatma Gambit changes the bid that Axis offers Allies?
-
IF SO, WHAT IS THE BID YOU THINK IS CORRECT? Please include what you thought before… and what you would offer now. Please keep in mind , the bid money is very likely going to USSR in Far East.
Now… the answers to this question , will speak for itself.
Thanks
-
-
Before i go on… I have 2 questions to all you & all the folks following this topic:
-
Do you think The Hoss Cartwright Gambit changes the bid that Axis offers Allies?
-
IF SO, WHAT IS THE BID YOU THINK IS CORRECT? Please include what you thought before… and what you would offer now. Please keep in mind , the bid money is very likely going to USSR in Far East.
Now… the answers to this question , will speak for itself.
Thanks
-
-
Hello,
@ ItIsILeClerc : Thank you very much for the rule clarification. This means small changes have to be made, but the general idea is still unharmed.
@ DizzKneeLand33 : Kudos for being a FIDE player.
Chess is chess and A&A is A&A. I was making an analogy. It is hard to do such a thing in 2 different games… but with a little imagination… I think yes.
The BB is the most expensive piece on the board, analogous to the Queen ( of course the movements are a completely diff issue)
You want the 9 pawns in compensation…
Well these are 9 islands (analogous to the 9 pawns ) that The Mahatma Gambit helps, by stifling Japanese attack on them before they happen, which may otherwise happen on J3 attack:
- Java
- Sumatra
- Celebes
- Borneo
- Phillippines
- Hawaii
- Ceylon
- Dutch New Guinea
- Midway
So yes… there is a point to be made regarding that analogy.
Now as far as the Zugzwang… if one fails to use the imagination… and adheres strictly to definitions… may not seem relevant.
However… look at the turmoil it causes… ( should Japan NOT kill the BB on J2 strike)
Churchill freaked out when he learnt the Bismark is on the loose in the Atlantic , when the UK ships lost track of it.
What would Japan’s reaction be , then a full BB can go forth from a Naval Base in Hong Kong.
Every transport unless it has a fully loaded CV escort is vulnerable!!!
The Japanese J2 BUY, if it has multiple transports… can be blocked from being loaded!!
The TRs in Manchuria are in a dilemma… if they end their movement , and load troops on the TRs… these troops may not be available in Manchuria or Korea for defense, should USSR come in.
So… yes… with a little imagination… as hard as it may be… a Zugzwang can be envisioned.
Lastly: This Gambit yes is a Loathed… gamey… move. Maybe so… But that alone is not the point.
The point is it COMBINES :
A) TIMING : … MIFF happens exactly before USSR attacks Manchuria and Korea. Earlier KJF strategies always wrote off the Soviet20 … as they would be wiped out. But MIFF allows the Soviet20 to get in…and get out… or get through!!! Possibly unscathed!
B) COORDINATION : The UK BB+DD freeze happens with help of ANZAC… main beneficiary is China
C) STRENGTH : Soviet20 has the Mass of Soviet troops as its advantage. 3 ANZAC planes with a DD+CRU + TR with an ART+ INF can hit a Strategic target. UK combines Malaya Inf+ MECHs+ India Units + 3 UK planes + 3 AAA to thwart a Japanese strike.
finally
D) PSYCHOLOGY : So far… the Allies always had to worry… when will Japan strike? The Japanese player was in control. After The Mahatma Gambit is played , there are usually 2 outcomes as have been detailed before. If Japan doe NOT do a J2 strike… then the Hunter becomes the Prey. It is now the Japanese player who has to worry … when will the Allies strike? !!!
As i have said before… there have been plenty of posts talking about Axis advantage… complaining about Never winning as an Allied player… whining and begging for huge bids for a fair play…NO MORE!
I have given Hope and ONE small way for the Allied players to get back on even terms.
-
I did a Google search of this arbitarily renamed Move of mine…. cannot find anything by that term.
Can someone find a HOSS CARTWRIGHT GAMBIT anywhere…? Is so please show it here. And what did it exactly do?
If it was around, how come NO ONE in this forum has ever discussed it?!
It is akin to plagiarism to take someone’s idea and then sell to under a false/different name.
-
I did a Google search of this arbitarily renamed Move of mine…. cannot find anything by that term.
Can someone find a HOSS CARTWRIGHT GAMBIT anywhere…? Is so please show it here. And what did it exactly do?
If it was around, how come NO ONE in this forum has ever discussed it?!
I think we’ll need to ask Little Joe about that one….
-
A few thoughts:
1. I have no problem referring to the move of UK bb to Honk Kong as the “Mahatma Gambit” [patent pending]. No need to be quite so obsessive about naming it, though.
2. The system of moves you’ve described is a subset of KJF in general. Since there are so many variables, I’d probably just call this simply “KJF” if I saw it played against me.
3. What if Japan declares war turn 1? That seems to invalidate the entire premise of the move, with the Malaya bb sunk before UK1.
4. The unfortunate reality is that the only real initiative the Allies have round 1 is with the Russians in Siberia and the British in the Med/Africa; everything else must necessarily be counterplays. In other words, you can’t plan on countering 1.e4 every game as Black; your opponent might do something else before you have a chance to act.
-
If you are a Chess player or are aware of moves, consider this :
TMGÂ = Queen Sacrifice to achieve Zugzwang !!!
The UK BB is the Queen, sacrificed to COMPEL the Japanese player to make a move, any move… that will weaken him :)
As a pretty highly rated FIDE player, your comparison, while compelling, isn’t really relevant. First of all, Zugzwang means that any move that you make weakens your position (short story: to the point of losing). Japan has lots of board moves that aren’t losing, but instead still keep troops moving forward. Secondly, you might be making a queen sacrifice, but I don’t see the 9 pawns worth of compensation….
Japan can simply move the transports out of the Sea of Japan during the combat move, and move them back during non-com and unload in Korea (or further south depending on your shuttle – you could throw down a harbor and still be able to hit some of the islands next turn), while building several more. Sure, it does slightly slow down the troop movements, but I will make up for that in future turns – the battleship is COMPLETELY FREE (any dented Japanese BB will heal next turn).
That BB is so much more valuable in later rounds either in the Pacific or to help support Africa/Med. You are simply wasting it in this scenario, and having to make an unprovoked declaration to boot. And I’m not even thinking of all of the other possible responses, but those should suffice for now.
Also, keeping the Russian troops east sure does help out the European Axis…
I never knew you played Chess. We might have to play sometime ;)
-
IMPORTANT - One is how to set a trap for Japan!
Before i go one, there is a good reason why the 3 ANZAC fighters be in Java, as well as the one lone surviving ANZAC Inf go to Shan State. It is to deny Japan - Malaya on J2. Should Japan capture AND HOLD Malaya on J2 strike, India’s position becomes untenable.
In reply to 3 very important questions:
- What happens if Japan does NOT strike on J2 or J3 , stacks Manchuria and Korea on J1 with troops from Japan and Chahar…. and plays Perfect to avoid the pitfalls of MIFF and TMG?
ANSWER: Good for Japan. The UK BB with the Mahatma bids adieu to the Emperor of Japan on UK3 , and sails away to the East , preferably to Midway (SZ 25 ) or (SZ 8 )the Aleutians. The US , if having building a Mega Navy can move in force to Midway and welcome the Mahatma with open arms :roll: . In case that is not the case, the BB becomes a blocker at Midway to a J4 attack. There are other possibilities too, but these seem the better options.
So the BB can be “saved” … and look at it Psychologically… the UK BB on Turn 1 goes to HK, Turn 2 goes to Tokyo, on Turn 3 goes to Midway, unscathed… interesting. But only… if Japan plays perfect to avoid TMG and MIFF .
But remember in doing so… they pretty much have lost in China already. The DEI is still in Allied hands, this is money Japan will need desperately and would already have had, but for escaping from TMG and MIFF.- What if Japan does J2 strike , in concert with Germany’s SeaLion… to divide US forces and win either in Europe or Pacific? The loss of the UK fleet on J2 will bring disaster to India.
ANSWER: Interesting question. US must choose which side to win the game on for Allies.
It goes after Japan, so it can choose! Enough has been written about SeaLion and what the USSR does and the US response etc.
All I can say is the US T1 buy is very important here for that decision to me made. And it has to be made immediately after J2 strike… and US should not waver. Will leave it upto the players to calculate this one out.
Now, J2 will not get Japan the DEI . They will come on the J3 move. If Manchuria and or esp. Korea are “takable”… USSR must take them .
After SeaLion, Moscow is not under threat for a long time. it can afford to even lose the planes.If on J2 , Japan goes all out for Malaya, everything it has landed there (it can land max 6 troops, as it starts with 3 TRs) will be killed by the UK Inf+Planes . Or if there are upto 3 troops surviving… the ANZAC Inf=3 FTR take them out. This important for 2 reasons. If Japanese planes land on Malaya on J3 , and IC goes on it on J4, India may fall by J6 or 7.
TRAP
If Japan tries to take Malaya and FAILS… it cannot take DEI for one more round at least , that is 15 IPC gain. The reason is that , there are No TR’s capable of reaching them, if they are all used in Malaya.
Important The 3 UK - India planes MUST be in SHAN STATE at the end of UK1 and NOT E. India.
Reason: There is a slight chance that Japan could do a J3 India crush. SO , if the 3 planes start from Shan State, they can kill Malaya AND reach back to India to defend against the J3 attack.LASTLY: If Japan is using all 3 TR for Malaya, fantastic! The Chinese are off the Hook! In this case, the UK 2 response would be to use the 4 Mechs ( UK1 buy) and 3 AAA to enter into Yunnan on UK3, forever keeping Yunnan for Allies.
- Are the USSR fighters+ TB not vulnerable to Japanese Bombers if they are parked in the rear?
Yes they are. And great care must be taken. In fact , it may be better, should the strength of Japan be on the higher side, to Land them in Buryatia with 1 AAA and 1 Inf. I will take these odds against a Bomber strike at all times. The 2 land units can become blockers, should the dice roll Japan’s way on a J2 strike against Amur.
Now that more or less all bases are covered, I would like to re-state that should Japan spend 2 more turns trying to take Malaya and DEI… with the US moving into Carolines… with the ANZAC (that why the 1 fighter buy in ANZAC 1 … if safe is important!) … the Pacific will pretty much be an ALLIED VICTORY ( Barring crazy dice rolls ) by ANZAC 10 max.… maybe much earlier depending on Japanese decisions .
The TUV and IPC of the Allies by the end of round 4 will exceed that of Japan stupendously. Do not want to do into details… will let others do that… but as long as the Allies do not give Japan the 8th Victory City in Europe , by the end of round 9, the Allies should win… ( think US TRs + planes and Subs!!! going via ALEUTIANS from US 5)NOTE: In the past, games used to go 20+ rounds . The benefit of The MAHATMA GAMBIT ( TMG ) is that you set a timer on the game. It will be decided one way or another by round 10.
So, you folks can give me credit… or not… it is your choice… but the game , IMHO has become much more exciting , even handed and enjoyable!
Thank you,
Ramdas Vaidyanathan
-
Last thought: *CAUTION *
Shan state is vulnerable by itself. It will have 6 Inf + 3 UK F…+ possibly the Queensland ANZAC fighter… is brought in on ANZAC1. It can land there. So 6 Inf + 4 planes… ( 28 Def Points + 10 pieces )
If Japan at end of J1 places Max planes in Kwangsi + 3 CVs off Hainan , keep UK planes in India/Burma… and ANZAC planes in Java.
As i have written earlier , TMG is an optional move that allies can make at end of J1… before US and UK go… It does not always have to be played… !
-
Should Japan UNLOAD… repeat UNLOAD 1-3 TR in Kwangsi at the end of J1… option of playing the DOUBLE MAHATMA GAMBIT ( DMG ) !
Where the DD goes to Kwangsi ( SZ 36) … and BB to Hong Kong !!!
Everything depends on how many Japanese planes are landed in Kwangsi and how many loaded CVs are there.
Japan could do a fighter sweep.
Shan State is defended accordingly!
yes… i know this is tedious…… but looking at all possibilities here!
Cheers.
-
A few thoughts:
1. I have no problem referring to the move of UK bb to Honk Kong as the “Mahatma Gambit” [patent pending]. No need to be quite so obsessive about naming it, though.
Would not have, except that the first few responses discussed the name rather than the merits. BTW, had The Mahatma called on India to support the Japanese, ( he did not) ….things might have been quite different for the British in India. For his forbearance and his support for peace… he did write a letter to The Fuhrer to try stop the war :cry: considering the BB is going in peace… i proposed the name of this move
2. The system of moves you’ve described is a subset of KJF in general. Since there are so many variables, I’d probably just call this simply “KJF” if I saw it played against me.
Subset…. maybe… but the combination as i described in a previous post , with timing , using the weak Allied strength to the fullest and the Psychological element to it … IMHO make it quite different. Maybe you do not make the BB move to HK… you can call it KJF… no problem… but using that particular move … it does save the Soviet20 which would have otherwise been lost in the “old” KJF …in concert with other moves mentioned… should be either TMG … and should the plan of the Allies be KJF… it can be TMG-KJF
3. What if Japan declares war turn 1? That seems to invalidate the entire premise of the move, with the Malaya bb sunk before UK1.
Uhhh…. No UK BB move to Kwangsi/Hainan or to HongKong… NO TMG … very simple… I mean… this should be very obvious
4. The unfortunate reality is that the only real initiative the Allies have round 1 is with the Russians in Siberia and the British in the Med/Africa; everything else must necessarily be counterplays. In other words, you can’t plan on countering 1.e4 every game as Black; your opponent might do something else before you have a chance to act.
Yep! Agreed. This is only optional! Should Japan play J1 accurately… and unless KJF is on the cards… TMG need not be played
-
I am afraid that the biggest problem the allies still have, is that they don’t know what the Axis are going to do during the early game AND that the axis have flexibility to adapt their strategy.
Why sac a BB and a DD UK1 just because you fear a J4, only to find out that Japan adapted a bit and attacks J2 taking the Uk hips for free. It makes the already viable J2 that much better.
Not to mention that leaving the Siberians in the east just invites Germany into Moscow beyond repair. I would even go as far as saying that the siberians Always must retreat to Moscow except when Germany goes SL.I admit I praise J4G4 most of all Axis strategies these days but I wouldn’t hesitate to take the offered free ships and do J2 anyway. If Germany is not going anal about launching Sea Lion, that is (J2 is the worst you can do if Germany wants to do that). After all, if J2 is launched opportunistically, there is still the G4 part of the success and if the USA looks like going KJF, a J2 will not hurt the Euro-axis at all, not even if they would want to do SL!
Last but not least, it is very easy for Japan to keep its TRS loaded J2 as a preventive action. When I come to think of it, for a J4 I’m not doing anything better anyway with those troops (load/unload J2 and then load them again J3 to sail them to their destination to invade J4. This basically nullifies Mahatma but he will most likely indeed be able to get away to safety if Japan is THAT determined to J3/J4.
Once again: KJF required!
And apart from a J1DOW I won’t be looking into KJF’s before the allies have proven to me that ‘GIF’ also works.
To each his own ofc, but personally I don’t want to be limited to ‘KJF’ as the only viable OOB allied answer to everything. -
I am afraid that the biggest problem the allies still have, is that they don’t know what the Axis are going to do during the early game AND that the axis have flexibility to adapt their strategy.
Well, the game is set up that way. Germany goes before Russia… and Japan goes before US and UK. So Axis always has the initiative.
If Japan wants to do J2 , it is going to J2. But the Allies no not know that. ALLIES ALSO DO NOT KNOW IF JAPAN WANTS TO DO THE SUPERIOR G4J4 Either! TMG forces Japan to choose between a J2… or playing under pressure of MIFF … or weakening itself by not doing the optimal moves that it wants.
Why sac a BB and a DD UK1 just because you fear a J4, only to find out that Japan adapted a bit and attacks J2 taking the Uk hips for free. It makes the already viable J2 that much better.
Let us suppose at the end of J1, Japan does its usual Naval moves. Split the Naval presence between Carolines to keep US and ANZAC honest … and either Hong Kong with the 2-3 TRs… and maybe some ships on Japan to threaten Hawaii… or to Hainan with 1 or 2 TR to project its threat to execute J2 strike. Also consider Japan keep air as follows 4-6 Kiangsu , 6 on CVs and 4-6 on Kwangsi, a couple on Japan or Manchuria… Suppose you do not play TMG . Well, look at a typical J2 strike. UK withdraws everything to India or Java on UK 1. The TRs are lost . Any blockers Allies may be foolish enough to keep are lost. Japanese Air power is spread over strike areas… Phillippines, all the DEI islands, Central China to help eliminate Chinese resistance and and Kwangsi . Usually Malaya or most DEI fall on J2. Hawaii AND Queensland is under threat. Right so far?
Now imagine the same scenario…. except …1) That on USSR2, the Soviet20 have moved to Amur…2) That you have 2 blockers in Borneo and Malaya and you play TMG . Let us suppose Japan decides to do a J2 strike. Now, they have to choose their targets…. the problem… is that there are too many targets!!! What are the Priority targets for Japan… DEI? Phillippines? Dutch New Guinea? The Soviet20? Japan knows they are coming next turn… or Hawaii? Or Queensland?? Or do they ignore ALL of these targets and go on to kill the Blockers… and try to Airsweep Shan state… Take Malaya… ( which might be re-taken!) … or keep pushing into China?!
Not to mention that leaving the Siberians in the east just invites Germany into Moscow beyond repair. I would even go as far as saying that the siberians Always must retreat to Moscow except when Germany goes SL.
My outlook is that the Soviet20 are in the East. Use them there. Use them when Japan is still figuring out WHEN and WHO to strike. Take AWAY some options. Take away Japan’s flexibility. Take AWAY its ability to use the 12+ Units on Manchuria and Korea that magnifies its ability to strike!!!
The Soviet20 are the BOON Allies have… the ONLY real force in proximity to Japan that can make it look over its shoulders, my friend LeClerc. Give the Soviet20 teeth… they will make Japan howl. Start making them plod backward to Moscow is only going to make Tojo do a song and dance!
I admit I praise J4G4 most of all Axis strategies these days but I wouldn’t hesitate to take the offered free ships and do J2 anyway. If Germany is not going anal about launching Sea Lion, that is (J2 is the worst you can do if Germany wants to do that). After all, if J2 is launched opportunistically, there is still the G4 part of the success and if the USA looks like going KJF, a J2 will not hurt the Euro-axis at all, not even if they would want to do SL!
No. Disagree on the G4 part of the success.
US has option to pursue a KGF option too. it basically depends on how many units survived in the fall of London ( if Sealion is successful)… how much Luftwaffe is left . And how big a German Navy was built on G1 and G2. I have seen SeaLion where Germany takes London with 1 tank… with 1 SB only remaining in the Luftwaffe… In that case… USSR and US should be able to take out Germany.
If SeaLion is a failure… Germany will fall faster than Japan. Axis has to take that into their calculations.POINT HERE IS THAT J2 ALLOWS US in early… early enough that… it can make a difference.
Last but not least, it is very easy for Japan to keep its TRS loaded J2 as a preventive action. When I come to think of it, for a J4 I’m not doing anything better anyway with those troops (load/unload J2 and then load them again J3 to sail them to their destination to invade J4. This basically nullifies Mahatma but he will most likely indeed be able to get away to safety if Japan is THAT determined to J3/J4.
TRS loaded are troops not fighting China… its a losing preposition for Japan in the long run
Once again: KJF required!
And apart from a J1DOW I won’t be looking into KJF’s before the allies have proven to me that ‘GIF’ also works.
To each his own ofc, but personally I don’t want to be limited to ‘KJF’ as the only viable OOB allied answer to everything.AGREED!
-
I can’t help but think that you give ‘the siberians in the east’ too much credit.
I admit if Russia moves into Amur in force, Japan should not stack SEAsia with all its air but kill the Russians instead. This gives the Chinese exactly 1 extra turn to survive but the Russians are permanently dead in the east (as well as in Moscow, but that’s another story)… No matter what Russia does in the east, Japan will Always win, at the cost of only 1 turn delay in China. Well, IMHO that’s not worth loosing all Siberians for.Think about it and prioritize your use of the Siberians:
A: Use and loose the Siberians all to delay Japan for 1 turn (in China) by moving them into Amur. Japan will subsequently take all of eastern Russia, Kill China and Isolate India early. Calcutta will fall J8-J9. With a German Barbarossa, Moscow will fall badly. A G4 economical game will still not take Moscow, but will have a far more comforting position in Russia (not having to fear Russian counterattacks -important purpose of the Siberians). Stalin retreated the Siberians and at least here is a small similarity with history.
B: Retreat all Siberians. Japan is not delayed 1 turn and will do everything mentioned above without delay. Germany will be in much more trouble than just a 1 turn delay however.
C: Gradually retreat the siberians by first positioning them all in Buryatia accompanied by some air aiming to delay Japan without loosing all Siberian units. I have tried this and IMHO the result is so-so. Yes, Japan is delayed and yes, you can keep all Russians alive while gradually retreating. You can however delay Japan only 1 - 2 turns and after that have to go in full retreat (or again, loose all siberians). Apart from helping Russia a little, it does nothing to help China or the rest of the allies. Needless to say Moscow is in no way helped either to survive or to counterattack, depending on German plans.
D: A combination of B + C. Retreat but first consolidate in Buryatia. This still delays Japan 1 turn AND the Siberians arrive in time in Moscow to either defend it or make Germany retreat from its gates.
My priority list: DBCA.
Ploy A only being used during KJF’s and even then only with great consideration for Moscow. After all, what is the purpose of giving Japan hell if this means Germany can win in Europe. Without the USA threatening anything in Europe for ~9 turns, chances are not that small that Germany takes both Egypt and Moscow. -
I can’t help but think that you give ‘the siberians in the east’ too much credit.
Mon Ami ItIsILeClerc , you have a Eurocentric Defensive Approach, I have a AsiaCentric Offensive Approach . Let’s say we have different Allied philosophies, and agree to disagree… as I think you give the Soviet20 too little credit :-)
I admit if Russia moves into Amur in force, Japan should not stack SEAsia with all its air but kill the Russians instead. This gives the Chinese exactly 1 extra turn to survive but the Russians are permanently dead in the east (as well as in Moscow, but that’s another story)… No matter what Russia does in the east, Japan will Always win, at the cost of only 1 turn delay in China. Well, IMHO that’s not worth loosing all Siberians for.
TMG is played correctly affects Japan for 4 turns , not 1 !!!
- It affects the J2 combat , where the TR’s in HK are frozen for combat , in case Japan goes for J2 strike.
- It affects J3 combat by freezing the newly bought TR’s that cannot be pre-loaded.
- It affects J4 by making the Japanese go NORTH - to SZ 5 !!! to kill the Soviet20 in AMUR… after they withdraw… if indeed Japan wants to chase them down!
- Then at SZ 5 in Amur… Japanese Trs and Navy? are out of position to hit any of their major NO …or objectives… only on J5… Japan comes back to its “steady state”… by which time US is ready to move![/color[/size]]
If J1 Non-Combat move ends with 2-3 Japanese TR *UNLOADED * in SZ 20 ( Off Hong Kong) … J2 itself will be frozen THE MOMENT TMG is played!.. if Japan had plans for a J2 strike that is. Now if Japan keeps the TR’s Loaded… at the end of J1… then TMG need not be played. Then on USSR2… the Siberians start their march back to Moscow… reaching there on R7 in a force of 18. China is very happy at not having to fight reinforcements that Japan did not unload
BUT…… if the 2-3 TRs are UNLOADED off HK… at and of J1… and The CV arm of Navy is not all there… &/ Kwangsi does NOT have the 14+ Aircraft at end of J1 … afraid iam giving away too much here… then play TMG ! This will make Japan’s life miserable immediately! J2 will sound like a muffled fart… rather than the explosive impact it has. J2 will NOT get Japan ANYTHING except Hong Kong and killing 3 UK Ships… OR HK and Phillippines…IF they declare on the US… That is all! And US is in the war! Then continuing the thought process… the Soviet20 need NOT attack!.. they can just sit there and Tie up 14-16+ Japanese units… wait for the IJN fleet to move The One move furthur … into DEI/MALAYA… and then strike on USSR4! they will be safe then. The J2 buy will be different… If it cannot “borrow” from Manchuria or Korea… Japan has to pay IPCs to build these units… so …instead of the 3-4 empty TR + CV…it will have 1-2 Loaded TR+CV … that means 2 less targets “hittable” later…
If Japan does NOT do J2 …. seeing the futility of it… and does NOT stack Manchuria/Korea with land troops…AND KEEP beaucoup Airstrike nearby… the Soviet20 strike with the plane(s)… and take Korea and or Manchuria wiping out upto 12 maybe 14 units there…Now … again… this is if Japan does not not have enough Land+Air Combo to kill it off.
If Japan stacks Manchuria and Korea… and keeps beaucoup Airunits at end of J1… then…do a J2 strike… hmm… J2 strike again a whimper! It is likely an either…or scenario… but it gives Allies everything they need to see before they decide.
Hence the timing is crucial…. TMG must be done then and there on J1… a turn later may be too late…
The last thing Japan can do is buy 3 TR on J1 … and keep all available Air it can spare in the vicinity where it can hit Amur. Because there are 2-3 unloaded TRs in HK, UK1 plays TMG on UK1 … USSR then can decide to move to Amur taking the risk on USSR 2 . If Japan kills the Soviet 20… USSR gets the 6 Mongolian units as a bonus… and Japan did not declare on UK+US … fine… but its Air Arm is out of position to help on a J3 strike. UK2 can just be a retreat to Burma with all Naval ( HK has a Naval Base) … and ANZAC may… or may not declare war on Japan…
But this again comes at a price for Japan…. to kill Soviet20… it loses troops… and maybe planes shot down by the 2 AAA… it loses TEMPO! Its TRs are out of position… It pretty much changes the OBJECTIVES of Japan… from taking the DEI and PHP and dominating Southern Pacific and killing China… to pretty much help Germany in killing Russia !
I mean think of the repurcussions…. and this happens before… repeat… before US2… so on US2… Allies can go with the comforting thought that India, Sydney and Hawaii are pretty safe as long as they play conservatively. US + Allies can choose KJF … so long as Egypt seems safe… results of Taranto or Tobruk will be in…
Lastly, should Japan NOT kill the Soviet20 , nor do a J2 strike… UK has the option on UK2… go back to SZ38 with the BB etc… OR do TMG deferred… where you still move the UK BB to SZ 6 … and DD to SZ 36 or 20 … wherever there are Max TRs… and ANZAC again… may… or may NOT declare war… depending.
What does this crazy sacrifice do… well all Japanese TRs are again frozen… If USSR3 was an attack and wipeout of Korea or Manchuria… then… Japan cannot on Combat turn take it out… If these places were stacked… and USSR did not attack… then J3 strike is a muffled whimper… as most TRs cannot do combat loading…
I hope you see the possibilities and the potential here.
Again… TMG is played to minimize J2…and only when J1 Non-Combat moves are favorable…( ie: check Japanese Navy, Air and TR locations) … NOT ALL THE TIME!
-
If you are a Chess player or are aware of moves, consider this :
TMG = Queen Sacrifice to achieve Zugzwang !!!
The UK BB is the Queen, sacrificed to COMPEL the Japanese player to make a move, any move… that will weaken him :)
As a pretty highly rated FIDE player, your comparison, while compelling, isn’t really relevant.
Hi Dizz and Cyanknight…
Methinks that : A&A = ChessxRisk
:lol:
I play chess well, yes. True. And have won College level and City level championships.
Also a member of MENSA :roll:
-
So, gentlemen, now that we’re talking chess: what are your ratings?
Just out of curiosity, really…… and to put some comments into perspective. I apologize for being off-topic, and maybe when the weekend comes and I have some time on my hands, I may have a comment on the actual tactic being discussed here.
-
Lol, you should stop using all the colors (at least in my quotes) :roll:, I can’t focus my eyes anymore :-D.
Too hard to make out the difference between what I wrote and your reply.
Better only use 1 color for your reply and leave in black what you quote. Much better to distingiush ;-).Well, let’s agree to disagree then!
I am indeed more ‘GIF-minded’ (not in the least place because JF seems to be the only way for the allies nowadays), and you are more into the Asia-offensive and that’s ok, ofc. But that’s not why our opinions differ.
I just can’t agree with your claim to have found an allied move that Japan cannot work around without shooting in its own foot and so I try to explain a few (out of many) work arounds Japan has at its disposal. As much as I am willing to accept (even hope for) allied ploys that can fight the axis just a little bit better, I cannot help but play advocate of the devil with any such claims!@Herr:
So, gentlemen, now that we’re talking chess: what are your ratings?
Just out of curiosity, really…… and to put some comments into perspective. I apologize for being off-topic, and maybe when the weekend comes and I have some time on my hands, I may have a comment on the actual tactic being discussed here.
Please enlighten us HerrKaleun!
Always a pleasure to read your comments. Should be fun to have 2 ‘Herrn’ in 1 thread :P.I used to play a lot of Chess, but years ago. I was a fine match to a friend who was with a chessclub but I don’t know what his rating was. So, clueless >.<
-
Oh, I’m old now in chess terms lol….
Back before computers were good at chess (almost 20 years ago), I was a good correspondence player – I stopped playing once computers were too involved. 2240+ USCF before my “retirement” :)
Currently my USCF over-the-board rating is 2023, FIDE is 2026 (peak over the past year was 2070). It’s fun to go to the large tournaments and see all of the people playing – especially the youngsters, who in this generation will remain off of electronic devices and maintain focus for 6 hour games – unusual in this electronic age!
I used to direct tournaments as well. At some point I may go back to teaching small groups – anything to help humans maintain the ability to think and reflect, a skill that seems to be disappearing in this world…
Suggested Topics
