I have tried this and it has worked. Bought all fighters turn one. Then all bombers turn two by turn three england landed in France and the US had like 6 fighters, 2 bombers, 2inf a tank and art in france after england had secured it the previous round. US took italy next turn and game ended shortly after. It was a few years ago so i cant recall anymore specifics. The key is pooling all available aircraft and witholding from Op. Torch. Also England needs naval dominance which sometimes doesnt happen with a G1 carrier build
German buys turn one
-
@Imperious:
Considering that the Soviets attack/conquer west russia and belorussia as part of their standard opening i have been tinkering with the solution to solve what would be the best thing for germany on turn one. Many people buy that carrier and 8 infantry on G1, but i am thinking about other choices.
-
A battleship would cost 24 IPC which takes 2 hits and can use its attack for shore bombardment against western E, Finland, and Leningrad. This can pay for the extra cost in a few turns. The planes would be freed up to help defend more vital areas. In the long run its probably not a good idea to use planes to defend the fleet. Also if the allies attacked this fleet and things went bad you can take the battleship as a loss and save another piece that would otherwise be sunk.
-
buy two destroyers which give you two threes and keep your fighters used for land defence and out of harms way.
-
ignore the baltic fleet and wait and see buying only land units unless UK moves her ships in for the kill.
-
try to leave the baltic and join the fleet in the medd–- “The channel dash”
which if these plans do you favor and why. My intention is to make a strategy guide with all the standard plays for each player.
Destroyers boo. Rationale, destroyers are totally useless in the ground war against Russia, and building navy like that forces Germany to race UK and US for navy.
Rest OK, a bit tricky for some but sound.
-
-
The option of 1-2 TRNs for the Baltic on G1 has been left out I notice…
-
@ncscswitch:
Because as several folks have said, there are too many assumptions relative to that move.
It has to be seen in total strategic context in order to properly evaluate it. The North Sea is not a vacuum, nor can a strat in it be tested in a vacuum.
Dont answer for him Switch.
HE said it was simple.
HE said if I posted my buy and told him where the units were, he could easily show me the block.
Both of his posted blocks cost him London.
If you boast that you can post a simple move, then do so. Or otherwise, respectfully, keep your mouth shut.
-
I only posted because I myself have fallen victim to the vacuum strat discussion before. It is not a valid or viable means of discussing a strat.
-
Then let’s settle it here and now, online. I’ll set up the thread. LHTR, No Tech, No NA’s.
No dude. I gave you the moves. You said you had a simple counter. Post the counter, like you said you could.
If its so simple, what’s stopping you???
Typical bully, when confronted you back down. If you’re so convinced that you’re right why not prove it. The thread is open, or are you not man enough to stand up to a challenge?
-
Squirecam: You must have some hope for a better tomorrow.
Additionally you seem to get into fights with other posters and this is not tolerated.
When i put my mind to something the final product will be to the benifit of others and it will be something that will be substantial.
I’m sorry you have poor experiences with lessor sites with all those rearguard swines at AH forums. Over here we create inclusionary ideas and projects that allow everybody a voice. Under this project i will assemble many plausible ideas from many peoples contribution and create ideas that are more or less extrapolated and explained out so its clear to everyone what the idea of the strategy would be given a flow chart of numourous plans. These ideas are not my definitive evaluation but plausible ideas each with some merit. However the context and discovery of these ideas would be ‘discovered’ under some Socratic method because i believe that the truth is something inside the individual and i have merely to ask enough questions to arrive at the truth.
“I haven’t always agreed with Crazystraw. Over time, I’ve come to respect him. But just like I’ve said to you, (and him) writing a “paper” on this stuff will only bring problems. You will be misleading people, as your assumptions about the best/risky moves would be flawed. The moves listed will contain many assumptions, many of which could be wrong and countered.”
I dont understand how i am misleading people? I take it you really dont understand what im doing? AS i have explained I will illustrate some opening systems explaining what the plan is and why and how it could work. Its up to the reader to come up with his own assesment. But its a decent starting point to illustrate these different plans.
“By your own admission, you don’t understand Crazy’s “channel” moves. It seems to me you should read those papers. But even then, you are going to be hard pressed to come up with a comprehensive paper of any sort which will definitively answer what is best. Because what is best varies based upon those too many factors I’ve said before.”
You are making a incorrect assumption Its not my job to tell people what to play. Its my job in this to demonstrate the different ideas and explore each of them so people can make up their own mind on what to play. Thats why they make “strategy guides”
Also i dont know why you keep bringing up Crazy straw… where does he come up in this evaluation? He is not the only proponent of the channel dash. Caspian sub ideas are very basic by their own admission.
“I don’t want to see you fruitlessly waste your time. Which is what this project will ultimately be.”
It will be great because i will make it so. Dont worry about a thing. Don Rae was not a waste. he clarified many ideas and made patterns so it would be easy to see ideas. I will do the same thing.
The more you bug me the more great ill make this just to spite you and make you eat your words eventually. My ambition has no boundries and is often reinforced by people who say “i cant do it”
You know me too well to know any different.
-
As far as the channel dash is concerned somebody who believes in it tell us exactly how you do it.
another person can play UK/ USA and demonstrate how he counters this.
Thats way we all see the how and why.
I suspect JSP would like to participate and possible Squirecam or ncscswitch or even Crazy Straw himself?
-
I am not likely to be Germany for the Cahnnel Dash demo.
I am in JSP’s corner in terms of ability to block/thwart it (which is the one major argument CS and I have had on these forums).
-
LOL! you allready made a name for it. “Channel Dash Demo” or CDD
:-D
-
The facts are pretty simple in terms of a Channel Dash, or a Sea Lion attempt…
If Germany invests heavilly in navy, so will UK, and the US will move to reinforce London. Yes, it will cost UK income in Africa, but the Russians will counter in Central Europe and the German Navy ends up as scenery in the fish kingdom a round or 2 later.
The ONLY way that those two moves work is if they are done somewhat covertly (minor navy buys) and with an Allied player who fails to see the risk.
And THAT my friends is why I inquired about why the 1-2 TRN purchase on G1 was not listed in the potential G1 buys above.
-
I would build 2 trn, 1 bb or no navy at all.
-
Well Sealion or the perception of sealion is on the table.
So given the low bid and no NA and what Soviets do. YOu still go for it?
Then the builds are what? 2 transports and 24IPC in land ( say 4 inf and 3 art)?
On G2 everything moves and how does UK counter it?
-
IL, I think the idea of a strategy guide is terrific. I don’t envision its creation or my eventually reading it as being fruitless.
One of the first things someone said to me by way of advice when I was learning to play A&A (Classic) is, “Germany doesn’t get a navy.” He was sinking it at the time.
-
IL…
it is Sea Lion SCARE.
Make the Allies counter Sea Lion, then you take Africa and take all UK’s money away, forcing the UK to continue to help protect London. Germany uses the extra cash to “Atlantic Wall” and smack the Russians around. :evil:
-
Ahh so its true:
“the threat is greater than its execution”
this is an old chess quote from hypermodern chess ideas.
I believe in this idea.
But this threat is still a dash no?
I mean you buy the transports and let them sit in the baltic or eventually you actually move them and attempt a link?
Is this a plan to exchange IPC with UK to try to slow them down?
Simplification only favors the side that is in the lead and i dont think that has been established yet.
-
Forgive me if I do not go in to details.
I have yet to be able to fully implement the concept I have in mind for Germany, and I may need it in the Tournament :-)
-
Also i dont know why you keep bringing up Crazy straw
I’m just surprisingly popular that way. Chicks dig my mathematical prowess and calculator watch. Squire digs my sarcasm.
But just like I’ve said to you, (and [crazystraw]) writing a “paper” on this stuff will only bring problems. You will be misleading people, as your assumptions about the best/risky moves would be flawed. The moves listed will contain many assumptions, many of which could be wrong and countered.
I gotta disagree with this. Analysis starts with drawing some constraints and analyzing specific phenomena. Anyone who thinks 10 pages of analysis should deliver perfection is expecting too much of 10 pages. But, conversely, anyone who thinks you can’t learn something quite useful in 10 pages is underestimating the nature of analysis.
I think what you should get out of a good analysis is either 1) a good new idea 2) a bad idea to avoid or 3) the general contours of a particular issue. Start with an analysis of a specific move and “riff” off it. Improvise. Or know what your opponent is likely going to attempt when you see him implempenting elements of strategy. But just to say an analysis is incomplete is itself an incomplete assessment of what the analysis is trying to do.
Peace
-
Wow this topic is huge now.
what exactly is going on with the German Navy build? or channel dash?
because on G2 the baltic and med fleet can link up between SE and Algeria (SZ 13) and the allies cannot stop this. I’m not saying much of the baltic fleet will make it, but the subs will because you can’t kill them all on turn 1
-
Then let’s settle it here and now, online. I’ll set up the thread. LHTR, No Tech, No NA’s.
jsp, that’s exactly what happened in the thread I linked to earlier. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=8335.0
This is what you wrote:
I don’t think any decent allied player would allow germany to unite their fleet in sz7. It’s easy to spot, and easily countered.
What then proceeded was a breakdown of the major counter options. Given the caveat of generally standard dice, we covered:
1. Algerian landing uniting UK & US in Z12. This was to prevent the move of the Med fleet to Z07 on R2. It was not a move that favored the Allies and a decent player wouldn’t do it.
2. The second way to “prevent” the unification was to prepare a counterattack that makes the unification unfavorable to the Axis. A counterattack on the carrier was deemed too expensive. A counterattack on the 3tra German build was doable but to the favor of the Axis costwise.
3. The third option was the Z06 block. That sucked with a mighty sucking power.Lots of folks helped with that thread and many good ideas were batted around. But no one came up with a Magic Bullet that was clearly a great way to counter the German United Fleet.
Since that thread you now have a 4th method? Lay it out.
Thanks
-
Then let’s settle it here and now, online. I’ll set up the thread. LHTR, No Tech, No NA’s.
No dude. I gave you the moves. You said you had a simple counter. Post the counter, like you said you could.
If its so simple, what’s stopping you???
Typical bully, when confronted you back down. If you’re so convinced that you’re right why not prove it. The thread is open, or are you not man enough to stand up to a challenge?
Thats the thing. I have proven it.
You have yet to post a simple block. The simple block you claimed to have. The 2 you posted did not adequately protect london.
So what changed between page 3 and now. Why cant you post this very simple strategy? You know exactly my placement.
Suggested Topics
