German buys turn one

[frood]

We all know that’s fake and that “Jenn” is prolly a 56-year old plumber from Jersey named “Hank” who we’d pay money NOT to see in a bikini.

Oops, off topic.

How’s this for a G1 buy: 8 AA guns. Watch out byotches!

[cyan]

@froodster:

How’s this for a G1 buy: 8 AA guns. Watch out byotches!

why not 8 tanks? coud this be viable for the germans to do? also what do you think of 4 figs.

[frood]

I said 8 AAs because it’s about the only combination that has not been suggested.

I often fantasize about an all-fighter build but usually chicken out. I prefer to build up the luftwaffe slowly, a Ftr every other turn or so. But 4 right off the bat would be interesting, you could really threaten Allied shipping. Might be an effective way to keep the US away from Algeria. But it would be better with an IC in WE, then you’d have the Ftrs in range right away.

How’s this though: 2 Bombers 1 Ftr. That DOES menace any attempt to land in Algeria early on, esp. if the Med fleet moves west. I’d try that for a kick. My guess is you’d see the Allies buy a few more AAs.

[cyan]

2 figs and 2 trns and a amr or inf(depending on the bid). talk about scaring the UK.

[U-505]

At the risk of whipping a dead animal of the equine flavor, I would like to address the German fleet unification issue as well as put my $0.02 in on the “channel dash” option. I am making the distinction because the “channel dash” is moving the baltic fleet toward the Med on G1 and unifying the German fleet in sz7 is not.

First, the Allies don’t have to prevent the German fleets from combining in sz7. As far as I’m concerned, it is in their best interest to let Germany do it to prevent an uneven loss of IPC’s in Germany’s favor. Blocking them on UK1 is much more costly to the Allies should Germany attack the UK fleet. The simple block comes in UK2.

All of this assumes that the bid is 1 arm or 2 inf in Lib, the German sub isn’t lost against the UK BB in sz13, and Russia didn’t kill the Ukr fig.

UK should purchase 1 CV, 1 arm, 3 inf and place the CV in sz8 and move all of their fleet to sz8 as well, landing the E Can arm in UK on the way. The bomber can be used to retake Egypt since it is likely that there will only be 1 or 2 German units remaining. The UK DD in sz15 will move to sz14 to prevent the German Med fleet from turning back to help in an Egypt attack on G2.

US should purchase 1 CV, 2 TP, 2 arm and transport 2 inf, 1 art, 1 arm to sz8 unloading in UK. Land the W US fig on the UK CV. move 2 inf from C US to E US, and move the E US bmb/fig to UK.

Russia will move the SS to sz8 on R2.

If Germany attacks the sz8 fleet (1 CV, 1 fig, 1 BB, 1 DD, 1 SS, 4 TP) with the Med fleet and aircraft (1 BB, 1 SS, 1 TP, 6 fig, 1 bmb) it will cost them half their airforce and leave the BB isolated. With the Russians bearing down on them losing a bunch of fighters will be devastating to Germany.

Attacking UK is also a bad idea. 1 BB, 5 inf, 5 arm, 6 fig, 1 bmb vs. 7 inf, 2 art, 4 arm, 3 fig, 1 bmb, 1 AA is approximately a 35%-40% win.

At that point, unifying the fleet is useless because Germany’s navy will be hopelessly outclassed with the addition of the US CV, DD, 2 TP from sz10, the Hawaiian fig, and whatever navy the UK buys in UK2. London will also be safe with the extra 2 inf, 2 arm the US lands on US2.

The block of the German fleet comes from moving the UK DD from sz14 to sz12 which will prevent a German landing in E Can or Brazil. Even if Germany manages to kill the DD without a loss in G2 and combines their fleet in sz7 the UK can place a SS in sz7 to prevent the German TP’s from loading and still have 19-22 IPC’s(+/- India income) to build more navy in sz8.

Seems a little risky for Germany even with maximum forces available let alone if they lose the Ukr fighter or a sub. I wouldn’t try it but if you can make it work, more power to you.

The Channel Dash move, in my opinion, requires a bid in Lib and a naval purchase in the Med. My preference is a CV/TP. If you can get away with it, the SS from sz8 should be combined with the baltic fleet in sz7 instead of helping attack the BB in sz13 but that depends on how many fighters will be needed in Europe on G1. The goal is to have 2-3 fig in WE, 2 fig on the CV, and 1 fig, 1 bmb in Lib after Non-com. It allows for massive attack pressure on sz12 if the Allies land in Algeria and all fighters available for attack in Europe if they don’t.

If the Uk attacks sz7 with air only, you have the option of submerging the subs or fighting it out depending on how many hits the UK scores in round 1. And if they attack with the BB and TP’s, as well, you probably will kill at least a TP on round 1 and submerging the subs will give you an attack force of 1-3 SS, 5-6 fighters, and 1 bmb against whatever is left, plus UK builds, on G2. I don’t mind losing some fighters in that counterattack because the door to Africa will be wide open and the UK has a lot of rebuilding to do before you would see UK ground units in Europe.

Another benefit is that by forcing an attack on sz7 instead of sz5, the UK bomber can’t reach Sink to threaten unprotected Japanese TP’s in sz60/61. A rarely used move but it’s a real pain in the ass to Japan.

Lastly, the CV/TP in the Med is a safety valve. In case the attack on Egypt goes horribly wrong, you aren’t necessarily dead in Africa. Even if the Egyptian fighter survives, an attack on the CV fleet by 1 bmb, 2 fig, 1 DD is only a 50/50 battle. And if the UK should reinforce Egypt and load up in sz15 instead, Germany has enough available forces to destroy both with likely an acceptable amount of losses. Either way, you still have access to Africa and the UK will be basically defanged in Asia and the Pacific. Japan should be happy about that.

So far the Channel Dash has served me well enough to abandon the CV build in the baltic but it’s still a work in progress so I can’t assume it’s viable.

[frood]

I like it. U-505s plan, that is.

[Guest]

I have to say I disagree with U505 on several points, but the only ones I’ll mention specifically are economics and the German airforce.

I disagree that the $ trade favors the Axis with a preemptive strike.  The boats are a sunk cost; they are there to suicide the Allies or board UK immediately.  There is no point talking about them like a long term asset.  If you can sink a few transports when they die, you’re pretty happy.

The Germans also have the option of pulling back from a naval assault.  And why would you ever leave a lone btl instead of saving German planes?

Any time the UK buys a carrier R1 I’m happy as an Axis player.  I would consider the unification threat forcing that buy to be an immediate benefit to my game.

Why is that?  Because if the carrier is a defensive purchase, you don’t need it until R2.  You would be better served building tra in Z02 R1, then moving up and landing troops R2 and building the carrier in your drop off zone.

Peace

[frood]

If you dash for SZ7 with the extra sub, You’re more likely to have 2-3 subs survive a UK attack. With the Med BB and TRN off Gibraltar and a bunch of Luftwaffe in WE / Libya, SZ 7 and SZ 12 become pretty inhospitable to the allies. In my tourney game against Sime I found control of the Mediterranean pretty key to my Axis victory.

As has been pointed out, the Baltic fleet is dead meat. With U-505’s plan you could end up with a Med fleet of 3 Subs 1 AC 1 BB 2 TRN. As has been said though, it has to be tested against a skilled opponent to see how it really works.

[jsp4563]

Sorry U-505, but I have to disagree with you on the “Channel Dash”.  It’s doubtful that you would make it to the med with just the Baltic Fleet, the addition of the sz8 sub still makes it an iffy proposition. If you do make it to the Med it’s likely you’d do so with 1SS.  That sub could have went to the med anyway with the BB, TP attack on sz13.  All you have accomplished is the destruction of the Baltic fleet, and you’ve left your Northern flank exposed.

[Guest]

Purpose of ther Baltic Fleet:
Take out as many Allied units as possible as it dies.

That is it folks.  Trying for anything else is a waste of resources for Germany

[frood]

I’d like to try hashing this out - we can play to the end of round 2 or 3, just to see how it works out in terms of fleet unification. I’ll take a bid of 7 to Libya, and I assume the Allies will post Russia 1 as if you had no clue of what Germany would be doing.

JSP? Any other takers? I’m not out to prove anything, I just want to play it out and see what happens.

[frood]

Just read the CSub paper on this - it suggests building two or three transports in the baltic as the best German naval option. It sounds sensible as do most strategies when I read them, and now it seems better than U-505s plan. The transports create a lot of options for Germany which it can take advantage of if the unification is blocked.

[jsp4563]

@froodster:

I’d like to try hashing this out - we can play to the end of round 2 or 3, just to see how it works out in terms of fleet unification. I’ll take a bid of 7 to Libya, and I assume the Allies will post Russia 1 as if you had no clue of what Germany would be doing.

JSP? Any other takers? I’m not out to prove anything, I just want to play it out and see what happens.

Sure, I think this needs to be fleshed out in a real game.  Give me a couple of days to wind down my current games.  The strategy is based on no bid with a Russian Belo/WR open.

[U-505]

My bad. I was assuming a CV, 3 TP buy which is what I believe was mentioned earlier in the thread and not just 3 TP. In that case, I would buy 1 CV, 1 fig, 1 inf for the UK and put the Russian SS in sz12 to keep the Med fleet from participating in a UK landing. Either way, I still prefer that the German fleet be allowed to unify for nothing while I build up the overwhelming Allied force to oppose it.

And a German buy of 3 TP’s in the Baltic makes me happy as the Allies. We can both be dismissive of each others purchases that way. I like the CV UK1 because it extends my fighter range to sz13 just for fun. Unifying the German fleets means Africa is lost for good. I can accept that.

Actually, I believe we are looking at this from 2 slightly different perspectives, Crazystraw. I am playing for the long term and you are playing for the short term because of the FTF Tournament time limits. We have to make that distinction to everyone because it can be relevant. My strategy can be a little slower and more plodding because I don’t suffer from a time window.

Et Tu, jsp. My tourney partner. The wound cuts deep.  :lol:

The likely result is 2 SS making it to the Med. But that isn’t necessarily the point. I’m not afraid of losing the Baltic fleet. I can just turn back and hit Egypt. However, with the addition of the sz8 SS it makes an air only attack a 50/50 shot. I get to see the attacking results before I defend so I can choose my options. And how often will the UK score only 1 hit or goose egg the 1st round? Maybe 1/3th of the time. 1 bmb, 1 fig vs 1 DD, 1 TP, 2 SS looks real ulgy for the UK and, at that point, he’s committed to that battle because letting me sail into the Med with that group is bad juju for the Allies. I guarantee you that every UK player is going to cringe when the first round is rolled. I’ll take the 40% win rate for that battle and even the 50% cleared result. It won’t bother me nearly as much as it would bother the UK player.

[frood]

@jsp4563:

@froodster:

I’d like to try hashing this out - we can play to the end of round 2 or 3, just to see how it works out in terms of fleet unification. I’ll take a bid of 7 to Libya, and I assume the Allies will post Russia 1 as if you had no clue of what Germany would be doing.

JSP? Any other takers? I’m not out to prove anything, I just want to play it out and see what happens.

Sure, I think this needs to be fleshed out in a real game.  Give me a couple of days to wind down my current games.  The strategy is based on no bid with a Russian Belo/WR open.

I don’t know if I’d try it without a bid. The CSub strategy IS based on an African bid. Without a bid I need the Med BB to clear the way for a TRN to attack Egypt, which means it is not in range to unite in SZ 12, and that means the SZ 8 sub is needed to take the hit from the UK BB in SZ 13, and the whole thing falls apart.

I don’t know what to think anymore. Either channel dash to SZ 7 right away, or build 2-3 Baltic TRNs first (which will get Inf to Karelia with a quickness) and unite in G2 if favourable, if not then just maintain separate fleets.

Now I don’t know what I want to test anymore…

[Baghdaddy]

@froodster:

Just read the CSub paper on this - it suggests building two or three transports in the baltic as the best German naval option. It sounds sensible as do most strategies when I read them, and now it seems better than U-505s plan. The transports create a lot of options for Germany which it can take advantage of if the unification is blocked.

I like the TRANs in the Baltic.  I read the paper (and made sure the Allied players did also) then built the TRANs on G1.  It kept the Baltic in the hands of the German fleet, kept Norway as a traded space into G4, kept Karelia reinforced and when the UK player got distracted by Africa gave me the means to do SeaLion with a fleet that he had forgotten to be worried about.

I also find the ongoing debate about the Med interesting.

We don’t play with bids.  None.

As Germany, I normally take Gibraltar and Anglo-Egypt on G1. 
Against the UK BB, I send 1 BB, 1 SS, 1 TRAN(INF,ARM), 2 FTR.  I take losses to damage the BB, sink the SS and lose FTR before I lose the TRAN.  Taking GIB is important and that INF and ARM are part of the G2 taking back Algeria.
Against Anglo-Egypt, I sent 1 INF, 1 ARM, 2 FTR, 1 BMB.  I take losses on INF, and then FTR.  The ARM has to survive to take AE.

This seals the Med for G1.
When the US hits (empty) Algeria, the BB and TRAN along with the INF and ART take it back.  With a little preplanning, the 2 SS from the BAL were moved to SZ7 on G1 and they can come down to SZ 12.  If that is the case the BB and the TRAN come to SZ12 also along with 2 FTR.  Now the US fleet is dead and the US is out of Africa.
If the UK wants to fight for AE with their ground forces, it will see-saw back and forth a bit.  If the UK sends their CV, Japan gets orgasmic since they can go a-hunting a UK flattop.  More frequently, the UK player is more concerned about trying to keep India or reinforcing the Caucus to get cute in Africa.

This sequence give Germany access to the Africa for several turns before US/UK get back on their game.  The UK is nervous about that Baltic Fleet.  The US is hearing the non-stop whine from the USSR about how he needs Murmansk convoyes now.

The down side to this is 4 FTRs to the Med for G1 and G2.  Odds are 1 or 2 are lost in order to keep ground forces in Africa alive.  This makes things nervous on the Eastern Front.

The answer is the “draw play”.  Let the Russians come.  Germany is picking up Africa territories as fast as or faster than the USSR is eating up land on the Eastern Front and every step closer to Berlin they get the further they are from Moscow and the Japanese Army.  Germany controls the Baltic and the Med and has TRANs in both.  Russia has to defend her flanks or risk an unpleasant surprise amphib landing behind the front.  Finally when Russia does get too close, it is amazing how many INF and ART you can buy with 40+ IPC.  Now the USSR has the long supply lines, a threat from the East and no quick way to move their forces back to defend against Japan.

I find this plays nicely against the KGF, especially with an overly agressive USSR player.  Germany collapses the UK economy by occuping Africa and hold the US at bay by sinking anything that even looks like it might carry men.  Russia rushed toward Berlin only to discover that by leaving Japan unoccupied, they are losing land and IPC as fast as they gain it and the Russian horde is in Warsaw when the Japanese come calling on Moscow.  When Moscow falls, the game is over.  London is next and then the US has to decide if they like beer or raw fish better.

[frood]

So then you have 1 DD 4 TRN in the baltic and 2 Subs in SZ 7? Won’t the UK just sink those subs? And your baltic fleet has less fodder too.

Without a Libyan bid, I don’t think I’d want to sacrifice air units just to close the canal. I’d maybe take TJ instead and sacrifice my SZ 8 Sub to kill the UK BB. I dunno.

[Imperious Leader]

Ok here my long winded take on the Channel Dash “gambit” I use gambit in place of another word just to be nice to people who play it.

The basic idea after looking at options on carrying it out is to in fact spend all of germanys income on G1 for a 40 IPC fleet consisting of 1 CV and 3 AP ( however building 3 subs proved a better option in terms of net IPC gained… but this will be proven latter)

Again as usual we assume this: a bid of zero to 5 IPC and no NA’s are being used. Further the Soviet player played safe with a attack on Belo and west russia ( both victories with average loses.

They also moved the sub in a manner that would not entail the german player attacking it.

The German player on his turn cannot bring the medd fleet into the atlantic on G1 or i feel he wont accomplish his immediate goals in three areas 1) egypt, 2) uk west medd BB, and 3) Uk DD off egypt.

In case #1 not taking egypt gives UK a critical fighter that he can use to either protect his carrier or defend/attack India and africa
In case #2 is obvious
In case #3 that DD will reinforce the carrier fleet and make Japans turn much harder.

Also if say the German atlantic sub attacks w/ fighters/bombers and takes out the west UK BB and in NCM the german BB and tranny move to SZ # 12 they will meet their demise at the hand of a Bomber, 2 tranny and a destroyer. ( allied loses: 2 tranny, German loses BB and tranny= 16 to 32 IPC). This would occur if they moved in sz #12 on G1 or G2.

Now the primary method of the plan was originally a “threat” of Sealion in addition to the idea of moving the baltic fleet to the medd. Thus if you built a CV and 3 AP you would be loading probably 1 tank/1 infantry on each for a total of 4 tanks/ 4 infantry= 16 hit points=about 3 hits first round.  The British player would have 1 fighter (USA), 2 Bombers ( one USA), 2 tanks,2 Inf,1 art= 18 points against 16 attacking points/ 8 hits vs.8 hits.

Now this option of Sealion is very remote because of 3 things: 1) your weaker, 2) to even maintain the odds your exchanging the luftwaffe instead of transports which is futile and 3) Your probably tossing the game away because in order to win you have to come from behind in both battles to get marginally ahead.

Now the British build a CV and Destroyer on Uk1 (save 2) and move the Soviet sub and the rest of her fleet= 1 ss,1 bb,1 ap,1 cv,1 dd, 2 fighters=21 hit points= about 4 hits first round

against:

The german fleet of 1 cv, 5-6 fighters,2 subs,4 ap,1 dd, 1 bomber= 27-30 hit points= 5 hits first round.

after round one the brits lose all except 1 bb and 2 fighters= leaving 12 points=2 hits
Germans lose either 4 transports ( if you dont load them up) leaving 1 cv,5-6 fighters, 1 dd,2 ss, 1 bomber= 27-30 points …or keeping the trannys they have lost 1 cv,1 dd, 2 ss

Second round:

UK fleet is gone and germans take 2-3 more hits

leaving the german fleet with 7 hits total and ONE ship left (perhaps the CV if they are lucky)

Now for the money…

UK/Soviets  lost 1 ss,1 bb,1 ap,1 cv,1 dd, 2 fighters= 8+24+8+16+24=80 ipc

GERMANY LOST: 4 AP,2 ss, 1 dd AND POSSIBLY 1 cv which is 32+16+12=60 and possibly (its real close and we are assuming a 6th german fighter) an additonal 16 IPC= 76 IPC total.

Now i can see that the USA player would like to kill that german carrier and leave the BB alone and move the american bomber and fighter from england along with the 2 trannys and destroyer and kill that carrier and both planes

1 fighter, 1 bomber, 1 dd, 2 ap= 10/5 hits vs 1 cv and 2 fighter= 11/3 hits leaving the german fleet and 2 fighters gone in 2 rounds

Money= Germans cause 3 hits in 2 rounds and USA loses 3 ships 12+16=28 vs. German fleet/ fighters gone 24+16= 40 IPC gain for allies =12

If germany does not protect the carrier with fighters then its a net gain of 8 IPC for allies ( each side takes one hit).

Conclusion:

The allies have merely exchanged IPC with the german player in the North sea battle of Sz#6 The germans gained about 4 IPC from all of that

The Allies gain from the followup USA players turn when he finished off any german units.

Now if the german player built 3 subs instead of 3 tranny he gains one hit and on the second round the allies lose one hit leaving one additional german ship as escort in the event the CV is lucky enough to stay afloat.

Thus Germany has invested 40 IPC, left the Soviets alone to gain a full turn to reinforce themselves, possibly allowed the British player to keep his medd destroyer and or the territory of egypt because he had to have all his fighters within range of SZ#6. Thet means no fighters in africa. The basic moves for germany have all been ignored in order to facilitate some showdown in the north sea.

Also you have left a hole in the baltic that cant be closed.

Switch is correct. The threat is a failure as well as the channel dash idea is a total unmittigated failure.

Channel Dash is a total waste.

The worst thing about this as germany the land power you have played into the strength of the Allies by trying to challange them. You totally ignore the buildup of the russian campaign to play ‘catchup’ with the british fleet and simply exchange value. Id spend the 40 IPC in a more wiser manner to actually gain the net value as a result of land buys slowly gaining against the Russian player in back and forth land battles.

You have also gained marginally some tempo from the allies as they build/ rebuild her fleet, but the hole left in the baltic makes it easier for the allies to take france because now you have to protect germany AND france from harrasment invasions. This is a process that is accelerated by losing the baltic fleet.

For germany only either land buys or some naval buy in the baltic seem good for germany. If you buy for baltic either a CV or DD ( defence by installment idea)

If you want a fleet in the medd you better buy something for that.

[Baghdaddy]

The subs dive after the first round.  He might get lucky and sink one or even both if he sends all his air but that means he did not go for Norway. Â

I actually build just the 2 TRAN in Baltic to bring the total to 3 TRAN and 1 DD.  If he hits it with 2 FTR and 1 BMB, half the time he loses his entire airforce.  I like that kind of exchange especially since it also means Norway was not attacked with real strength.  If he sends his air to either the SS or the BAL, the best he can bring to NOR only has a 56% of making it ashore.  If I chose to leave Norway more exposed by pulling the FTR out, it becomes a tempting target over the SS or the Baltic Fleet.

The fun part about that is with 3 TRAN taking Norway back is fairly easy and puts a flanking move on the Russian charge.  It also exposes his BB and 2 TRAN to some action.  The DD and 2 FTR along with a surviving SS(?) can make a mess of the invasion fleet.  Taking out the BB might be too hard but you can certainly put some hurting on the 2 TRAN and that will slow down the northern operation.

Nothing quite like chewing up his amphibious force and his landing on G2 along with doing a similiar number on the invasion force in SZ12 and the US forces in Algeria.  This tends to put some sand in the US/UK transmission and gives Germany room to start chewing on the USSR. Â

If the USSR player has been agressive enough to threater or even push into EEU and BAL, those mass INF builds are on the front line and the Baltic and Black are nice highways to his rear area.  Nothing is more amusing than watching Russian INF fighting its way back to Moscow.  By G3/G4, the Luftwaffe is mostly free of other duties and with those tanks you did not expose to destruction USSR is suddenly wondering how he found himself looking at a fully armed and undistracted Germany even as Japan starts to put pressure Moscow.

This sequence plays out strangely enough that I have done things like put a German INF in Brazil.  The US player decided, based on IPC that the 3 IPC I was getting was not sufficient payback for the INF and TRAN to keep it so he left me alone.  Then in T7 when the US player became extremely focused on dealing with Operation SeaLion that same INF pulled off a high risk raid on Fort Knox.  Talk about killing the momentum of the US! Even if he had instead chosen to retake Brasil, I count it as a win.  A turn spend sending US forces to retake Brasil is a turn that the Fatherland can breath a little easier.

I have also used the Luftwaffe that was tagging along into Africa to make that pesky UK CV, DD and TRAN go away.  Was I over committed to Africa with more units than the IPCs in Africa?  Definitely yes.  Did it pay for itself in being able to destroy that CV before it got to the Atlantic?  I say yes big time.  As important as IPC counting is in this game, the value of an INF that is 4 moves away from your nearest factory is higher than that FTR that can be back in action next turn.  FTRs as casualties sucks BUT they typically can participate in attacks from their build location so you don’t spend three turns getting those INF to the front line in Africa.

In all the reading I have done at CSub and the playing I am doing FTF, I see Africa as a huge win for Germany (non-tournament play).  The ecomonics of taking away Africa from the UK makes Europe safer and because it brings those points to Germany, it makes it easier to fend off the US.  The UK and the US find themselves faced with an “Africa First” strategy and that makes the USSR awfully nervous.  With a little PSYOP contention placed between the US/UK player(s) and the USSR player and the Allies start to sound like little old ladies arguing over the last biscuit on the plate.

I’m sure there are counters for this but all of them seem to require the Allies to play more cautiously and be more deliberate in their moves.  Norway, Algeria and the Eastern Front suddenly don’t get as much pressure as fast.  This puts the USSR under time pressure with Japan beating down China and the Yakut door.  The biggest counter is to pull a KJF but this requires the USSR to make that move before Germany’s turn or to be one turn delayed as compared to the US/UK moves.  This is a less than optimal KJF and Germany is still eating up Africa.

In short, an agressive use of Naval forces to speed troop movements, a willingness to take casualties in FTRs to push the African Campaign and Japan sticking it to Russia can really change this game.  If you get the Allies to give you a bid in Africa, it is even better!

[squirecam]

@Imperious:

Ok here my long winded take on the Channel Dash “gambit” I use gambit in place of another word just to be nice to people who play it.

Switch is correct. The threat is a failure as well as the channel dash idea is a total unmittigated failure.

Channel Dash is a total waste.

That’s funny, since c-sub people have used a fleet build to win FTF tournaments. I would suggest you play with the c-sub build a few times before proclaiming it a total waste.

And, this goes back to my earlier point. You are trying to create a comprehensive paper for people, when you proclaim strategies are “total failures” and you have never tried it or seen it FTF.

I do mean this Respectfully IL. I dont think you should be doing this paper without getting some more experience with the strategies which you say wont ever work.