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
-
Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 26, 2007, 03:56:18 PM
Now how exactly does this channel dash thing work? How is it a viable option on G1 or G2?
Sealion is not possible with a bid of zero or 3. I have only seen it work with a bid of 8. If UK buys a fleet how then can G2 be a decent plan for channel dash?
I do see the merits of such a plan but i dont see how they get away with it against a decent Uk player. its certainly not w/o major risks of failure.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on January 26, 2007, 07:26:17 PM
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?
Since you were asking how it works, it seemed that you had never seen it in action before.
You missed this post–- Reply #81 on: January 26, 2007, 07:23:23 PM that reads:
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.
Re- read those lines in terms of the following method of discourse:
All of that was merely the Socratic method in play. The basic idea is to plead ignorance and ask questions from others and elucidate the truth. The truth only needs to be filtered out by more questions. That question was my attempt to get ideas from others. If you don’t ask questions you don’t get information.
Look up the Socratic technique on the internet.
Example:
In a trial an attorney the prosecution asks alot of questions that he may have his own opinion on in order to gain insight on how others view the issue and to also help them look outside of the box.
-
(Off topic) but in a trial no lawyer asks any questions they don’t know the answer to.
I’m interested in IL’s thoughts on my answer to his questions before this moves on to something else.
-
I disagree with spending all 40 IPCs in the baltic. For UK1, 4 TRN 2 Sub 1 DD are plenty to make the UK attack a waste of IPCs. The AC can be purchased in G2 if extra defence is needed.
++++ right the baltic fleet idea can be purchased incrementally over time. Id say a CV first then 1 tranny per turn. That way you maintain constant pressure against the Soviets.
By the way, can you really land Ftrs on a newly built carrier? TripleA seems not to allow it, but I recall earlier discussion of the rules that this was allowed. Anywho, the AC can wait until G2.
++++ The discussion is OTB play. I cant say anything about Triple A
So to answer your questions:
-
Preliminary - by not building the AC in G1, you can at least build 4 Inf 1 Art, so that partly eliminates your concern about less land units. Could also build just 2 TRN, as CSub recommends as the advanced option.
-
Counter the soviets by bringing loads of stuff to Karelia quickly
-
Allied landings - With the baltic locked up, the Allies can’t land in EE or Berlin, allowing defence forces to be concentrated in Karelia (or Norway) and WE. That more than offsets the reduction in initial land production.
-
Purchases - perhaps equal parts Inf/Arm, with 40 IPCs 5 Inf 5 Arm works nicely - hmm, only 3 TRN needed to move 5 Inf each turn. The Inf go by boat, the Armor by land, and both arrive in Karelia at the same time. With 4 TRN, you could build 4 Inf 4 Art to send by water (28 IPCs) leaving a healthy amount to spend on defence.
++++ yea i do like the idea of landing infantry/ artillery by boat and tanks go on the factory. They arrive at the same time.
(my approach for) German attacks: (assuming a bid of 5 and Ukr ftr lives)
attack UK BB w/ 1 Sub 1 BB 4 ftrs (should take wol) - land in WE
land 1 Inf via TRN in Gibraltar
attack Egypt w/ 1 Inf 2 Arm (1 from bid) 2 Ftr 1 Bom - land in Lib++++ why do you favor the gibrater plan? Is this your plan to safeguard the medd fleet from aerial attacks? also, why not also land an infantry on algeria if your gonna do that? Last question why do you ignore the DD in eastern medd? its like 12 free IPC. The uk BB is total overkill dont you agree?
and leave the DD the hell alone - it will be stranded and useless with the channel closed.
Based on that, if the US tries an African landing in US1, its fleet will face 1 Sub 6 Ftr 1 Bom while the BB/TRN head back to reinforce/retake egypt. So you basically dictate that UK and US both head north. I guess if UK and US BOTH go to Africa in round 1 they might survive. Checking - nope. Germany can bring everything and lose just 1 TRN 1 Sub to kill 4 TRN 1 DD 1 BB.
++++ If you took out the uk BB with that i also think USA will turn north. The question is you dont have alot of fodder in egypt and you may lose tanks.
Germany: more options
Allies: fewer options -
-
@Imperious:
++++ why do you favor the gibrater plan? Is this your plan to safeguard the medd fleet from aerial attacks? also, why not also land an infantry on algeria if your gonna do that? Last question why do you ignore the DD in eastern medd? its like 12 free IPC. The uk BB is total overkill dont you agree?
++++ If you took out the uk BB with that i also think USA will turn north. The question is you dont have alot of fodder in egypt and you may lose tanks.
I’d sooner build 2 TRN than 1 CV - Ftrs need to land in WE anyway to protect Algeria. 2 TRN add 2 to count and 2 to punch, so defensively comparable to the 1/3 contribution of a CV, plus the TRNs add to your capability to move troops - which is part of what offsets the lessened production of land units.
On your two questions above:
Gibraltar - yes, this is to protect the fleet. if the UK can land there it can hit my BB, TRN and Sub with 1 DD 2 Ftrs 1 Bom which is a loser for Germany.
I want the Med fleet in SZ 13, that’s vital for preserving the fleet unification option in SZ 7 for G2.
The UK DD - there’s no reason to kill it if the channel is closed and Gibraltar is taken. While not killed, the UK still loses the use of this 12 IPC unit because it is impotent on its own without the RAF or the India fleet.
Germany can’t “do it all” in G1 so the DD is the one thing that I think is lower priority. And Egypt will likely be re-taken anyway, which I don’t mind because I can re-take again and have substantially reduced UK forces and made India an easy grab for Japan. UK fleet then has to sail around Africa or get killed by Japan. That fleet’s eventual arrival though is one good reason to get out of the baltic if you get a chance.
-
Well that egypt attack will bite into tanks somewhat depending on the bid.
OK if you head over to SZ 13 your plan is to unit the fleet on G2? And i suppose you saw the math on that which was 1 sub,1 bb,1 AP,1 CV, 1 DD, 2 fighters
against the german fleet of 4 ap, 1 CV, 5-6 fighters, 1 bomber, 2 subs.The allied fleet will cause 7-8 hits on the german fleet before its destroyed (28 hit points and 8 hits to soak vs germany and her 26-29 hit points and 13-14 hits to soak up)
Leaving allies gone and germans losing 7-8 pieces which leaves either no fleet or losing a few planes costing more. Say you keep the carrier. On USA turn they finish off the carrier in SZ# 6 or 7 and germany has a medd fleet in the atlantic with no fleet to link with.
USA can come in with a fighter, bomber and destroyer and 2 tranny to mop up whats left in either SZ#7 or 6 and the Uk player will build in the same SZ.
I see your idea with gibrater. Its what we used to do in milton bradley days.
What do you think of the idea of building these 3 trannys and cv in the baltic and leaving them to hoist over 8 infantry per turn to Soviet Union?
You have a great threat also against britain and you dont have any hole in the baltic. You get a floating factory out of the deal and protection for germany and a counter to the chuck to finland.
-
I haven’t really studied it, but is it a given that the Allies will be able to attack with all of that? As I said, I’d only move out to SZ 7 if it was safe to do so. It may be that some Allied units can be hit by the luftwaffe, reducing the threat, or that they move out of range somehow.
Maybe some Allied fleet will move to block the unification, which can be killed off. Maybe they won’t build those naval units when/where you think they will.
I don’t understand your scenario - how do the Germans have 6 Ftrs and a Bom with their fleet - one CV can only carry 2 Ftrs.
IF the German fleet can meet in SZ7, it would be: 3 Subs 5 TRN 1 DD 1 BB, and if the CV is build add 1 CV 2 Ftrs to that. That’s a lot of fodder and some decent defence. The UK starts with … ahh I see - you are thinking about the German fleet attacking a UK fleet in SZ 6 and assuming a CV build, whereas I am talking about moving both fleets to SZ 7 in non-combat if possible.
If the Baltic is blocked up and Norway dead-zoned, the UK may not put its fleet in SZ 6 at all. That’s when I’d consider uniting the fleet, if I didn’t think keeping those TRNS in the Baltic was worth it.
Maybe I’d build 1 TRN 1 AC instead in the Baltic.
-
@froodster:
By the way, can you really land Ftrs on a newly built carrier? TripleA seems not to allow it, but I recall earlier discussion of the rules that this was allowed.
Yes, you CAN land fighters on a newly built carrier, under Larry Harris Tournament Rules (LHTR), which TripleA (at this moment) does not support.
ONLY for the moment, though. I sense change coming. And I’m not just talking about my underpants.
-
@Imperious:
Look up the Socratic technique on the internet.
Ew. I mean, she’s cute, but she IS my sister.
–
No, really. The Socratic method is basically this:
Bright Shiny Eyed Individual (bright and perky): “Hi! I want to write a guide!”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard (lounging in chair): “Oh, GOOOOOOOD! :-D”
Not So Bright Shiny Eyed Indvidual (a bit less shiny eyed sixty hours later): “OK, here’s the first draft!”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard (waking up from long nap): “Oh, this won’t work at all.” (slice chop wham bam. Horribly enough, criticisms are accurate.)
Slightly Downcast Individual (a bit downcast): “Er, um . . . okay . . . let me rewrite this . . .”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard (sipping a nice cool drink): “Oh, yeah, you do that. Heh heh. I mean, um, I look forward to it!”
Exhausted and Bitter Individual (bags under eyes): “Okay, here’s the second draft. It has all the facts and figures and extrapolations and projections.”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard (looking up from comfy chair): “Oh, but you missed . . .” (slice chop wham bam. Horribly enough, criticisms are accurate.)
Angered and Embittered and Exhaused Individual (suicidal): “I can’t do any more! I give up!”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard (cheerfully): “Oh, you look like you could use some cheering up. How about we both sit back on these comfy ass chairs and snooze in the sunlight, while waiting for a Bright Eyed Individual to come along?”
Evil Old Socratic Bastard II (cheerfully): “Oh, that sounds QUITE fun!”
–
Works for politics too!
Basically, you sit back and relax, let someone else make all the arguments, and you poke holes in it.
-
If I can chime in….
There are keys that were briefly mentioned but not taken into account:
1). Russias buy
2). The amount of russians left alive in West Russia and Ukraine.
3). Russias non-combat on R1If Russia is pressuring the Germans out east, a fleet may not even be an option.
How good is the Russian player? Does he recognize that the German fleet buy on G1 causes Germany to be ground unit poor, and now Russia can/should be willing to throw units at Gemany (even at a loss) to begin to bleed Germany dry.When Germany buys a navy, you are not really forcing the allies to do all that much differently. Axis game plans that force the allies to react usually work better. The allies are going to build an Atlantic navy regardless. But now Germany is not buying what she needs/usually will buy: ground units.
This is a tricky dance Germany is attempting… my experience has been that unless the allies mis-play their reaction to the German navy, or Russia is weak in the eastern theatre, then this is a poor long term game plan.
-
Your comments are welcome and its great that you have taken some time to post.
The original idea is russia took belo and lost 1-2 infantry, and took west russia and lost 2-3 infantry. The russians probably bought 8 infantry or 3/3 or even 4 inf or 3 artillery.
The russian player and the allies have the idea of KGF and the bid was 3-5. The russian sub was/is with the allied fleet at SZ#6 for the block.
No NA’s are being played.
the options were:
- attempt a link up with the medd fleet
- sealion
- keep the fleet in baltic as a threat and shuck infantry/art to russia with 4 trannys
I maintain only #3 is a plausible idea and option #1 is pretty much a huge gamble.
All of this is an attempt to make sence of the german buys on G1.
the choices so far:
- CV and 3 Tranny
- CV 8 infantry or (mix of art and infantry)
- one DD, balance land units
- all land units ( whatever combination of inf,art,and tanks)
- rockets and bomber ( morrison games)
- Buy tranny for medd, balance land
- 1 CV and 3 subs
- land and air units combo
-
I’m not sure on that assumption on the Russian sub. If it moves to SZ 6 by itself, it’s a pretty nice target of opportunity for Germany in G1. I’d kill it with air (ftr/bom) and then there would be less Allied ships to interfere with the possible dash on G2.
Then, if the UK still moves into SZ 6, I wouldn’t attempt unification in G2. I MIGHT strafe to sink a few TRNs but that would be about it. Then as fleets move around during the game I might sneak down to SZ7 if the opportunity arose.
My whole strategy is based around not getting my units killed. I like to make my victory omelet with as few of my eggs as possible, though I don’t mind using the other guy’s eggs.
-
I would presume the Tranny moves first to SZ#2 and then on R2 to SZ#6. The German player would probably leave it alone.
But Floodster what do you think about just leaving the stuff in the baltic and shuffle 8 men to russia?
And additionally you keep the sealion threat open.
and provide real defence for Germany.
-
Are we talking about the tranny or the sub? Yeah, I guess it can move to block in SZ 6 in round 2.
I think the Baltic factory (if that’s what were calling it) is a good option, perhaps better than fleet unification. Of course, if it is, the allied player may NOT want to block unification just for the sake of allowing the German player to move if they want to.
-
Et Tu, jsp. My tourney partner. The wound cuts deep. Â :lol:
Nothing personal, you’re just WRONG! :evil:
Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY? Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2? I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.
-
Yes that is true. What i gather a few think the fleet will join up after all is said and done and move into the medd somehow.
The second idea they want to maintain is after the battle they claim the allied loses are so great that the German player has swindled them in a disadvantageous exchange.
I maintain the only halfway decent option is:
- ignore the navy buys on G1
- buy enough just so planes alone dont sink the baltic fleet
- buy a carrier and trannys (either at once or by installments) and use it as threat ans shuck material to russia.
-
Wow. What a condescending post. From a moderator, no less.
<shakes head=“”></shakes>
-
Yea you probably correct … Ill edit.
-
Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY? Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2? I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.
Well my “why” is to gain long-term control of the Mediterranean, to control Africa and really threaten Caucasus. If spending 16 IPC in the baltic allows me to eventually bring a 52 IPC navy to join the 40 IPC navy in the Mediterranean, that’s a good use of 16 IPCs.
I have yet to actually achieve this in a game though, so I’m just spitballing here.
And for the record, I have not advocated attacking the Allied fleet as being some kind of favourable exchange. As Germany is initially surrounded and outproduced, I don’t think simplification is as good plan for Germany - again, force conservation is my modus operandus.
-
@froodster:
Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY? Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2? I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.
Well my “why” is to gain long-term control of the Mediterranean, to control Africa and really threaten Caucasus. If spending 16 IPC in the baltic allows me to eventually bring a 52 IPC navy to join the 40 IPC navy in the Mediterranean, that’s a good use of 16 IPCs.
I have yet to actually achieve this in a game though, so I’m just spitballing here.
And for the record, I have not advocated attacking the Allied fleet as being some kind of favourable exchange. As Germany is initially surrounded and outproduced, I don’t think simplification is as good plan for Germany - again, force conservation is my modus operandus.
If long term control of the Med is the goal, the a G1 or G2 purchase of 1CV & 1tp is a better option. Trying to unite the fleets in sz7 for a move to the med will result in heavy losses to the fleet before they can get back to the med.
-
If you want (you meaning others who favor it) to link up the fleets why not just buy a damm carrier and 3 trannys in the medd and avoid all of this mess?
Then you got 4 trannys and 8 men per turn right into the caucasus and africa is protected. Eventually your baltic fleet is under attack but you cant win them all. The medd is more important anyway.
Suggested Topics
