Tank Purchases R.I.P.

@Plasticdeathbydice:

Feels so nice to be quoted….at least when the person quoting you agrees!

That is rare.

Sorry mates, i’ll stick with my mech inf with art and a crapton of planes as backup.  Germany can afford planes and they serve a dual purpose at keeping the US/UK honest.  Russia cannot afford to waste IPCs on tanks as they have a limited income and should try to maximize build quantity or risk being overran by unit count alone.

With this setup I foresee a slow german infantry push being backed up with air and mech as they get further from the home factories.

@bugoo:

Germany can afford planes and they serve a dual purpose at keeping the US/UK honest.  Russia cannot afford to waste IPCs on tanks as they have a limited income and should try to maximize build quantity or risk being overran by unit count alone.

Germany can afford planes but not tanks? Why is this? Planes do serve a dual purpose in offense against Russia and deterrant against invasion… but you will never have enough planes to go around for attacking and deterring. Not unless you buy planes at the expense of buying land units… in which case you can’t win anyway. Planes are also way more valuble than tanks, so their commitment to battle will be even more careful. Planes still cost nearly double that of tanks and they cannot hold territory, meaning your infantry units are subjected to counter-attack only rolling on 2s. Not good if Russia has tanks or planes.

Maximizing build quantity has never been enough for Russia, they need quality units just as much as Germany, though in lesser quantity.Traversing the Russian front will require speed, as it is huge, and it will require Germany to bring some firepower along; firepower that can occupy territories: tanks, not planes. While Ivan has to be agressive, he does not have to advance. Jerry has to do both, because if Russia can hold him off, the combined Allied weight will make him crumble. Germany still needs tanks the premier offensive weapon and Russia needs them as important supplements to defense and hit-run attacks.

Unit count alone won’t win the war for Germany… they need more superior units: more tanks, more fighters. But mainly more tanks.

What I mean by that is i could buy 2 mechs and a fighter for 18, or three tanks for 18.  I’ll take the mechs/fighter any day of the week.  And i’ll still have more units than russia because of my income being nearly double his, and I won’t have to waste as many units defending my coasts because UK/US need more surface ships to protect there transports.

Inf, art, mechs, and planes will win the day in russia for germany.  You don’t need tanks when you can afford to buy a fighter for every tank your opponent purchases, along with a mech.

@bugoo:

What I mean by that is i could buy 2 mechs and a fighter for 18, or three tanks for 18.  I’ll take the mechs/fighter any day of the week.  And i’ll still have more units than russia because of my income being nearly double his, and I won’t have to waste as many units defending my coasts because UK/US need more surface ships to protect there transports.

Inf, art, mechs, and planes will win the day in russia for germany.  You don’t need tanks when you can afford to buy a fighter for every tank your opponent purchases, along with a mech.

2 mech and ftr attack at 5 and defend at 8. 3 tanks attack at 9 and defend at 9. Same number of hits. Tanks can defend the captured territory, fighters cannot

@calvinhobbesliker:

@bugoo:

What I mean by that is i could buy 2 mechs and a fighter for 18, or three tanks for 18.  I’ll take the mechs/fighter any day of the week.  And i’ll still have more units than russia because of my income being nearly double his, and I won’t have to waste as many units defending my coasts because UK/US need more surface ships to protect there transports.

Inf, art, mechs, and planes will win the day in russia for germany.  You don’t need tanks when you can afford to buy a fighter for every tank your opponent purchases, along with a mech.

2 mech and ftr attack at 5 and defend at 8. 3 tanks attack at 9 and defend at 9. Same number of hits. Tanks can defend the captured territory, fighters cannot

Alright, alright … we’ll have to test theories and find out. Good luck.

@LHoffman:

Alright, alright … we’ll have to test theories and find out. Good luck.

That’s right.  Thanks guys for making me take another look at mech.  I see they will indeed be pretty sweet.

@calvinhobbesliker:

2 mech and ftr attack at 5 and defend at 8. 3 tanks attack at 9 and defend at 9. Same number of hits. Tanks can defend the captured territory, fighters cannot

Better skew for the mech + ftr  :-P

Just kidding, obviously the tanks are stronger in this situation. But the fighter buy has some advantages too: more mobility, keeping allied fleets at bay, better trading zone opportunity, no need to sacrifice costly units (tank vs mech). Fighters rarely die in land battle, so after a while you’ll end up with a nice stack staring at moskva  :-D

Moreso, for 2 extra IPC’s, you get the omnipotent bomber  :-o Maximum mobility, and in a dull moment there’s always so;ething to strategically bomb raid. Add in a tac fighter every now and then… I like it! Air + mech, a powerful combo for Germany?

I for one think Tanks are finally balanced, a cost of 6 is perfect.  They were way too cheap before.  We had too many games were tanks ruled and they often would comprise a countries sole purchase.  Now things are as they should, Tanks are still useful for winning combats but inf will win the wars as is true in real life.

@allweneedislove:

no tanks are ever purchased in pac40 because china is not allowed to, uk is too poor and island hopping nature of usa, anzac and japan.

Hey, A&A is almost starting to be historically correct! :-D

Seriously, I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

I also believe tanks are still a great buy. If you used to buy say three tanks in a given turn that would cost you 15. Now it costs 18. One infantry of a difference. I don’t really see the problem. Again, it’s more historically correct. Undoubtedly some fewer tanks will be purchased, but the huge masses of infantry far outnumbered tank corps and armies in WWII, so no problem. A tank is still the only land unit with a considerable punch that is also capable of holding a territory (that is, useful in defense too; unlike aircraft that have to land in a previously held space).

I for one cant wait to try out these different strategies!!! Bring on Tuesday!

The new cosring is going to create more combined arms forces. More exciting game play. It is more necessary to bring a cheap infantry screen now to cover your tanks.

Even early in the war germany did not go in only with tanks.

But can enough infantry get to Moscow in time?

The battle will already be decided.

WARNING! : The following is just my opinion based on what I have read.

turns 1 and 2  germany should be building loads of infantry to defend against Overlord, a few aircraft, and some navy so the rest doesnt get sunk too early and gives the uk something to worry about and leave the med alone, and a few transports will help keep them honest too.

Anyways, after this I would be building tank/mech combos so I can keep them racing forward. Maybe a amphibious landing in Russia to help keep them split on where to defend.

But since I play Japan usually I figure Germany can do whatever it wants and I will just send 12 tanks at some point into russia to really screw with them.

And before anyone says anything about 18 infantry, they wont last long if Japan makes 1 concentrated effort to kill them. Unlwess I misunderstand some neutrality rule or something.

@gredert:

And before anyone says anything about 18 infantry, they wont last long if Japan makes 1 concentrated effort to kill them. Unlwess I misunderstand some neutrality rule or something.

A good opponent won’t group the 18 infantry together where you can kill them.  More territories = harder to kill.  Also, USSR goes before Japan on turn 1, so the 18 infantry will be safe J1 (except for the 2 or 3 that pre-emptively took over Korea, possibly)

Like you I may be completely wrong because I haven’t played global yet, but based on my experience and assessments, I think Japan’s gonna have a helluva time succeeding.  They can’t take a money island or attack ANZAC or UK without bringing the USA into the war in the first couple rounds like they could in P40 (that’s gotta be a bad move in G40 any way you look at it), and with 5 enemies….  well, it’s not gonna be easy at all.  I don’t think you’ll be able to send one turn’s purchase into Russia to “screw with them” and even if you did, it’s an awful long way there, and probably won’t have air support (at long last - a much more realistic simulation of this front)

USSR and USA are gonna be complete beasts.  Complete beasts.

Way too early to say this, but I can’t resist.  I predict that with skilled and experienced players who are equally matched, the Allies will have a significant advantage (win 60-70% of games) when played 1v1.  When Allies are broken up among 3-5 players, then this advantage should drop quite a bit.  I would list all my reasons and analysis, but it will take too long.  I’ll just throw this prediction out there (since I can’t play the game yet!!!)

@gamerman01:

@gredert:

And before anyone says anything about 18 infantry, they wont last long if Japan makes 1 concentrated effort to kill them. Unlwess I misunderstand some neutrality rule or something.

A good opponent won’t group the 18 infantry together where you can kill them.  More territories = harder to kill.  Also, USSR goes before Japan on turn 1, so the 18 infantry will be safe J1 (except for the 2 or 3 that pre-emptively took over Korea, possibly)

Why take Korea? The convoy is blocked so you lose 3 inf for 2 inf.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@gamerman01:

@gredert:

And before anyone says anything about 18 infantry, they wont last long if Japan makes 1 concentrated effort to kill them. Unlwess I misunderstand some neutrality rule or something.

A good opponent won’t group the 18 infantry together where you can kill them.  More territories = harder to kill.  Also, USSR goes before Japan on turn 1, so the 18 infantry will be safe J1 (except for the 2 or 3 that pre-emptively took over Korea, possibly)

Why take Korea? The convoy is blocked so you lose 3 inf for 2 inf.

That’s a great point about the convoy (and is a great example of why I don’t understand why the convoy rules are the way they are).  So you’re right, people probably won’t.

I’m not too sure about the ally advantage in global.  Yes Russia will be a beast, but Germany will be as well, and italy may actually be useful!  Other thing to keep in mind is the US are out 40 IPCs that they would have in the seperate games, and all NO money for UK goes to UK, not India.  Thats 5 IPCs first turn, and on turn 2 without a war dec 10 more that India does not get that they would normally get.

I actually fear a UK pincer in global with both India and London getting taken out, or at least be something that forces the allies to play a specific way to avoid losing them both on turn 3ish.

@bugoo:

I’m not too sure about the ally advantage in global.  Yes Russia will be a beast, but Germany will be as well, and italy may actually be useful!  Other thing to keep in mind is the US are out 40 IPCs that they would have in the seperate games, and all NO money for UK goes to UK, not India.  Thats 5 IPCs first turn, and on turn 2 without a war dec 10 more that India does not get that they would normally get.

I actually fear a UK pincer in global with both India and London getting taken out, or at least be something that forces the allies to play a specific way to avoid losing them both on turn 3ish.

Indeed!  The Axis can really gang up on the poor British to leave them with nothing but ANZAC at the beginning of Round 4!  However, looking at the cost to the Axis war effort, that’s about as far as they’ll get if that’s all they do.  Germany will need to buy so many TRNs to make Sealion an effective tactic, that unless the USA is completely stupid, the Sealion fleet can easily be blown out of the water US4 with England liberated as well.  You can still make hay out of threatening a Sealion if Britain insists on ignoring Germany UK1.

I’m thinking more realistically that India will be the first major power to fall (less chance of major reinforcements), hopefully followed by either the Soviet Union or ANZAC.  If the Axis can’t get India to fall by Round 5, I’m thinking that with Russian help added to the British stack that taking India will be impossible.  Remember, the Axis historically did not prepare for long, dragged out wars like in WWI!  The Allies also have the biggest swing on the board, in the form of an 82 IPC Godzilla USA lurking in the background.

With an 82 IPC USA in this game, the gameplay shouldn’t drag out quite so much as previous games.

I dunno about that, Germany can easily get into the high 50s low 60s, and so can Japan.  US is going to have its hands full splitting there builds effectively, and the US is the only one who can go toe to toe with those two.  Ignoring either theater will result in alot of pain for the allies with the way the NOs are worded.