Alpha 3 Intelligence Report - Straight from the front lines!

In fairness, I think having a Battleship that dies in 1 hit is enough of a punishment.  :lol:

I think it’s more than reasonable for a 20 IPC unit to be able to completely function after suffering a hit.

is it gonna be hitorricly correct

@450thMSAF:

is it gonna be hitorricly correct

I think the changes for the most part will be for better game play, but that’s not to say their not thinking about historical accuracy.

Will the new Alpha 3 provide Japan with additional NO’s? Such as Phillipines or Malaya? or Shanghi? Japs need an incentive to counter the US.

@sargon:

Will the new Alpha 3 provide Japan with additional NO’s? Such as Phillipines or Malaya? or Shanghi? Japs need an incentive to counter the US.

From what I understand (which is not much), there won’t be any additional NOs for Japan. However, they may be trying to figure out how to make the existing NOs more obtainable. Of course thats just a guess, I really have no idea.

@Cmdr:

I have just recommended (yesterday) that perhaps Germany/Italy should only need 7 Victory Cities to win, to offset this, Japan should have 7 Victory Cities to win.  This would allow America to choose which war s/he wants to focus on while punishing America for ignoring one side or the other. (Without America, Japan can easily get 7 VCs.  Without America, Germany/Italy can easily get 7 VCs.  With America, Japan or Germany/Italy might get 7 VCs, if they play strategy!)

Larry is “considering it”

Really? 7 cities is easy for Germany : London, Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Rome, Leningrad, and your choice of Egypt or Stalingrad….Moscow is never needed for a win if you have London. The game would end by turn 7 or 8 every time. In fact, I usually win with the axis by ignoring Moscow, and taking both Egypt and Stalingrad for the 8 city win. Take London turn 4, Leningrad turn 6 with the transport fleet (8-10 ships) that secured London while driving over land to the south to link up with Italy for grabbing Stalingrad by turn 7 or 8. If the US pressured Japan at all, they will not be able to Liberate London by that time.

@Cmdr:

@Xandax:

@GoSanchez6:

<snip>. On another note I am laughing at these posts a little because when the game came out so many shouting for Alpha 3 were saying Germany could take London and still have plenty of money to fend off the Russians. What Happened?</snip>

They found out that while they could fend off the Russians, they didn’t stand much chance against a combined Pac/EU USA economy dumped into one side of the board on top of it.

Also, fending off the Russians == winning the game.  Eventually the Russians will hold the German/Italians at bay long enough for America to return from destroying Japan and add that little oomph required to finish off Germany.

Just curious, If I see America spending lets say 6-7 turns building and acting in the Pacific, what stops a German player, with 8-10 transports having taken London on turn 4 from looking at a stacked Russia and an empty E. USA from simply using plunder to plop down a larger fleet turn 5, move to Gibratar turn 6, and seize either CUS or EUS on turn 7….Russia is harder to take then the EUSA with a Pacific first approach. I’ve done it. Most US players are not counting on a German fleet redeployed off of Gibraltar if they have their focus on Japan.

If you secure EUSA(Washington), then grab Ontario for the 8th city win, you already have London, Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Rome and Egypt if the drive is on Japan, leaving Russia out of the game completely if they refuse to surrender when you seize the US.

I guess I’m just asking if anyone has taken EUSA in the 100percent Japan strategies I have heard about? It should be a softer target then 2/3 of the Russian Victory Cities. Is this crazy?

Subtle Alternative: On turn 4, send one transport to seize Iceland with 1 infantry (to prevent air landings they will think), the others grab London. Stack additional Germans on Belgium or Normandy. Be sure you take London from sz 110. Then on turn 5 move 8-10 transports and 16-20 land units to Iceland, drop a naval base there and sack Ontario via sz 120 (3 sz from Iceland) on turn 6 for your 8th city if you have grabbed Leningrad Stalingrad (Italy) by then.

Two things for the US to consider, it is assumed this is used when they are going 100 percent Pacific:
1:On turn 4, you see London fall and a lone Transport with 1 infantry in Iceland. Do you see this as an Ontario threat or EUSA threat? Most honest players will say no. Maybe you build a sub and move an infantry into Quebec to protect it, maybe not…you are focused on Japan and this is turn 4, your first chance to declare war.
2:On turn4, do you honestly expect Germany to move to Iceland with its whole fleet. At the very least, you might suspect the Gibraltar move, but not Iceland. Especially with a Naval base that does not yet exist. Maybe you build some ships on the east coast, to get a head start against a possible Gibraltar move. But honestly, you are not likely to even think of Ontario as it has probably never falling in a single game you have played while playing the US.

Riddle me this, lets say the US see’s the Gibraltar as a likely threat and goes navy…How many US players going Japan first stack land units in EUSA? Probably none if they are going navy on the east coast…maybe some for a few transports…when you drop off 20 units in Ontario and some of the tanks in Alberta, you now have to protect the WUSA, CUSA, and EUSA from a turn 7 capture if the game is not over.

Is this idea also far fetched? Or is it a valid VC win? I know, where will Russia be with all this effort going away from them…4 turns of building, then Londons plunder and say 2 turns before Russia is near Germany, you will be fine holding Berlin…Maybe you are required to liberate Warsaw, maybe not. Something else to consider.

@Cmdr:

Well, the fact that you can get to the Gulf of Mexico from SZ 10 for one, a 70 IPC America for 2.

So if I move to Gibraltar, you will pull your west coast fleet to the Gulf of Mexico? and build 70 what with the US? I don’t care if you sink my fleet after I grab Washington.

70 IPC = 23 land units of which 10 can go into EUS and CUS each, or 4 carriers and a sub permitting 11 planes to defend the East coast if you have them in range (I bet a few are on Hawaii or Australia by turn 5). Seems like doing this on turn 5 would slow your efforts against Japan, and Germany can then just redeploy north after sending 3 transports south towards west africa for additional income. If you did not have 11 planes defending those 4 carriers, you might lose your capital, for only 1 round….I’ll trade the German fleet for 70 IPC plunder and a EUSA minor factory knockdown. This definitely buys Japan all the time it needs using only pieces that are now wasted (having no further objective after grabbing London) sitting on the board doing very little other than maybe grabbing Northern Russia.

For Number crunchers, this is my typical German fleet on turn 4 when I grab London:
2 carriers, 1 BB, 1 Cruiser, 1 sub, and 1 DD with 10 transports. I often need the second carrier cause I like to stage in Scotland on turn 3. I wait to take London until turn 4 to keep the US neutral and to take fewer losses. This gives me 45-54 land units plus 9-11 air units vs London’s defenders lets call it 40 units. Typically I have 15-20 land units left.

@Cmdr:

But you wont get Washington.

For one, there’s already units in the US, all of which can be in DC if need be.  There’s the British in Canada.  British ships to block the way, American ships to prevent the landing from ever happening too. (6 Aircraft already on hand, what’s it cost to put 3 carriers in the water to add all those fighters too?  48 IPC?  Leaving what, 22 IPC?  Another 2 fighters for scrambing!)

You will have the effect of pulling all the Americans out of the Pacific for a round, however.  If that is your goal.

True, it could be prevented, bringing your turn 4 fleet to sz 89 (G.O.Mexico) which puts it 2 turns from Hawaii, or the W. Coast, with those carriers in the East coast, I just prevented a build in the west coast. Those carriers will be 2 turns from Hawaii if they go that way. Seems like it would be a major disruption for a planned USA Pacific first approach, buy Japan 2 additional worry free turns, and even permit the sacking of Either India or Australia before the US could thwart them.

All this by simply sliding a few boats already in the water to another spot in the water. True, It would buy Russia 2 turns as well as my transports would be out of position…but given that Pacific first is your favored approach, taking your attention from the Pacific seems warranted.