@American:
True, but when I play America no one ever even thinks of trying to invade it.
Honestly though nobody ever seriously thinks of trying to invade the US even when it is completely empty, since it is just to easy to fill it up with defenders the second you get a whiff of a possible attack.
Not true, there was much debate over a Kill America First strategy on these forums.
Not saying it was WISE, but it did HAPPEN a few times and it was FUNNY as human feces!
@Cmdr:
Not true, there was much debate over a Kill America First strategy on these forums.
Not saying it was WISE, but it did HAPPEN a few times and it was FUNNY as human feces!
I don’t think you really refuted our statements (you did quote me as saying seriously). Are you describing somebody doing it purely for fun, or is it part of a credible plan that might actually work?
It looks like a Sea Lion, except you hit Gibraltar on 3 and if America left its guard down then slam the East coast. Italy needs to get out and help.
Cmdr Jen can get you all the info on it, or do a bunch of digging.
It can and has worked but certain things have to fall in place, I also think it may have been easier with the A+2 version.
Surprise your friends and try it.
S.A.
@Cmdr:
Not true, there was much debate over a Kill America First strategy on these forums.
Not saying it was WISE, but it did HAPPEN a few times and it was FUNNY as human feces!
I don’t think you really refuted our statements (you did quote me as saying seriously). Are you describing somebody doing it purely for fun, or is it part of a credible plan that might actually work?
I think I remember reading that it was a pretty good surprise move the first time an opponent sees it but that was in Alpha 2. Something about a rule change regarding what Japan could do before it was at war. This is all very vague though.
It can be done both as a feint to tie up the US resources and for real if Japan wants to over-invest they can maybe pull it off, it is very risky though.
Wiping out the US is very hard but doable.
Correction- With Global it is only nine infantry.
Honestly if US saw Germany with a huge fleet off Gib then they would jsut build a bigger fleet. Germany could attack a fleet containing a carrier loaded 2 subs 2 DD’s cruiser and 3 scrambling planes. No way!
Honestly if US saw Germany with a huge fleet off Gib then they would jsut build a bigger fleet. Germany could attack a fleet containing a carrier loaded 2 subs 2 DD’s cruiser and 3 scrambling planes. No way!
If I remember correctly the strat was based on convincing the US that the Fleet would go London or or into the Med, so it was a work-once-and-never-again-against-same-opponent strat.
Page 45 of this thread about half way down.
Have fun!!!
Honestly if US saw Germany with a huge fleet off Gib then they would jsut build a bigger fleet. Germany could attack a fleet containing a carrier loaded 2 subs 2 DD’s cruiser and 3 scrambling planes. No way!
If I remember correctly the strat was based on convincing the US that the Fleet would go London or or into the Med, so it was a work-once-and-never-again-against-same-opponent strat.
Yea, that’s how I remember it.
Keep in mind, the idea was for the strategy to hit the US before they came into the war, or the round after, cant remember which. It pretty much destroyed the United States and gave the Axis powers eternities to deal with England/Russia.
I’ve seen it used, pretty effective in Alpha games, useless in 2nd edition since there is LITERALLY no way to take London on round 3, unless the British player has NO gaming experience at all.
@Cmdr:
Honestly if US saw Germany with a huge fleet off Gib then they would jsut build a bigger fleet. Germany could attack a fleet containing a carrier loaded 2 subs 2 DD’s cruiser and 3 scrambling planes. No way!
If I remember correctly the strat was based on convincing the US that the Fleet would go London or or into the Med, so it was a work-once-and-never-again-against-same-opponent strat.
Yea, that’s how I remember it.
Keep in mind, the idea was for the strategy to hit the US before they came into the war, or the round after, cant remember which. It pretty much destroyed the United States and gave the Axis powers eternities to deal with England/Russia.
I’ve seen it used, pretty effective in Alpha games, useless in 2nd edition since there is LITERALLY no way to take London on round 3, unless the British player has NO gaming experience at all.
This may be a little off topic, but as the allies don’t you kind of want the Axis to go for UK? I have had success on tripleA not trying to hold london but just trying do do some damage when gerry takes it, since you get those 5 free hits with the AA gun that were not around before A3, and Russia gets those (IMO) silly NO’s.
If the game is global, no you don’t want to loose UK, especially on G3. Loosing UK on G4 when he spent all his income turns 1 and 2 on ships and landed in scotland on turn 3 is different. Then I would say hell ya that is great for the allies.
Losing the UK was only an issue in Alpha 2 and it was, statistically, unstopable so it was the go to move for Germany and why not? You essentially end the British for the entire game and lock the US out of the European theater for quite a while - though not indefinitely, but any round that gives you more than 4 rounds to deal with the US is a massive shift!
Once AA counted as casualties, any hope for the UK to go down was lost - at least early in the game. So it’s a moot point now. Honestly, I think it is FAR more likely for Sea Lion to succeed before the US is in the war than after - historically speaking. I mean, it almost becamse the US/UK against Japan, Italy and Russia! But the men who control the rules - and they are MEN - had a hissy fit and went too far in defending England from an early attack - IN MY OPINION.
@Cmdr:
Losing the UK was only an issue in Alpha 2 and it was, statistically, unstopable so it was the go to move for Germany and why not? You essentially end the British for the entire game and lock the US out of the European theater for quite a while - though not indefinitely, but any round that gives you more than 4 rounds to deal with the US is a massive shift!
Once AA counted as casualties, any hope for the UK to go down was lost - at least early in the game. So it’s a moot point now. Honestly, I think it is FAR more likely for Sea Lion to succeed before the US is in the war than after - historically speaking. I mean, it almost becamse the US/UK against Japan, Italy and Russia! But the men who control the rules - and they are MEN - had a hissy fit and went too far in defending England from an early attack - IN MY OPINION.
Ummm… How fun is a game where a country dies 100% of the time on turn 3…? Is that supposed to be a well made game? I think it was a great change. Also it is really historically inaccurate. UK’s navy was HUGE!
@Cmdr:
Losing the UK was only an issue in Alpha 2 and it was, statistically, unstopable so it was the go to move for Germany and why not?� You essentially end the British for the entire game and lock the US out of the European theater for quite a while - though not indefinitely, but any round that gives you more than 4 rounds to deal with the US is a massive shift!
Once AA counted as casualties, any hope for the UK to go down was lost - at least early in the game.� So it’s a moot point now.� Honestly, I think it is FAR more likely for Sea Lion to succeed before the US is in the war than after - historically speaking.� I mean, it almost becamse the US/UK against Japan, Italy and Russia!� But the men who control the rules - and they are MEN - had a hissy fit and went too far in defending England from an early attack - IN MY OPINION.
Ummm… How fun is a game where a country dies 100% of the time on turn 3…? Is that supposed to be a well made game? I think it was a great change. Also it is really historically inaccurate. UK’s navy was HUGE!
Not to be that guy but I always thought Sealion was cool because it was a thinly plausible what-if scenario. But Alpha 3 ruined it when USSR was making 14 IPC from the 2 IPC of italian territories in North Africa. But I can see how it sucks to have a power die so early, especially in a multi game (Shut up France no one cares that you die round 1 :-D)
The real problem I had with it was that even noobs could do it. That is not axis and allies in my oppinion. “Oh buy a carrier 2 transports, and then you buy 10 transports!” lol dumb!
The real problem I had with it was that even noobs could do it. That is not axis and allies in my oppinion. “Oh buy a carrier 2 transports, and then you buy 10 transports!” lol dumb!
That’s a good point. It doesn’t take much knowledge of the game to win with, sort of like the often suicidal but sometimes game breaking russian triple in Revised.
the tripple with russia in revised is foolhardy. If it fails you loose. Even if it works it has to work really really well to have been worth it.
the tripple with russia in revised is foolhardy. If it fails you loose. Even if it works it has to work really really well to have been worth it.
It seemed like with maxagaz on GTO he would take 5 casualties or less quite a lot as Russia. He ended every game on round 1, I have never seen anything like it. I met a lot a people on their who would not play him. It wasn’t a remotely respectable play style, but it was unique.
The reason people don’t like playing with someone like that is because of how risky it is. The player is basically a douche bag and trying to decide the game on the first turn. The tripple that he does is really high risk, and just not fun to play with someone who does that all the time. If they win it is really annoying, and if they loose most of the time the quit.
But “I win” scenarios have long been a history of this game!
Classic “I win” strategies:
A) Canadian Shield, until someone figured out how to stop it.
B) Smush Russia First (Dogpile of Axis on Russia), until someone figured out how to make Germany pay and open a 2 front war, thus taking pressure off Russia.
C) Spanish Invasion - until players learned how to deal with it.
D. The Infantry Push Mechanic - again, until people learned to deal with it.
Revised “I win” strategies:
A) Smush Russia First (same as Classic.)
B) Kill Japan First - still in use since most players cannot handle a revised battle of the Pacific, as far as I can see. But certainly no longer an “I win.”
C) British Bombardment Strategy (warships park off France and blow the crud out of the defenders.)
D. Note, Revised enhanced had to be created to spread the battle over the globe and make the game a lot more fun again due to the mechanicalness of Revised after a while.
Anniversary:
A) Kill Germany first….really, that’s like THE go to strategy for any game of Axis and Allies (theater specific ver. are NOT axis and allies, I dont care WHAT the box says. IMHO.)
Global:
A) Kill Germany First
B) Kill Italy First
C) Kill England First - round 3
D. Invade Russia round 2
E) Kill India First
F) Kill ANZAC First
G) Walk Around China
H) Walk THROUGH China
…
Thing is, what seems unstopable just has not been stopped yet. All of the above strategies have their flaws, and they can all be stopped with the appropriate amount of thought and timeing.
Ex) Sea Lion Round 3
Sol) The United States liberates on Round 5
Ex) Kill India First
Sol) Reinforce from Russia/ANZAC - later US
