Who Wins

@Uncrustable:

@Texas:

How would France have 25+ a turn when they turtled up in Paris and allowed the Germans to take all their European territory.� The math isn’t adding up for me.� Wouldn’t they just have Paris, Portugal, and some territories in Africa?� I would think 15-18 would be the max they would have at that point.

Spain, Morocco.

The thing is they will not be as big if Germany attacks them first instead of Russia.
BUT…Then Russia will be big lol
OR…Austria goes all in for Russia, now Germany must fight both French and Italy for 6 turns then USA too!

The Axis (CP) problems in 1914 do not exist in other A&A games because of long range units (aircraft and tanks) and more factories + ability to make more factories.
All land units moving 1, no real air game and only 1 factory per nation cripples the axis (CP) whereas it does not make much difference for the Allies, mainly because UK and USA build their units and load them onto transports the very next turn, which have the same movement as other A&A games.

Okay…I thought France was retreating to Paris, when would they take Spain?  Sp. Morocco was included in my count already.

What CP strats have you tried or seen tried?  We have never established that.

How much have folks been using subs as the CPs?  I am starting to lean towards them being better than battleships (BBs very useful for home port defense though).  They can bypass enemy ships, very difficult to kill off, force the US to escort their transports to land forces…  An interesting option with Germany is to create sub swarms and utilize USW.

USW is nigh USeless. 1/3 chance of 1 sub doing only 1 ipc of income damage. It takes on average 9 turns to get your investment back.

Submerging may seem cool but it’s really not that hard to hit the subs when you are attacking at 3 or 4.

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

USW is nigh USeless. 1/3 chance of 1 sub doing only 1 ipc of income damage. It takes on average 9 turns to get your investment back.

Submerging may seem cool but it’s really not that hard to hit the subs when you are attacking at 3 or 4.

That is using the assumption that the only reason you bought the sub was for USW.

If there are 10 subs, it may be bit more difficult, not to mention any subs you do hit have a 1 in 3 chance of returning the favor.

To hit on a few battleships who shrug them off. Battleships have been lowered in price, but not in effectiveness. Subs have stayed the same price from Global, but are much more anemic.

It doesn’t really matter why one thinks it’s a good idea to buy subs, it matters how effective they are. The weakness of the submerge, the lack of the first strike, and the nigh pointlessness in economic warfare make them not worth the investment.

It depends on how many battleships you brought with you, may roll instead of submerge.  10 subs will cause approx 3 hits, but you also have to take the damaged battleship back to port.

I assume your comments are based on game play and you didn’t even touch on their most effective use.

Texas hmm… I don’t think Prussia can afford to deploy such navy.

They can as long as you aren’t sacrificing your troops at the gates of Paris.  For some reason, a lot of people seem to think the CPs have to capture Paris as fast as they can to win.  They don’t and using that strat doesn’t work anyway.

And can you defend your rerritories from france and russia?
What is AH doing? You cant really attack Itaky with Franxe full support?

You have plenty to defend, if France and Russia are attacking, it’s a good thing.

France typically falls back to defend.  It’s kind of hard to describe something this complex and fluid in a sentence or two.  Way too many variables.  AH can also disrupt the Med.

@Texas:

You have plenty to defend, if France and Russia are attacking, it’s a good thing.

France typically falls back to defend.  It’s kind of hard to describe something this complex and fluid in a sentence or two.  Way too many variables.  AH can also disrupt the Med.

When Germany is buying as heavily naval as you describe, if France is still falling back, it is their error and decidedly not the merits of the CP strategy that determine such an unnecessary retreat, unless of course Russia is just being ignored until they get next to Berlin or Vienna.

France and Russia are attacking Germany, Germany is buying Naval units which means they have less to defend with and, more importantly, less to attack with (they need to capture capitals eventually), and that is a good thing? I think what we really need from your tests are evaluations of the Allied play, not general CP strats that seem to be using much more resources than the CP have.

At what point in this Naval strat do the CP actually start advancing on land?

What does the income situation look like when Germany buys all these ships and barely attacks?

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Texas:

You have plenty to defend, if France and Russia are attacking, it’s a good thing.

France typically falls back to defend.�  It’s kind of hard to describe something this complex and fluid in a sentence or two.�  Way too many variables.�  AH can also disrupt the Med.

When Germany is buying as heavily naval as you describe, if France is still falling back, it is their error and decidedly not the merits of the CP strategy that determine such an unnecessary retreat, unless of course Russia is just being ignored until they get next to Berlin or Vienna.

France and Russia are attacking Germany, Germany is buying Naval units which means they have less to defend with and, more importantly, less to attack with (they need to capture capitals eventually), and that is a good thing? I think what we really need from your tests are evaluations of the Allied play, not general CP strats that seem to be using much more resources than the CP have.

At what point in this Naval strat do the CP actually start advancing on land?

What does the income situation look like when Germany buys all these ships and barely attacks?

Well, for starters, at what point does France or Russia decide to attack.  No one provides any answer to that.  I had asked once before and I was met with response that France won’t attack and expecting them to is an error in the CP strat. CPs advance on land beginning turn 1.  It is a limited advance rather than doing nothing (don’t attack the big stacks).  Take what they give you.  On G1, Germany takes Poland, Belgium, Holland, and African territories.  I am not saying to buy all naval, but if you aren’t as aggressive on the offensive, you aren’t losing as much either.  Income situation is dependent on what the Allies do, but Germany is pushing 50 by turn 3.

In every one of our games, if Germany buys Navy the UK can easily match whatever Germany buys and still has plenty left over to buy in India.

Meanwhile, because Germany is buying navy, France can easily match Germany’s ground forces because they have absolutely no need to buy navy with the UK footing that bill. The UK isn’t in danger of ever losing London so they can pretty much focus on neutralizing the CP navy.

If AH buys navy as well then France might have to start throwing out a BB or CA from Marseilles before the US arrives, but then Italy and Russia are outproducing ground troops.

@Texas:

Well, for starters, at what point does France or Russia decide to attack.  No one provides any answer to that.

Of course not. You were the one present at your games in which the CP are doing this mysteriously effective strat, not me.

@Texas:

I had asked once before and I was met with response that France won’t attack and expecting them to is an error in the CP strat.

That’s a pretty huge misinterpretation. You were describing a specific situation where Germany was adjacent to Paris and the French and German armies were equal there. How the fact that France attacking in that situation is a terrible idea became interpreted into being a statement where France should never attack in any situation is beyond me.

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Texas:

I had asked once before and I was met with response that France won’t attack and expecting them to is an error in the CP strat.

That’s a pretty huge misinterpretation. You were describing a specific situation where Germany was adjacent to Paris and the French and German armies were equal there. How the fact that France attacking in that situation is a terrible idea became interpreted into being a statement where France should never attack in any situation is beyond me.

That is the situation in question.  What did I misinterpret?  Germany is pushing towards Paris, when would France attack rather retreat?

Texas you did say that you would ‘bait’ the french into attacking lol

what does one do do achieve this in an axis and allies game? dangle bacon over the board?

@Uncrustable:

Texas you did say that you would ‘bait’ the french into attacking lol

what does one do do achieve this in an axis and allies game? dangle bacon over the board?

Heck, I’d sign an armistice if bacon was involved!

@Uncrustable:

Texas you did say that you would ‘bait’ the french into attacking lol

what does one do do achieve this in an axis and allies game? dangle bacon over the board?

That isn’t what I said I would do.  The question I had asked in that post is what would France do in that situation.

@Texas:

what happens if the Germans don’t attack Paris with a 50 vs 50 stack and hold just outside and wait for reinforcements or bait the French into attacking?  The Germans are gong to lose half their units on an attack like that and I agree, the Germans have no chance of winning it.  What is France’s income at about that time?  I think that basic plan is impossible to win as you would be losing more troops than you are reinforcing with.  I think a mistake people are making with the CPs are they are being too aggressive.  What do the Russians typically do in your games after the Germans take Poland, but they aren’t going full force towards Russia (and Austria isn’t going to attack a 40-man stack either)?  Couldn’t the Germans walk up the coast while the Russians hunker down.  At some point they will have to spread out a bit to prevent the loss of all their territory.  I agree with the learning curve though.  The way it is set up makes it look like you have to play it the same way you play WWII and be ultra aggressive with the CPs when you have to use a restrained aggressiveness.

You also say the CP must be patient, but with a large income gap they cannot afford to be patient lol
They have to take tt and hold it fast else they are doomed to at best losing a war of attrition

Anyhow Larry’s strategic movement idea would greatly improve balance and give the CPs a real fighting chance!