So the big battle would be made of 15 Bombers against 5 Full Carrier, for 180 IPCs.
If the Fighter are the last casualties (assuming to lose all Carriers) we get this results:
Overall %*: A. survives: 10.6% D. survives: 87.8% No one survives: 1.6%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=10&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=5&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=
Keeping Carriers as the last casualties:
Overall %*: A. survives: 29.4% D. survives: 69.4% No one survives: 1.2%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=11&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=4&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=
There is no Destroyer fodder in this mix, let’s suppose 9 Destroyers for 72 IPCs.
15 StBs against 3 Full Carriers and 9 Destroyers (180 IPCs)
Overall %*: A. survives: 13.4% D. survives: 84.9% No one survives: 1.7%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=6&dBom=&dTra=3&dSub=&dDes=9&dCru=&dCar=3&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=
So, there is some room to buy a few transports to bring troops: 5 transports would cost 35 IPCs (almost the same as a Full Carrier)
Now the result is inverted with only 4 Full Carriers to protect these 5 TPS:
Overall %*: A. survives: 68.1% D. survives: 28.9% No one survives: 3.1%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=8&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=4&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=
However a full 3 Fgs scramble to protect this little fleet could work very well:
Overall %*: A. survives: 9.1% D. survives: 89.6% No one survives: 1.4%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=11&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=4&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=
@Baron:
So the big battle would be made of 15 Bombers against 5 Full Carrier, for 180 IPCs.
If the Fighter are the last casualties (assuming to lose all Carriers) we get this results:
Overall %*: A. survives: 10.6% D. survives: 87.8% No one survives: 1.6%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=10&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=5&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=15 StBs against 3 Full Carriers and 9 Destroyers (180 IPCs)
Overall %*: A. survives: 13.4% D. survives: 84.9% No one survives: 1.7%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=6&dBom=&dTra=3&dSub=&dDes=9&dCru=&dCar=3&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=So, there is some room to buy a few transports to bring troops: 5 transports would cost 35 IPCs (almost the same as a Full Carrier)
Now the result is inverted with only 4 Full Carriers to protect these 5 TPS:
Overall %*: A. survives: 68.1% D. survives: 28.9% No one survives: 3.1%
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=15&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=8&dBom=&dTra=5&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=4&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Tra-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=However a full 3 Fgs scramble to protect this little fleet could work very well:
Overall %*: A. survives: 9.1% D. survives: 89.6% No one survives: 1.4%
That’s only in 91, without the other 8-10 or so figs and tacs and the odd sub.
Introduced Advanced Shipyard Tech for all players and the trick will be done. :-D
Bombers would have more hard times… :evil:
Well stated, axis dominion! I won my first test game of Dark Skies when the US spent too much money in the Atlantic, Germany didn’t take the bait of attacking a powerful navy off of Gibraltar, and Japan painted Asia yellow.
In my second test game, I’m playing the Allies. My game plan is building a strong Russian artillery force so that I can block Germany’s advance to the Middle East. I will have to see if it gets shoved back as his ground forces advance.
My 2 cents:
Buy a few AAAs and Fighters as Russia. Be sort of aggressive.
Threaten Germany in 2 separate locations on the same turn. The bombers can only take out 1 threat effectively.
Suicide transports to make landings in Europe.
Neuter Italy and blockade Germany with all subs.
Build bombers to bomb German factories and kill the bombers if Germany leaves them exposed.
You probably won’t be able to do all of these in 1 game but you can do a few of them.
1) Buying AAAs and fighters as Russia prevents them from being aggressive. If you want to be aggressive, you need artillery so your attack is better than their defense.
2) The German bombers can take out one threat on one turn, and respond to the second threat the next turn. With say 6 infantry and 18 bombers, they can kill 15 infantry losing just their own sacrificial German soldiers. Hence it is easy to respond to the second threat by just building a small stack of sacrificial troops.
3) That is a massive cost for the allies compared to the cost for the Germans to respond.
4) All subs can raid Normandy and Norway for 5 PUs a round… not a bad contribution but not devastating. If you send a bunch of subs into the med to convoy raid Italy, they will build a destroyer their turn and the Germans can bomb the subs to bits on their turn.
I would love to see a posted game where a strategy works. I think that the Allies have a chance if they can prevent the Germans from reaching the oil fields.
My 2 cents:
Buy a few AAAs and Fighters as Russia. Be sort of aggressive.
Threaten Germany in 2 separate locations on the same turn. The bombers can only take out 1 threat effectively.
Suicide transports to make landings in Europe.
Neuter Italy and blockade Germany with all subs.
Build bombers to bomb German factories and kill the bombers if Germany leaves them exposed.
You probably won’t be able to do all of these in 1 game but you can do a few of them.
@Arthur:
Sure, 8 loaded carriers would be sufficient to prevent the Germans from launching a bomber raid against the Allied navy. Keep in mind that such a build requires 4 full turns of US spending in the Atlantic plus a turn or two for moving the fleet into position. Time is on the German side in Dark Skies. Once the Germans reach the oilfields, their income will start matching that of the US. Also consider that Germany has quite a bit of flexibility. The bombers can be used to destroy Russia, navies, London, and supporting raids on territories with medium-sized stacks of troops.
In my last game, the US tried a KGF strategy with a very large navy off the coast of Gibraltar on round 3. The Germans mostly ignored it. From the base in Paris, the bombers could limit the options of the Allied navy and also force Russia to retreat back towards Moscow. Meanwhile, Japan was about to capture India and it seemed inevitable for a total victory on J7-J8.
ABH, thank you. you speak a lot of sense. i’m sorry, but when people focus on things like “loaded carrier vs bomber–bring it on!”, they’re not really understanding the difficulty. i guess they have to just experience it for themselves. to think that US can build 8 fully loaded carriers in the atlantic is, imo, showing inexperience and lack of really understanding just what kind of punishment will be delivered by the foe on the other side of the map.
I don’t think you should call people inexperienced if you aren’t even going to read their posts. As I clearly pointed out:
2. The US doesn’t need 8 carriers. That provides only a 7% survival for 24 bombers, obviously this is overkill. I haven’t done the math, but I’m pretty sure the US could get by with a smaller fleet.
I wasn’t suggesting the US build 8 carriers. I was showing that bombers can’t possibly deter Allied fleets if Germany loses all their bombers trying to kill the Allied fleet. I’m not the only one, and I’m certainly the least experienced, to point out that if Germany commits its bombers to stop an Allied invasion, Germany loses its bombers, its threat projection, and the IPCs it spent.
Furthermore, you called Zhukov’s point “totally right”, even though I pointed out that DizzKneeLand pointed out that fixing SBR doesn’t fix Dark Skies (at least how DizzKneeLand does Dark Skies) because SBR isn’t part of the strategy. How can Zhukov be totally right when his (her?) solution doesn’t even work?
I believe you spent more time looking at users’ post counts rather than their posts.
Amanntai, I am currently playing the Allies against a Dark Skies German. His bombers are severely hindering my American build in the Atlantic. On G3, he will have 11 bombers. I will need at least 3 loaded aircraft carriers to escort transports to Africa or Western Europe. By the time I get those carriers, he will have even more bombers. I probably will need 6 carriers in the Atlantic before I start ferrying troops over. That is 216 PUs or three full turns of production. Just having the threat of the bombers is delaying an Allied invasion by a couple of turns. I decided to play KJF strategy so I won’t be able to start building in the Atlantic until tun 3 or 4. That means an expected landing on turn ~7. It is quite frustrating as the Allied player.
When I do bring my fleet across the pond, I fully expect that he will ignore my carriers and simply plan to counterattack the troops that I drop on his shores. He will not be trading bombers for carriers. I don’t think that he will be very concerned about amphibious landings until turn 9 or so. That is quite late compared to other German strats where the Allies have a good invasion force on turn 6-7.
The huge bonus for him is the potential threat of many bombers forcing me to spend heavily on defense instead of transports + troops. Every round of the building fleets in the Atlantic is another round where he is beating up Russia, sending his troops to the oil fields, and further expansion of his bomber fleet.
@Arthur:
Amanntai, I am currently playing the Allies against a Dark Skies German. His bombers are severely hindering my American build in the Atlantic. On G3, he will have 11 bombers. I will need at least 3 loaded aircraft carriers to escort transports to Africa or Western Europe. By the time I get those carriers, he will have even more bombers. I probably will need 6 carriers in the Atlantic before I start ferrying troops over. That is 216 PUs or three full turns of production. Just having the threat of the bombers is delaying an Allied invasion by a couple of turns. I decided to play KJF strategy so I won’t be able to start building in the Atlantic until tun 3 or 4. That means an expected landing on turn ~7. It is quite frustrating as the Allied player.
When I do bring my fleet across the pond, I fully expect that he will ignore my carriers and simply plan to counterattack the troops that I drop on his shores. He will not be trading bombers for carriers. I don’t think that he will be very concerned about amphibious landings until turn 9 or so. That is quite late compared to other German strats where the Allies have a good invasion force on turn 6-7.
The huge bonus for him is the potential threat of many bombers forcing me to spend heavily on defense instead of transports + troops. Every round of the building fleets in the Atlantic is another round where he is beating up Russia, sending his troops to the oil fields, and further expansion of his bomber fleet.
If Germany isn’t going to attack your fleet, why do you need 6 carriers? That’s a waste of IPCs, if you ask me. You don’t need enough fleet defense to win, only enough to kill a sizeable number of Bombers. If Germany loses most of it’s bombers, then it loses the power projection it had. If Germany doesn’t attack, then you saved the IPCs. On one hand, it’s a loss, but a Pyrrhic Victory for the Germans, and on the other, a win.
On a side note, you know what HR would really fix this? Bringing back Classic transports. Or any of the other transport with defense rules.
@Arthur:
Well stated, axis dominion!�  I won my first test game of Dark Skies when the US spent too much money in the Atlantic, Germany didn’t take the bait of attacking a powerful navy off of Gibraltar, and Japan painted Asia yellow.� Â
If you are referring to our first game, little correction: no1 lost or won that game. I suggested to start over (not giving up) because I didn’t want to play a game where strategies need to be switched around turn 2. Clearly, the fastest way the USA can build up in Europe isn’t going to help the allies enough in Europe because the USA is (barely) missing the power to do something meaningful. If they spend more in Europe to gain such power, the Pacific will be lost forever (again, unless the USA suddenly decides to send all Europe forces back into the Pacific). So, I’d say this rapid buildup is only effective at slowing down Germany a turn or two, after which the USA needs to withdraw and return the Euro-forces into the Pacific.
But maybe you are referring to another test game… Nvm.
In my second test game, I’m playing the Allies.�  My game plan is building a strong Russian artillery force so that I can block Germany’s advance to the Middle East.�  I will have to see if it gets shoved back as his ground forces advance.
I think you will see that I am right about what I said earlier:
Germany will (should) be able to push Russia back into Moscow, but will have a lot of problems approaching it. I will need all German FTR + TAC to protect any such approach. In short, I doubt Germany will be able to get Moscow, but we’ll see. I’m going to try and if I calculate that I cannot approach, I will continue playing for the oil fields and we’ll see how that will work out.
Amanntai,
Please try out a game playing the Allies against a good German Dark Skies player. If you don’t build up a huge navy, he will destroy your invasion fleet with minimal bomber losses. If you do build up a huge navy, he will ignore it and wait till your troops are ashore. Germany has the choice of when and where to attack. The massive flexibility of the bombers allows it many more options than you normally have in a game. That makes up for the lack of damage/PU compared to other units. I truly wish that I had other valid options besides spending heavily on a massive Atlantic fleet since that is severely delaying my ability to assist Russia.
Just an idea, but if it’s really like that (not sure about that yet). If it’s really like building a lot of navy (without a proper transport force) that Germany then just ignores, that fleet is perhaps an ineffective investment, not? Apart from convoying, but you don’t need an overkill for that. If it’s like that the allies could try a different approach, buying stuff that they can do something with.
What if the UK puts a heavy focus on the ME (building from SA and an IC in Egypt or the ME itself). This could put London in a dangerous position later on, so the USA can invest in protecting London to make sure UK can spend most of its income in the ME (once London looks safe), assisting Russia from there.
USA builds that come to mind for this are FTR, STR, SUB. And perhaps a few occasional DD and opportunistic TRS. If Germany gets the hint and leaves London alone, USA can also start channeling FTR + STR into Russia (it is aircraft so it’s flexible), while the subs fullfill a passive-aggressive role: convoying axis shipping. Of course, the downside is that Germany can focus on a 1-front war which is possibly not a good idea… It would all come down to how much economy both sides can channel into Russia. The side who has the economic edge should win it, if the economical underdog doesn’t have a too big initial military advantage.
As an alternative, the USA could just go all-out against Japan, and then start reinforcing Russia from the South West Pacific, once it has secured India, the DEI, and SE Asia. A way to protect London from a late game axis invasion is still needed as well, ofc. Just another thought. But, as far as I’m concerned, an annoying one since this would mean another (K)JF that saves the day. In A&AG40.2, (K)JF seems to be the one limited thing the allies can do, must do even, otherwise they’ll be toast.
And last but not least, if I have a large allied Navy (with or without a lot of TRS) that I cannot do anything with in Europe, I always comfort myself that this will deter a German invasion of London as well and keeps a lot of German forces pinned down in Western Europe, away from Russia.
Trial and error, and if nothing works, place a higher bid.
I just lost a game using the German Bmb strat. I built 10 Inf first round, 10 Art second, and then just pushed forward buying mostly Bmbs and subs until I started building land forces on the Russian factories.
The weakness of the strategy is twofold - For one thing, German land forces will be weaker than usual when they get to Russia’s door. That’s why I lost; Russia annihilated my stack.
But the second weakness is that, while German bombers can theoretically attack anywhere, they can’t ACTUALLY attack everywhere. You’ve got to make choices. Sure, you can nuke the USA fleet, but that takes a chunk out of your bomber stack. Can you rebuild your stack before the Allies rebuild their fleet?
I think the key to this strategy is really good Japan play. Which is unfortunately a weakness of mine.
Here’s the game if anyone wants to see:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35576.new#new
I see Shin Ji beat me to this thread! :lol:
I was his opponent in that game.
Adding to what Shin said, I’ll note that the allies had a big bid which allowed them to hold the middle east–critical so that the UK can aid in the atlantic and the USSR when the time comes.
But really, I think, the way to fight the bombers is loaded carriers. This has been hit on before. So nothing new there.
The point however is that the USA can’t go KJF and really needs to split almost 50/50 so that the carrier force is strong enough, if not to prevail, then at least take down as many bombers as possible.
In that game, I lost 2 fleets to the bombers, but each time it reduced the bombers to low single digits, saving Russia from being blitzed.
The other important thing is to move decisively with the carriers, i.e. threaten something important to make him attack you. My big fear in that game was that he’d ignore my fleet and just wipe out Russia.
So I moved to take Norway and built an Mmic there. He had to kill me then.
Also, I have to admit, I had good luck on the BOMBERS vs CARRIER battles… but they are dicey battles anyway.
From what I’ve seen and read, part of the problem is maybe you don’t have enough bombers for Germany ?
well, I’d have to go back and look, but Shin had upward of 17 bombers I think at one point?
He never got too many bombers because he had to spend them on the fleet. The allies fleet was in action against western europe around round 5-6, so he had limited time to build up
I thought Germany had to have 18 to 20 bombers by end of turn 4 ?
That’s more of a pure Dark Skies strat. I was doing one that involved a slower ramp-up of Bombers. Buying 3 or so per turn starting turn 3.
I think more bombers would actually have been easier to fight off to the extent the Russian’s could get aggressive and build art and tanks to kill the small German land forces.
As it was with Shin, the German armies were too strong for the Russians to kill so they just had to withdraw, making the bombers the final hammer that would kill Russia once the land forces got to Moscow…. very distressing strategy.
again well said ABH. my biggest beef (and rgp44 earlier in this thread had the same beef) is when people who have not yet played against this strat try to minimize just how hard it is to play against by focusing on one aspect of it or another (e.g., saying SBR isn’t part of the strat or talking about bomber vs. carrier trades)…please understand, the real problem is not this one thing or that, but ALL the options the mass bombers have, taken together…that they can reach many critical targets at once (threat projection), that they can “get bored” and decide to bomb the crap out of london or moscow, that they can wipe out any invasion, that they can obliterate even a very sizable fleet, that they can turn on a sea lion (SL) at any point in the game if allies are busy elsewhere, that they can park in FIC (with an airbase) to unblock in the pac while STILL threatening moscow, and so on. again, from my experience, SBR does become a problem if you decide to go KJF and thereby give the bombers fewer targets, i.e., they become “bored” and decide to make good use of themselves. regardless if Dizz or other DS players don’t consider SBR as a critical part of their strat, it is NONETHELESS a major threat. the threat is always there, and it’s very significant, just like the threat of SL is always there as well, regardless of whether it’s considered a primary part of their strat. put another way, if you aren’t careful and neglect certain things, the DS player can pull out one of those options (SBR campaign or SL, e.g.) in an instant and completely change the course of the game.
@Arthur:
Amanntai,
Please try out a game playing the Allies against a good German Dark Skies player.� If you don’t build up a huge navy, he will destroy your invasion fleet with minimal bomber losses.� If you do build up a huge navy, he will ignore it and wait till your troops are ashore.� Germany has the choice of when and where to attack.� The massive flexibility of the bombers allows it many more options than you normally have in a game.� That makes up for the lack of damage/PU compared to other units.� I truly wish that I had other valid options besides spending heavily on a massive Atlantic fleet since that is severely delaying my ability to assist Russia.
