8 bid, RR, Axis victory

AA guns don’t fire during Non-Com.
So you can safely Non-Com all planes to Mos.

Always Active AA - is only an option and I didn’t include that.

If you’re splitting your force to take out the Allied ships and hit Kar then 13, 7, 2, 1 is not enough to take Kar with any force.  With NO aa hits you can take with 2 arm killing your planes.  +/- an arm.

Now what if Russia shoots down a plane?  You’re looking at a Russia HOLD with 3 arm, 1 ftr.  +/- a unit.

Why reduce the game to a crap shoot?  50% of the time the Axis lose prior to UK 1 (when Russia holds)

And the other 50% you only take with maybe 3 arm.  That is not enough to seriously threaten Moscow, even with Cauc and the EE arm.

Further if you intend on landing J ftrs in Kar, that means you can’t use them in Chi.  They can’t do both.  Granted you can still take Chi with other air, but you do lose some offense.

The key to Russia (in the East) is to not lose the Inf.  It doesn’t really matter if J takes Ind, Chi, SFE, Yak, and Sin.  The key territory is Novo.

The Allies start with 11 inf in the East (7 R, 2 US, 2 UK), minus the 2 in Chi they are a lost cause.  Now even if you take out the 2 from Eve that still leaves 9.
A tactical retreat can leave you with 9 inf in Novo.  Now, when Japan threatens you can even pull back to Mos and now place 5-6 inf in Mos.  Now If Japan trys to move Heavy into Novo, you strafe teh heck out them with 16-18 inf, 4 arm, 2 ftr (unless you bought move arm).  That means Japan needs 16-20 inf to even consider holding.  It takes Japan 3 turns to get units to Novo, But Russia’s placements are immediately usable.

I don’t see Germany as being much of a threat in this scenerio.  Of the key battles they do (with the allocation you used) , there is a pretty good chance you lose one of them or at the very least have poor rolls in one and if it happens in UK sz or Kar it is game over before Japan even goes.

You’re better off placing your 8 bid to Afr (1 arm, 1 inf) and strengthening Germany for the early rds giving Japan the time needed  to muster the force to crack Novo and hold.  Rather than an all or nothing on G1.

Allied Support would arrive in Fin on rd2 and Kar by rd 3.  If you leave the BB, that means UK can buy 3 trns in rd 1 and 1 US tran leaves 4 with a bb.  I’ll bait this attack with the Allies and Germany will have lost at least 2 ftrs on G1, probably 3 (including the bom in Kar if they want to hold with multiple arm), so if they want to send 3 ftrs vs. 4 trns 1 bb, then go ahead.  Now Germany will be out of all its arm and air.

Also rd 2 UK can go more trans (if needed) and US 1 purchase of 3 trns arrive in Fin on rd 2.  Which means both UK and US can get to Kar in rd 3.

Obviously there are a lot of what ifs, but my main point is an all out G1 crap shoot on a heavily defended Kar is not the way to go.  You reduce your game to hoping for good to even great rolls.  Which simply won’t happen very often.  Yeah, maybe a game or 2 you get incredible dice, but over the long hall your going to end up losing probably 80-85% of the time or more.  I mean straight up the Allies win about 95% of the time, so you improve the Axis odds to 15%, not a difference maker because you still rely too heavily on dice for a win.

Anyone got the odds of an Axis take of Kar with 2+ arm when the attack looks like this:
13 inf, 7 arm, 2 ftrs, 1 bom vs. 19 inf, 3 arm, 1 ftr?

I’ll gladly play you, only I don’t use AAA or play the CD online.

I do however Play by Email.  It is really fun and requires no added tools.  There is a map to email, but you don’t even really need that.  I’d be glad to show you how it works.  Although, it is addictive, so be warned.   :-D

I’m currently playing Madscientist in a PBEM game (in the games section) and with Christmas this weekend, I won’t have the time till next Mon. or so. but think about if you want and let me know.  We could even just do some play testing if you didn’t have the time for a whole game.  Just play out till rd 3 or 4 and see how the game shakes out.

EDIT:

You’re right I’d probably kill your ships.
But I don’t think the UK ftrs are that big of a deal, as I don’t think it would come to that.  Meaning I don’t think Ger can mount the threat where +/- a UK ftr or 2 will be needed.

EDIT 2:

You’re right about UK going right for trannies on UK 1 (as listed above)

@DarthMaximus:

Anyone got the odds of an Axis take of Kar with 2+ arm when the attack looks like this:
13 inf, 7 arm, 2 ftrs, 1 bom vs. 19 inf, 3 arm, 1 ftr?

God dammit, I can’t keep up with you two. Good points on both sides. The only thing I was holding on to in the end that I could comment on was the fact that the US can reinforce KAR no problem, but DM got to that in his last post.

Since I’m the odds man around here, I’ll lay it down for you:

50% chance for attacker win, 48% chance for defender win, and about 2% chance for mutual kaboom.

The interesting part is that if the defender wins they come out looking a lot better than the offender. 28% of the time the defender will come out of the battle with all of its armor and a fighter. Within that 28%, there is a roughly even divide between infantry. That is, of the 28% pie, it is evenly divided between holding with not only the armor and fighter, but 0 inf, 1 inf, 2 inf, 3 inf, 4 inf, 5 inf. It is just as likely that Russia will hold with 1 inf as it does with 4. On the flipside…

There is about a 24% chance for the offense to succeed with armor on the ground, and saving its air. In that 24% chance there is a roughly even divide between 1 armor, 2 armor, 3 armor, 4 armor, and 5 armor. Talking outside of either of the above outcomes would be silly, as they would be very far from the mainstream dice.

Hope that helps. Obviously, germany can take out its air sooner rather than later to improve what it takes with. It really is still such a crapshoot. I wish people would stop having pipedreams about karelia.

I wish people would stop having pipedreams about karelia.

Not to mention that karelia is not Moscow…if Germany takes Karelia, that doesn’t mean the game is over for the Allies.

Thanks for the odds aaFiendish.

ncscs, yes while Kar can be important, the round 1 assualt can often do more harm than good.

IMO, the best time to make the move on Kar would be right as Japan is about to take Novo.  Usually this can be about rd 5.

This way Russia can do anything about it, can must concede both spots to the Axis.

If you go too early (or without sufficient force) with either Novo or Kar, then Russia has the ability to defend the one taken and pull out of the other, then on the following turn do the same thing to the other side.
It is similar to what Germany can do with WE-Ger-EE.

I don’t like putting my hopes in a 50% battle, especially that early in the game.  I’d much rather place my bid in Afr, wait for Japan and then see if the battle shifts to 60%, 70%, 80% in my favor.

I agree with DM, but I’d like to add another point.

If Germany keeps its forces back, there does exist the possibility of an Axis lurch to an economic victory.  Germany won’t be able to do its part (take Karelia, Ukraine, African territories?)  if it spends its forces so early.  By turn 5 or 6, Japan is usually at 45+ ipc and this is where Germany can help lurch to an economic victory by taking Ukraine/cauc, Karelia, African territories.

Even with the 8 inf bid into the baltic, I think it is still shown that karelia is a bad idea. You have to do really well to not have karelia taken back, and if you don’t it’s game over. Effectively by placing that transport there you make your chances at taking karelia strongly better, but still marginal, and if russia does defend you have wasted 8 ipcs.

But again, Karelia is not Russia.  In the worst case, Russia could just go with an all infantry buy for several turns and retreat the Asia forces and the Allies could land their fighters in Moscow.  Germany won’t have sufficient forces to take Moscow, having only a couple tanks and Japan is still several turns away.  The Allies will  have sufficient force to retake Karelia for Russia, probably before Japan can get to Novo.  Now Germany will be spent and will probably collapse before Japan can muster sufficient force to take Moscow.

I think this is a good plan, but its not as good IMO as a power africa or power europe move with the bid.

Well, I don’t think Germany will be able to keep it… or keep at a 40 ipc level because WE, SE, EE and even Karelia will be weakly defended.  I could be wrong, but I don’t think Germany will be able to reinforce all of these before the allies can successful take some of them or before Germany will make Russia fall.

I do think your plan is good, but I don’t think it is good enough to win.

To put it into perspective, most people consider a 12 bid is necessary for the Axis to have a real chance of winning…so it might be the best possible way to win with an 8 bid.  Here the odds are 50/50 on either UK or Karelia.  As the Allies, I’d rather lose Karelia.  Then what are the odds for being able to take Russia…I don’t know…I’m going to guess 50/50 here so perhaps 25% chance of winning Russia overall (the Allies could still win if Russia falls, but I’ll not consider it here).

With an 8 bid PA or PE plan, your odds for the Axis aren’t going to be that good either, I’d guess maybe 20%.

With a tech roll, the odds of one dice getting IT, or HB (the game winning technologies)  is about 5%.  10% with rolling two dice.

Lots of guessing, so again, this may be the best approach with only an 8 bid.

The opening concept is the threat of Sealion in G1 by building a Baltic tranny with the build.  That threat assumes that Russia sends at least 1 fig to UK in R1 to counter.  It also established RR so Germany would have 2 trannies in the Baltic for transporting forces to Karelia for G1 (if Russia did counter an immediate Sealion by sending a fig).

But it is not really a threat.  Kar minus 1 ftr is not a big deal.
Also I believe there is only like a 3% chance of getting HB on G1 for Sealion.  16% to get a 1, then 16% to get whatever HB are, so .16 * .16 = .025 or 2.5%.

Is this right?

Again, so you get lucky and win a game via Sealion on G1, but if you do this everytime you’ll lose more than 95% of your games.  I’d much rather be on the 95% win side.  I’m sure with an 8 bid to Europe, Afr, or even Asia you can win more than 3-5% of your games.

I think what some of us are trying to get across is, yes the Kar strike or Sealion could work, but that that win is solely based on the outcome of whether you get good dice or bad, not whether you played a superior strategic game.

Gosh, I’m starting to sound like Panda.  :-D

And over the long term if you employ this strat, you won’t win very many games.

It would be no different if you just played a regular game and started teching right away.  Heck 3% of the time you get IT or HB with Ger in rd 1 and probably have a very good chance of winning that game.  But that is not a fool proof strat for straight-up, and still doesn’t take away the need for bids.

Heck, someone who never ever played A&A before can come along roll for tech and beat me this way (the Sealion attack).  I certainly wouldn’t call them a better player me.  They just got lucky, it happens, and it happens maybe 3-5% of the time with this specific attack.

I think Panda (although it could have been another Club player, I’m not sure) used to say about 20% of the games are decided by dice, what you should look for are ways to win the 80% of the games that aren’t.

The chance of any specific tech is 1 in 36 per tech die.
The chance of any random tech is 1 in 6.

Ger 1 can afford 6, which gives 6 in 36 chances of HB. 
The other valid tech would be LRA.  Which also helps, but not as much dicewise, as HB.
SS helps, but even less. 
NC also posted (maybe another thread) about IT, but Ger will need need income to use that.  The R2-3 will strip much of that income away.  KGF will commence, and Ger will be short on air power.

I thought the point of the $8 trn bid was that G1 invasion of UK when Rus does nothing to help defend the capital is that it gave decent odds without either tech.

UK sz:
trn + BB + Sub® + trn®  vs. (Ger) 3 ftr + 2 Sub
8                                      vs.        13

UK
AA + 2 inf + arm + 2ftr + Bmr  vs.  4 inf + 2 ftr + Bmr.
3  + 15                                vs.  14

Just remember that the invasion is pretty much all or nothing.  The loss of all of that air power will be wasted if UK holds, not to mention what R2 brings with $0 spent on the ground to counter.

The R2-R3 moves against Germany are not THAT significant.  Germany will still have almost all of their land forces (down 4 INF).

No they will also be down 9 inf, 1 arm or 10 inf since they went for dice.  If no tech and Sealion fails it is game over.

1.  Russia does not send fig(s) to UK to defend against Sealion.  Germany rolls tech and has 33% chance of hitting a tech that GUARANTEES Sealion victory.  The other 67% of the time they have a slight edge.  Call it a win 4 times in 5.

Nothing guarentees victory.  What if UK gets 1-3 aa hits???  What if you lose the naval battle?  Things can happen.

Example, I got 9 hits with only 17 inf in my game with Madscientist, likewise, he got 8 hits with only 14 inf and 2 ftrs.  On J1 I attacked China with 5 inf, 3 ftrs and LOST.  I finally cleared it but I had to retreat only 2 ftrs.  And MS got hammered on his UK 1 egy counter, he lost 3 inf, and 1 ftr against only 3 inf and 1 arm.  He was left with only his bom.

This is what can happen when you only try to win by being “lucky”, you never know how the dice are going to go.  It is not a good long term strat.

2.  Russia does send a fig to UK blocking Sealion.  Germany builds land forces and goes for Karelia and Caucuses.  Caucuses is virtually empty (1 INF) and falls to BB and 2 INF.  Karelia is a 50/50 fight, and if it falls Russia can;t re-take in R2 due to Japan figs flown in for defense.  Also, UK has no fleet to tranny forces in before U

I disagree, Russia will easily reclaim.  That is if Ger also trys to hit the UK sz.

I am not calling this a sure thing.  I am calling it one hell of a first-strike strat for Germany that offers at least 50/50 chances of pulling off an Axis win for the game by making major gains in G1 that cannot be totally countered by the Allies until MANY turns later, assuming that Allies play extremely well, that dice go against the Axis, or the Axis player plays poorly.

But it is not that good of a strat.  Russia should probably let G try Sealion and you can have your 16% win percentage, I’ll gladly take the 80+% win percentage.

This strat is based solely on luck and is easily defendable with Russia help and reduces the game to a G1 crap shoot, whether it is in UK or Kar.

In other words, it is a strategy that preserves game balance, and makes it worth playing out

But at best it only gives you a 16% chance to win.  That is not very balanced.

If it were a viable strat, it would be used more in the PBEM Clubs and bids wouldn’t be as high as they are.

I think it is unfortunate switch that you are hellbent on relying on a strategy that gives you a 50% chance. I personally feel that the game should start out with a roughly 50% chance of each side winning. The goal that I place upon myself is increasing my odds to something much higher than that throughout the game and then taking that chance.

I feel that by attacking karelia you are taking the chance that if you win, and win very strongly, it will probably give you the game. 50% of the time you won’t win the karelia battle, however, and you just won’t be able to recover. Yes you can hole up in germany and create a strong fortress europe, but with all of your armor and most of your inf spent, you won’t ever really be a threat. Okay, if you get heavy bombers you might be, but I find tech pretty cheesy in this case, and most others. Instead of using tech to make the game even, I would prefer to add units to give me that 50%, and then through good play raise my percentage. I define good play as a series of moves and attacks that give me favorable position and unit exchange. I guess I just don’t like the fact that the absolute worst player in existence could still win simply by rolling heavy bombers, whereas if they did not tech they probably never would. It does not even the ground between the axis and allies, it evens the ground between good and bad players. That is just my opinion though, and I wouldn’t even consider myself a good player, I just try to be.

In terms of karelia, if you take it and I have no transports as the UK I will hit it with naked air and clean up whatever is left. I’ll probably lose a plan or two in the process, but that’s the breaks. If you land your fighters from japan there, I will attack it with 2 1’s and 2 3’s (you forgot the fighter in the UK?) giving me a 80% chance of taking. We then trade for another round. Yes it is a pain if germany takes it, but that 50% chance is what irks me. If you were able to win assuredly after the 50% chance, okay maybe. As it is though, you could definitely still lose. If it pans out it makes the game pretty even, but if it doesn’t it makes it pretty uneven.

I’m going off of memory here, but with the odds I ran for karelia and the assumption that you were planning on hitting the canada tranny with a sub?, that leaves you attacking UK seas with 3 fighters, 1 sub vs. 1 battleship, 1 sub, 2 transports. That gives you only 70% chance of winning (combined with your other 50%), and when you win you will most likely lose at least one fighter, maybe two. If you attack with two subs and your three fighters, you have a 90% chance of winning, much better. It is still quite probably that you lose a fighter, though less so. Now there is a pesky transport that can go to karelia though, allowing the UK to take it back if you managed to take it in the first place. You could try and leave a sub to block that, but then you decrease your chances of taking and substantially increase fighter loss. Indeed, if you tried to leave a sub you would probably be down to 1 fighter, 2 fighters at most really. If you were only left with one fighter, I wouldn’t bother building a carrier and I’d just go heavy on the transports. If you took with two fighters, I’ll probably still have to build an AC, but at that point you would have a damn weak assault against the navy and in UK 2 troops begin landing.