The Afrika Korps

@Afrikakorps:

Afrika Korps focuses on getting Egypt and Southern Russia fast because of the $$.

I like how you talk in the 3rd person about your plan….reminds me of the Rock.

Ok. You’re spending quite a bit of time thinking and writing, might as well play if you want to prove your point.

I would play a friendly game of Afrika Korps plan if somebody else wants to try it out.  I am fine playing either side.

@afrikakorps said in The Afrika Korps:

General Hand Grenade made an excellent video about the strategy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxSfedTpnbI

Cool the Afrika Korps is still kicking ass!

If you are going with a middle east strategy then I think the best way is to use Japan to force the US into building in the pacific. This allows the axis to take africa without the neutrals or if so, with less risk as US cant get Spain easily.

@squirecam I’m late to this thread, but what’s the importance of taking Sweden before you take Turkey? Wouldn’t it be better to just let Sweden be for a turn? If you’re building a second carrier to hold the Baltic and putting pressure on Leningrad, it’s quite hard for the Allies to get any troops into Sweden; Sweden doesn’t have a coastline on the White Sea. I’d much rather risk the Allies getting control of Sweden around turn 6 than risk having the Russians reinforce Turkey on turn 4. If you lose Sweden it creates moderate economic problems later in the game; if you lose Turkey the entire strategy falls apart.

@argothair said in The Afrika Korps:

@squirecam I’m late to this thread, but what’s the importance of taking Sweden before you take Turkey? Wouldn’t it be better to just let Sweden be for a turn? If you’re building a second carrier to hold the Baltic and putting pressure on Leningrad, it’s quite hard for the Allies to get any troops into Sweden; Sweden doesn’t have a coastline on the White Sea. I’d much rather risk the Allies getting control of Sweden around turn 6 than risk having the Russians reinforce Turkey on turn 4. If you lose Sweden it creates moderate economic problems later in the game; if you lose Turkey the entire strategy falls apart.

If I were to attack the neutrals then I would be planning it from the start, or at least planning that I might be. Which means I’d be planning on taking all 3 neutrals on the same turn.

Let’s say G4. In that case, Italy would attack USSR I3. Germany would not declare war but simply reinforce the Italy territory. Then Germany takes all 3 neutrals so that it keeps the bonuses, both for Sweden and not attacking USSR.

Italy should have troops in Greece to follow Germany into Turkey. If the USSR had too many forces to somehow threaten Turkey then you wouldnt attack the neutrals but would move into Ukraine.

All of this depends upon Germany supporting Italy from the start. Which is why attacking the neutrals needs to be somewhat planned instead of a spur of the moment idea.

@squirecam have you done this strategy in a play-by-forum match before?

@arthur-bomber-harris said in The Afrika Korps:

@squirecam have you done this strategy in a play-by-forum match before?

Yes. My typical opening is purchase of the German fleet (carrier either with transports or sub/des) and moving J1 fleet to Caroline Islands.

This doesnt mean I’m moving into the med with the fleet, or intent on attacking the neutrals, or that I won’t attack J2 into the money Islands. It’s simply a round 1 placement that allows me options and the knowledge of what the allies are doing before I strike.

If you attack J1 the allies know where you are going and that India is the target. India can still be the target from my placement but so can Australia or Hawaii.

Likewise I can have options for the med or a sea lion or attack back into Lenningrad.

@squirecam my apologies, I looked through your post history and can’t find any of your play-by-forum matches. Do you have a link to a forum game?

@arthur-bomber-harris

This is from my last testing with Crockett. It was a different scenario where Crockett was saying he had a KJF strategy he wanted to test. I just moved everything to Hawaii to show that Japan couldn’t be blocked if it wanted it. So that was a weird version of a test, but it has the opening move in it.

If Japan is the subject of a KJF then I think it should give up China and kill the US fleet, which is what happened in the test.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/37066/squirecam-vs-crockett?page=1

@squirecam It appears that you lost the exhibition match by Turn 6 despite Crocket being a very bottom-tier opponent?

@arthur-bomber-harris said in The Afrika Korps:

@squirecam It appears that you lost the exhibition match by Turn 6 despite Crocket being a very bottom-tier opponent?

I think not.

The test was supposed to be to see if Japan could be killed by a KJF. It couldnt. The usa fleet was wiped. Japan, though temporarily losing china, kept its entire fleet. It was poised to take the money Islands back and nothing was between it and australia. It still had Hawaii. So it just needed the India or the Chinese VC to win after that.

Crockett then switched sides. Moving to the atlantic. Which wasnt part of what we were testing.

But in any event there was no troops between Germany and the middle east. Germany could have stalingrad and moved in troops to take india. The middle east was wide open. Germany also could have went into Turkey with troops and the italians or played more conservative and just taken territories and held.

As a further example, the next round attack on Australia, not counting shore bombards, would be 93% win.

As I said it was a different parameters. But you wanted a link to the opening move which is what that test had.

Also, whatever you think or dont think about someone, its rather rude to say what you did about him.

@squirecam There is a big range of skill levels in G40. I used to be in the upper half of the League players and now I have fallen to the lower half of the talent as I haven’t been active for the last four years. I can only beat players like Axis Dominion with incredible luck of the dice. Players like Adam wouldn’t even put themselves in a situation where I can have variance make up for the talent gap. It is what it is.

Crocket is way, way below me currently. Perhaps he will catch up in skill if he plays a bunch of games, or perhaps he will enjoy his current casual level of gameplay. Nothing wrong with either option. It is what it is.

My point is that the strategies need to be tested against a decent opponent to find flaws. Almost everything works against players that make a ton of mistakes. Heck, Japan could have attacked Amur on J1 in your game and essentially ended the match on the first turn in your game. Hard to come back after having the entire Siberian army destroyed, leaving the entire Soviet Far East open for rapid conquest.

@squirecam triplea_37066_1 japan better.tsvg

This is what you do when they place all of the Russian units in Amur on R1 (low-luck outcome). DoW on Turn 3 allows the Japanese Navy and air force to be back in position. Meanwhile Russia and China are essentially annihilated.

@arthur-bomber-harris said in The Afrika Korps:

@squirecam There is a big range of skill levels in G40. I used to be in the upper half of the League players and now I have fallen to the lower half of the talent as I haven’t been active for the last four years. I can only beat players like Axis Dominion with incredible luck of the dice. Players like Adam wouldn’t even put themselves in a situation where I can have variance make up for the talent gap. It is what it is.

Crocket is way, way below me currently. Perhaps he will catch up in skill if he plays a bunch of games, or perhaps he will enjoy his current casual level of gameplay. Nothing wrong with either option. It is what it is.

My point is that the strategies need to be tested against a decent opponent to find flaws. Almost everything works against players that make a ton of mistakes. Heck, Japan could have attacked Amur on J1 in your game and essentially ended the match on the first turn in your game. Hard to come back after having the entire Siberian army destroyed, leaving the entire Soviet Far East open for rapid conquest.

You aren’t listening to what I am saying. This wasnt a game and it wasnt the point to attack the Russians. Crockett was saying that he could go “one on one” with the us fleet (using subs) and destroy the Japanese fleet with a KJF. I told him that Japan was not going to lose its fleet and instead would crush the US fleet if it wanted to. There were others in that thread who insisted that Japan could be blocked from destroying the US fleet. Obviously they weren’t considering that Japan can wait until J3 to attack and can ignore any blocking by going to hawaii.

Attacking Amur was not the point. The point was to show Crockett that his KJF idea was not going to work. That he wasn’t going to destroy the Japanese fleet as he thought.

This was never meant as anything but that. Because I was staying within the test parameters of moving everything towards caroline’s i was not going to attack Amur.

@squirecam matches against Crockett unfortunately don’t mean too much in proving strategies as there are so many flaws in his tactics, with him having so much to progress in his experience level. It should have been a very easy victory for the Allies if they executed better.

I will be interested to see a more experienced player tried the early neutral crush in a play-by-forum match and had success. It seems to open up so many holes in the European defenses as the Allies now can attack both Turkey and Spain while simultaneously pushing back on the Eastern Front with Russian forces. Too many critical territories while Germany hasn’t yet had time to create a huge air force.

I am fascinated by this strategy, but I am running into the problem some people mentioned earlier in the thread: as Germany, I simply cannot be successful in diverting the resources I need to in the Middle East at the same time as staging a whalloping Barbarossa. In my (albeit limited so far) playtesting against myself (sub-optimal, but it’s what I have), Germany may get Leningrad, but by the end of round 5 or maybe 6 the eastern front looks like a stalemate if not Russians in Romania. If the German land units are sent south and investments are put into the navy, Russia is difficult not even to capture but to hold back. Anyone found a good way to handle this?

@tamer-of-beasts said in The Afrika Korps:

I am fascinated by this strategy, but I am running into the problem some people mentioned earlier in the thread: as Germany, I simply cannot be successful in diverting the resources I need to in the Middle East at the same time as staging a whalloping Barbarossa. In my (albeit limited so far) playtesting against myself (sub-optimal, but it’s what I have), Germany may get Leningrad, but by the end of round 5 or maybe 6 the eastern front looks like a stalemate if not Russians in Romania. If the German land units are sent south and investments are put into the navy, Russia is difficult not even to capture but to hold back. Anyone found a good way to handle this?

So what are your purchases and the moves for the first three or four turns with Germany? What are you doing with the allies in response?