How many ships do purchase as Germany in a typical game?

AAR modified the “heavy bomber” problem so they don’t roll 3 dice anymore. Out of the box rules limits them to 2 dice and the LHTR limited them even further to 2 dice and pick the best result of the 2 rolls. Don’t get fooled into thinking heavy bombers are the game changers they were in Classic.

In addition to the non-reinforce and sail out of the Baltic fleet, you need to look at the Med Fleet too Frimmel.  An AC buy for the Med looks good… on paper.

Yes, it secured the Med… for a turn.

After that, US parked a fleet of an AC, FIG, 2 DSTs and TRN’s in SZ12 and blocked you in.  Added a BOM in Africa that would add serious punch to an attack on your fleet if you left it in range of that US fleet.  That left you with just Africa landings or RUssia support as the roll for that Med Fleet, and in either case, the fleet was too far east to shield Southern (run the sim on a Southern attack by USA in US3… 2 INF, 2 ART, 1 FIG, 1 BOM against 6 INF and an AA… 74% Allied win…)

That strat was not my first choice. Ezto was very behind it and I decided I would go along. Not that I made the best decisions on turn two and three. I thought  there was more room for error than there seems to be. I need more practice. I also have some things that work in my limited group of players that aren’t flying here. And a few bad habits I need to let go of. Live and learn eh?

@U-505:

AAR modified the “heavy bomber” problem so they don’t roll 3 dice anymore. Out of the box rules limits them to 2 dice and the LHTR limited them even further to 2 dice and pick the best result of the 2 rolls. Don’t get fooled into thinking heavy bombers are the game changers they were in Classic.

No, they don’t get 3 dice anymore, but in a NORMAL game of AAR, they can still be a game deciding technology.

It is a small shift under LHTR (usign the highest die of 2)

And to be honest, if you are using HB’s for SBR’s, they are NOT worth the investment.

BUT… using them to attack, when supporting land units, they ARE impressive… almost always hit.

In straight from the box rules Heavy Bombers still rule the battlefield. The only time I rolled for them and got to use them I hit with four of every six dice to hit the table over four rounds in a final assault on Germany. The LHTR puts 'em more in line. But there are few times when 3 bombers become 6 for less than 45 (I pumped 40 into the tech roll) and you get to use them right now when the playing field doesn’t change.

If you are going to play with Tech, and do not want the game to come down to pure luck, use LHTR with Tech.

I like the LHTR rules much better. I also like no tech better. Just end the chance that that stack of FTRs in WEU is going to be able to sink your “safe” TRNs in SZ2.

At least with tech in LHTR, you would still ahve 1 turn to reinforce or move those TRNs before the LRA would come into effect, since the tech is active at the END of a turn, instead of immediate…

@ncscswitch:

At least with tech in LHTR, you would still ahve 1 turn to reinforce or move those TRNs before the LRA would come into effect, since the tech is active at the END of a turn, instead of immediate…

Which is MUCH better.  After all, you spent that round researching it.  You didn’t wake up one morning and say “Eureka!”  Right?  You don’t get your purchased units at the start of the turn, why get your tech then?

I wonder if people would roll techs if we allowed it in Tournaments. I probably wouldn’t (especially with heavy bombers being extremely crappy with LHTR), but I wonder if some people would. Germany could get some great use out of rockets, and the Americans could roll for super subs the turn before a large naval attack to provide an extra 10+ attack points on their stack of subs. And Russia could get combined bombardment to shell out Southern Europe!!  :-D

Forget Rockets with Germany….get 'em for Japan! snickers  :-D

Our most common tech here is if Japan happens to have the Banzai Infantry and Tokyo Express NA’s, he’ll roll for Combined Bombardment on turn three once he has some spare cash.

That’s $15 for a nice addition to any amphib assault…I’ve seen stacks of ten destroyers for Japan by games end in such a situation…makes the Jap fleet nearly impossible to crack, and it will slaughter nearly anything on the coasts.

But I’m getting off topic…I usually don’t even bother with the Baltic fleet, unless I know Britain and US are coming for me from turn 1. I usually just go with a tranny or two in the Med to speed up the take over of Africa, then focus on Russia.

Actually, I might be interested in the Jet Power tech for Germany.  Especially with the reduced cost of fighters in AAR.

Comes into effect at the end of the round???  no problem!  Let’s turn those Russian/British/American infantry into ground beef!!!  Bwuhahahah.

(Not to mention that baltic fleet iwth AC, if you got one, is now exponentially harder to destroy at a much higher risk to the allies.  And if we’re going that route, nothing’s stopping me from 1 sub a round up there to make it even harder.)

And if we’re still going that route, let’s go with SS in turn 6 with Germany to sink those pesky allied tug-boats!

And while Germany and Japan are buying tech…

Russia is cleaning house in Central Europe AND asia with INF backed up by a few ART, ARM and FIGs.  Russia with an inome of $35 anyone?

@ncscswitch:

And while Germany and Japan are buying tech…

Russia is cleaning house in Central Europe AND asia with INF backed up by a few ART, ARM and FIGs.  Russia with an inome of $35 anyone?

Bah, I always get Russia up to 35 IPCs…doesn’t everybody???  :)

Seriously, if 16 IPCs isn’t too much for a carrier, then I fail to see 15 IPCs for tech being too much for Jet Power, Switch.

But you are then trading that security for 3 rounds in the Baltic, which means UK can start hitting Eastern (and Germany) almost immediately.

You also may have to spend more than 1 round rolling for it.

To hit Moscow and be able to do more than $4 total to Russia, you ahve to send AA’s to Eastern or Balkans,  And with no Baltic Fleet, Eastern is in play…

Well I play my first game of “Revised” in a small tournament of all things. I’m a long time 2nd ed. Player via Zone.com

I’ve been pouring all over for ideas (I play Allies this Sat)… I went to  http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Caspian_Sub/ and reviewed his strategy of putting 2 tra instead of an AC. I’ll quote some of it here… any thoughts?

Two Transports
What else can we get with those 16 IPCs?  Subs are still not a great buy since we’re worried about planes, so let’s look at 2tra.  Here are the top three outcomes in the sim when we add two transports to the navy:

Outcome Times AFtr Abmr DTra DSub DDes
Defender    Wins 210 2 1
Defender    Wins 185 1 1
Defender    Wins 165 3 1

**The defender wins about 72% of the time.**  That is comparable to the destroyer.  The UK could strafe this fleet, but that is a substantial gamble.  A strafe is likely to only trade UK fighters for German subs, and most German players would be very happy with that trade.

The objective is to escape and merge with Med

I’ve done 2 transports before. It has its own sets of pros and cons.

The first thing to understand is that you require a bid in Africa (Libya/Algeria). You must take Egypt on G1, otherwise the UK gets a windfall of units to use against you across your underbelly, meaning you’ll make no progress in Africa whatsoever. How large the bid is depends on your confidence. It could be as low as 1 inf, and it may be as high as 1 inf 1 arm if you’re counting on losing the fighter in Ukraine.

The next in line is that you’re attempting to link the med and baltic fleets together to create a threatening navy. If you don’t do so, the carrier is a better buy if you simply want to sit there because of the immense increase in defense it presents (+9 dice points, +1 count vs 2 transports).

The third thing is that if you’re serious about threatening UK/US with those transports, you need to keep a modest number of units in W. Europe. Some people don’t do that, and sometimes you really don’t want nor need to because the landing the Allies can present early on is insignificant.

If you understand those points, then the 2 transport buy works viably. The major pro of 2 transports vs 1 carrier is that you don’t need to keep your fighters out at sea. Buying a carrier essentially does mean you create another territory you have to defend with fighters. 2 transports also gives you potentially great flexibility if the linked fleet makes it back to the med. 2 transports is also better than 1 carrier if you’re just going to suicide your navy.

There is one counter that I like as the US against a 2 tran buy. The US starts off with 2 fighter 1 car as their purchase, and moves their existing navy to SZ1. On US2, they can attack the linked fleet with 5 fighter 1 bomber 1 dest 2 tran, which has a high chance of wiping everything out there. Still, the US is set back. It has likely lost 2 of its existing transports, and has built none to compensate for it. According to my experience in a few games against myself, the results still tend towards an Allied victory, but I couldn’t tell you for sure as my style keeps changing a bit and you can never tell with some fluky dice here and there.

A carrier buy + naval link is pretty deadly. The US doesn’t have a quick counter to it, and it’s a very nasty fleet defensively. It may have not much flexibility as 2 transports and does require your fighters float out in the waters, but neither do you have to station troops in W. Europe, and it’s very likely that your fleet will live past Turn 2.

And yet, I still fail to see how spending 5 IPCs to get Jet Power, a round, is going to hand Eastern European Provinces to the Russians. :P

Seriously, if you’re going to go with a carrier and loose the carrier, 2 planes, a destroyer, 2 submarines and a transport, you are going to need to beef your airforce.  So you get 1 less tank until you get the tech.  big deal.  But two fighters defending at a 5 or less is infinitely better then 2 fighters defending at a 4 or less.  IMHO.