Help me win

@Glamorboy A big load of subs can definitely be useful, and if you aren’t trying to protect transports at all, it is a good option. True, one carrier and 2 fighters loses to 5 subs. Typically though, your navy will be much more expensive than $34 and the fighters are also relevant on land. Also, subs are not good at defense while fighters defense kings.

When I play against friends who are new, I just give them a bid. If they win, their bid goes down and if they lose, their bid goes up. I never spend money on both coasts as US because I feel like I can never get anything going at all and it seems like all the money is wasted. Also, I think it is more helpful to use viable, typical strategies against new players so that they know what to expect. I have learned a lot more about the game through losing than I ever have by winning.

@domanmacgee

I used to play this version often some time ago… I might remember wrong but I think Germany is strong enough to take down Russia alone some times, just because Germany is so strong at the beginning and sometimes one less than average dice result would kill Russia early. It doesn’t mean Allies can’t hold but it’s tough the first 8 rounds for Allies. Once passed this threshold the chance of Allies victory improves over time typically…

Greeting from HK player…  Enjoy the new set up and let us know what you think…

@taamvan:

thanks for pointing that out Baron, I was misapplying that.   Seems ok balance wise but may make the offense too risky esp. against Germany.  As you emphasize, the bombers are even more precious in the small economy versions you have fewer to risk and fewer to lose.

The most difficult part for a fine SBR HR  is that it should not be too much bias toward the attacker, while the intercepting Fighter presence on IC should not be a complete deterrent.

Of the many SBR values suggested in the past years, I believe the Young Grasshopper provides the best incentive for both attacker and defender being part of such raid. Using “1” values only is less a deterrent than @2 (because,  with IC’s AAgun it means around a low 50% odds of survival for 1 StB) or first strike @1 (because a hit forbid interceptor to retaliate).

Here is the mechanics:
Young Grasshopper HR
G40.2 SBR HR
**Bomber A0 but 1 Attack @1 per bomber group
Damage: 1D6+2
Cost 12

Fighter A1 D1
Cost 10**
It is less OP than Global SBR, but these features increase interactions.
How?
This means the first Bomber gets a single @1 while additional StBs bring nothing against interceptors but increase damage on IC.
This is also an incentive to bring Fgs escort to get more @1 against interceptors.
For defender, letting go a few StBs is a costly tactics. Adding a defense @1 per Fg increase odds to shot down at least one bomber, which means less damage on IC.

To compare break even point:
Break even point: 2 StBs A1/A0 C12 D6+2 vs 3 Fgs D1 C10
0.667 StB/Fg break even ratio with lower number of units
8 IPCs/10 IPCs = 0.8 off/def ratio

Young Grasshopper, in 1942.2 order of economy would probably gets around this 2 StBs vs 3Fgs ratio most of the time.
And .667 StBs/Fg is far better for the attacker than the two other methods previously suggested (both near or above 1.00 StB/Fg break even point).

Also, on an StBs only against Fgs scenario, there is no Interception Threshold ceiling: attacker can add an infinite number of bombers (attack remains a single @1 roll), intercepting with only a single Fighter is still  reducing damage for defender. So, this method have the best incentive to make dogfight happen.

Finally, when escorting Fgs are parts of the fight at low numbers, it is easy to judge if it worths the risk to intercept. Each one on one Fg vs Fg nullify each other damage, and 1 escort above interceptor increase damage by 1.667 (10*1/6). Making Interception Threshold ceiling according to the number of escorting Fighter.

So in a case like above with 2 StBs against 3 Fgs, 1 additional escort makes (1.819 + 0.152= +1.971 IPCs damage on average) less damage than 2 full blown StBs on IC (2*2.583= 5.166 IPCs on avg).
With 2 additional escorts, it means 1 full blown StBs on IC (2.583) because if both Fg are taken down, 1 StB is clear, the last StB against the last Fg is at 1.819. Sum 2.583+ 1.819 = 4.402 IPCs on avg.
And this case still better than letting go 2 full blown StBs on IC (4.402 < 5.166).
On 2 StBs with 3 Fgs against 3 intercepting Fgs, it is clear there is no difference between intercept and no interception: escorts and interceptors nullify each other. Both situations are even, so this is the Interception Threshold ceiling. Beyond that, each additional escort over interceptor brings +1.667 IPCs damage on avg. And from a statistical POV, it is better not intercept.

Of course, if defender feels lucky, it is not an unusual situation to have less units than attacker in Axis and Allies in a given combat.

StB 1A1+xA0, D6+2 vs Fg A1 D1

2 StBs A1+A0 against 3 Fgs D1
1 StB A1 vs 1 Fg D1: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs, 1 vs 1
1 StB A0 vs 2 Fgs D1: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPCs, 1 vs 2
OR
1 StB A1 vs 2 Fgs  D1: + 4.850 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPCs, 1 vs 2
1 StB A0 vs 1 Fg D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC, 1 vs 1
Sum: + 8.669 - 8.723 = - 0.054 IPC damage/SBR
Net: -0.054
Break even point: 2 StBs A1/A0 C12 D6+2 vs 3 Fgs D1 C10
0.667 StB/Fg break even ratio with lower number of units
8 IPCs/10 IPCs = 0.8 off/def ratio

Play Memoir 44 and Risk with them first.  Axis and Allies isn’t a good beginner game.

My bad, its just 1 sub + 1 fig you can bring to attack the Aussie fleet. (sub + cruiser + trans + 2 inf)

Seems like a good trade (average 24 defender IPC losses in excess of attacker losses)

And, if you survive with the fighter and land it on a carrier next to New Zealand, the US will have to make a choice.
Either bring some of the Pacific fleet (Hawaii) down to New Zealand to kill the fig and carrier, and thus delay atlantic fleet build up. Or just ignore the carrier+fig.

First off you need a bid. I know this might be discouraging because you will be adding pieces to the Out of Box set up, but without a bid the allies are in very poor shape. I recomend a 9 bid for allies. Look at the bid thread for this edition on what you should do with your bid purchase and place.

The allies can do a lot of different strategies, but the important thing to remember is that you should go all out for that strategy. For instance if you are trying to go KJF, and UK killed Japans AC BB and 2 figs, then don’t spend 50% of US’s money in both theaters. Spend all 100% of your money in the pacific against Japan. The same works the other way when going KGF. The two key important areas for the allies through out the first 3-6 turns will be India and West Russia. Make sure you can hold West Russia as long as possible. What I mean by hold is that you have a giant stack of units that Germany can’t attack and defeat. Holding India really depends on what strategy you are going for. If you are going all out against Japan you should be able to hold India for 4 turns at least, unless Japan made a mistake and spent too much of his income on transports and ground forces. You should pull out of India when

1. Moscow will fall in 3 more German turns. Example would be it is UK turn 4 and on Germany’s turn 7 you see that Moscow has no chance to hold, but with the 10+ units from India reinforcing Moscow the turn before Germany will be able to attack should swing the battle greatly in your favor.

2. India will fall to Japan on Japans next turn. This will likely happen on T4 or T5. An agressive Japan might be able to take it on T3, but that is very unlikely.

3. Lastly, if there is a more favorable place for your fighters to be at the end of your turn, then give up India to Japan.

Japan can easily counter, every island touches the FIC seazone. Thanks for playing.