POLL:favorite player

This has long been my theory - I think the UK with 30+ IPC’s can be the most useful/flexible (& most fun) of the allied players. <30 IPC’s and they’re a liability.

I would agree.  UK needs to have a MINIMUM of $30 in order to be a viable force.  That allows for builds of 4 INF, 2 ART, 2 ARM to fill 4 TRN.  It also allows them to build 7 INF and replace/add a TRN in a single build if needed.  Better is in the mid 30’s to allow a FIG to be purchased each turn for added offensive punch, or to fly to Moscow for defense of the Kremlin.

Problem, Switch, if you are building 4 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 2 Armor a round with England, how do you build a fighter?

That’s why I’m perfectly content with 3 Transports.  3 Ifnantry, 2 Artillery, 1 Armor + 1 Fighter/Transport

Seperate sentences there Jen.

Multiple options based on varying levels of income.

At $30 you can do the 4/2/2
At $30 you can also do TRN/7INF

With more you can add a FIG to the mix.
And YES you would have an empty slot on a TRN that round… OR you can use the slot to pick up “staged” forces from perhaps Norway and add them to the TRN to send to Eastern (as an example).

There are MANY reasons why you may want more than 3 TRNs as UK (or even more than 4).

As Germany, I LOVE when UK has only 3 TRNs - with that it is never a serious threat against Germany, and Germany can send a lot more stuff against Russia.

As Germany, what makes me sweat is when the UK has 7 TRNs and a bunch of stuff in Karelia or Norway already. Then I have to defend both Berlin and WEU against potentially 7 Inf 7 Arm 2 Ftr 1 Bom 1 BB. That’s not cheap, and can even force me to fall back from EE, which only means that Berlin faces even more pressure the following turn.

Dan GETS IT!

Dan,

Tell that to Weekend Gamer.  I have England crawling all through the South Pacific and all over Europe and I never built a fourth transport in the Atlantic.  I did build a battleship ther,e but never a 4th transport.

The 4th one is nice, but completely irrellevant.  In fact, it might actually HARM you.  Since now you feel obligated to fill those transports instead of, say, buying a fighter or a bomber or something of more importance at that moment.

3 Inf, 2 Art, 1 Arm, 1 Fighter = 32 IPC, very easy to attain for England and that added fighter a round is a royal B*TCH when you want to take Moscow and there’s 14 British Fighters sitting there in Round 12.

But with only 3 TRN, the msot you can bring on Berlin is 6 units plus air and BB.  That means Germany can stay VERY THIN on home resources, and basically send EVERY BUILD to the front instead of adding more and more to Berlin.

Just 2 INF that get to leave Berlin and head East (or West) is equivalent to a gain of 6 IPC’s for Germany over those same INF having to be held in Berlin for fear of a 12-14 division UK strike using UK and Norway/Karelia forces.

It ALSO means that Germany can be FAR THINNER in Western since they only have to worry about countering 7 divisions isntead of 14 landed there…

Extra TRNs for UK are a FORCE MULTIPLIER in terms of making Germany play conservative.

And the difference in defensive forces against 8 ground units and no air vs 6 ground units and dozens of planes is in Germany’s favor how, exactly?

not to mention, you have a threat of 5 full transports from America, possibly 10 if staggered right (5 in SZ 5, 5 in SZ 8, 10 units in Norway/Karelia, 10 units in England) plus air cover.  So Germany’s not going to be thin unless she has to be to stop the Russian wall from walking into and over her.

Meanwhile, if I have 4 transports, I’m either wasting transport usage and money by not filling them (and England usually cannot fill them all) or I ahve 3 transports (easy to max out with a various assortment of options) and air power very useful in stalling Japan and strafing Kruats fleeing to their mother’s bossoms as Limeys and Doughboys storm their positions.

Well, my memory of our team game with me as Germany and you as UK with 3 TRN is that it was mostly you unloading two units (I guess in order to not waste transport space) into my deadzone in Eastern Europe, and four units per turn into Norway/Karelia, all of which I was also able to keep killing without much loss to my massive German stacks as they marched toward Russia. And your massive US force was busy in Africa somewhere, not sure where because they never really bothered me too much.

I seem to recall the Axis winning that one.

With 3 UK TRNs, I think the best play would be to just unload to Archangel where your units are safe, and I guess any extra money would go into fighters, or a Norway IC.

Also, offensively, tanks are much better value than fighters - half the price and they can actually hold territory, and they don’t suffer AA fire. Even assuming you could get ONE dozen fighters with UK, which I’ve never seen, it would still be better to buy TWO dozen tanks.

If UK came after Berlin with 3 Inf, 3 Arm and a dozen fighters, I’d wet myself with glee, because Berlin would be stacked with lots of cheap infantry and then some fighters and tanks for extra muscle. I’d dance with joy after the second round of combat when UK will have lost at least six to eight fighters in total to kill a handful of my infantry.

@Jennifer:

And the difference in defensive forces against 8 ground units and no air vs 6 ground units and dozens of planes is in Germany’s favor how, exactly?

Where are you landing those FIGs?
In UK?  Great, they can;t reach Berlin
In Moscow for defense?  Again they can;t reach Berlin
In Eastern?  I smell a German counter attack of Eastern coming.

Or were you planning on spending another $96 IPC’s on carriers?

You know Jen, you keep putting out all of this stuff about how screwed up players like Dan and I are in our strategy analysis.  Yet when I look over at DAAK…
I am ranked 13th with a record of 26 and 8
Dan is ranked 52nd with a record of 2 and 1
You are ranked 80th with a record of 3 and 11
Now… which of us have a better tactical/strategic grasp of the game as it is played?  :evil:

ouch. i’ve said jenn plays AA just a little better than W plays president.  :-D

I don’t play at DAAK, the Dicey there hates me. =p

The few games I have there, are mostly team games.

And no, you can land the fighters easily in Karelia and Norway, very easy to hit Berlin with.

You can also stack 6 units a round in those areas and march to Berlin with the Russians and Americans.  Really, your lack of imagination is astonishing, it’s little wonde you have one method of winning and one method alone.

Oh yeah, some good old trash talking - YEAH!

Jenn - I’ll just say it’s better to have one way of winning than no way of winning. Ouch! Okay, just having fun here.

Seriously though my record is a little too limited (It’s actually 3-1, I’ve played one non-DAAK game) to claim that I have any superior ability. My last game in the tournament really humbled me - out after G4 I think I was. I played very poorly strategically, I think I was a little over-confident after 3 axis wins in a row.

But in the coming weeks I expect to clean Switch’s clock and humble him a little  :evil: Nah, I expect it will be a tough fight, but a very interesting one. I just hope he doesn’t spend the game peppering me with analysis and surrender offers…

Actually my hope is to beat switch using the in-house dicey, because if I can do that then people will know that I can win without cheating and not worry about whether I would rig my own dicey.

Say what you like, I still win better than 3 games out of 4.

You LOSE more than 3 of 4.

So again, which of us has a better handle a=on tactics and strategy?

Go ahead, park those FIGs in Karelia.  Would be a nice excursion for me out of Eastern… and since you are landing your troops in Norway or Karelia to provide fodder defense for those FIGs (so that I do not trounce them with my own airpower), then you certainly do NOT have forces massed in eastern…

Switch, the problem is, when you are faced with a strong strategy from a different avenue you dont know how to adapt.  The reason you win 3 of 4 games is because people play YOUR game, not THEIR game.

Why do you think JSP was beating you consistently with the KJF tactic?  You had to learn a new game!

Me?  I play a lot of games for fun, that means I try weird stuff like building 1 Artillery, 2 Fighters with Russia on Round 1.  or buy an IC for England and put it in E. Canada on Round 1.

Or I set up a Jap invasion of North America.

Do I lose a majority of those games with weird and new tactics?  Yea.  But you know what, I learned that those tactics don’t work and why.

What do you learn from doing the infantry push mechanic in every game, every time you play Germany/Russia/England?  Would you even have a clue how to handle Russia with Japan completely dominated and a strong British fleet sailing rings around Europe?  Do you know how to handle a Germany staged to invade North America?

@Jennifer:

Why do you think JSP was beating you consistently with the KJF tactic?  You had to learn a new game!

Considering my actual record vs. JSP in solo games is 2-1, not exactly a good comparison.  YES, I was becoming a bit too predictable in certain circumstances, and JSP taught me a lesson in that regard with a strat tailor made to defeat me.  Since then, he has lost to me TWICE.

Hardly convicing evidence that I have no idea what I am doing.

While it usually takes some help, I love beating back the German offensive while having half (or less) of the money with Russia.

Yea, the only time I’ve ever lost to the Germans as the Allies is when they are extremely tank heavy from teh get go.  I’m actually considering a German strategy of 100% tank builds, since you can build as many tanks as Russia can infnatry.

Hey Jen,

I would like to know how that 100% tank build goes.  :-D

I seem to be more comfortable with about a 50-50 IPC split with INF and ARM. For example:
(15IPC = 5 INF) + (15IPC = 3 AMR)

Then every time you X that by 2 add  1 FTR. Thats what I feel gives me the most blood for the buck!