If you play NA´s i would encourage you to just do away with super-fortress (USA NA) Invulnerable SBR bomber is so incrediable unbalanced not even funny.
Axis and Allies first turns - Germany
-
Can someone explain to me why (under what circumstances) Germany should ever build an IC in Western Germany? To me it sounds like a waste of money considering you have 2 already right next door. I cannot see a scenario in which this is not a waste of money.
But I am willing to hear a strong argument, and I have not yet. -
Can someone explain to me why (under what circumstances) Germany should ever build an IC in Western Germany? To me it sounds like a waste of money considering you have 2 already right next door. I cannot see a scenario in which this is not a waste of money.
But I am willing to hear a strong argument, and I have not yet.- It’s Western Europe, or FRANCE if you prefer. Not Western Germany. But I like your thinking… :evil:
- Some people would use it to launch naval units. Not sure how good/bad this is.
- I’ve never tried it, nor had anyone try it against me, if that helps any.
Squirecam
-
i tried it against U-505 in our league game, it workes fairly well… (game still in Progress)
I used it early to launch more ships, and be able to move out my SZ5 fleet to SZ7 and then threthen all Uk Sea zones, Down side of course is that i need to defend it, more then usual. (and it costs 15 IPC)
Basically it´s there to Delay Allied landings in Europe for a couple of extra rounds.
-
I think a well rounded strat will allow you to do both relatively seemlessly while if you venture too much into a “reactive” strat it may not allow you to take adv of mistakes as quickly.
Don’t you mean “OVERreactive” strat?
If you make unsound purchases based on what you think your opponent’s going to do, that is overreacting.
If your opponent sees your mistake, and acts in the best possible manner to exploit your weakness, that is reacting.
Yes.
But also:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
Maybe I’m nitpicking. :-)You can think proactively (2-3 turns down the road) and force your opponent into difficult decisions or mistakes.
I’m of the school that assumes that their opponents will be worthy, hence that mistakes will not be made; hence that losses will be from bad luck or the aggregate result of suboptimal plays, rather than from a blatantly wrong move.
To clarify, you can NEVER “maneuver” your opponent into making a mistake. Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.
–
In other words, say I know you like alcohol, and that you don’t really care too much about money. So I bring free drinks to our poker game, you get drunk, and I win lots of money. Did you make a MISTAKE, or a CHOICE? I think you made a CHOICE.
Now, if you were holding a straight, in five card draw no wilds, and you folded, you probably made a MISTAKE. But that was your choice.
If you were drunk when you folded, I would say that you made a CHOICE to enter into a situation in which you would more readily make MISTAKES. But still, folding on that straight would be YOUR MISTAKE. Nobody forced you into folding.
-
Would you recommend using a major HI invasion with this IC strategy to press US on both sides? It seems that might be the only way I can see that holding them off. Otherwise, anyone good playing Russia should be able to put a hurting on Germany.
I may have to try it though, just to play it out… -
Can someone explain to me why (under what circumstances) Germany should ever build an IC in Western Germany? To me it sounds like a waste of money considering you have 2 already right next door. I cannot see a scenario in which this is not a waste of money.
But I am willing to hear a strong argument, and I have not yet.Too much crack.
No, there are actually a number of reasons to buy an industrial complex in Western Europe, the primary one of which is German defense of the Atlantic, without committing either to the Mediterranean or the Baltic (as Allied attack at Mediterranean can force a German retreat to the Baltic, in turn allowing the Allies control of Africa, while an Allied attack on the Baltic can force a German retreat to the Mediterranean, allowing the Allies to reinforce Moscow through Archangel, or contain Germany’s ground forces by attacking and retreating throughout Norway, Karelia, then Archangel or Eastern Europe.
To explain a bit further, both the German Baltic and Mediterranean fleets are forced to stay in their locale, as the moment they move out, they are subject to attack, and Germany cannot do anything but retreat. (If Germany presses the navy on, that navy will be destroyed; if Germany remains where it is, the navy will be destroyed, if Germany remains where it is and attempts to move reinforcements up from new naval units built in the Baltic or Mediterranean, it is extremely likely that the Allies will simply use Allied air to sink any new builds at the Baltic, or use Allied air to sink any new builds at the Mediterranean). A Western Europe complex allows the Germans to IMMEDIATELY reinforce their units with no space for Allied attack. A Western Europe complex also allows the German to create a more immediate naval and/or invasion and/or air threat to which the Allies must respond.
In general, a Western Europe industrial complex built early drains IPCs from Germany, hence making subsequent turns against Russia difficult. Built late, the battle for the Atlantic is often already decided. Build midgame, the IPCs sunk in the industrial complex will detract from the late game push on Moscow. In sum, a Western Europe industrial complex is not necessarily useless, but it requires extremely careful use.
Would you recommend using a major HI invasion with this IC strategy to press US on both sides? It seems that might be the only way I can see that holding them off. Otherwise, anyone good playing Russia should be able to put a hurting on Germany.
I may have to try it though, just to play it out…No. The more you send to Hawaii, the less you have in Asia to press on Moscow that many turns later. I advocate a mid to late game invasion of Western Canada (which you can reach from Japan in one turn), which allows you to attack Western, Central, and/or Eastern U.S.
-
I think a well rounded strat will allow you to do both relatively seemlessly while if you venture too much into a “reactive” strat it may not allow you to take adv of mistakes as quickly.
Don’t you mean “OVERreactive” strat?
If you make unsound purchases based on what you think your opponent’s going to do, that is overreacting.
If your opponent sees your mistake, and acts in the best possible manner to exploit your weakness, that is reacting.
Yes.
But also:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
Maybe I’m nitpicking. :-)You can think proactively (2-3 turns down the road) and force your opponent into difficult decisions or mistakes.
I’m of the school that assumes that their opponents will be worthy, hence that mistakes will not be made; hence that losses will be from bad luck or the aggregate result of suboptimal plays, rather than from a blatantly wrong move.
To clarify, you can NEVER “maneuver” your opponent into making a mistake. Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.
–
In other words, say I know you like alcohol, and that you don’t really care too much about money. So I bring free drinks to our poker game, you get drunk, and I win lots of money. Did you make a MISTAKE, or a CHOICE? I think you made a CHOICE.
Now, if you were holding a straight, in five card draw no wilds, and you folded, you probably made a MISTAKE. But that was your choice.
If you were drunk when you folded, I would say that you made a CHOICE to enter into a situation in which you would more readily make MISTAKES. But still, folding on that straight would be YOUR MISTAKE. Nobody forced you into folding.
I think we’re agreeing with each other.
(your mistake or not) Your betting pattern, poker face, demear at the table all provide the other player with information into the decision about their hand.
You come out betting strong, with a stone cold dead face, I read that as hell I can’t beat him I fold. I made the choice, but you willfully provided informaton that helped me make a decision. All be it a wrong decision but at the time I assed all available info and came to a conclusion, which in this case was wrong and a mistake.The whole theory behind deadzoning is manuevering to get your opponent to (help them if you will) make a mistake (or bad choice). Yes your opponent makes the choice to move in his whole army, but you set up the board.
I also play assuming your opponent is “worthy” and makes no mistakes, but that doesn’t mean I won’t set “traps” to test them. B/c as we both know, no one is flawless and I’ve seen plenty of good players overlook the smallest things from time to time (including myself).
I think we are agreeing with each other here.
I think these statement are equivalent:ME:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
YOU:
Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.
Perharps I shouldn’t have used the word “mistake” in the first sentence, but they basically say the same thing. Force a person into a “lesser of two evils” decision.
Suggested Topics
