Planning

Fail to plan ==> plan to fail.

I do something very similar to you, Romulus. Since a D-Day type invasion is a good move for the allies, it is safe to assume that if it is possible for them to do it, they will do it, and commit all their forces.

So I usually evaluate what will be left in WE (for example) what will be left after an all-out UK attack, taking into account that they may have slightly better than average luck. Then I see how what’s left will withstand a subsequent all-out attack by the US. The goal is to make sure that they either can’t attack, or that if they do attack and possibly win they will lose much more in IPCs than me. But preferrably I want them not to attack, because Germany can’t afford to lose units once Allied shipping is in full swing, and also, counter-attacking into WE moves my units in the wrong direction, away from Russia.

A pretty key part of my planning is looking at what will be left AFTER any battle that I’m considering, and then seeing how vulnerable it is - what can it be attacked with? Even if a battle looks like a winner for me, I won’t do it if the result is to leave 5 tanks next to a big pile of infantry, armor and fighters.

I will sometimes leave SE under-defended however. My thinking is that if I can lure the allies into landing there, it pulls 3-4 of their transports out of position. Thus for the next few turns, they lose the use of 24-32 IPCs of naval units as their transports move back to where they can be useful for other purposes, and fewer units are transported across the atlantic in the meantime.

I’m more happy with trading SE as US than Germany.
If Germany does not need to trade WE or SE then more forces can be spend towards Russia.
Usually, allies will take either SE or WE as soon as possible.
I did it once with US, I lost a turn, was too early in the game and couldn’t ship units next rnd.
That is bad planning.
UK wants to have both EE and Norway, Norway to hold and EE to trade, this also threatens Berlin.
In a 2vs1 game, we (axis) could se that G could take Caucus in 2 rnds, Russia could not stop it and US+UK
could not strenghten Caucus in time, Jap moved in to secure Caucus, that is good planning. 
Likewise, if UK can take WE and US move units so G can’t take it back this is the sort of planning that
helps you win the game.
I have had several big standoffs in med. with US, G cant afford to build much navy from rnd 4-5, and even if
Jap manages to move fleet to med. US can outproduce both powers, regarding naval units.
Once it took me 6-7 rnds and 6 subs, 2 AC, 4-5 ftrs, + all ground units that could reach Libya, but the strat paid off
in the end.

Agreed. It’s not ALWAYS a good idea to let the US take SEU. What I’m talking about is when, as for you, it’s still too early for the US to move in that far.

If the US has transports to spare, then it’s not as good an idea.

I only like it as a tool to pull needed transports out of position, because then I get to kill US front-line units, while US units in ECAN are stranded and prevented from getting to the front line for an additional turn - it’s a double whammy.

And you also sometimes have the opportunity to get some of the US transports with your German aircraft. Venturing into the Med becomes risky business to the US transport system when they have to spread out their capital ships to protect 2 groups of transports. In many cases, I don’t have a problem with sacrificing some of Germany’s airforce to stall the US in getting ground units to Africa or Europe. Especially when it results in the US having to spend money to replace their transports, as well.

And Romulus,
When it comes to defensive planning I start with my capital and work my way down the list of terrtories in order of importance(IPC value or strategic value) with strategic value outweighing IPC value. For example, if it is more important to hold Eastern to allow Germany access to trading territories or prevent the Allies from stacking next to Germany then I will abandon Western Europe or Southern Europe. Most of the time I defend my territories with only enough units to give me a slight edge and dare my opponent to gamble on bad odds but in the case of strategically important territories and my capital I defend with overwhelming odds in my favor.

And the first question I ask is whether or not an average battle result will cause me to lose defending fighters. If I can’t be expected to kill as many fighters or bombers as I lose in the territory I will either add ground units or abandon the territory if I can’t spare any extra ground units to add for defense.

It’s a great idea to let Russia take S. Europe, they can’t make full use of it!  :wink:

@U-505:

And Romulus,
When it comes to defensive planning I start with my capital and work my way down the list of terrtories in order of importance(IPC value or strategic value) with strategic value outweighing IPC value. For example, if it is more important to hold Eastern to allow Germany access to trading territories or prevent the Allies from stacking next to Germany then I will abandon Western Europe or Southern Europe. Most of the time I defend my territories with only enough units to give me a slight edge and dare my opponent to gamble on bad odds but in the case of strategically important territories and my capital I defend with overwhelming odds in my favor.

And the first question I ask is whether or not an average battle result will cause me to lose defending fighters. If I can’t be expected to kill as many fighters or bombers as I lose in the territory I will either add ground units or abandon the territory if I can’t spare any extra ground units to add for defense.

That sounds a lot like what I was proposing as one of the basic routines for a TripleA AI in another thread, with Romulus actually… It’s a small forum.

I agree that defending with just a slight edge is a great strategy. If your opponent attacks, it’s a bad attack. If they don’t attack, you have freed up as many units as possible for other uses. Don’t do it with your capital though because then the risk becomes worth it for your opponent. The other thing I don’t like about that is then the whole game comes down to lucky dice in one battle - it becomes less like chess and more like craps.

@Frood:

I agree that defending with just a slight edge is a great strategy. If your opponent attacks, it’s a bad attack. If they don’t attack, you have freed up as many units as possible for other uses.

I guess that depends on if you’re winning or losing.  I don’t give a player a chanceto get back in a game if I am winning by giving them 40% odds in a battle.

I could lose big and then also lose my advantage.
@Frood:

I agree that defending with just a slight edge is a great strategy. If your opponent attacks, it’s a bad attack. If they don’t attack, you have freed up as many units as possible for other uses.

You also have to take into account losing those units.  If it would hurt you badly (like most of your tank corps), then I do not prescribe to this train of thought.

For me it’s usually Inf + Ftrs in WE - it’s too far from the front for tanks to be useful there. And my principal approach is to put in enough Inf that the bad guys can’t kill my Inf w/o losing their air power even with some good luck.

Only thing I would add would be a clarification to your post Romulus…

Capital Defense is not ALWAYS #1 priority.

If your capital is not under threat, then why defend it?  Germany is often safe early in the war, allowing Germany to shove forces to the front.  The same is true of Russia early.

You just have to keep a very close watch on actual and potential enemy movements so that in 2 or 3 turns when your Capital IS under threat that you have adequate forces in range to move to defend it.

@ncscswitch:

Only thing I would add would be a clarification to your post Romulus…

Capital Defense is not ALWAYS #1 priority.

If your capital is not under threat, then why defend it?  Germany is often safe early in the war, allowing Germany to shove forces to the front.  The same is true of Russia early.

You just have to keep a very close watch on actual and potential enemy movements so that in 2 or 3 turns when your Capital IS under threat that you have adequate forces in range to move to defend it.

This is what I call overview, or visual “intelligence”.
We have all been newbs sometime, right?
Now it’s routine for me to check the BC each round when I’m on the axis side. What can hit Berlin?
Sometimes US trades SE, but if both UK+US stands in WE, then this is a 2 punch calculation.
And if Germany does not get this right, then the game is lost beacuse of this.
This issue is crucial if Jap got about 50% for Moscow, and gains each rnd, stacking novo.
holding cap for 1 more rnd can win the game….

This is why some TT’s are much more important than others. It’s actually cheaper to do bad TUV trades with G and J, for Russia,
if this means Russia have at least 1 inf on every TT outside Moscow. Or else Moscow may have to be stacked big time including
UK/US fighters which could be used elsewhere.

@Romulus:

Ok, Switch, I understood your clarification. I made a statement that it is not always true. Sometime it is sufficient to check for danger and be sure to have defending forces nearby.

Indeed, it is always a planning resoning, and is what I am looking for! Your precisation make the analysis more clear!

With a good sense for “overview” it makes it more easy to make good plans.
This is better in tripleA for me, at least I’m more used the screen than the board.

Sometimes losing your capitol is irrellevant to the need to destroy the armies of your enemy too.

For instance, if you can hit Germany hard with Russian forces making it impossible to defend when England goes, who cares if Japan takes Moscow?  England’s now ready to pump out 10 tanks a round and, hopefully, you have America set up with S. and W. Europe so they can put out 12 tanks a round. (IC in W. Europe, duh.)  THat’s 22 tanks vs 8 of whatever Japan’s building in Moscow.

Germany can fall.

If you take out Russia strong and have most of the German army left (because you pushed forward and you have a lot of your armor and fighters left) you can push back and reclaim Berlin without too much trouble.