REVISED - have any AAORG vets

belive it or not in all the games i have played ive only gotten tech 2 times, both germany and both times it was war bonds. so, ive won several games playing tech without getting any tech as the axis……that being said, im thinking germany may need a bid here pretty soon, but we should know more in a couple of months.  more fine tuned allied cordination and just 1 german ic hurts

Does winning without your technologies coming into play count?

I won with the axis with NOs but Japan had Radar and that never came into play.

No. I haven’t. Not too many people play without techs here.

@JWW:

@Cmdr:

Does winning without your technologies coming into play count?

Sure it does! I’m having trouble seeing how the axis have a real chance right now. Maybe I’m wrong?!?

Axis in 1941 have to “explode” out to win.  Karelia, Baltic States, Ukraine, Egypt, Jordan, (Perhaps Gibraltar instead of Egypt or Jordan), SZ 12, SZ 2, Hupeh, Kwangtung, Borneo, Sumatra, Suiyuan, SZ 53, SZ 35, SZ 56, SZ 50 and Philippines should all be conquered in Round 1.

Round 2 should solidify Germany’s position, get Italians brought up to the front and Japan should get Australia/India, press deeper into China (eliminating remnants of the Chinese army) and possibly deny America a second NO (Taking Wake/Midway or Wake/Solomons would do that nicely.)

Nah, every one of those battles has a 90% chance to succeed, JWW.  If anything, it takes extremely good luck for any one of those battles to fail, and if you want a lot of failures it would be statistically impossible for the dice to be that bad. (Though it has happened.)

@Cmdr:

Nah, every one of those battles has a 90% chance to succeed, JWW.  If anything, it takes extremely good luck for any one of those battles to fail, and if you want a lot of failures it would be statistically impossible for the dice to be that bad. (Though it has happened.)

This is incorrect. Egypt alone has only a 40% chance to succeed without the bomber. And when you factor in that you are bringing the bulk of Germany’s fighters to Karelia, you have to understand that you may have a 90% chance to win that battle but the percentage of an unfavorable result is a lot higher(probably around 30%) because winning with 1 art, 1 fig or 2 fighters remaining is definitely NOT a good thing.

even though ive won with the axis, i can see the holes already starting to develope, another 3 months and there will be an axis bid

Well, that’s a mischaracterization U505.

Egypt has an incredibly good chance to fall, especially since you can retreat everything to Libya except the two units you landed by transport.  But what really makes it is that Germany should so cripple Egypt, even in the one or two games where they don’t take Egypt, that Italy can basically walk in and thus, Egypt falls.

As for Karelia, we’ve had this discussion I’m sure.  YOU WILL TAKE KARELIA WITH TWO GROUND UNITS.  This will result in 4 ground units and a royal headache for the allies.

@JWW:

@tcnance:

even though ive won with the axis, i can see the holes already starting to develope, another 3 months and there will be an axis bid

we should incorporate one now for any proposed league or tourney play!

Great! How works negative bid?  :-D

@JWW:

@Funcioneta:

@JWW:

@tcnance:

even though ive won with the axis, i can see the holes already starting to develope, another 3 months and there will be an axis bid

we should incorporate one now for any proposed league or tourney play!

Great! How works negative bid?  :-D

You won’t need a negative bid. Just bid zero and you’ll get the axis I’m sure. And after losing over and over vs real competition then you can move up to a 1 or 2 bid!

i agree with jww, ill play u as the allies anytime

@Cmdr:

Well, that’s a mischaracterization U505.

Egypt has an incredibly good chance to fall, especially since you can retreat everything to Libya except the two units you landed by transport.  But what really makes it is that Germany should so cripple Egypt, even in the one or two games where they don’t take Egypt, that Italy can basically walk in and thus, Egypt falls.

No it’s isn’t a mischaracterization at all.

The fact that Germany can retreat from a failed Egypt attack in no way improves their odds of winning that battle. How you can even suggest such nonsense is beyond me.

Now, I don’t care what you’ve seen happen and I don’t care what you’ve done, the fact remains that 60% of the time the UK fighter survives. And 44% of the time at least the UK armor survives with it. That means that almost 1 out of every 2 games, the UK survives in Egypt with enough firepower to move to Trans-Jordan and keep Italy from acquiring their middle East NO.

Right there, you’ve put Italy behind the eight ball because not only do they have to take an extra turn to claim T-J and the NO but also the Allies are almost certainly landing in Algeria on round 1(if they are smart) and for the rest of the game Italy is fighting tooth and nail just to make more than 15 IPC’s every round.

And what would it cost the Allies to keep Italy under their thumb? An initial investment of a CV and another capital ship, 2 fighters and 1 or 2 TP’s to keep unloading units into Algeria every turn. Easily achievable by the US. They wouldn’t even have to spend their whole 1st turn income to do it because they start out with the 2 fighters and 1 of the TP’s in the Atlantic already.

As for Karelia, we’ve had this discussion I’m sure.  YOU WILL TAKE KARELIA WITH TWO GROUND UNITS.  This will result in 4 ground units and a royal headache for the allies.

As for Karelia, we HAVE had this discussion before. YOU WILL USUALLY LOSE AT LEAST 2 FIGHTERS TO DO IT AND POSSIBLY MORE. This will result in Germany being short of aircraft on round 2 and, for the Allies, a royal bottle of Tylenol for their so called royal headache.

Whenever I face you, I will have no problem taking the Allies because I won’t even have to try to defeat you. With an opening like this, you’ll probably defeat yourself.

@tcnance:

even though ive won with the axis, i can see the holes already starting to develope, another 3 months and there will be an axis bid

Yeah, I think I’m leaning toward your way of thinking.

As it stands right now, I see a lot of the Axis supporters relying on semi-risky battles to open strong enough to keep up with the Allies. All it would take is for one of the big battles to go sideways or for them to take an unusually high number of casualties in the nickel and dime battles and they will be in a hole that they would have a hard time digging out of.

If the Axis can’t start the game with solid openings(read: not risky) and have a decent shot at winning then they will definitely need a bid.

how about bad axis opening, like my game vs u where germany lost 2 subs 1 fig and 1 bomber  in sz12 on round 1……that one didnt last long did it? from what ive seen axis round 1 cannot have any battles go south, look at my current game against jen, russia is poised to collects about 48 ipcs next round

So far out of the twenty or so games I have played, all with TECH, I’ve found that the tech is what makes or breaks the difference.

I always play for the money, as the axis, I find that a strict assault on UK territories across the board, brings the game quickly into balance. If builds are reasonably conservative in Europe, against a KGF (IE lots of inf, a fgt or a few tanks a turn), I find that the axis can hold out for a VERY long time.  Anything can happen, especially once the economics become paralleled.  That being said, so far, even when one side or the other has had an advantage, Techs have rapidly upset the balance of the game, and turned the losing side into the winning side, more then I’d like to mention.

I’m looking forward to Tournament with no TECHS, I believe it will be an accurate test of the games balance.  As everyone will be using the best, result driven strategies, they have.

@JWW:

@Cmdr:

Does winning without your technologies coming into play count?

Sure it does! I’m having trouble seeing how the axis have a real chance right now. Maybe I’m wrong?!?

The Axis are currently winning a large majority of the games, regardless of tech or NOs.  Its widely believed that this will even out or switch eventually.  Though its still unclear, I suspect that NOs help Axis, who need money desperately, while techs help Allies, who have money but need something to turn that into tactical or strategic leverage, something they are very short of.

The reasons why the axis have the advantage are the following:
1. The Axis go first, whereupon they sink well over half of the allied fleet, and easily demolish a dozen territories on the first turn before they have a chance to regroup.
2. Without a fleet, the Allies have to wait a turn or two before they can have a significant impact on Eurasia/Africa/Indonesia.  By that time, Axis will have conquered pretty much all of it except Russia and the fringe territories.
3. Upon the end of turn 2 or 3, the Axis has as much or more money than the Allies.  While they are now spread out and vulnerable like the Allies were on turn 1, the difference is that the Allies still have to expensively transport troops in to attack, while the Axis do not.

Keep in mind that if you are playing with NOs, by the end of Turn 1, Germany will have 50ish Income, Italy will have 20ish, and Japan will have 45ish.  By the end of Turn 2, that will go up to 55ish, 25ish, and 60ish.