Bunny, here you go again.

We all know the criticism, all I say is that when it works, it really can work beautifully. Of course, Allies were blessed with some kind dice early on, of course the Axis game was suboptimal to say the least because Germany really should not be sinking IPCs in the water, but it does not diminish my joy of having Russian tanks in Berlin R4. Priceless.

On balance, I have to say the only recent time when I felt I was thouroughly outplayed, the guy, apperantly an old Revised Pro at the end of the game told me the only mistake I made was going Norway R1 since “all the senior players agree, it is way too risky”.  :-D I think the guy has meant it as a flatter but in fact he was just adding an insult to an injury.

So OK, I admit for the best players playing against the best players NG might not be the optimal way, but I know as you know, that I am not going to beat the best anyway on the standard dice, so why not give it a shot with the edgy sharp opening, eh?

We have talked a lot about the cases when NG does not or might not work. Let me for once tell you a story of how it looks when it actually works, a story of a perfect Norwegian gambit I would say. A Norwegian Gambit when you enter Berlin with russian tanks on R4  :mrgreen:.

You do everything as usual in R1, you get good dice, so you leave 6inf, 2 art, 3 tnk on WR, you have 3 units left on Norway, you have 2 infs and the lame fig on Kar and 6 units on cauc.

Germany takes AE, takes Kar, builds defensively only ground units and does not kill SZ1, but uses the sub on SZ 13, thus preserving all subs (cru does not hit) and all 5 figs.

UK takes back AE and luckily with all 3 infs surviving, sinks SZ 59, kills the SZ5 trannie, and builds AC, dd, trn, hence having 3 trns on R1 on SZ8: not bad really. The figs land on WR, the Indian Ocean fig plus the bmb land on Belgian congo.

Japy does some ussual shimy shumy as she usually does on China and Pearl, builds an IC and something else.

US builds 3 trns, AC and inf plus art, thus having 6 units to move off EUS, plus four on UK with the trns and cru on SZ8. Lands 2 figs on UK AC SZ8. Bmb kills the dd SZ7.

Russia R2 builds 3infs and 4 tnks, because I really love having 10 R tanks on R2 and story of this game will show you why.

G2 is a major mistake since the guy really does not feel like losing the med fleet so he builds an AC and fortifies Libya like Kaddafi.

He gets KAr, bel and ukr but just, and fortifies WEU.

UK is cold as ice and does not move anywhere from SZ8, build 3 more trannies and ground units, so it has 6 full trannies to unload R3. And moves all air to cauc. Retreats 2 units from AE leaving there just one, and keeping 3 on Kenya (one is the original SA guy) and 2 in India, with 2 on the aussie trannie in SZ 30.

J goes west with its ships which is really interesting, it tooks Hawaii, bury, sink, and gets some more guys to FIC, to invade india, where the 2 annoying gurkhas were able to keep it for her majesty on UK1 and UK2 really.

US2 builds 2 more trannies /so it has 8 o them which is all it needs really/ and 7 ground units in order to have 8 units ready to be shipped off Eastern Canada from R3 on (one of the 8 being the AA gun from EUS).

R3 Russia is having real feast since Germany is fighting for Med like a fire engine going to a wrong fire. So it takes Karelia, with 7 infs and 10 tnks, it takes bel and ukr too.

Germany on R3 makes another real bad decision because some mistakes tend to produce more mistakes and builds another AC on med. The guy does not want to lose the ships including the AC he has build the previous round. So it ends with trying but not taking UKR, trying but not taking bel, leaving one guy on EE, and having BB, 2 ACs, 3 subs and 4 figs off Italy, but only 5 inf, 1 bmb and  2 figs on Berlin. Impressive. Just for the record: Germany takes AE with three units.

UK uses its trannie that on R1 moved the guy from NZ to Aus, and on R2 moved 2 guys od Aus to SZ30 to move the 2  infs to AE where they merge with 3 infs from Italian East Africa (2 retreated from AE, 1 came from Kenya) and since there are 4 planes from cauc, they kill all three Ger units on AE with not a single hit back, thus taking AE with 5 infs. UK also moves everything it can to Norway, setting up the fleet SZ3. The important thing is the US figs move on board of the UKs AC.

Japs come with really strong fleet to South Atlantic, take india, Sink and yakut, but they are nowhere near anything important really.

US kills the Gerrys EE guy with bmb and 2 figs off the Uk AC SZ3. Just for the record, the Gerry did not strike back. They move the fleet to SZ 3 too and all UK units to Norway, 4 trannies are there at SZ 3, 4 others are at SZ1 with the bb, and there are 8 ground units on ECanada, there are also 3 infs and 4 tnks at WUS to keep the japs honest, and 4 infs on EUS.

Round 4: Russia attacks Berlin with 10 tanks taking it 5 tanks remaining. Russian also take balkans. Although Gerrys were able to retake it, Axis player resigns before the round ends. It is obvious Allies would prevail not before too long.

I really dont see all inf buy working as a good strategy against succesful Norwegian gambit. If allies set up in Karelia in time, the infantry will never come to threaten russia at all. And with Germany on -40 and UK/US pumping 16 units to Europe a round it is only a matter of time before Allies get Berlin because Germany will not stay competitive in the arms race.

On the other hand buying all inf Germany can be a powerful offensive move if you see Allies go after Japan. I than ussually buy all inf on G2, G3 moving that East and building all tanks, R4 moving all that infantry and tanks to UKR and building some more tanks, R5 taking cauc, moving the tanks from Berlin to Ukr, building bmbs, R6 taking Moscow.

It worked for me so perfectly against last KJF attempt applied on me, that I took moscow with 21 tanks remaining. But this you will not be able to do if Russia is not wasting its units on skirmishes with Japan in Far East and if US/UK set up themselves on Norway/WEU R3.

@special:

Edit: that’s an odd situation, and a lot of American IC’s…

Well, the fact it is an odd situation made me to start this discussion.  :wink:

I have built all these ICs making myself ready for a long fight, and being able to produce units where I really need them. I think I had a good chance to develop a real pressure on FIC/japan, but as we left it I have not really checked.

In TripleA. It is a TripleA file.

@Paulzy:

After a fresh look at the save, maybe Axis should have built a couple Jap factories in Africa and began pumping out troops and/or waited a couple rounds saveing IPC’s until Jap could have dumped a much larger fleet in the pac while Germany built up?

I also cannot stop thinking of the game  :-D.

After ckecking the file I think Japan would get under severe pressure in the coming rounds having to defend both Japan and FIC. And actually there would be some options in India too. US build next round would be 3trns and tnk Borneo, 2inf and tnk philippines, 2bmb EIC, moving the fleet next to borneo. Thus US would be threatening the next round to hit either FIC or Jap with 4inf, 2tnk, 3figs, 3bbs, 10bmbs (8 on jap). It would not be entirely easy to defend both. Or US could have set up at India, threatening to produce there 3 UK units before the next jap move. It could have been difficult for jap to hit India then without exposing FIC. If US would get India and FIC, I think Allies may get the upper hand again. But should those threats fail I think Axis would prevail soon after this.

Sorry, just noticed the original save of the game was not correct. Now there is the right one. Apologies to the two users, who have downloaded it already  :roll:

I had a very inetersting game with Paulzy the other night and I thought I would ask for a feedback from other players who might have experience with the situation that evolved in our game.

I was Allies and since it was not a league game and I really like playing Paulzy I decided I would try something special. Of course I did my standard Norwegian move R1 but I decided to go after Japan. The idea was to build US IC on Alaska on R1 and UK IC on India R2. The India IC worked very well in the early stages, while Japan made a move to get the Alaska IC which it did, but it really slowed her and got under pressure in the middle game.

The Russians were able to keep things more or less under control on the European front for quite a long time. UK managed to sink the Germany med fleet and contested succesfully Africa with Germans in the early stages and even managed to sink half of the Japanese ships off FIC. The US was producing bbs, trans and bmbs. Many bmbs.

There were some substantial tactical mistakes on both sides during the game I would say but Paulzy is an outstanding player so gradually Axis was gaining ground and Japan managed to get hold of India after a little bit of unkind dice. Japan got most of Africa and Germans started to push Russia really hard. At the other hand UK was starting to develop some pressure on Germany too, holding Nor, and trading EE and WEU.

At the same time US was a monster in Pacific with fleet of 2 loaded ACs, 3bbs, trns, dd, sub and 8bmbs. It took all three juicy islands.

R8 Russia went for straffing stack of 18 G tanks on WR which proved to be futile since Moscow than fell on German move. It was clear there is no way of retaking mosc any time soon and it was only a matter of short time UK would be pushed out of Europe.

Axis was up on production. Germany 40+, Japan around 50, UK -30, US 50 +. But Allies hold 4 VCs and was not going to lose any of them any time soon (London, Manilla, LA, NY). US just sunk very expensive Japanese naval build and was in a complete control of PAcific and Indian Ocean with ICs on all three islands and 8subs in the adjacent SZs and the 8 bmbs in Philipenes. There was no question of Japan getting back on the water in the game.

Surely UK would get soon under pressure from Germany, but had a decent Atlantic fleet and could retake Africa with the aid of US really soon thus getting Japan back under 40, while staying competitive or at least being able to hold its own.

And I felt that if the US had managed to set up a foothold on Asia mainland or even break Japan hold of FIC (pretty fortified at the time) and India it could still turn the game around. I thought that could still be the turning point of the game.

We felt the game would drag for a very long time before one of us (probably Axis for that matter) getting 9 VCs and we decided call it a draw.

Has anybody ever played the endgame US/UK vs Germany/Japan and won?

connection_lost_on_X_14_at_02_46.tsvg

Can anybody please explain to me, why was the poll I posted on where people do play online removed? Did I break any rules of the forum? :?

After my first gaming experiences at GTO I can see the charms of playing there, but I think there are also many disadvantages. But since my experience playing there is really only slim, maybe I am missing something. So please correct me if I am wrong.

GTO:

Advantages:
1. No need to bother with setting up the hosting
2. Much more players
3. AAA players play only Spring 1942 or Revised, no BigWorlds, NWO etc.
4. Keeps your basic personal stats
5. Has functioning and competitive league
6. Time control

Disadvantages:
1. You can play only after you pay GTO coins, which costs you money
2. You can save the game only to the PBEM format whch costs you more money
3. No chance to observe other games when they are played /but I was told they work on it/
4. No battle calc, no complete picture of the game (no TUV statistics), less user friendly interface
5. Keeps personal statistics, but not precisely enough (you cannot see who did you play)
6. Time control
7. No edit option to fix or bypass the bugs

TripleA

Advantages:

1. Open source for free
2. The old bunch of the nice guys
3. When you get bored with spring 1942, you can play AA50 or some of the special maps for a change :-)
4. Very good interface, keeps control of the stats during game
5. You can easily save and you can watch other players’ games
6. It has the kind edit mode
7. Sometimes you can play Hobbes here  :-)

Disadvantages:

1. Really hard to get a V4 game sometimes
2. Limited number of oponents
3. No personal stats at all
4. The league is not working if someone so mediocre as I can lead it  after 20 + games in 6 months :mrgreen:
5. Not entirely easy to host a game
6. Not that much challenging oposition (I think Hobbes must have hit really something extreme when he lost his first 2 games, since I am 4-0 at GTO after four games, taking Moscow R2 in the last one :roll:)

Well, please those lists are just from a top of my mind, please correct me, vote and discuss! I would be esspecially interested in ideas what can be done to get more people playing at TripleA because I sort of love it there and after a few experiences at GTO I am affraid I might get seduced by the marvellously easy way you get a game there.