Greetings all,

I just wanted to drop a little appeal/invitation to all players that post and discuss general strategies to move the discussion or at least add to the discussion experience in actually trying it in games online.
I think it would help many players in this forum to get a better understanding of what works and what doesn’t.

So guys: Do not only discuss in theory but also put your strategies into practice in the G40 league.

New players are always welcome, in case you feel insecure about how to handle the tripleA client and how to find opponents and handle games, the league community is very friendly and helpful.

Cu on the other side hopefully! :-)

Congratz to the new league champion, Farmboy. Well played!

I follow the final closely, and it was an atypical game on the Eastern front.
The Germans were slightly behind schedule on the Eastern front and after turn 6 or so the German stack moved to Bryansk, allowing the Reds to launch an attack. The odds were clearly below 50% but in case of a success, the game may have been over in favor of the Allies.
The attack did not go the way the Allies wanted and left both armies crippled, including the Russian airforce which suffered from a 2/3 AA success by the German F.L.A.K.
I think one could argue that, from here, it was an uphill battle for the Allies.

The Axis headquarter remained calm and kept a cool head. Germans were not forcing any matters on the Eastern front but focused on stability, while establishing the Atlantic wall, including a massive German fleet protecting WGR and Germany. A fleet arms race developed in 112 and 110 while the Germans continued to stabilize on the Eastern front.

Japan was mostly uncontested in the Pacific. She let India grow to a massive size and never made a serious attempt to take India while focusing on dominating China and slowly eating up Eastern Russian territories, facilitated by Stalin’s order to send the entire Siberian army home. The Siberian army secured the survival of Moscow after the battle at Bryansk, but left Japan uncontested on the main land.

This way, the Axis achieved income parity, which, in many cases, leads to a slow death of the Allies, especially as Gamerman concluded the fall of Moscow was inevitable.

Thanks to both participants for the great show, what a pleasure this game was to watch!

@axis-dominion said in Post League Game Results Here:

long game as is typical with our matches… big fireworks in the end but results were ultimately not in allied favor

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/40655/l24-bm4-adam514-axis-vs-axis-dominion-allies-21

Congratulations to Adam for winning the most epic battle I have ever witnessed in a top-tier competition encounter.

I highly recommend that everyone download the game’s history and play through it themselves.

@taamvan said in We need an allied playbook.:

this convo is just a digression from that original goal. I dont think there can be an allied playbook without it being an endlessly complex series of if thens. crockett brought it up so maybe he has a different view.

The key problem I see in 95% of all the discussions is that people think the game can be analyzed by making concrete plans on what to do in turn 1, 2, 3. 90% of this is pointless for 2 reasons:

• In contrast to chess, there is luck involved and one can never predict the exact position at any point. Not even at G1 as there is plenty of options on how Allies spend the bid.
• A naked plan is worth quite little in A&A unless the player understands key principles on HOW to operate plans and on WHAT is important as Allies.

If I keep the analogy to chess many plans I read here are like: In order to win with white, play e4, then castle queenside and then make a mating attack on the kingside.
This is useless advice, because it means nothing if the player does not understand fundamental principle of chess.

Back to A&A: 2 players can execute the exact same plan as they are often discussed here in the forum: Round 1 build this and round 2 build that, do this and that etc
The outcome of this (even when assuming average dice for everyone) can be fundamentally different depending on the knowledge of the players on HOW to execute a plan.

The differences in experience, skill and understanding of fundamental principles of A&A are often so big amongst various players, that the outcome of executing a plan can be black and white. Total success or total failure, massively depending on either the skill of the “attacker” or of the “defender” in this situation.

This leads often then to conclusions which are entirely wrong “ABC does not work” --> Just because you failed to execute it, this does not mean it cannot work
ABC is imbalanced (often heard for Dark skies) --> No, it is not necessarily imba, maybe you just lack understanding of key principles in order to player properly against it.

My general advice would be: Think less about plans on what you do in turn 1, 2, 3 but think about key principles and key objectives you want to achieve and then the most important part:
Work on the details on how to execute a plan efficiently, such as:

• How to trade efficiently
• How to avoid blockers
• How to pose as many threats as possible
  and many more

This is certainly not easy, and in case I would elaborate on that, I would certainly do a video series about it. Just writing all that stuff down is so dry and cumbersome.
To me, it only makes sense to explain these principles on the board, but the TripleA board using a screencast and now recording an actual board with a camera.

@AndrewAAGamer said in Post League Game Results Here:

Thank you @gamerman01. Not playing this game anymore is my way to move on from a very negative experience for me. It is not worth the points to have to deal with it or think about it. I have met some very nice people on this site and I hope to continue playing against them and others I have not played against yet. Overall my experience here has been pleasant. I appreciate your effort in helping this site be a good experience for all.

I read through your game thread and it was a heated discussion. According to what I read it felt for you that trulpen did some weasel-ish move by not giving you notice of an obvious blunder you made while you think he should have as I think you gave him notice on a blunder on his side before.

I do not want to judge this situation at all, nor do I want to dive in deeper, all I would like to say is that I played trulpen twice this year, and he was a good and fair opponent. He is ambitious and eager to win, but never crossed any lines and so I think he did not in other games.

All I want to say is that sometimes things go South in a game but I would consider this an exception and not the norm.

I definitely hope you may call this under the bridge soon and continue playing league games. It would be a shame to lose you here because of this unpleasant dispute in a single game.

Hi everybody,

I’m Tobias from Germany.
I played my first A&A in the mid-90s and got re-introduced to the game in about 2011-2012 when a colleague invited to play the game. Playing Japan in the first game with no clue what to do I started to look out on the internet to find some strategies.
Boy, I would love to see how we all played this game back then. If I recall correctly we forgot to put the Chinese fighter on the board as well as the Naval base at the Philippines:D If I recall correctly I made some crazy excursions in J2 to Canada and fought for California for 1-2 turn while doing a J1 DOW LOL. I found a way for the J1 DOW in this forum and that is the way I got introduce to this community.
Later, I guess in 2012/2013 I learned about the tripleA online client and league play. At first, I played with a friend in the online live client before I found out about the option to play less stressful league games.
I played my first league game in 2013. Since then I participated in every season.

Next to 1-2 games 1941/1942 on a board game I have played G40 global online exclusively. Since last season, I play BM only, because I believe BM is a great addition that does not only make the game more balanced, but also just a better game in general. Kudos to the creators of BM!

Cheers,
Tobias

I am very sorry to hear that but I, of course, totally understand.

I can’t say it any better than Witt, so I just quote and second him.

@witt said in League General Discussion Thread:

@gamerman01 you have been a great representative of this forum and what you have done for the League is immense. You can’t be thanked enough .
We will miss you, but totally understand .
Keep well, my friend.

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Who’s interviewing next?

I vote for AD :)

@taamvan said in State of the Onion G40 2019:

Hey crew!

I think we are still trading around some great ideas. To throw in my two cents

Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting
Going KJF is much more satisfying in some ways than KGF–with KJF you stand a better chance of toppling or surprising and seriously disrupting Japan than Germany.
However, you can’t defeat Japan and while you’re suppressing Japan: Germany takes the game and so we need to prepare USA for a KGF regardless of what the Axis do or what their plan is
This dynamic means that the everything the Allies do should flow towards moscow and be in place before the culminating battle

ANZAC 3 planes to java (dont forget many players think you cannot land on dutch islands without capturing them that is incorrect) and then all 6 of those allied planes go to persia, then russia

You cant lose on the pac board, so ANZAC should turtle after the intial 3–includes infantry because of limited production then protect sydney. Same Hawaii–guys dumped here early count for alot and can be supplemented by fighters even if you never buy fleet over there
Taranto must be done, but that costs you alot of fighters–so UK must be garrisoned starting from turn 1 and continuing all game, no exceptions (and no factories, airbases, or tank SA buys until its clearly safe and Germany is headed elsewhere). Not doing taranto makes Italy rage which is way worse over time for the UK than just dealing with them from game start
UK East wants sumatra and ethiopia and yunnan but you should take persia turn 1 and do what you need to do to keep egypt safe all game (tobruk? turtle? up to you)

The best KGF I’ve seen has the USA transition directly from SZ 91 to norway, then finland, building bases as we go–so at some point you’ll want to destroy the German fleet to ensure they can’t do anything about it. If Germany wastes time or flinches you will be able to go over the top and take back leningrad thats 3 factories pouring out tanks

A combination of US north and UK south rescue forces is the only thing that can prevent the income flop whether moscow dies or not
for russia, more fighters is better than armor or mech or tacticals because they dissuade the crippling stratbombings
for UK, more fighters is better than more men and ships because you go after the US and can support a US landing
realistically, USA only gets 1 wave of ground troops before the russia game is decided–do not waste 1 man

Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*

I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill

good luck have fun boys

Hi taamvan,

thanks for sharing your thoughts. While KJF or KGF are somehow viable options, I disagree on a bunch of your statements.

“Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting”
I do not agree on this. The magic in good play with the Allies is to achieve much with little. I believe splitting is essential because I believe that one power will eventually win in case a KxF is played relentlessly. Also, given the defender’s edge in A&A, Allies can actually achieve a lot by splitting in case they manage to exploit the defender’s edge in both theatres optimally.

“Taranto must be done”
Disagree. I believe that Taranto is a viable option but moving the fleet to 92 UK1 is certainly a viable option, too which I meanwhile prefer in most cases. Taranto is keeping Italy down but trading UK fleet and planes mostly against Italy at an even rate. (considering the counter potential Italy and Germany have against taranto). There are better ways to crush the Italian fleet at a way better TUV-exchange rate than in Taranto. Also, as you mentioned, the lack of UK planes makes it harder to secure US beachheads in either Normandy or Norway.

“I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill”
Well, even in league games, the Allies have a decent win rate even at lower bids, but the better the competition, the higher the Axis win rate.
On the highest level, in Vanilla games, any bid below 35 gives a clear edge for the Axis, I believe the equilibrium lies in the 40-45 range for Vanilla.
And even in BM, people slowly but steadily realize that after enjoying the thrill of playing the Allies with all those new NOs, that Allies need a 10-15 bid to have equal chances to win against Axis.
Again, this is based on Axis played on a high level.

Best regards,
Tobias

@djensen I just changed my username then!

@axis-dominion said in AD (L+28) vs FB (X +10) #4 BM:

feels like luck is against me… i’ve been getting a lot of misses with my defenders and you up and get 3 hits in bry lmao

Overall, Germans hit 3/8 total @2 this turn. Nothing extraordinary to me.
Or was Bryansk particularly important?

@GovZ said in L24 bm4 axis-dom (axis) vs farmboy (allies+17) #3:

Games like this are why I prefer low luck.

Games like this is why I prefer no low luck.
Gamblers ans those who watch the gambles need being reminded from time to time that aggressive play can lead to quick game losses:-)

@axis-dominion game on, we await #4.
play a safe opener this time and show if you can beat the champ the „boring“ way or whether good dice early on are required to stand a chance vs Farmboy‘s deadly Allies.

Amazing game, gratz AD!
The key takeaway seems to be that if the Germans cause enough havoc, the Axis can still succeed, even without much support from the Luftwaffe for a while.

There has to be a better way to counter JDOW4 though. I can’t believe J4 is that dominant.

Farmboy, I know I’m late to the party, but I wanted to congratulate on your back-to-back league championship! What an incredible achievement to defeat Adam’s Axis in the final.

I have to say, after the G1 110 disaster, it seemed like the Allies’ advantage vanished by turn 8 or 9. At that point, I would’ve bet on the Axis. The early Europe play felt a bit sluggish - Egypt was temporarily abandoned, and the first major U.S. landing was to liberate Egypt instead of securing a beachhead. Despite delays, Germany managed to break through Bryansk, alongside with some very expensive Russian blockers that weakened their position.

On the Pacific side, Japan had favorable early dice and took India with relative ease, even with an early British Indian Ocean fleet. Japan’s dominance at sea was clear, though the Chinese-Russian cooperation posed a thorn in their plans. However, with India already taken, that threat seemed manageable in my opinion.

Your consistent, error-free play was impressive. Though cautious at times, it was precise, and you managed to exploit Germany’s weakness in the skies until they eventually collapsed. The subtlety in your strategy was remarkable. I especially liked how you kept ANZAC aggressive, even though Japan was just one victory city away. While not all the island trades seemed efficient, you kept Japan occupied, preventing them from launching a decisive attack on Sydney or Hawaii.

One question, though, regarding the Russian strafe-stunt back to Moscow - did you miscalculate earlier? It seemed like you could have just stacked Bryansk, and the risk of the strafe felt unnecessary to me.

Again, congratulations on a very well-played game! Certainly a game for the books to study on Allies play against Axis giants!

“You have several advantages slowing down the Axis”
Must read “Allies” of course

@jkeller said in L24 BM4 jkeller(Axis) vs axis-dominion(Allies+20):

Going for Egypt with med play in this version is so difficult to pull off withGermany having to make plane buys, planes being out of position, Italy needing some good dice, etc. […]

I don’t think there’s an easy way for the Axis to take Egypt by force early on if the Allies play correctly, whether in Vanilla or BM. Losing Egypt early as the Allies typically happens due to one of three reasons:

1. General misplays or dice disasters by the Allies.
2. The Allies deliberately gave up Egypt, at least partially, to make significant gains elsewhere.
3. The Axis heavily overcommitted and paid a steep price, such as a risky and costly German airstrike.

If the Allies play cautiously and anticipate potential Axis moves, they should be able to hold Egypt early. However, this often comes at the cost of delaying other priorities such as a stronghold in 110 for example.

@jkeller said in L24 BM4 jkeller(Axis) vs axis-dominion(Allies+20):

I am pretty disgusted with how this game went last round of moves so I will probably just forfeit it and I would love to start a new one with you after that but if you don’t mind since I have limited time right now I will focus on advancing my other ongoing games first so it might be a couple weeks. In the meantime I will see if I have the will to play this one out.

I believe it’s premature to give up at this point. I’ve heard you’re a strong chess player. In chess terms, I’d say you’re perhaps a pawn down with not much compensation, around -0.8 to -1.2, but not a piece down or more. Against Stockfish, it might look grim, but against any human opponent and factoring in luck, there’s still a game left for the Axis.

You have several advantages slowing down the Axis, such as a strong Italian ground force in Africa that will be difficult to eliminate and a healthy Italian fleet that will require significant effort to sink. Additionally, you have a fierce defense in Caro. Japan may appear worse off than it is; it can retake islands, and the Allies have almost no loaded transports.

However, Japan is overstretched. Against 17 or 18 + 2 Siberian Russians, it’s better not to commit to going north. Instead, maintain a stalemate at Manchuria and focus your efforts on keeping India and China small, along with enough troops for island warfare.

Throw everything into breaking through to Volgo and the Caucasus as soon as possible. Even if this might risk allowing the Russians a potentially game-winning attack (I didn’t run numbers), but if they succeed, you can safely resign. If the dice roll in your favor, you’re back in the game. If the Russians hesitate, you can gain some ground.

I apologize for offering unsolicited advice. AD and I are friends, and he was disappointed you wanted to resign, so I took another look. Knowing AD, he prefers competitive positions, so his disappointment suggests he wouldn’t resign as the Axis.

@Me1945

Scramble 111 please:-)

@crockett36 said in Video interviews of league players by Crockett36:

https://youtu.be/97ThP4NWJqo?si=-Zuz81qo0QHxdAYc

Interview with JDOW. Like no other interview so far, we get into the nuts and bolts of objectives for each of the big nations, benchmarks for measuring success and detailed analysis of the pros and cons of blockers.

Thanks for having me and for being such a nice host, It was truly delightful conversing with you.

@Myygames My view on LL is just an opinion and personal preference. There is nothing wrong at all about LL, it’s just not for me. Coming from a semi-pro poker background, I find the element of chance to be an essential ingredient, adding an extra layer of complexity that fascinates me.