Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> AI Opponent Discussion >> RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy - 7/23/2008 8:58:36 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
Don't forget that lots of airpower can reduce cp losses.

The biggest problem the CW has is that it has a lot of defensive commitments worldwide early on, may have a major defensive commitment (the UK if Sealion is coming) during the early-mid game, has to keep the convoy lines open all game, and of the European Allies is usually the first to switch from defence to offence, strategically speaking (unless Sealion is coming) - which requires a different set of on-map forces than defence does.

It's probably the hardest Ally to play.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 211
RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy - 7/23/2008 9:13:00 PM   
sajbalk


Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline
The CW is the toughest ally to play by far. China just sits there and maybe attacks late. France just sits there and dies. The US builds everything and does as it pleases. Russia is simple, as it takes mostly lands, but Russia can often live on the knife's edge.

A new player, introduced into a bunch of veterans, would likley be placed with France (to learn the ropes) and the US (so as to see the fun side of WiFFE)



_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 212
RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy - 7/23/2008 11:52:19 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

The CW is the toughest ally to play by far. China just sits there and maybe attacks late. France just sits there and dies. The US builds everything and does as it pleases. Russia is simple, as it takes mostly lands, but Russia can often live on the knife's edge.

A new player, introduced into a bunch of veterans, would likley be placed with France (to learn the ropes) and the US (so as to see the fun side of WiFFE)




I found that the veterans say to the new player - "Maybe you should play Russia. It is easy and you do not have to learn the naval rules. It starts slow as well"

Then the most experienced player, famous for saying to the Japanese "I leave you Vladivostock if you hurry up" in Jan/Feb 42 turn when he captures the last Russian city on the european map gets to play Germany.

-Orm

(in reply to sajbalk)
Post #: 213
RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy - 7/24/2008 2:17:20 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

The CW is the toughest ally to play by far. China just sits there and maybe attacks late. France just sits there and dies. The US builds everything and does as it pleases. Russia is simple, as it takes mostly lands, but Russia can often live on the knife's edge.

A new player, introduced into a bunch of veterans, would likley be placed with France (to learn the ropes) and the US (so as to see the fun side of WiFFE)




CW is the major power I prefer the most and the major power I play the worst.

(in reply to sajbalk)
Post #: 214
RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy - 7/30/2008 1:47:35 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
This is my standard setup of CW convoy points. (No Food in Flames and no tankers)

For Production:
6 Can res/oil -> Atlantic -> UK = 18 cp
2 Ven oil -> Carribien + USA -> Canada = 2 cp
1 Cyp res -> Med -> UK = 4 cp
3 African res -> Atlantic -> UK = 12 cp
4 Indian res -> Incian ocean + Atlantic -> UK = 32 cp
2 Malaysian res -> Bay of Bengal -> India = 2 cp
1 Br. Gyana res -> Atlantic -> UK = 4 cp
1 Aus res -> Australia = 0 cp
2 UK res -> UK = 0cp

Oil transported to save
1 Ven oil -> Carribien + USA -> Canada = 1 cp
1 Persian oil -> Rail -> Egypt = 0 cp
2 NEI oil -> S. China Sea -> Singapore/Malaya = 2 cp

Oil for reorganisation or save in the area
1 Port of Spain - Not transported
1 Burma -> Rail -> Burma

Resources not used.
2 Australia

Equalls 22 res/oil for production. Since only 21 is needed to produce full for CW (1339) there is one extra in case the Cyprus res is stopped. Otherwise save an oil in UK. 4 traded oil transported to be saved and 2 oil for reorganisation or to be saved. This uses up 77 cp and leaves 4 in reserve.

My main reason for the 2 cp in the medíterranian is that you draw supply to Malta from 2 directions.

-Orm


< Message edited by Orm -- 7/30/2008 2:24:20 PM >

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 215
What about Convoys In Flames? - 7/30/2008 2:24:53 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
What about Convoys In Flames? What's the standard setup for CW convoy points with tankers? Any difference?

_____________________________

"'Malta - The Thorn in Rommel's Side"

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 216
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 7/30/2008 2:25:41 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
Not really, you just sub in tankers for convoys as required.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 217
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 4:56:46 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
Here's a thought for a summer '41 campaign for the CW (assuming Germany is attacking USSR). The AIO can add it to its bag of tricks.

Step 1: Denmark.

Typically, Germany leaves 1 corps in Frederikshavn and (maybe) 1 corps in Copenhagen, and that is the German defence.
What the CW does is invade along the southern coast such that it ZoCs the rail line; and up north on the island with Frederikshavn to get a beachhead there.

Then blitz units come in and knock the Frederikshavn defence into the sea while the CW builds up to assault Copenhagen (possibly including invasions from the Baltic by ships passing through Frederikshavn). After that comes the Copenhagen assault, opening up the Baltic to the Royal Navy.

The key here is, by cutting the rail line, if the Germans want to assist they have to do a combined (which Russia will be very grateful for) to bring out the sealift (if they have any available to sail into the Baltic to pick up troops).

At the end of the turn, the sealift that brought troops ashore RTBs to Frederikshavn and/or Copenhagen (if they have the movement).

Step 2: Finland

CW forces sail out into the Baltic and land in Finland. Over the turn they build up land and air assets and conquer Helsinki. During the end-of-turn step, Finland is completely conquered.

Now that the RN is in the Baltic in force, Germany will have a very hard time sending anything other than air units to defend Finland unless Leningrad has fallen (which has usually not taken place in summer of 1941).

Reasoning
(1) There has been a suggestion that the CW should commit land forces to Karelia to help the USSR by defending Murmansk against the Finns. I've never been a big fan of that option. This option accomplishes the same goal by removing the Finns from the game.

(2) This reduces German production by having the RN active in the Baltic, sinking German convoys. Denmark is also a handy airbase for strategic bombers.

(3) A blocker force with an anti-tank gun on the Danish-German border will require serious German effort (at least 1.5 armour) to crack (if they want to blitz), and the straits can ensure the islands containing Frederikshavn & Copenhagen will hold.

(4) If the Axis diverts long-range fighters & naval bombers to fight the RN, it means less Axis land-based air in the Med. Likewise, if they divert airpower from fighting the USSR to defend Finland, it is a respite for the USSR.

(5) Lend-lease to the USSR can now be as follows:
Murmansk (city + port) = 2 bp plus 1 res & 1 bp per railed factory (up to 2).
Leningrad (city, 2 factories, port) = 4 bp and 2 res.

With this scenario, I would not bother lending to Archangel.

So the theoretical limit is 8 bp and 4 res, which in 1942 is a hefty 13 bp on turns the Germans attack in the USSR's home country.

If Murmansk did not get any factories you're still looking at 6 bp, 2 res, which would be 9 bp (still respectable in 1942).


_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 218
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 7:29:23 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Here's a thought for a summer '41 campaign for the CW (assuming Germany is attacking USSR). The AIO can add it to its bag of tricks.

Yes, if it want to loose.

The real thing is knocking out Italy, not playing in the Baltic which leads nowhere. The German activity that you will draw to the Baltic, you would have drawn to by attacking in the Med. Knockingo ut Italy is not only fighting around Saridnia, Sicily and the Italian Coast, it is also fighting for Tripoli and the Italian East Africa.

When I play Germany or Italy, there is nothing that I welcome more than a CW that invade Denmark in the summer of 1941. Easy to stop, easy to knock out, and leads nowhere for them. The complete contrary of a Med CW come back, where it is difficult to stop nearly impossible to knock away, and leads right in your heart.

This said, the AIO needs to know this trick that composer exposed, because :
(1) It needs to know how to loose (OK, it's a joke ).
(2) There may be global circumstances inthe game that makes this move non costly for the CW and useful for them, but this is far from the norm IMO.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 219
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 8:47:59 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Patrice,

Being predictable is a very bad thing for the AIO, so the more options, the better. And there must be some point where as the CW you would invade Denmark. Say the Axis had no units in Denmark and just two units in Germany: Berlin and Hamburg, perhaps a couple of fighters too. If things are juicy enough, do you still ignore Denmark?

If the AIO always went into the Med and never touched the Baltic, then the human players will quickly learn to strip everything out of the Batlic, since the AIO will never attack there. As I said, being predictable is really bad for the AIO.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 220
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 9:57:28 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

Easy to stop, easy to knock out, and leads nowhere for them


I disagree.

German reinforcements - especially armour/mech units - will mostly be arriving in Koenigsberg and maybe Stettin in summer 41 for deployment to the Eastern Front during a Barb. That means, once the CW lands, they must either rail over or spend 2 impulses or so walking back to Kiel (and if the CW waited an impulse, the armour has already walked into USSR for an impulse, which forecloses on it making it back in time).

By landing to cut the rail line off, the CW has impinged on Germany's ability to stop the conquest of Denmark. Stuff two cheap corps and an anti-tank gun on the southern frontier and you keep the Wehrmacht at bay for the impulse or two required to finish the job. After that, the CW is not obliged to try to hold on to the tank country of mainland Denmark and the vaunted German panzers are going to have trouble crossing the straits at half combat factors and half blitz mods.

As for leading nowhere - I believe the strategic aims of the Denmark/Finland campaign as mentioned above demonstrate exactly what makes it worth it.

quote:

The German activity that you will draw to the Baltic, you would have drawn to by attacking in the Med.


The naval bombers and long-range fighters that were keeping RN carriers & sealift at bay in the Med get brought up to try to deal with the Baltic incursion, which is easier for the CW to support as it is right near the UK. So then the RN's main forces go back down to the Med to re-energize efforts there. Now the Axis have two theatres to defend with the naval air they had defending only one theatre. If you had stuck to the Med, they'd all still be concentrated there.

The Axis has it in them to keep the CW at bay in the Med in 1941 (especially if they get the luck they need on the search roll dice), run an okay Battle of the Atlantic, and still run a competent 1941 Barbarossa, especially if they took Malta. But I don't think they have the ability to do all that and defend the Baltic theatre at the same time.

Of course this is not something the CW would do every game. But I disagree that it is a game-losing proposition.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 221
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 10:12:46 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Patrice,

Being predictable is a very bad thing for the AIO, so the more options, the better. And there must be some point where as the CW you would invade Denmark. Say the Axis had no units in Denmark and just two units in Germany: Berlin and Hamburg, perhaps a couple of fighters too. If things are juicy enough, do you still ignore Denmark?

If the AIO always went into the Med and never touched the Baltic, then the human players will quickly learn to strip everything out of the Batlic, since the AIO will never attack there. As I said, being predictable is really bad for the AIO.

Yes, I agree, if the circumstances are right, this is what I meant in my second point.
As to not being predictable, this what I meant with my first point

This said, I agree 100% with what you wrote, and I agree with Composer last sentence of post 221 (and I volunteer to demonstrate him that this is a loosing strategy when used when the cirmstances are not right -- i.e vs. a German that knows the ropes --, as soon as IP play is available)

Also, I might be biased because I always play with Option 12 (limited supply across straits), and attacking Copenhagen with this option on and the Kriegsmarine still kicking is hell believe me.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 222
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 10:16:12 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Also, I would add that there are creative ways of knocking out Italy, and that knocking out Italy in itself is not equivallent to being predictable. Which means that you can be unpredicatble while still have the same long term goal, no need to get lost in fruitless ventures (which I believe the Baltic in 1941 is for the Allies, especially with Option 12 as I said above).

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 223
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 10:24:11 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99
As for leading nowhere - I believe the strategic aims of the Denmark/Finland campaign as mentioned above demonstrate exactly what makes it worth it.

Sorry, I don't buy that a second.
IMO in 1941 a CW Baltic venture is only wasted time, as no advancement will have been achieved against the Axis (except in special cicumstances as Steve described for example), and the Axis will have had 1 more year to settle their defense. The CW is in no shape in 1941 to be of any serious threat ashore, and any forces involved and destroyed in that 1941 campaign will be sorely missed next year when the real deal will come.

But I believe that we agree overall. I agree that the CW AIO must know this trick, and you seem to agree that this is not a common CW play to do that. It is a possibility that the AIO has to know about.

Also, the Baltic Venture begins to be more interesting after Italy has been knowcked out, when the Russians are coming back. So the CW AIO (& US too) definitely has to have that string to its bow.

The USSR also should have this string to their bow because a 1944 or 1945 campaign here can make them gain ground more rapidly in Germany.
Also, the USSR must consider knocking out Finland, anytime this looks possible, since day 1 of the Great Patriotic War and up to the end. This is such a blessing for USSR to knock out Finland that they must always look in that direction.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 224
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 11:14:19 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
Oh, and the AIO should ignore a seemingly weakly defended Germany in '41 and '42. The Germans will practically invite you right in to get the production boost, then put down their new units to bottle you up. If you do take out a factory, the Germans will just shift resources to idle Italian factories.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 225
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/16/2008 11:33:16 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
somewhere a long response went to the great bit-bucket in the sky.

the CW attacking Denmark in '41 is a very viable option ... so viable that I defend Frederikshavn with the Hamburg and Kiel MIL (so the cats come back right where you need them ... a good idea for all countries - use the MIL in their local area where applicable on the defense and keep the MIL pool empty). I also put a corps in the middle of the peninsula, and eventually a Mech division and later a few more tank assets. Denmark is a very sensitive spot for the Germans.

A frequent Allied mistake is slowly building up the most awesome come-back force ever, with large ship gearing limits for the US all through 41 and 42. By the time they are ready to fight, the Germans have put the Russians on life support, the Axis economies are going at full steam, and their perimeter is filling up with pointy bits to fight the West, hard. By 1941, it's time to start throwing those cardboard pieces at the enemy...you have no worries about Manpower limits like the real commanders did.

If the British can get the Kriegsmarine to do anything at all in the summer of a 1941 Barbarossa, that is a victory all by itself. Watching the panzers grind to a halt over concern about the crossing arrows in Denmark will probably make the Russians jump up and down with glee. If the Tommies are messing around in East Africa, the Germans just shrug, tell Benito good luck, and continue the full court press against the hapless black print Red Army. They might respond the same way to a big CW effort to take Tripoli from the Rome MIL and a TERR. The British have to do something serious in 1941, and Denmark is about as serious as it gets for the Germans.

I like this build schedule for the CW: Nov/Dec '40 - PARA, FORT/4or5, AMPH face-up; Jan/Feb '41 - MAR. Come summer '41, let the fun begin.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 226
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/17/2008 5:14:28 AM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
CTRL-A then CTRL-C before you post. It saves a lot of grief.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 227
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/17/2008 6:56:26 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Here's a thought for a summer '41 campaign for the CW (assuming Germany is attacking USSR). The AIO can add it to its bag of tricks.

Step 1: Denmark.

Typically, Germany leaves 1 corps in Frederikshavn and (maybe) 1 corps in Copenhagen, and that is the German defence.
What the CW does is invade along the southern coast such that it ZoCs the rail line; and up north on the island with Frederikshavn to get a beachhead there.

Then blitz units come in and knock the Frederikshavn defence into the sea while the CW builds up to assault Copenhagen (possibly including invasions from the Baltic by ships passing through Frederikshavn). After that comes the Copenhagen assault, opening up the Baltic to the Royal Navy.

The key here is, by cutting the rail line, if the Germans want to assist they have to do a combined (which Russia will be very grateful for) to bring out the sealift (if they have any available to sail into the Baltic to pick up troops).

At the end of the turn, the sealift that brought troops ashore RTBs to Frederikshavn and/or Copenhagen (if they have the movement).

Step 2: Finland

CW forces sail out into the Baltic and land in Finland. Over the turn they build up land and air assets and conquer Helsinki. During the end-of-turn step, Finland is completely conquered.

Now that the RN is in the Baltic in force, Germany will have a very hard time sending anything other than air units to defend Finland unless Leningrad has fallen (which has usually not taken place in summer of 1941).

Reasoning
(1) There has been a suggestion that the CW should commit land forces to Karelia to help the USSR by defending Murmansk against the Finns. I've never been a big fan of that option. This option accomplishes the same goal by removing the Finns from the game.

(2) This reduces German production by having the RN active in the Baltic, sinking German convoys. Denmark is also a handy airbase for strategic bombers.

(3) A blocker force with an anti-tank gun on the Danish-German border will require serious German effort (at least 1.5 armour) to crack (if they want to blitz), and the straits can ensure the islands containing Frederikshavn & Copenhagen will hold.

(4) If the Axis diverts long-range fighters & naval bombers to fight the RN, it means less Axis land-based air in the Med. Likewise, if they divert airpower from fighting the USSR to defend Finland, it is a respite for the USSR.

(5) Lend-lease to the USSR can now be as follows:
Murmansk (city + port) = 2 bp plus 1 res & 1 bp per railed factory (up to 2).
Leningrad (city, 2 factories, port) = 4 bp and 2 res.

With this scenario, I would not bother lending to Archangel.

So the theoretical limit is 8 bp and 4 res, which in 1942 is a hefty 13 bp on turns the Germans attack in the USSR's home country.

If Murmansk did not get any factories you're still looking at 6 bp, 2 res, which would be 9 bp (still respectable in 1942).


Yes...or given that it's summer, you could challenge them to a game of cricket. For all their cleverness, the Germans were hopeless at cricket in 1941 (and not much better now it must be said). The Italians, typically, showed great flair but their batting technique was suspect, their bowling erratic and they often looked lethargic in the field. The Japanese had tremendous trouble pronouncing the word correctly and never really mastered cricket, although they always fought out games to the end.

Apart from great English players, the Commonwealth could draw on tremendous reserves of cricketing talent from all over the British Empire, like George Headley from the West Indies or Australia's Don Bradman, the greatest batsman of all time. Historians now recognise that the Japanese advance into India was essentially stopped not by supply difficulties and stiffening Allied resistance but rather by their poor performance against quality spin bowling. Probably.

Of course the Germans recognised their cricketing deficiency and by 1942 were planting huge forests of Willow trees for bat manufacture on a vast scale and began a complex network of practice nets and cricket grounds surrounded by white picket fences, much of it underground for protection from the growing Allied bombing offensive. They mass-produced an austere cricket bat, the Volksschläger, that could be made in far less time and by unskilled labour. German aerodynamicists developed advanced balls that swung more and used less leather but, as with so many other of the Third Reich's desperate projects, it was all too little, too late.

By 1943, the great all-rounder Keith Miller was in England, and when his superiors could pry him away from socialites and princesses and get his trousers back up from around his ankles, he could really give Jerry some curry.

On a serious note, Keith Miller flew Beaufighters and Mosquitoes in 1944/45 and had a post-war career as a fabulous, attacking cricketer who played with an attractive style, both with bat and ball. Tall, powerfully built and a natural sportsman (He also played the top level of Australian Football and declined a trial with the Boston Red Sox baseball team), he was described as "the Australian in excelsis", to which another writer commented "By God he was right". He was a legendary ladies' man and struggled with military discipline, being involved in more than a few punch-ups. Many years later he famously answered a Michael Parkinson question about pressure playing cricket by saying "pressure is a Messerschmitt up your arse, playing cricket is not". My Dad, who is a man of few words told me, "When I was young, Keith Miller was my hero".

And BTW, just to give you an idea of how good the aforementioned Don Bradman was, this is from Wikipedia...

"Statistician Charles Davis analysed the statistics for several prominent sportsmen by comparing the number of standard deviations that they stand above the mean for their sport. The top performers in his selected sports are

Bradman, Cricket, Batting average, SD = 4.4

Pele, Football/Soccer, Goals per game, SD = 3.7

Ty Cobb, Baseball, Batting average, SD = 3.6

Jack Nicklaus, Golf, Major Titles, SD = 3.5

Michael Jordan, Basketball, Points per game, SD = 3.4

The statistics show that "no other athlete dominates an international sport to the extent that Bradman does cricket". In order to post a similarly dominant career statistic as Bradman, a baseball batter would need a career batting average of .392, while a basketball player would need to score an average of 43.0 points per game. The respective records are .366 and 30.1.

When Bradman died, Time magazine allocated a space in its "Milestones" column for an obituary:

... Australian icon considered by many to be the pre-eminent sportsman of all time ... One of Australia's most beloved heroes, he was revered abroad as well. When Nelson Mandela was released after 27 years in prison, his first question to an Australian visitor was, "Is Sir Donald Bradman still alive?"


His record would have been even more formidable but he suffered a serious illness early in his career that he never really recovered from. That said, he is statistically about twice as good at batting as anyone else. The relative worth of players who can bat and bowl, such as Keith Miller, is another argument again. Bradman was quite stylish but the distinguishing feature of his batting was its ruthless, relentless, robotic quality.

Cheers, Neilster

Here's Keith Miller





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Neilster -- 9/17/2008 8:25:03 PM >

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 228
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/17/2008 8:21:55 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
But couldn't too much cricket activity inadvertenly lead to Churchill's nightmare scenario...the dreaded Indian Civil War? careful.

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 229
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/17/2008 8:56:57 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

But couldn't too much cricket activity inadvertenly lead to Churchill's nightmare scenario...the dreaded Indian Civil War? careful.

Well this is true. It's a delicate balancing act.

I forgot to mention one of the great difficulties the Germans encountered during their huge, late-war cricketing build-up...a severe shortage of Linseed Oil with which to season new cricket bats. Vast numbers of bats were manufactured in the dying months of the Third Reich that were never used for lack of Linseed Oil.

The SS always seemed to have enough but for the rest, captured Allied stocks were often all that could be had. German batsmen would stare in amazement at the lustrous, well-oiled, beautifully knocked-in standard of British bats and a captured Philip Mead or William Sykes was highly prized.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 230
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/23/2008 8:09:50 AM   
morgil


Posts: 114
Joined: 5/9/2008
From: Bergen, Norway
Status: offline
Assuming that Norway is German occupied its better to start there, and then take out Denmark. Remember that whoever holds two of those and Kiel blocks shipping between the North Sea - Baltic. Also, not having a Unit in Copenhagen is seriously wrong for Germany, as CW can paradrop there from London, and from Copenhagen they can drop into Helsinki, along with the MAR that just helped take out Oslo, Operation Lilja, or Lilly in english.

Why do you ask would one bother with this, instead of Africa ?
Well, its a sideorder, and in the beginning its only annoying Hitler, but consider that you take one resource from Norway, and one from Finland, that can be railed directly to Russia, also you need to cover less sea areas with CONV's, and you remove 6 Winterized units from the attack on Leningrad, and 3 swedish resources during winter.

German AI should probably have it Hardcoded to always have atleast one GAR in Copenhagen and one in Helsinki, for just that scenario.

_____________________________

Gott weiss ich will kein Engel sein.

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 231
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/23/2008 4:42:38 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
Copenhagen is important but the western Allies don't always have a PARA in range, so I wouldn't order a permanent garrison to Copenhagen. And really the Allies need a fair amount of assets to successfully drop on Copenhagen...multiple PARA units and multiple long range ATR. I would defend Denmark from the 'fron't - the beaches and Frederikshavn - until the ever-deadly Allied 1st Parachute Army (a fantasy group, but the Axis has plenty of fantasy going on in WiF too) starts becoming really threatening.

And you won't see very many German occupied Norways...but that doesn't mean the CW can't land there anyway in the middle of the game.

(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 232
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/30/2008 8:01:19 PM   
npilgaard

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
The real thing is knocking out Italy,


I agree that taking out Italy first is the usual way the allies handle the Axis.
However, there are other strategies that can work well also, I think (important to create variety to the AIO strategies (as has been mentioned already), but also because they are not bad strategies in themselves, imho).

E.g. don't focus 100% on Italy in '41/'42 ('43), but maybe do one of the following instead:

1. Japan first - Japan is very vulnerable against concentrated allied effort. If the US builds for this strategy early on and CW supports (and maybe an early attack by USSR to take away the Manchurian resources) and they manage to bring Japan to her knees fairly quickly (especially if playing with oil), then it will leave time to go all out for Europe in '44/'45 (even with Italy on play the Axis will have a hard time getting through).
This will mean no relief-invasion for USSR in Western Europe until maybe '44 though

2. Japan 'first-first'. Haven't tried this myself but have heard of successful very early campaigns against Japan (Russia, CW and France DoW on Japan in '40 or maybe even '39)

3. Germany first: Lots of LL to USSR and a strong US/CW invasion in France (or maybe even in Holland or Belgium if Eastern front demands enough German troops)

4. Not a strategy in itself as such, but due to the action limits it is often a good idea to concentrate on specific type of units, i.e. US builds lots of land units for Europe while CW builds mostly ac - then the air+land impulses can be very effective. Doing such ac-focused build (especially if done early on) will limit CW invasion force (invasion of Italy by US land forces can still be done, but if luck is lacking regarding US entry it might not happen until '43)

And probably more.

In general, I agree that going for Italy is a good option for the allies (and probably the standard strategy for many players), but there are other good options as well, so the AIO shouldn't be locked on the Italy first strategy.

_____________________________

Regards
Nikolaj

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 233
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 9/30/2008 10:42:50 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Nikolaj,

Thanks.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to npilgaard)
Post #: 234
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 7:55:36 AM   
Stabilo

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: npilgaard

2. Japan 'first-first'. Haven't tried this myself but have heard of successful very early campaigns against Japan (Russia, CW and France DoW on Japan in '40 or maybe even '39)





We did this in one of our latest games and it brought Japan to it knees after one year of combat. France has to declare war very early (N/D 1939) to use its fleet before the Wehrmacht reaches Paris, the UK and Russia follow in later impulses so the Allies have three surprises against the Japanese CONV.

It is very hard for Japan to maintain its trade with the US and its oil supply and defend in Manchuria and China at the same time.

If this strategy is choosen by the Allies the German strategy has to be changed to an immediate attack against France to reduce the pressure on Japan.

(in reply to npilgaard)
Post #: 235
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 10:01:30 AM   
Frederyck


Posts: 427
Joined: 12/7/2005
From: Uppsala, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stabilo
We did this in one of our latest games and it brought Japan to it knees after one year of combat. France has to declare war very early (N/D 1939) to use its fleet before the Wehrmacht reaches Paris, the UK and Russia follow in later impulses so the Allies have three surprises against the Japanese CONV.

It is very hard for Japan to maintain its trade with the US and its oil supply and defend in Manchuria and China at the same time.

If this strategy is choosen by the Allies the German strategy has to be changed to an immediate attack against France to reduce the pressure on Japan.


I suppose that the US won't ever be able to declare war against Japan with this strategy, so would the prudent thing to do be to put all three chits in the German pool at the start of the game? (CW and France DoWing Japan seperately is -26 twice and the USSR DoW is -17 against the Ja-pool)

(in reply to Stabilo)
Post #: 236
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 2:59:12 PM   
Stabilo

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stabilo
We did this in one of our latest games and it brought Japan to it knees after one year of combat. France has to declare war very early (N/D 1939) to use its fleet before the Wehrmacht reaches Paris, the UK and Russia follow in later impulses so the Allies have three surprises against the Japanese CONV.

It is very hard for Japan to maintain its trade with the US and its oil supply and defend in Manchuria and China at the same time.

If this strategy is choosen by the Allies the German strategy has to be changed to an immediate attack against France to reduce the pressure on Japan.


I suppose that the US won't ever be able to declare war against Japan with this strategy, so would the prudent thing to do be to put all three chits in the German pool at the start of the game? (CW and France DoWing Japan seperately is -26 twice and the USSR DoW is -17 against the Ja-pool)


Yes, the US has to concentrate its chits against Germany. But the US will be able to start unrestricted naval warfar against Japan (and the UK has to do the invasions).

(in reply to Frederyck)
Post #: 237
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 4:03:25 PM   
npilgaard

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck
I suppose that the US won't ever be able to declare war against Japan with this strategy, so would the prudent thing to do be to put all three chits in the German pool at the start of the game? (CW and France DoWing Japan seperately is -26 twice and the USSR DoW is -17 against the Ja-pool)


This strategy was presented in the latest Annual, iirc(?).
Don't know how 'fair' the AIO is expected to be, but one could argue that this strategy is exploiting a loophole in the rules (US can never have negative amount of chits even though it is required to lose chits when it has none).

I think I would prefer to play it (and thus see it implemented) in a 'lighter' version - maybe CW/France DoW together after a few turns and USSR in spring '40 so US has enough chits every time.

In that way the allies will lose one naval surprise round against the Japanese convoys, and USSR will have to end the war fairly quickly (depending on German strategy), but the 'lighter' version seems most fair to me.
Also, if US is not allowed to ever DoW Japan some major adjustments should be made regarding AIO US (and Japan) strategy. In addition to this an early multi-power surprise attack on Japan can make a very boring game for a Japanese player - being on the defensive right from the start of the game and until '45 (if Japan survives that long).

_____________________________

Regards
Nikolaj

(in reply to Frederyck)
Post #: 238
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 5:53:14 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: npilgaard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck
I suppose that the US won't ever be able to declare war against Japan with this strategy, so would the prudent thing to do be to put all three chits in the German pool at the start of the game? (CW and France DoWing Japan seperately is -26 twice and the USSR DoW is -17 against the Ja-pool)


This strategy was presented in the latest Annual, iirc(?).
Don't know how 'fair' the AIO is expected to be, but one could argue that this strategy is exploiting a loophole in the rules (US can never have negative amount of chits even though it is required to lose chits when it has none).

I think I would prefer to play it (and thus see it implemented) in a 'lighter' version - maybe CW/France DoW together after a few turns and USSR in spring '40 so US has enough chits every time.

In that way the allies will lose one naval surprise round against the Japanese convoys, and USSR will have to end the war fairly quickly (depending on German strategy), but the 'lighter' version seems most fair to me.
Also, if US is not allowed to ever DoW Japan some major adjustments should be made regarding AIO US (and Japan) strategy. In addition to this an early multi-power surprise attack on Japan can make a very boring game for a Japanese player - being on the defensive right from the start of the game and until '45 (if Japan survives that long).

On the other hand, if you are playing both Japan and Italy, this should make Italy much more interesting to play.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to npilgaard)
Post #: 239
RE: What about Convoys In Flames? - 10/1/2008 10:01:23 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stabilo


quote:

ORIGINAL: npilgaard

2. Japan 'first-first'. Haven't tried this myself but have heard of successful very early campaigns against Japan (Russia, CW and France DoW on Japan in '40 or maybe even '39)





We did this in one of our latest games and it brought Japan to it knees after one year of combat. France has to declare war very early (N/D 1939) to use its fleet before the Wehrmacht reaches Paris, the UK and Russia follow in later impulses so the Allies have three surprises against the Japanese CONV.

It is very hard for Japan to maintain its trade with the US and its oil supply and defend in Manchuria and China at the same time.

If this strategy is choosen by the Allies the German strategy has to be changed to an immediate attack against France to reduce the pressure on Japan.


If Japan is aware that this is a possibility it is alot tougher to bring Japan down. And since US can never declare war on Japan it might be fun to play Japan. Japan might be suspicious and start to prepare when he sees the Allied setup (and their moves during the first impulses).

If the allies go for 3 different suprise impulses Japan can declare war on the ones going later if US entry is such that US never can declare war on Japan.

-Orm

(in reply to Stabilo)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> AI Opponent Discussion >> RE: General thoughts on strategy for CW - Knock Out Italy Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.141