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: AI for MWIF - Poland

 
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: AI for MWIF - Poland Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/4/2008 4:36:09 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline 		It's not the threat of getting of Polish plane killed, it's the threat of it being aborted or of the GE player aborting himself after 1 round to cause a return to base (you can't intern on a RTB).

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 91
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/4/2008 5:54:43 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I'm uneasy about too much "gameyness" in the minor set-ups. We have to remember that these were proud countries with militaries whose purpose was first and foremost to defend their territory, not to scarper in some clever way to contribute to the strategic cause.

Cheers, Neilster


Actually, several of the South American countries had long held animosities with their neighboring countries, so the prospect of them attacking each other is not all that ahistorical. The unit write ups on the South American armies provide some information about those pre-WWII conflicts.
---
Upon reflection, it is probably impossible to find any two neighboring countries anywhere in the world that have not been at war with each other some time in the last 400 years.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 92
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/5/2008 4:36:50 AM   
Neilster


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

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I'm uneasy about too much "gameyness" in the minor set-ups. We have to remember that these were proud countries with militaries whose purpose was first and foremost to defend their territory, not to scarper in some clever way to contribute to the strategic cause.

Cheers, Neilster


Actually, several of the South American countries had long held animosities with their neighboring countries, so the prospect of them attacking each other is not all that ahistorical. The unit write ups on the South American armies provide some information about those pre-WWII conflicts.
---
Upon reflection, it is probably impossible to find any two neighboring countries anywhere in the world that have not been at war with each other some time in the last 400 years.

I was thinking more about Poland, Belgium, Holland etc. They fought courageously, even when it was obvious that their cause was lost. I think it is completely ahistorical to have them doing anything else.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 93
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/5/2008 5:33:28 PM   
Norman42


Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline 		One way that I find to justify the 'gameyness' of having these European minors do anything but fight to the last man is remembering that most of these countries like Norway, Poland, Netherlands, found ways to smuggle thier national treasuries (the story of the smuggling of the Polish gold reserves through occupied territories is an epic tale in itself) to Britain/France to continue on the fight. So when a Polish plane stands down to save a few build points for the CW, I just think of it as 8000 bars of gold being heroically transported to the Allied cause.

In the case of the South American countries, most of them had fought wars against each other in the pre-war era, some of them quite devastating(google the Chaco War, or The War of the Pacific), so having them in 'marauder defences' does make sense.  They would rather pound thier neighbors then be shipped off to Europe.

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 94
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/5/2008 11:39:28 PM   
Incy

 

Posts: 336
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline
quote:

Upon reflection, it is probably impossible to find any two neighboring countries anywhere in the world that have not been at war with each other some time in the last 400 years.


Norway and Russia have had a common border for ~1000 years, without ever having a war with each other (unless you count cold wars).
There are of course short periods where there was no border (like 1919-1945), and both countries have had various different configurations throughout the period (Norway bordered Novgorod, not Muscovy, for instance). Of course, this says little about the peaceful nature of the two peoples (or man), as this border is so desolate that any war was near impossible, and certainly not meaningful.
And anyways, the border area was originally mostly populated by lapps, which both countries have fought against and supressed.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 95
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 3:00:13 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Incy

quote:

Upon reflection, it is probably impossible to find any two neighboring countries anywhere in the world that have not been at war with each other some time in the last 400 years.


Norway and Russia have had a common border for ~1000 years, without ever having a war with each other (unless you count cold wars).
There are of course short periods where there was no border (like 1919-1945), and both countries have had various different configurations throughout the period (Norway bordered Novgorod, not Muscovy, for instance). Of course, this says little about the peaceful nature of the two peoples (or man), as this border is so desolate that any war was near impossible, and certainly not meaningful.
And anyways, the border area was originally mostly populated by lapps, which both countries have fought against and supressed.

Thanks.

I had thought about Sweden, which is why I went back 400 years, instead of 300.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Incy)
Post #: 96
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 5:30:45 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		People playing WiF will always do ahistorical things, it's unavoidable - we know how the script turns out in the end. On the first turn, any smart French player sends two cruisers or maybe a SUB into the Baltic before the Germans can 'close' it. In real life, that would have been a suicidal mission unlikely to accomplish very much. But in WiF, it's only a couple of surplus cardboard pieces or computer icons. So why not do it? Human players will be doing whatever they can to play the rules system in the way most likely for them to win the game. The AI should do the same.

It's too bad it is good play to send the Polish air force away without fighting. In real life, I think the Poles shot down more German planes than the French did. But a lot of Poles did escape to fight another day, and the success of the Blitzkrieg and the unwavering commitment to resist on the part of the UK did set a precedent for military figures in other countries to follow later. It's only really possible for the Dutch, Belgians, Spanish, and Portugese, but it's not too difficult to imagine real life leaders deciding to save some portions of their military for use from colonial bases, especially after the bombings of Warsaw and Rotterdam. Even then, it's fairly rare to see in a game except for the Dutch navy (historical), and occasionally parts of the Spanish army deployed in Africa (probably not too historcial).

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 97
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 9:29:37 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I'm uneasy about too much "gameyness" in the minor set-ups. We have to remember that these were proud countries with militaries whose purpose was first and foremost to defend their territory, not to scarper in some clever way to contribute to the strategic cause.

Cheers, Neilster


Actually, several of the South American countries had long held animosities with their neighboring countries, so the prospect of them attacking each other is not all that ahistorical. The unit write ups on the South American armies provide some information about those pre-WWII conflicts.
---
Upon reflection, it is probably impossible to find any two neighboring countries anywhere in the world that have not been at war with each other some time in the last 400 years.

I was thinking more about Poland, Belgium, Holland etc. They fought courageously, even when it was obvious that their cause was lost. I think it is completely ahistorical to have them doing anything else.

Cheers, Neilster

Warspite1

I take your point but I think if a minor is being attacked your opponent will set the units of that country up in such a way as to ensure that it is as difficult as possible to be conquered with the occasional exception. It is natural to look at the big picture to try and ensure that once conquered, you reap any benefits the rules give you. If that means keeping the Polish air force out of the way so you can grab the pilot then so be it. For me by far the most important thing is that the computer does not have just one set up and one tactic so that the game becomes predictable and you can work out fail safe plans of attack. That is the stated intention and why Peters hard work is so appreciated.

There are historical happenings that make this "gameyness" acceptable. The two Polish squadrons that fought in the Battle of Britain being the obvious example. Probably one of the key events in the Battle of the Atlantic - the transfer of the Dutch and particularly the Norwegian merchant shipping over to the UK.

(in reply to Neilster)
Post #: 98
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 10:07:12 AM   
yvesp


Posts: 2083
Joined: 9/12/2008
Status: offline 		What I wanted to make sure of when I raised this issue was that the AIO for Poland would also not be predictable. Sometimes it should be able to fight to the bitter end ; sometimes it should decide that the air force (pilots) should be saved. Even in a given German setup, this should not be a given. If the German knows that if he sets up enough planes near Poland, the polish air force will flee like frightened birds, and if the polish air force indeed flees too soon, then the German is free to begin an immediate rebase of his airforce, using the one rebase he has in each land action (is that it ? it's been so long...). The longer the german has to wait, the better. The polish doesn't even have to use it : having their air force within range strands the German fighters as well.
Question : how much build points is it worth to have the German lose a turn to attack west ?

Yves

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 99
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 11:39:37 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: yvesp
Question : how much build points is it worth to have the German lose a turn to attack west ?

In my opinion, it is worth 0 BP.
The German is not stranded with time between S/O 39 & M/J 40. He has a lot of time to do whatever he wants, and having the poles fall in N/D 39 or later is not a problem (other than in German pride).

Loosing the Polish Pilots on the other hand is a lot more costly for the CW, as it is an immediate loss of 2 air units that won't be bombing the Germans from N/D 39 to M/J 40, which is an enormous loss for the CW IMO.

For the German, killing the Polish Air Force in S/O 39 is a future pain in the ass relieved, so you should never make this present to them.

(in reply to yvesp)
Post #: 100
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 12:34:35 PM   
yvesp


Posts: 2083
Joined: 9/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: yvesp
Question : how much build points is it worth to have the German lose a turn to attack west ?

In my opinion, it is worth 0 BP.
...


I'm not sure that's a fair answer ; suppose there were a rule saying that in Sept 39 the British can spend one BP to stall the German war machine for one turn, you'd not be using it ? Personally, I would...

Because that one turn may also lessen the chance of a Barbarossa attack in Apr/May 41... It will not always work ; but one turn lost gives less leeway to recover from a strike of bad luck in France (has happened), where the initial strike gets nowhere and a full turn gets almost lost due to a sequence of rolls of 3 or less. Some hex gained, but that's all. Not a big deal. Still I agree that the German probably has enough time to achieve what he wants. And maybe not. That turn may also be the one missing when it comes to attacking a badly defended Gibraltar to a well defended one...

I know the british needs these pilots ; but having them will hardly achieve much. You have enough to fly your fighters (if you agree to commit them over France, which not all british players agree to), and the starting british bombers are mostly crap. Still, I agree it's nice to be able to fly those planes rather than let them sit idle.

One of the thing where we disagree here is that it is my opinion that even if the polish air force is used, the pilots are not automatically dead. You seem to consider that using that airforce will automatically kill the pilots. I'd rather bet that I can annoy the german with the polish air force (depends on german commitment of course ; I'm no fool) AND have enough luck to keep the pilots. I believe that the AIO should be able to use both approaches so as not to be too predictable.

Yves

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 101
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 1:28:14 PM   
yvesp


Posts: 2083
Joined: 9/12/2008
Status: offline 		Note than in many ways, this small topic can be broadened to the way the AIO behaves.
Many times, attacks at less than 3 to 1 are bad bets. But there are some times where they can be good bets ; for exemple when a success may bring a fruitfull result such as putting enemy units out of supply ; or when you know that you can bear the loss but that a success will be a serious pain to your opponent ; or when you know that you'll be able to reorganize ; or...
The AIO must not be predictable (or one will build lines such that the attack places will be known in advance, and thus more easily countered with a second line and such), nor reckless... and that's the base point of the whole affair. I know that will be rather arduous...

Yves

(in reply to yvesp)
Post #: 102
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/6/2008 2:40:15 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline 		If the german player is even a somewhat good player, in my sense Poland has no chance to hold the entire turn against him.

What to do with the polish airforce is another matter. What to do? Fight the luftwaffe hoping to destroy one german airplane with odds of -3 or worst or send the airplanes to Rumania to use the pilots on better british airplanes later on? up to you.


(in reply to yvesp)
Post #: 103
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/8/2008 10:45:57 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

It's not the threat of getting of Polish plane killed, it's the threat of it being aborted or of the GE player aborting himself after 1 round to cause a return to base (you can't intern on a RTB).

Actually you can do it on an RTB. There are two occurrences of Option 58 in the rules. The first says you can be interned by rebasing. The second (just before 19.2) says you can be interned by moving or rebasing.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 104
RE: AI for MWIF - Poland - 10/9/2008 4:56:11 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

It's not the threat of getting of Polish plane killed, it's the threat of it being aborted or of the GE player aborting himself after 1 round to cause a return to base (you can't intern on a RTB).

Actually you can do it on an RTB. There are two occurrences of Option 58 in the rules. The first says you can be interned by rebasing. The second (just before 19.2) says you can be interned by moving or rebasing.

We did it that way (can do it on an RTB) in our home games.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 105
Gdynia gambit - 10/9/2008 5:27:09 PM   
wfzimmerman


Posts: 660
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline 		I have always liked the idea of the Gydnia gambit: is there any conceivable way that Poland can hang on to a Baltic port long enough for the CW to make good on its commitment to Polish security? I.e. secure the necessary chokepoints and send an Anglo French expeditionary force into the Baltic.

I've never been able to come up with a plausible deployment, but it is a historically logical (if not sensible) strategy.

_____________________________

Contribute to the Steve H. thank you book! http://www.nimblebooks.com/wordpress/2009/04/contribute-to-the-wargamers-wwii-quiz-book/

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 106
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/9/2008 6:10:00 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

I have always liked the idea of the Gydnia gambit: is there any conceivable way that Poland can hang on to a Baltic port long enough for the CW to make good on its commitment to Polish security? I.e. secure the necessary chokepoints and send an Anglo French expeditionary force into the Baltic.

I've never been able to come up with a plausible deployment, but it is a historically logical (if not sensible) strategy.

The major problem is that naval movement occurs before land movement. That means the CW transports, with land units, can't arrive in the port if it is full of Polish infantry. If you leave only 1 Polish unit in the port, that is easy for Germany to eliminate, should they so desire.

The other possibility is to leave the CW transports at sea and disembark the land units into Polish controlled coastal hexes. That might be possible, but the CW would then have to take a Combined Action to do both the naval and land moves. The Polish units wouldn't be able to move if the CW is using its land moves for the British units.

Either way, it doesn't seem likely that 4 units can be delivered. The CW transports in the Baltic will be very vulnerable to both the German navy and the land based air units. Germany can also take out Denmark and trap CW naval units in the Baltic.

I don't see any appreciable gain for the Allied side from these actions unless, ...

Germany has decided on a France First strategy and has left the Polish units more or less unmolested. Then Poland might last until the end of the first turn and 4 CW land units could be of help. But France is going to be frantic to have the BEF deployed immediately in France or the lowlands, and having the BEF off flirting around with Polish girls (instead of French ones) will not make the French player very happy.

As Germany, there are fewer things I would rather see during the first turn that having the BEF land in Poland. I might buy them all tickets.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to wfzimmerman)
Post #: 107
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/9/2008 6:38:59 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		the trapped in the Baltic via Germany taking Denmark is a big problem ... but the bigger reward for the CW. Some Germans send something weak, like a Mot division or the motorised AT Gun to take Frederikshavn...then it is a simple matter for Gort to land with another corps on any Danish hex still not controlled by the Germans (such as adjacent to Frederikshavn) and then, along with the guns of the Royal Navy BBs, blow that away and make the Germans come dig them out from across the crossing arrows. (As the Germans I now send a full MECH or ARM corps up there, and try and take that whole island if it is not raining and I have enough 6 mover units).

I've thought about messing with Gdnyia too, but I think it would work best after a failed German intervention in Denmark as above (though it would then be extremely rare to still see the Poles alive in the port, but HQ-I's can land on friendly hexes, and be evacuated from them, like the one to the west); the CW could land there on a combined impulse...they do cooperate with the Poles and can stack together. The nice thing about putting the Poles in the far northern port (vulnerable to the blitz table though, but if the Germans don't break down something at start to make some extra motorized divisions, you want to entice them to use the blitz corps against a double stack) is the Germans might be out of position somewhat to come and take it, and if they do and then it rains, they might not have enough time to march the committed units back to the Warsaw front. Though I think going for the possible extra USE chit of delivering 4 whole corps is too much to hope for, and too much to commit. The goal would be to participate in this:

There is one rare German nightmare scenario in Poland. The bad weather comes on so heavy and fast in both Sep/Oct and Nov/Dec that Poland is still alive in Jan/Feb...and then they discover units in an enemy ZoC &/or >3 hexes from a Russian hex don't count towards the pact garrison with the Russians (So a Gdnyia adventure could play into that, maybe taking advantage of Defensive Shore Bombardment there). Note that if Russia beaks the pact, they don't necessarily have to start a war with the Germans, but the resource/BP trading is gone for good.

< Message edited by brian brian -- 10/9/2008 6:57:30 PM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 108
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/9/2008 11:25:52 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		As a German I would drool if CW commited units to Poland (or northern Denmark). That means fewer CW units in Netherlands/Belgium/France.

If CW commit its transports/land units in sep/oct I would most likely declare was on Netherlands right away to get Rotterdam without CW interferance. With Rotterdam in German hands Belgium is doomed. And that spells an early fall of France.

-Orm

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 109
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 12:16:04 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Orm

As a German I would drool if CW commited units to Poland (or northern Denmark). That means fewer CW units in Netherlands/Belgium/France.

If CW commit its transports/land units in sep/oct I would most likely declare was on Netherlands right away to get Rotterdam without CW interferance. With Rotterdam in German hands Belgium is doomed. And that spells an early fall of France.

-Orm

Yeah, I guess that is my strategic sense of this. The CW is thin on naval transports and land units. France and Lowlands are a better place to use those units than Poland. There is just not enough to spare for risky ventures.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 110
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 1:35:15 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		I'd trade you guys Rotterdam for Frederikshavn any day of the week; but it's not impossible to intervene in both places. France is doomed anyway. But life is a lot harder for the CW without those free 10 Dutch Convoy Points. You don't have to stay in Frederikshavn forever, just long enough to hit the German Convoy Points and attrition the Kriegsmarine for a couple turns, then move to France in time for the sunny weather. Or you can just leave a couple MIL up there, maybe the extra AT/AA guns you are less likely to have enough foreign troop commitment levels to use in France, and still have a decent BEF in France. The CW can get a lot done with 4 TRS and smart re-organizing of them. The overall level of risk might depend on whether you are using Defensive Shore Bombardment, and whether Germany crossed either of the crossing arrows on to the Frederikshavn island.

All that said, I've never gone all the way to Poland, but that's not generally an option anyway. Maybe in a now fairly rare France First, but then you can't afford to go anywhere else.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 111
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 6:09:29 AM   
bredsjomagnus

 

Posts: 141
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Mayby i´ve played this rule wrong. But in 11.4.4 Navel movement restrictions I read:
You can´t move naval units between the Baltic Sea and the North Sea (even via Fredrikshavn or Kristiansand) if major powers you are at war with control at least 2 of these cities:
  • Oslo
  • Copenhagen; and
  • Kiel

So if I as the Germans control Copenhagen and Kiel the "only" thing, if CW is in Fredrikshavn, that can get in the Baltic Sea is NAVs and FTRs, right?

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 112
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 7:06:23 AM   
lomyrin


Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline 		CW ships based in Fredrikshavn can sail to the Baltic. they can also only rebase back to Fredrikshavn. 

Lars

(in reply to bredsjomagnus)
Post #: 113
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 3:58:00 PM   
bredsjomagnus

 

Posts: 141
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		 Ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.

I realize that this a bit OT. Sorry for that.

(in reply to lomyrin)
Post #: 114
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/10/2008 9:31:38 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		Depending on the size of German commitment to taking Denmark to begin with, the CW can send 2 corps in (1 must be an HQ in all likelihood) if the Germans do not seize all of the hexes adjacent to the North Sea and secure the island north of Frederikshavn. This CW presence can be a pain to remove (I speak from bitter personal experience).

They will still have 2 more transports and 2 other corps in UK to stuff into Rotterdam if the Germans attack - which, by the way, is not easy to do on the first turn if they have a Polish-heavy deployment or want to do anything special like the "no-Bessarabia" gambit (to say nothing of the possible weather problems).

All that said, it is almost certainly too much of a stretch for the CW to attempt to intervene in Poland unless the Germans (a) are weakly deployed there, (b) muffed up their Danish invasion, and (c) get bad enough weather to delay the conquest of Poland in September/October.



_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to bredsjomagnus)
Post #: 115
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/11/2008 12:38:28 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		it is not good to DoW Denmark in the rain...

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 116
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/19/2008 9:02:36 AM   
morgil


Posts: 114
Joined: 5/9/2008
From: Bergen, Norway
Status: offline 		Dowing Denmark is almost obligatory second impulse action for Germany. Not only does it keep the Baltic safe, but it prevents the sneaky -ing russian to take it.

If Denmark places all Convs in Iceland, and the UK has no ships in the North Sea, you might even consider invading Iceland on this impulse. If the RN is sailing, you should definately consider subs off Iceland.
Otherwise, you put a Nav in the North Sea, use a 6 mover to roll up to Fredrikshavn, and a 4 mover to grab Copenhagen.
This might seem like overkill for a country with 0 units, but in my book an overkill is a good kill, and these are units that there mostly wouldnt be room for in a Polish campain anyways.

The teory is that you just dont want the Wallies playing around in that part of the world, well on one level you want them there cause they are easier to kill, however you stand to loose units aswell, and you really dont want to be taking combined impulses just to replace lost Convs. On the same line, Germany should always try to force the Wallies to react on theire actions, allways keep the preasure on hard, otherwise the tables turn and it will be the other way around.


_____________________________

Gott weiss ich will kein Engel sein.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 117
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/19/2008 9:11:39 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: morgil
Dowing Denmark is almost obligatory second impulse action for Germany. Not only does it keep the Baltic safe, but it prevents the sneaky -ing russian to take it.

If the Russians do that, this is a reason for Germany to break the nazi-soviet pact (19.5.3).


(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 118
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/19/2008 10:08:11 AM   
morgil


Posts: 114
Joined: 5/9/2008
From: Bergen, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil
Dowing Denmark is almost obligatory second impulse action for Germany. Not only does it keep the Baltic safe, but it prevents the sneaky -ing russian to take it.

If the Russians do that, this is a reason for Germany to break the nazi-soviet pact (19.5.3).


Quite so, but that is unlikely to happen. Its far more likely that Germany will claim one more oil, or pay one less BP (5.1)
So its probably not a good Russian strategy, but ohh so annoying for the Germans to not be able to secure the Baltic.

_____________________________

Gott weiss ich will kein Engel sein.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 119
RE: Gdynia gambit - 10/19/2008 10:44:13 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: morgil
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil
Dowing Denmark is almost obligatory second impulse action for Germany. Not only does it keep the Baltic safe, but it prevents the sneaky -ing russian to take it.

If the Russians do that, this is a reason for Germany to break the nazi-soviet pact (19.5.3).


Quite so, but that is unlikely to happen. Its far more likely that Germany will claim one more oil, or pay one less BP (5.1)
So its probably not a good Russian strategy, but ohh so annoying for the Germans to not be able to secure the Baltic.

I don't understand how you can view breaking the pact as less likely than claiming more oil / pay less BP, but I suppose that your mileage can vary.

(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> AI Opponent Discussion >> RE: AI for MWIF - Poland Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   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

3.891