RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR)

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: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR)

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 >> After Action Report >> RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR)

Page: << < prev 28 29 [30] 31 32 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 9:01:32 AM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

I don't think Morocco is a very safe place to be right now. I won't give it up easily, but I don't know if it's worth keeping the MECH in the mountains any longer. The RSA TERR is just waiting to be crushed, the French CAV can either run away to the south or try to ZOC in place of the MECH, while the MECH joins the Montreal MIL or the RSA TERR in defending Rabat. Probably better to have the TERR do it, swapping him with the MIL, since he gives a +1 to the die roll if he defends alone.

With the German threat very real, and with only 3 Land moves to work with, I'm reconsidering what to do here.

Plan B
After some more thought, I debated moving both the MECH and the MIL into the hex now occupied by the RSA Territorial, and moving that unit into the mountains where the MECH is. Even though that gives up a +1 to the die roll, at least it doubles the combat value to 8, and Germany can only attack it from a single hex, unless it also tries a Paradrop (which gives another +1 -- not making the same mistake twice by including the Notional unit here for a +2 . . . or a total of +3 against the TERR).

But that ATR stacked with the PARA is a serious problem. If I change to the above plan, Rabat is in danger. The Notional Unit would defend at 3 factors (its normal 1, +1 for the city, +1 for being in the ZOC of a friendly unit). The PARA is a 4-factor unit, with 2 factors of Ground Support that can be added. That's a 2:1 +2 attack (+1 for the paradrop, +1 for disorganized defender). That attack has a 50% chance of success, which in my opinion, is worth trying. The result would be 3 CW units OOS and potentially isolated . . . so, abandon plan B.

Unfortunately, the conquest of France (instead of Vichy Declaration) means the CAV can't stack with any CW units, which means it can't try to defend Rabat, because the RSA FTR is there after its failed attempt to support a Ground Strike on Gibraltar. I might still need it in a forward defensive position, but once it is dead, it will be gone for a very very long time. My plan for it is/was to send it to Mogador, instead. This idea was actually generated by composer99's comment about Germany not needing to take it, since unless an Allied unit was there, it would come under German control as soon as Morocco was conquered. But . . . if the French CAV holds on to it, Germany needs to spend another impulse or two getting rid of it. Otherwise, the USA will have a port to begin transferring troops to once it enters the war.

"An impulse gained is a victory." I'm adding that as one of my mottos, along with "Too many rules . . . too many rules . . . "

So, let's look at:

Plan C
Send the French CAV to Mogador, to buy those impulses.

Move the Montreal MIL into the hex where the MECH is, move the MECH into the hex with the RSA Territorial (creating stacks of 10 and 11, respectively), and the final move is . . . HQ-I Gort to the hex now occupied by the French CAV. It's a forest hex, so "safe" from any Ground Strike, but that isn't going to matter, because . . .

In order for both Rabat and Casablanca to have a chance against a German Paradrop, that FTR needs to be alive and kicking in Rabat. At the end of the impulse, if I use Gort to reorganize the FTR, Germany isn't likely to risk a paradrop on either of those cities at unvaforable Air-to-Air combat odds of +5/-5 for the CW.

Plan C has a smal drawback. There's no way to prevent the Italians from enforcing ZOC into Rabat next impulse -- even if Germany doesn't make an attack on one of the CW stacks. So, let's move on to . . .

Plan D
This is the Same thing as Plan C, but it has Gort moving into Rabat so that supply can be maintained regardless of the Italian actions. This leaves Casablanca a little more vulnerable to a Paradrop, but the active 5-factor RSA fighter should be enough to keep that from happening.

So, Plan D it is: final result will be a potential safe haven/pest in Mogador, stacks of 10 and 11 next to Tangier, and a unit in Rabat to maintain supply.

Perhaps Gort would be better off joining the MIL in the mountains, but I just don't like that idea. If Germany finds a way to knock him out, the MECH and TERR end up Isolated, Rabat and Casablanca no longer have any kind of defense, and the Axis can steamroll its way to Mogador. I'm trying to learn from what forum members attempted to teach me during the invasion of France: defend in depth

Also, if it looks promising, there's still a Canadian TERR on a transport in the E. Coast. It can potentially join the fight next impulse.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 871

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 9:54:46 AM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Another "before and after" shot of Communist Chinese options. Only one stack of 2 units moved (circled in blue).

I could have left things as they were, but that would let the Japanese mount a 4:1 attack on this stack, with a chance at 5:1 either by Fractional Odds or through HQ Support. Moving this stack into the mountains pulls it away from the "Sian defensive line", but keeps the Japanese ZOCed to a single hex advance (unless they also want to take Tianshui, which would be pointless). This move also means the best attack the Japanese can mount is a 3:1 against the MTN unit, with a shot at 4:1 only by using HQ Support.
----
Been reviewing it some more, and I've changed my mind again. The 7-3 INF still goes to that mountain hex, but the Lanchow MIL should move into the hex with the MTN unit. That makes stacks of 14 and 23, respectively. For this impulse, the best the Japanese could do is mount a 2:1 attack with a 50/50 shot at 3:! against the 7-3 INF, and that would require taking Tianshui. As the Japanese player, I haven't decided yet if this would be worthwhile or not. It's probably better to spend another impulse or two slipping through the gap to force the Chinese to come out of the mountains to defend in front of Sian.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 872

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 10:11:05 AM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

After reorganizing the S. African FTR with Gort, the Allies almost got lucky with a roll of '3' to end the turn. But, alas, they needed a '2' to do that. And now, not that it makes a huge impact on things, the weather roll for impulse #9 (extreme once more) shows Fine weather everywhere:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 873

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 11:05:52 AM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Incedentally, I think this AAR is probably a very good example of why the ADG crew decided to introduce the 2D10 charts in the first place. Too much luck on one side can really mess things up. It's actually why I'm enjoying it . . . you can't always select an attack and be fairly certain that half your units will remain organized . . . it's an all or nothing thing. I only ran a few games for about a year each using the 2D10 tables, but I felt like there wasn't enough chance for "admirable conduct" among my Generals. True, it is closer to the real world, and this game is supposed to be a simulation, but I like the opportunity in a game to pass out those Outstanding Conduct Medals.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 874

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 11:29:48 AM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Too many rules . . . too many rules . . .

And I thought I was doing so well. Turns out I made a rather nasty mistake with the Communists. By allowing the Japanese to "slip through" instead of "outflank", I didn't realize that move would put the MTN unit stack into an Isolated position. It's not a terrible mistake, and can be solved without too much damage done, but it was an error I probably should have foreseen.

Mark it as another spot where I was either trying to do too much, or where overwhelming force just makes you act stupid. In the end, it did buy the extra impulse or two it was supposed to buy, but when the units are finally attacked, one of them is going to be disorganized. (Unless I figure something out that is very clever, indeed).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Red Prince -- 1/8/2012 11:30:36 AM >

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 875

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 12:30:00 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Having finally managed to get troops across from Gibraltar to Tangier, the Axis made one attack this turn.
-----
You'll notice that in the panel that shows the Odds Column: 3:1, the Armor modifier shows both modifiers. The first (-1.00) is for an Assault, and the second is for a Blitz attack. With the Blitz Bonus optional rules, the defending MECH always gets the die roll modifier if defending in a non-city clear or desert hex, regardless of the Assault/Blitz decision; attackers only get the bonus if conducting a Blitz attack. Since Germany will have the option to choose the attack type, the "net" modifier is shown based on that assumption: -1 for combat friction, nothing for Armor (Blitz Bonus).
-----
This particular attack, with a 91% chance of moving up to the 4:1 column, has a 60% chance of gaining the hex:

And the results:

Attack on Spanish Morocco [75, 17]: Blitz, Fractional Odds .653 (Yes), Roll = 9-1 = 8 = */1B (Not Converted to Retreat, TERR destroyed)

I suppose you could see this as another lucky roll, but there was a 40% chance of a Breakthrough, so while the roll was a high one, it was not a "must have" kind of roll producing the victory.

So, the CW is down to 2 units in Morocco, and the French have just 1 there. The Blitzing German Corps charged right on into the hex where the Italians started the attack, waving as they crossed paths and grinning the whole time. The 2 Italian Corps and the German ART took over control of the attacked hex, and the CW MECH will find itself mysteriously in the UK come S/O '40.

The CW has a few choices now:

1. Take an Air Impulse, so the Liner in Cape St. Vincent can reorganize the LND in Casablanca so that it can rebase safely out of harm's way (along with the FTR in Rabat)
2. Take another Combined impulse, so that the CV Glorious is certain to escape, a 10-stack can be built in Rabat, and the FTR can rebase, although the LND is likely to be lost.
3. Panic.

Of these options, I consider #2 to be the best. Gort is a'gonna die, but he should force the Axis to mount a solid attack by including the Canadian MIL. Losing the LND would be sad, but risking the loss of the CV would be worse, I think.
-----
Okay, I just looked up the rules and as long as the CV is not disorganized (and it isn't), it doesn't risk being lost, so maybe option #1 is the best. Yes, Rabat will be easier to take, but as long as the Canadian MIL can stay organized, the Axis needs to beat it with an attack that can take on 10 defense factors. And if it doesn't get that done this turn, there might be some shore bombardment to deal with, too. Germany can't very well begin toasting its victory if there are still anemy troops in the neighborhood, even if it has "conquered" the nation, can it?
-----
Edit: For those of you wondering why I don't suggest a Land or Naval impulse, the CW has only 7 SCS in port and organized, and 5 of them are in Aden. The other two are Greek ships trapped in Cyprus. Taking a Combined Action would let me bring the Canadian TERR over to Morocco, but that only adds 3 Factors . . . and if it defends alone, which it would have to do in Casablanca (Rabat is not a port), it gives the enemy +1 on the die roll. To me that seems like a waste of 2 BP.

As for a Land Action, what can I really do with it that I can't do with a Combined Action? There are only 3 units worth moving anyway, and 2 of them probably shouldn't (the 2 in Suez). The CW has to hope the turn ends quickly (now, preferably), so that it can get its navy back into the game.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Red Prince -- 1/8/2012 12:40:16 PM >

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 876

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 12:45:45 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Just want to answer a question someone asked ealier in the thread. I'll paraphrase it and expand it . . . the original was something like: "How can the Allies manage to lose both Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn?" . . . and I'll add Morocco to it, too.

Well, one answer is poor play by the CW player (me). Another answer is unconventional thinking. I don't mean this to sound too rude, but I think when MWiF is released to the public, many "old-school" players are going to have to get away from their conservative ideas about how this game is supposed to be played. There are going to be a lot more people like me out there, who are willing to try anything once.

For example, raise your hand if you would have thought to rail all of your HQs to Gibraltar at the time that I did it . . . well, maybe that wasn't too surprising . . . but how about using the O-chit anyway, even though I didn't need it for Gibraltar, to reorganize the units needed to finish off the Allies in Morocco, thus securing that front in one summer? Personally, I think people rely way too much on the "intimidation" factor of an O-chit. Yes, it's a nice thing to have around, but if you need to get a job done, then by all means use the O-chit! It's kind of like keeping a bunch of pilots in your reserve pool with a bunch of fighters they could be flying, but not the fighters you really want them in. You paid for them in BP, but neither the Pilots nor the fighters do you any good if they don't get used.

You can probably tell that I don't play conservatively with my O-chits. If I see an opportunity to make it work for me, I don't bother to count BP and calculate the "actual" value of using it. I jump right in and do it. Sometimes that's going to get me into trouble, but a lot of the time it's going to take the enemy by surprise . . . which is what the "intimidation factor" is all about, isn't it? If your enemy knows you like to hold onto an O-chit just to scare him, he's not going to be scared.

But I digress. That's just an example of the kind of thinking that can cause all of these horrid things to happen to the Allies all at once. Another example is that overkill is sometimes useful. I know you're only supposed to commit "what you need to get the job done", but this early in the game, there isn't a threat in sight from anywhere else. With Amphibious rules, even if I had all 6 CW transports that I was "supposed" to have, what can they do behind the lines? Nothing, really -- no Marine units to invade with. So I went into Spain with all the forces I could spare that weren't required for Garrisson duty. That's overkill, but it certainly did the job.

Of course, luck doesn't hurt either, if you want to take Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn. I like to think I planned it well, but luck was probably more in control of things than I was, when it comes right down to it.

Euhm... Do you really want me to comment on this? Personally I would have sacked Chamberlain by now, if you get my drift.
This is a lot of so called bullshit. I've stated previously that the longer the CW is continuing to run away from a good fight, the worse they are going to end up in the game. Sure, luck has something to do with it (and the CW is extremely unlucky). however: don't think you are doing so well with the Axis because of what you are writing here.
Unconventional thinking by the Axis? Sorry, but I don't buy this at all. It is all about not knowing how to defend. That in itself is to be expected from newbie players. "Old school" players? What are you thinking here? I would have kicked the Italian ass from the start, if I had been playing the Allies. No way I would have been conquered with the French.
"Old school" play, as you call it, is to get the Axis into the position where they are forced to create Vichy France, since Toulouse is a real French fortress, with a British presence in the Bordeaux-Bayonne area. "Old school" play is to throw cheap CW units in front of German and Italian troops. "Old school" play is to build the units the CW needs to survive. "Old school" play is to preserve the oh so precious CW sealift and kill the Italian sealift. Did we see "Old school" play by the Allies: Not at all.
So please, don't start saying that Axis play is "unconventional".
This "old school" player really wants to show you how to defend with the CW and France. At this point of the game, the Axis should have conquered Paris this turn and not Gibraltar/Suez. France should become Vichy end of this turn. Italians in Egypt? Perhaps some poor TERR, not the forces you've got now in Africa...
So please: refrain from writing these kind of things. You've never played against an "old school" player, so don't start these kind of nonsense...
I don't want to go back into all the mistakes you've made, since that's not the way I play any wargame. Mistakes happen and one should go and look how to exploit or to counter the mistakes that are made. However: I don't like people saying they are doing so good, when they really aren't.
By the way: keep up the work. I really like this AAR...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 877

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 12:51:58 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Unfortunately, due to FTC rules, I can't use the Liner in Cape St. Vincent to bring the Spanish INF that was saved earlier into Casablanca (in case you were thinking about that, as I just was).

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 878

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 1:06:07 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Just want to answer a question someone asked ealier in the thread. I'll paraphrase it and expand it . . . the original was something like: "How can the Allies manage to lose both Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn?" . . . and I'll add Morocco to it, too.

Well, one answer is poor play by the CW player (me). Another answer is unconventional thinking. I don't mean this to sound too rude, but I think when MWiF is released to the public, many "old-school" players are going to have to get away from their conservative ideas about how this game is supposed to be played. There are going to be a lot more people like me out there, who are willing to try anything once.

For example, raise your hand if you would have thought to rail all of your HQs to Gibraltar at the time that I did it . . . well, maybe that wasn't too surprising . . . but how about using the O-chit anyway, even though I didn't need it for Gibraltar, to reorganize the units needed to finish off the Allies in Morocco, thus securing that front in one summer? Personally, I think people rely way too much on the "intimidation" factor of an O-chit. Yes, it's a nice thing to have around, but if you need to get a job done, then by all means use the O-chit! It's kind of like keeping a bunch of pilots in your reserve pool with a bunch of fighters they could be flying, but not the fighters you really want them in. You paid for them in BP, but neither the Pilots nor the fighters do you any good if they don't get used.

You can probably tell that I don't play conservatively with my O-chits. If I see an opportunity to make it work for me, I don't bother to count BP and calculate the "actual" value of using it. I jump right in and do it. Sometimes that's going to get me into trouble, but a lot of the time it's going to take the enemy by surprise . . . which is what the "intimidation factor" is all about, isn't it? If your enemy knows you like to hold onto an O-chit just to scare him, he's not going to be scared.

But I digress. That's just an example of the kind of thinking that can cause all of these horrid things to happen to the Allies all at once. Another example is that overkill is sometimes useful. I know you're only supposed to commit "what you need to get the job done", but this early in the game, there isn't a threat in sight from anywhere else. With Amphibious rules, even if I had all 6 CW transports that I was "supposed" to have, what can they do behind the lines? Nothing, really -- no Marine units to invade with. So I went into Spain with all the forces I could spare that weren't required for Garrisson duty. That's overkill, but it certainly did the job.

Of course, luck doesn't hurt either, if you want to take Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn. I like to think I planned it well, but luck was probably more in control of things than I was, when it comes right down to it.

Euhm... Do you really want me to comment on this? Personally I would have sacked Chamberlain by now, if you get my drift.
This is a lot of so called bullshit. I've stated previously that the longer the CW is continuing to run away from a good fight, the worse they are going to end up in the game. Sure, luck has something to do with it (and the CW is extremely unlucky). however: don't think you are doing so well with the Axis because of what you are writing here.
Unconventional thinking by the Axis? Sorry, but I don't buy this at all. It is all about not knowing how to defend. That in itself is to be expected from newbie players. "Old school" players? What are you thinking here? I would have kicked the Italian ass from the start, if I had been playing the Allies. No way I would have been conquered with the French.
"Old school" play, as you call it, is to get the Axis into the position where they are forced to create Vichy France, since Toulouse is a real French fortress, with a British presence in the Bordeaux-Bayonne area. "Old school" play is to throw cheap CW units in front of German and Italian troops. "Old school" play is to build the units the CW needs to survive. "Old school" play is to preserve the oh so precious CW sealift and kill the Italian sealift. Did we see "Old school" play by the Allies: Not at all.
So please, don't start saying that Axis play is "unconventional".
This "old school" player really wants to show you how to defend with the CW and France. At this point of the game, the Axis should have conquered Paris this turn and not Gibraltar/Suez. France should become Vichy end of this turn. Italians in Egypt? Perhaps some poor TERR, not the forces you've got now in Africa...
So please: refrain from writing these kind of things. You've never played against an "old school" player, so don't start these kind of nonsense...
I don't want to go back into all the mistakes you've made, since that's not the way I play any wargame. Mistakes happen and one should go and look how to exploit or to counter the mistakes that are made. However: I don't like people saying they are doing so good, when they really aren't.
By the way: keep up the work. I really like this AAR...

I'm sorry I irritated you with this post. I don't mean to say that "old school" play is obsolete. I just mean that there are going to be a lot of players out there who, like me, don't know how to play one side or the other.

I will come to my own defense on one count: I took the defense of France directly from the suggestions of the forum members. I planned very little of it for myself.

Two counts, actually: If you played with the initial setup I made, I doubt you could have done as well as you state above, though you would no doubt have done better than I did.

I do have one question, though. And I'm very serious about this, and not the least bit sarcastic. If you had to "take over" the CW from another player . . . let's say after the first 2 turns . . . and got similarly bad rolls on whatever attacks you decided to make after that, how would you have created the defense for the Allies? That means, starting with the mistakes I made in all areas before the J/F '40 turn began, what would you have done that would have changed things so completely?

I ask this because there is always a snowball effect in these games. The earlier you screw things up (as I did), the more damage is going to be done. This leads me back to the point I was initially trying to make: when MWiF is released, there are going to be just as many greenhorns playing the Allied side as there are playing the Axis side. That's going to create a lot of opportunities for "unconventional" activity.

Just because one side is playing poorly, that doesn't negate the fact that the other side is playing well. And, please take note, that I didn't claim to be "doing so good". What I said was that I came up with a few ideas that are unconventional, and I was lucky to have them work out.

Maybe you will throttle me when we first take each other on. Only time will tell. And if it happens, I'll have to adapt.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 879

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 1:08:38 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

If Gort is disorganised, he dies. Otherwise, you might embark him (since he is on a coastal hex) on the liner, therefore preserving him.
I really have trouble with those status indicators. I don't seem to get the hang of those small squares, indicating what's what. Now, when you are probably used to it, that might disappear.
Therefore, I have a question. If I sea a status indicator on top of the unit, can I then click on that indicator or on the unit and get the necessary information at that point? Could be helpful, IMHO.

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 880

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 1:12:13 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

If Gort is disorganised, he dies. Otherwise, you might embark him (since he is on a coastal hex) on the liner, therefore preserving him.
I really have trouble with those status indicators. I don't seem to get the hang of those small squares, indicating what's what. Now, when you are probably used to it, that might disappear.
Therefore, I have a question. If I sea a status indicator on top of the unit, can I then click on that indicator or on the unit and get the necessary information at that point? Could be helpful, IMHO.

When you hover the mouse over a unit, you get all the information about that unit on the Main Form:

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Red Prince -- 1/8/2012 1:16:46 PM >

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 881

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 1:37:13 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Just been looking over the map, trying to decide what to do for the CW Action choice, and I can tell you that while Egypt may fall, Suez isn't dead yet, and the CW can keep on reinforcing it from India and S. Africa for a good part of the next turn. I'm almost sure I can get 2 more units there, and maybe even a 3rd. With Italy trying to get to Transjordan to activate Iraq, that means a small screening force of 1 unit is sitting in Cairo. Yes, HQ-I Balbo will be active again, soon, but the CW might still hold Suez itself for some time yet.

If Italy fails to plan for it (and so far, it has), Wavell might even be able to gain control of the 4 Canal hexes long enough to get back into the Med (if that seems wise).

For the moment, I am still trying to figure out what to do for the impulse.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 882

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 2:09:20 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

I may be doing lousy with the CW, but since I decided to defend Sian instead of Lanchow, I think I'm doing okay with the Chinese Communists.

By moving the 5-1 GARR out of Sian, leaving the 4-1 GARR behind to defend against a mere 7 factors it faces (for now), I got the Lanchow MIL out of the mountains without having to disorganize any units. This builds a 9 factor stack, and though it might seem unwise, I moved the white print INF back out of the mountains so that Japan could only attack those 9 factors with a single stack. The best they could do with that is a 19:9 attack, which is not something they'd be willing to do, given the units required.

So, the 7-3 INF may be destroyed if the turn continues for another impulse, but Japan won't be able to get any closer to Sian from the west. And, if the turn ends after this impulse (40% chance) or the next (50%), then the 5-3 INF that is coming in S/O '40 can go directly into Sian. Given a few good-weather impulses or some risky attacks, the Communists probably won't last beyond S/O '40, but at least they should get that far.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 883

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 2:23:17 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Once again, I'm getting to the point in the turn which has the Allies with very little left to do.

The Soviets cleared some room in the German border cities for fresh meat . . . er, INF units and aircraft.
The CW went ahead with the Air impulse, failed a Strat Bombing raid, rebased the RSA fighter to Casablanca (still safe from direct assault) in preparation to rebase elsewhere, and reorganized the LND, also in Casablanca, using the Liner.

The turn didn't end, and the new weather roll is about what you'd expect:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 884

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 2:50:39 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

Euhm... Do you really want me to comment on this? Personally I would have sacked Chamberlain by now, if you get my drift.
This is a lot of so called bullshit. I've stated previously that the longer the CW is continuing to run away from a good fight, the worse they are going to end up in the game. Sure, luck has something to do with it (and the CW is extremely unlucky). however: don't think you are doing so well with the Axis because of what you are writing here.
Unconventional thinking by the Axis? Sorry, but I don't buy this at all. It is all about not knowing how to defend. That in itself is to be expected from newbie players. "Old school" players? What are you thinking here? I would have kicked the Italian ass from the start, if I had been playing the Allies. No way I would have been conquered with the French.
"Old school" play, as you call it, is to get the Axis into the position where they are forced to create Vichy France, since Toulouse is a real French fortress, with a British presence in the Bordeaux-Bayonne area. "Old school" play is to throw cheap CW units in front of German and Italian troops. "Old school" play is to build the units the CW needs to survive. "Old school" play is to preserve the oh so precious CW sealift and kill the Italian sealift. Did we see "Old school" play by the Allies: Not at all.
So please, don't start saying that Axis play is "unconventional".
This "old school" player really wants to show you how to defend with the CW and France. At this point of the game, the Axis should have conquered Paris this turn and not Gibraltar/Suez. France should become Vichy end of this turn. Italians in Egypt? Perhaps some poor TERR, not the forces you've got now in Africa...
So please: refrain from writing these kind of things. You've never played against an "old school" player, so don't start these kind of nonsense...
I don't want to go back into all the mistakes you've made, since that's not the way I play any wargame. Mistakes happen and one should go and look how to exploit or to counter the mistakes that are made. However: I don't like people saying they are doing so good, when they really aren't.
By the way: keep up the work. I really like this AAR...

I am sorry, but I have to toss my two cents in here on this internet tough guy.

First off, you might be the world's best WiF player there is. I somehow doubt it, but who knows for sure. You sure come across that way and your "know it all" attitude comes out a lot at least to me.

From the way you talk, the Axis need not bother to show up since the Allies, especially the CW, are going to kick their butts. If that is the case, then why do an AAR or even publish the game since we all know, seemingly according to you, that the Axis are wasting their time.

Just because you think the game should be played a certain way doesn't mean it is the only way. While I think it a given that you are a terrific player and know what you are doing, there might be some things or tactics/strategies you/your circle of players has not thought of and you just might get surprised when this sucker goes live and you face fresh blood that also knows what they are doing. That is part of the point I think Aaron is making.

That mistakes were made is not in doubt. That things could have been done better IN HINDSIGHT is not in doubt either. Any player involved in a game of this size and magnitude is going to make mistakes. How well the opponent can take advantage and make them pay for those mistakes will go a long way to determining the outcome of a game.

Let me remind you of another "old skool" saying I like to mention from time to time.. "Better lucky than good.. "

You can have all the fancy strats and generally out play your opponent only to watch your best efforts go down as your opponent has red hot dice. It happens. If you don't think it has been happing in the sea war, then you need to go back and look at the die rolls. Somewhat the same can be said of the weather, which was one of the single biggest factors in the fall of France. My bet is if you went back and recreated the weather over that time is that you have never been involved in a game that had that run of weather so favorable to the Axis.

All I am saying is ease up a bit please.

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 885

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 3:01:10 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

I just want to announce officially:

I respect everyone who has offered advice here.

And Centuur knows that I respect him, I think. We don't always agree, and that's part of the fun. I also know that English isn't his first language, and I often write in a style that can easily be misinterpreted or mistranslated.

While I happen to agree with a lot of what Klydon says in the post above, concerning luck and my initial point, I certainly understand how my original post might have been seen as offensive to people who have been expert or near-expert WiF players for years or even decades. For that I apologize. It was not my intent.
-----
Edit: Concerning the weather, I'm keeping a spreadsheet of all weather rolls. That's what you're seeing at the end of each turn when I make my reports -- a clip from that spreadsheet. I'm very interested to see how the weather complicates or helps things for each side over the course of the game, particularly the average number of Fine impulses for each weather zone in each of the 6 game turns. So, as things get farthur along, I'll probably start posting the averages. Since we're just finishing the first year right now, there is nothing to average.

Also in this spreadsheet, you'll notice that I keep track of how many impulses each side gets. This will also show the number of double-impulses, as well as the overall advantage in the number of impulses over the course of the entire game.

< Message edited by Red Prince -- 1/8/2012 3:07:04 PM >

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 886

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 3:24:43 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

A question: which option is better . . . Germany conquering Morocco? or Italy conquering Morocco?

I think I know the answer, but I can't be sure.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 887

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 3:30:36 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

My first thought would be the Italians from the standpoint that I assume you plan on using mostly Italian forces to try to defend Africa in the future. On the other hand, Morocco is a must have for the Allies if they want to pry open the Med at some point in the future and the Italians facing Patton alone is not a very enjoyable thought from the Axis side. ;)

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 888

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 3:33:48 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

My first thought would be the Italians from the standpoint that I assume you plan on using mostly Italian forces to try to defend Africa in the future. On the other hand, Morocco is a must have for the Allies if they want to pry open the Med at some point in the future and the Italians facing Patton alone is not a very enjoyable thought from the Axis side. ;)

That's kind of what I was expecting for an answer . . . that Germany should take it, so that if the USA wants to land anywhere other than in Spanish Morocco, it has to DOW Germany first.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 889

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 3:58:23 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Axis attacks for the impulse:

And the results:

Attack on China [75, 135]: Blitz, Fractional Odds .388 (Yes), Roll = 10 = */2B
Attack on Rabat: Assault, Fractional Odds .332 (No), Roll = 4 = */2S

Well, if you don't believe the Axis is getting the benefit of luck, I don't know which AAR you're watching.

I chose the Blitz in China because there was a 30% chance of the INF surviving (vs. no chance on the Assault CRT), and the same 30% chance to disorganize the Japanese (vs. 50% on the Assault CRT). This late in the turn, I figured I might as well try to preserve the unit. Earlier in the turn I might have gone for the better odds of halting the Japanese advance. Well, a roll of '10' is overkill for this particular attack, but it's another "lucky" roll that might have shown up at some other more crucial moment.

As for the attack on Rabat, well, the roll was just high enough to keep the attackers organized, but at 7:1 odds (8:1 really) the only choice was the Assault CRT. Gort was going to find his coffin one way or another, and only the Assault CRT offered the chance to disorganize the enemy, costing precious Oil, at the least . . . and stopping them in their tracks if the turn keeps on going for 2 more impulses.

I chose Germany as the new Overlords of Morocco, since I can also claim the hex the Canadian MIL is in for Germany. That means there is only 1 hex (Tangier) that the USA can get to by way of the Atlantic that is owned by Italy. You can be sure it will be almost as well fortified as Gibraltar, and so the USA will either have to take the long way around if it wants to go to war with Italy before Germany, or it will have to suck it up and DOW Germany first (or at the same time).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 890

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 4:16:36 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Other things that happened this impulse?

Well, Italy made its way into both Amman and Jerusalem, and is in position to claim Iraq in a few more impulses. Then they have to take Syria away from France, so that they can get that Oil to the homeland (Italy). They'll be a little vulnerable for a while in Egypt, but should be able to keep things pretty secure even if 2-3 more units join Wavell next turn. Also, since the Germans are already in N. Africa with some fast units, the Italians can use their TRS to reinforce Egypt with their own units. HQ-A Guderian has at least 3 fast Corps with him to finish the job in Morocco and still be able to traverse the Northern Sahara in time to be useful in a campaign against the Caucasus.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 891

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 4:19:30 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

And, to nobody's surprise I'm sure, I used HQ-I Terauchi to reorganize 2 of the units sitting on the Sian doorstep.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 892

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 4:27:26 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Kind of a waste of Oil for Japan, as it turns out. With a 50% chance of turn ending, the die roll was a '4' making it a shorter turn in the end than the M/J '40 turn, by 3 impulses. Since it ended after an Axis impulse, the Allies gain +1 on the Initiative track, which is now at +1 in favor of the Allies. It was a risk the Axis was willing to take to start this turn off right, and I think it paid off fairly well for them.

But will they ever manage to get the initiative back again? Or will the Allies keep them on the wrong end of that particular stick?

Stay tuned . . .

And now, the weather.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 893

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 4:41:17 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

Next up is the form showing the units destroyed in J/A '40 (Turn #6):
-----
It doesn't show destroyed Convoy Points, because they are generic units, but if I remember correctly, France lost 2 and the CW lost another.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 894

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 4:45:02 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

So, here's another good question for you . . . which is more important? Freezing Japanese assets . . . or Repairing Western Allied ships?

I'd probably go with the repairs, since I can always choose to freeze the assets if the roll fails, but some might disagree. I'm actually going to pause in playing the game for a bit, so feel free to toss your thoughts into the mix.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 895

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 5:33:05 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Just want to answer a question someone asked ealier in the thread. I'll paraphrase it and expand it . . . the original was something like: "How can the Allies manage to lose both Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn?" . . . and I'll add Morocco to it, too.

Well, one answer is poor play by the CW player (me). Another answer is unconventional thinking. I don't mean this to sound too rude, but I think when MWiF is released to the public, many "old-school" players are going to have to get away from their conservative ideas about how this game is supposed to be played. There are going to be a lot more people like me out there, who are willing to try anything once.

For example, raise your hand if you would have thought to rail all of your HQs to Gibraltar at the time that I did it . . . well, maybe that wasn't too surprising . . . but how about using the O-chit anyway, even though I didn't need it for Gibraltar, to reorganize the units needed to finish off the Allies in Morocco, thus securing that front in one summer? Personally, I think people rely way too much on the "intimidation" factor of an O-chit. Yes, it's a nice thing to have around, but if you need to get a job done, then by all means use the O-chit! It's kind of like keeping a bunch of pilots in your reserve pool with a bunch of fighters they could be flying, but not the fighters you really want them in. You paid for them in BP, but neither the Pilots nor the fighters do you any good if they don't get used.

You can probably tell that I don't play conservatively with my O-chits. If I see an opportunity to make it work for me, I don't bother to count BP and calculate the "actual" value of using it. I jump right in and do it. Sometimes that's going to get me into trouble, but a lot of the time it's going to take the enemy by surprise . . . which is what the "intimidation factor" is all about, isn't it? If your enemy knows you like to hold onto an O-chit just to scare him, he's not going to be scared.

But I digress. That's just an example of the kind of thinking that can cause all of these horrid things to happen to the Allies all at once. Another example is that overkill is sometimes useful. I know you're only supposed to commit "what you need to get the job done", but this early in the game, there isn't a threat in sight from anywhere else. With Amphibious rules, even if I had all 6 CW transports that I was "supposed" to have, what can they do behind the lines? Nothing, really -- no Marine units to invade with. So I went into Spain with all the forces I could spare that weren't required for Garrisson duty. That's overkill, but it certainly did the job.

Of course, luck doesn't hurt either, if you want to take Gibraltar and Suez in the same turn. I like to think I planned it well, but luck was probably more in control of things than I was, when it comes right down to it.

Euhm... Do you really want me to comment on this? Personally I would have sacked Chamberlain by now, if you get my drift.
This is a lot of so called bullshit. I've stated previously that the longer the CW is continuing to run away from a good fight, the worse they are going to end up in the game. Sure, luck has something to do with it (and the CW is extremely unlucky). however: don't think you are doing so well with the Axis because of what you are writing here.
Unconventional thinking by the Axis? Sorry, but I don't buy this at all. It is all about not knowing how to defend. That in itself is to be expected from newbie players. "Old school" players? What are you thinking here? I would have kicked the Italian ass from the start, if I had been playing the Allies. No way I would have been conquered with the French.
"Old school" play, as you call it, is to get the Axis into the position where they are forced to create Vichy France, since Toulouse is a real French fortress, with a British presence in the Bordeaux-Bayonne area. "Old school" play is to throw cheap CW units in front of German and Italian troops. "Old school" play is to build the units the CW needs to survive. "Old school" play is to preserve the oh so precious CW sealift and kill the Italian sealift. Did we see "Old school" play by the Allies: Not at all.
So please, don't start saying that Axis play is "unconventional".
This "old school" player really wants to show you how to defend with the CW and France. At this point of the game, the Axis should have conquered Paris this turn and not Gibraltar/Suez. France should become Vichy end of this turn. Italians in Egypt? Perhaps some poor TERR, not the forces you've got now in Africa...
So please: refrain from writing these kind of things. You've never played against an "old school" player, so don't start these kind of nonsense...
I don't want to go back into all the mistakes you've made, since that's not the way I play any wargame. Mistakes happen and one should go and look how to exploit or to counter the mistakes that are made. However: I don't like people saying they are doing so good, when they really aren't.
By the way: keep up the work. I really like this AAR...

I'm sorry I irritated you with this post. I don't mean to say that "old school" play is obsolete. I just mean that there are going to be a lot of players out there who, like me, don't know how to play one side or the other.

I will come to my own defense on one count: I took the defense of France directly from the suggestions of the forum members. I planned very little of it for myself.

Two counts, actually: If you played with the initial setup I made, I doubt you could have done as well as you state above, though you would no doubt have done better than I did.

I do have one question, though. And I'm very serious about this, and not the least bit sarcastic. If you had to "take over" the CW from another player . . . let's say after the first 2 turns . . . and got similarly bad rolls on whatever attacks you decided to make after that, how would you have created the defense for the Allies? That means, starting with the mistakes I made in all areas before the J/F '40 turn began, what would you have done that would have changed things so completely?

I ask this because there is always a snowball effect in these games. The earlier you screw things up (as I did), the more damage is going to be done. This leads me back to the point I was initially trying to make: when MWiF is released, there are going to be just as many greenhorns playing the Allied side as there are playing the Axis side. That's going to create a lot of opportunities for "unconventional" activity.

Just because one side is playing poorly, that doesn't negate the fact that the other side is playing well. And, please take note, that I didn't claim to be "doing so good". What I said was that I came up with a few ideas that are unconventional, and I was lucky to have them work out.

Maybe you will throttle me when we first take each other on. Only time will tell. And if it happens, I'll have to adapt.

Aaron,

Bear in mind that some of the people (e.g., like me) posting to this thread have played WIF for 10+ years over-the-board. While most often it has been against the same opponent(s), these forum members have moved very far up the learning curve on how to play WIF well. They have seen good die rolls and bad under all kinds of situations. Given that mass of scar tissue and personal (oftentimes agonizing) experience, their comments should not be dismissed as simply "old school".

As for taking over poor positions and remedying them into fair positions, that happens all the time in every game. Typically it occurs when the die rolls go against you. World in Flames is not like chess where a well known response to every attack/defense exists and can be relied upon to meet your enemy's best efforts. Instead, you do the best you can with what you have and adjust to to vagaries of war that follow. As you yourself have commented on many times, it is very difficult to 'see' all the possible actions that your opponent might take. And when you miss one, there you are with a poor position that you need to remedy into a fair one.

And yes, recovering the Commonwealth position after two turns, was doable. But, and this is a very big but, it depends on the opponent's play. Usually when I had such a poor position it was because my opponent was a much better player than I was at that time. He had crushed me for the first two turns and he would undoubtedly crush me for the rest of the game.

I will follow up on what Peter said. At this point you are a much better player when you attack than you are when you defend. You are much better with land units than you are with naval units. Neither of those comments should be surprising to you. In fact, this is almost always true for players new to WIF. They have played a lot of war games involving land units and know what to do with them. The WIF naval system is unique and new players have trouble learning how to position and move naval units.

Your AAR is engrossing, but it undoubtedly is driving experienced players nuts (I include myself here), with comments like "You did what!!!!"

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 896

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 5:44:06 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

Your AAR is engrossing, but it undoubtedly is driving experienced players nuts (I include myself here), with comments like "You did what!!!!"

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 897

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 5:49:30 PM

Orm

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

I would go with freezing the Japanese assets. It is more important because you want to do Oil Embargo as soon as you have passed War Appropriations Bill. And because an option that requires a pre-requisite to be picked first, it must have been picked in a prior turn.

< Message edited by Orm -- 1/8/2012 5:51:20 PM >

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 898

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 6:02:12 PM

Red Prince

Posts: 3686
Joined: 4/8/2011
From: Bangor, Maine, USA
Status: offline

quote:

Given that mass of scar tissue and personal (oftentimes agonizing) experience, their comments should not be dismissed as simply "old school".

Apparently I wasn't able to clear up what I meant by "old school" in my later post. I had no intention of "dismissing" those comments.

All I wanted to say was that MWiF will offer players who know the game, but have never had a chance to play vs. a live opponent, the opportunity to do so, and I think that's going to force players of all skill and knowledge levels to adjust to a variety of styles of play they may not be used to . . . precisely because they know how to play the game well.

Maybe I'm wrong about it all, but the larger the pool of available opponents becomes, the more the standards will be tested. That's what I believe. I'm not dismissing those opinions on how to play the game. I'm trying to learn from them. As you say, though, there is no perfect way to play, and I expect a lot of imperfect play to generate a few new standards.
-----
Back in the mid-90s, I used to play Axis & Allies with the same 3 or 4 people every night for an entire summer. (No, I am not comparing the games in terms of complexity, though this was the "revised" edition, which was more complex than the original). It got to the point that we each knew how to play the game almost perfectly with each major power, so the game became a little boring . . . the die rolls determined the winner, rather than strategy.

One night, in our second game -- a game we were playing more out of habit than for fun -- I decided to open up with an insane move. It worked, and eventually the maneuver was named after me among our friends, because we discovered that it was crazy, but almost indefensible. Over time, we each started trying things like this. Some worked brilliantly, and some failed.
-----
So, my point is simply this: there might be a fairly standard way to play successfully, and I respect that and want to learn it myself, but with an expanding supply of opponents soon to be available through MWiF, even the world's greatest player is going to get into trouble now and then because he/she hasn't anticipated some action -- because it's not part of what is usually thought to be a sensible way to play.

_____________________________

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it!
-Lazarus Long, RAH

(in reply to Red Prince)

Post #: 899

RE: MWiF Global War Hot-Seat (AAR) - 1/8/2012 6:10:03 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

I would go with freezing the Japanese assets. It is more important because you want to do Oil Embargo as soon as you have passed War Appropriations Bill. And because an option that requires a pre-requisite to be picked first, it must have been picked in a prior turn.

I agree.

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 900