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 - USA

 
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 - USA Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 7/14/2009 7:15:59 PM   
paulderynck


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

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I guess the question is, does the US ever run out of oil when playing with RaW oil? I don't know. I thought I learned from Froonp's comments over the years that it might but I rarely see 1944/45 in WiF.

They never run out of Oil for re-org, but may have to reduce production. My peak usage was 14.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 151
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 7/15/2009 12:31:36 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		so it always pays off to build the SYNTH then? I always do. Recently I did decide to switch from that on the first turn along with the Hornet and a CP, to the SYNTH and 3 CPs, with the Hornet following on the 2nd turn.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 152
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 7/15/2009 3:11:09 AM   
paulderynck


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

ORIGINAL: brian brian

so it always pays off to build the SYNTH then? I always do. Recently I did decide to switch from that on the first turn along with the Hornet and a CP, to the SYNTH and 3 CPs, with the Hornet following on the 2nd turn.

Not so sure about "always". Certainly it is possible it will be needed. In my last two games with oil usage up in the 13 to 14 range, the U.S. had been fortunate enough to have reconquered the 2-oil hex in NEI. That, combined with lending oil back and forth with the CW - allowed max builds up to ND44. After that, the "magical end-of-game" effect kicks in and the US is unlikely to need all its BPs since the units to buy won't show up in time to affect the outcome.

If playing the "continue beyond JA45" option, I would definitely think about building the Synth.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 153
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/16/2009 5:37:33 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		As I promised Steve to go through all the forums post of all AI for MWiF – XXX, here is the result for USA. A few good suggestions from forum members. I have now compiled it to define 2 possible starting convoy routes for the US, from which the AIO will chose from.

Since the USA often has a long time to prepare for war the reserve convoy placements is also interesting.

As always if you have any comments about these convoy routes, we would love to hear them. If nothing else, you could help us decide on their probabilities.


################################################################

US Convoys plans/routes Global war

Route 1: Japan and Venezuela (Standard).
Keeps the critical trade agreement with Japan and gets home the important Venezuelan oil. 3 CP in reserve.

reserve convoy placements %
A) Honolulu:3 CP 20 %
B) San Diego: 3 CP 10 %
C) Norfolk: 3 CP 70%

Route 2: Philippines.
Keeps the critical trade agreement with Japan and gets home the important Venezuelan oil and keeps Philippines in supply. 1 CP in reserve. Might be useful if planning to resources to China. The China plan is to move a CP to the Philippines, reorganise it and the next turn send it out into the South China sea and transport the Philippines resource to China by French Indo China (as long as it French and the Burma road is open).

reserve convoy placements %
A) Honolulu:1 CP 100 %

Base Convoy Deployment %
Route 1 70%
Route 2 30%


Optional rules that might affect Convoy Deployment %
• Limited Overseas Supply
• In the presence of the enemy
• Rough Seas
• Convoys In Flame
• Oil tankers
• Cruisers in flames
• Oil Rules
• Saving Oil Resources and Build Points
• AIO Strategy

< Message edited by peskpesk -- 8/16/2009 6:05:16 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 154
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/16/2009 5:38:20 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		Route 1: Japan and Venezuela (Standard).





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 155
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/16/2009 5:38:57 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		Route 2: Philippines




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 156
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/16/2009 5:50:21 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Route 2: Philippines




Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 157
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/16/2009 6:03:52 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Route 2: Philippines




Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?


No, then nearest US CP starts in Honolulu and it is 4 sea areas to South China Sea, so it needs the make a stop at the way. It reaches the China Sea, but China does not control any port with a railway line to a Factory in that sea area.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 158
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/17/2009 3:51:19 AM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline 		Am I miscounting? The map shows 26CP and RAW7sceanario.pdf shows 27CP.



 
World in Flames: Global war (see 24.4.7)

WiF Naval
US east coast - Note 1: CV~Ranger; BB ~ Texas; CA~Pensacola, Quincy; CL~ Cincinnati, Trenton
US west coast - Note 2: CV~Enterprise, Lexington, Yorktown; BB ~Mississippi, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia; CA~Chicago, New Orleans, Portland; CL; Brooklyn, Omaha
USA - 4 Trs, 2 Sub, 10 CP
Honolulu - 15 CP

SiF, CLiF & CoiF Naval
US east coast - Note 3: BB~Arkansas, New York; CA~Indianapolis, Louisville, San Francisco, Tuscaloosa, Vincennes, Wichita; CL~Concord, Memphis, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Savannah
US west coast - Note 4: BB~Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico; CA~Astoria, Augusta, Chester, Minneapolis, Northampton, Salt Lake City; CL~Boise, Detroit, Honolulu, Marblehead, Nashville, Phoenix, Raleigh, Richmond
USA - 7CVP, 4P, Sub, 2 CP



_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 159
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/17/2009 6:21:41 AM   
peskpesk


Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Am I miscounting? The map shows 26CP and RAW7sceanario.pdf shows 27CP.
...


No you are correct, the last CPs are reserves, see the text.

...
Route 1: Japan and Venezuela (Standard).
...
reserve convoy placements %
A) Honolulu:3 CP 20 %
B) San Diego: 3 CP 10 %
C) Norfolk: 3 CP 70%

Route 2: Philippines.
...
reserve convoy placements %
A) Honolulu:1 CP 100 %
...

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 160
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 8/17/2009 3:52:28 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
Well done you showing some well thought out routes here.

But shouldn’t we be using the term from the RAW  “convoy lines”?

"Convoy Plan" instead of “Route” would seem a better title.
 

At first I was concerned about Route 2 to the Philippines. But after checking the FAQ at ADG it stated that the resource convoy lines could also be used as supply lines.



I know everyone is going to consider this nitpicking but I consider this important.

When using rule 22.4.19 Convoys in Flames (CoiF option 76) you might want to mention how many ships in the “convoy lines” would be Tankers.
 


_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 161
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 12:08:55 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline 		Standard USA set up

World in Flames: Global war (see 24.4.7)

quote:


24.1.6 Setting up
After you have finished setting-up, you can make naval moves out to sea with your naval units. Treat this as a naval action you conducted last turn, so the units must finish their move, then drop to a lower sea-box section as if they had stayed at sea last turn (see 13.4). Neutral major powers can only make these moves with convoy and tanker points.

CoiF option 76: Up to half the convoys specified to be set up in each location may be tankers. For example instead of setting up 7 convoy points in Italy, you could set up 0 to 3 tanker points in any ports there with the remainder being convoy points.


USA – 12x CP (6x CP, 6x Tankers)
Honolulu – 15x CP (8x CP, 7x Tankers)


Japan-USA Trade agreement
1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco
2 Oil resources to Japan (8x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x Tankers from USA) – Mendocino (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x Tankers from Honolulu)
2 resources to Japan (8x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x CP from USA) – Mendocino (2x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (2x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x CP from Honolulu)

Venezuela-USA Trade agreement
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Mobile
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea - Port of New Orleans
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Saint Louis

Alaska
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Alaska - Gulf of Alaska - Port of Tacoma


Japan-USA Trade agreement 6x CP from USA; 6x CP from Honolulu; 2x Tankers from USA; 6x Tankers from Honolulu
Venezuela-USA Trade agreement 3x Tankers from USA
Alaska 1x Tanker from USA

Total 12x Tankers, 12x CP

Reserve 1x Tanker, 2x CP (The Reserve can start in USA instead Honolulu by changing the Gulf of Alaska Tanker and the 2x CP from Mendocino from USA to Honolulu)


_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 162
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 12:20:00 PM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Route 2: Philippines




Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?


No, then nearest US CP starts in Honolulu and it is 4 sea areas to South China Sea, so it needs the make a stop at the way. It reaches the China Sea, but China does not control any port with a railway line to a Factory in that sea area.


china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to peskpesk)
Post #: 163
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 5:09:37 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees


quote:


17. Lend lease to China - Each Allied major power can give up to 5 build points a turn to China (see 13.6.4 Lend lease). The US can use its convoy points to transport build points to China from the USA. This entry option can only be chosen if you have already chosen entry option 9 Resources to China.


13.6.1 Resources
Transporting resources by sea
A chain of convoy points across one or more sea areas doesn’t all have to be from the same major power.

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other major power on the same side. Neutral major powers can only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA and 13.3.2 US entry options, option 9 Resources to China).

(A)Neutral major powers’ convoys cannot transport resources or build points to other major powers unless the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA, 13.3.2 US entry options, options 9 Resources to China, 15 Resources to western Allies, 17 Lend lease to China, 19 Resources to USSR, 27 Lend lease to western Allies and 30 Lend lease to USSR).



True, if the following US entry options have been chosen:
Option 9 Resources to China
Option 17 Lend lease to China (requires Option 9 Resources to China)


(A) can be read two ways:

(1) The USA cannot transport resources or build points to French Indochina at all unless it has selected Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies.

(2) The USA can transport resources or build points to French Indochina as long as the resources or build points are going to China with French permission.

According to the map France will have to use a CP to complete their end of the convoy line.

And the USA would of course have to have 3x more USA CP to get the convoy line to Hawaii and use the reserve CP/Tanker located in Hawaii to complete the convoy line.


As long as the Japan-USA Trade agreement is intact.



< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/18/2011 5:14:00 PM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 164
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 9:10:08 PM   
Orm


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

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees


quote:


17. Lend lease to China - Each Allied major power can give up to 5 build points a turn to China (see 13.6.4 Lend lease). The US can use its convoy points to transport build points to China from the USA. This entry option can only be chosen if you have already chosen entry option 9 Resources to China.


13.6.1 Resources
Transporting resources by sea
A chain of convoy points across one or more sea areas doesn’t all have to be from the same major power.

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other major power on the same side. Neutral major powers can only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA and 13.3.2 US entry options, option 9 Resources to China).

(A)Neutral major powers’ convoys cannot transport resources or build points to other major powers unless the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA, 13.3.2 US entry options, options 9 Resources to China, 15 Resources to western Allies, 17 Lend lease to China, 19 Resources to USSR, 27 Lend lease to western Allies and 30 Lend lease to USSR).



True, if the following US entry options have been chosen:
Option 9 Resources to China
Option 17 Lend lease to China (requires Option 9 Resources to China)


(A) can be read two ways:

(1) The USA cannot transport resources or build points to French Indochina at all unless it has selected Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies.

(2) The USA can transport resources or build points to French Indochina as long as the resources or build points are going to China with French permission.

According to the map France will have to use a CP to complete their end of the convoy line.

And the USA would of course have to have 3x more USA CP to get the convoy line to Hawaii and use the reserve CP/Tanker located in Hawaii to complete the convoy line.


As long as the Japan-USA Trade agreement is intact.



(A) only covers when the resource is transported by convoys. Therefore it has no relevance on wether the resources can be transported by rail through French Indpchina. Alternative (2) is the correct one when one reads the rules covering transporting resources by rail.

In order for USA to send a resource to China it is easiest to return one Convoy Point to base in the Phillipines. The Phillipines has to be in supply so the CP can be reorganized. After that USA can move out the CP and send the Phillipines resource to China. If the route through Frech Indochina is closed then Burma road can be used (if open) but then there need to be more CP sent to the Phillipines.


Cut from RAC: 13.6.1 Resources
.....
Transporting resources by rail
You transport a resource to a factory in the production step by railing it
from its hex to a usable factory. It must move along railway lines (roads
count as railways for this purpose). It can also cross a straits hexside
from one railway hex to another. Each resource cannot cross more than
1 straits hexsides.
This move does not count as a rail move and the resource does not have
to start its move at a station.
The move can only pass through:
• hexes you control;
• hexes in neutral minor countries; and
• hexes controlled by another major power, but only if it allows you.
Allied major powers (except the USSR) may only trace resources through
Soviet controlled hexes while the USSR is at war with Germany.
The resource’s move can only enter or leave a hex in an enemy ZOC if
there is a friendly land unit in the hex. Its move must stop when it enters
an enemy ZOC. If the resource is in the same hex as the destination
factory, it can be used there regardless of enemy ZOCs.


RAC: 13.3.2 US entry options
....
41. US reinforces the Philippines - You can’t move Allied land and
aircraft units to the Philippines until either you have chosen this
option or an Axis land unit has entered the Philippines. Thereafter,
there is no restriction.

< Message edited by Orm -- 1/18/2011 9:12:02 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 Extraneous)
Post #: 165
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 11:17:57 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Route 2: Philippines




Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?


No, then nearest US CP starts in Honolulu and it is 4 sea areas to South China Sea, so it needs the make a stop at the way. It reaches the China Sea, but China does not control any port with a railway line to a Factory in that sea area.


china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

(A) only covers when the resource is transported by convoys. Therefore it has no relevance on whether the resources can be transported by rail through French Indochina. Alternative (2) is the correct one when one reads the rules covering transporting resources by rail.


Is the USA (a neutral major power) allowed to use convoy points to send a build point to French Indochina without selecting Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies? The answer is NO

Is the USA (a neutral major power) allowed to use convoy points to send a build point into French Indochina without selecting Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies and then rail them to China if Option 9 Resources to China and Option 17 Lend lease to China have been selected?

Using the map the Philippines is in supply since there is no restriction on using the Japan/USA Trade agreement convoy line as part of a supply line (see peskpesk’s post #154).





< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/19/2011 5:00:17 AM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 166
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/18/2011 11:19:53 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline 		Strategies

Maintain at least 1x US entry marker in both Ge/It and Ja entry pools to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

quote:


The entry and tension pools
The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.


The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

Asia first strategy: 1x US entry marker in the Ge/It entry pool, 2 US entry markers Ja in the entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry markers in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry marker in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.



Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns


Scrap all: BF2C, F3F, SBC-4, P-26, and P-35.


Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns






< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/19/2011 4:02:13 AM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 167
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 2:01:47 AM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline
quote:

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...


_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 168
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 2:33:31 AM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline 		Yes USA has plenty of oil until the midgame

And what about the Brits if Adolf goes for Gibraltar and SUB heavy? This means cutting the convoys to Africa and you simply doesn't know at the beginning of the game.

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 169
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 2:57:32 AM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...



Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


You forgot about my production spreadsheet

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns



< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/19/2011 4:49:32 AM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 170
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 5:17:27 AM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...



Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


You forgot about my production spreadsheet

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns



still think you are wrong ... when a synth comes on the map. USA have 11 saved (4 start + 7turns) and by that time they don´t send to Japan ... so they have a free oil.

I really think that is wrong..... USA don´t need it when it is build and sentiently don´t need it when it arrives

from start
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japan -1 save) = 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan -1 save) 37pp = 9,25 = 9bp +1 bp from japan
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japa ) = 39pp = 9,75 =10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan) 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan

after option 13 and 22
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japan -1 save) = 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan -1 save) 38pp = 19 = 19bp
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japa ) = 40pp = 20 =20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan) 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp

after 23, 31 and 34
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(-1 save) = 41pp = 31bp .... 1 free oil
with out phi 42 -( -1 save) 41pp = 31bp .... 0 free oil
without saved oil
with phi. 43 = 41pp = 31bp 2 free oil
with out phi 42 = 41pp = 31bp 1 free oil

< Message edited by michaelbaldur -- 1/19/2011 5:19:46 AM >

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 171
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 3:35:46 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Strategies

Maintain at least 1x US entry marker in both Ge/It and Ja entry pools to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

quote:


The entry and tension pools
The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.


The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

Asia first strategy: 1x US entry marker in the Ge/It entry pool, 2 US entry markers Ja in the entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry markers in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry marker in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.


I somehow completely disagree with that, and I thought I had to say it and say why.

It is true that you can have one of these 3 strategies above.

But, whatever the strategies, for me you absolutely need to have at least 2 US Entry Markers in the Ge/It Entry Pool. You can't have less.

This is for many reasons :

a) Whatever your strategy, the goal is to reach a tension of 11 and an entry of 22 against all foes as soon as possible. You just have to put the 1 chit per turn for 3 turns in the Ja pool to reach equality between both pools, so the 3 initial chits are irrelevant for the goal of reaching the Gear up. What is relevant is how many chits you have in all 4 pools after some turns.

b) Having too few chits in the Ge/It entry pool remove freedom of action from the allied side on the first couple of turns : They can't DoW Italy early if they want of have an opportunity (risk of loosing 2 chits), they can't claim East Poland the Baltic States and then DoW Persia in all security (risk of loosing 3 chits).

c) You have no actions that you want to do that risk you loosing chits against Japan, so having 0 chits against Japan at setup is not a problem.

So my conclusion is that all chits should be in the Ge/It Entry Pool. To be less extreme, I'd advice that at least 2 of the 3 setup chits are placed in the Ge/It Entry Pool.

As a last remark, I'd also say that, using my advice, you don't give up your strategy at setup.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 1/19/2011 3:37:08 PM >

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 172
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 3:47:28 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are :

a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are not worth to be built. Really not. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. so IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be build, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Idealy, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 173
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 4:57:58 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...



Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


You forgot about my production spreadsheet

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns



still think you are wrong ... when a synth comes on the map. USA have 11 saved (4 start + 7turns) and by that time they don´t send to Japan ... so they have a free oil.

I really think that is wrong..... USA don´t need it when it is build and sentiently don´t need it when it arrives

from start
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japan -1 save) = 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan -1 save) 37pp = 9,25 = 9bp +1 bp from japan
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japa ) = 39pp = 9,75 =10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan) 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan

after option 13 and 22
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japan -1 save) = 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan -1 save) 38pp = 19 = 19bp
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japa ) = 40pp = 20 =20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan) 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp

after 23, 31 and 34
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(-1 save) = 41pp = 31bp .... 1 free oil
with out phi 42 -( -1 save) 41pp = 31bp .... 0 free oil
without saved oil
with phi. 43 = 41pp = 31bp 2 free oil
with out phi 42 = 41pp = 31bp 1 free oil


To get the resource from the Philippines requires a 6 CP convoy line to the West Coast. You have 3 reserve CP’s at the start of the game. If you use them all this would get the convoy line from the Philippines to Hawaii and you would require 3 more CP’s.

Do to gearing limitations you can only build 2 CP each turn (Every 5 convoy points is 1 naval unit; SiF option 9: Every 2 convoy points (or any spare point) is a naval unit).

So in order to complete the convoy line from the West Coast to the Philippines would require 9bp and 6 turns.



But here is an idea on peskpesk’s post #154. (Feel free to flame me on this bit of Rule Lawership)

quote:

5.1 Trade agreements
Japan-USA
The USA and Japan start the game with an agreement in place to exchange a Japanese build point for US resources. The USA must supply Japan with 4 resources each turn. Two of them must be oil resources. These amounts can be reduced, or avoided entirely, by certain US entry options (see 13.3.2 US entry options). Japan must lend lease the USA with 1 build point a turn until the USA embargoes strategic materials (see 13.3.2 US entry options, entry option 13 Embargo on strategic materials).

To avoid US entry penalties (see below), the USA must have enough convoy points in the West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific ocean sea areas to transport the resources to Japan. Similarly, Japan must have enough convoy points in the Japanese Coast sea area to transport the build point to the USA.


Ship the resources from the Philippines to Japan using the 2 CP.

Japan-USA Trade agreement

1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco

2 Oil resources to Japan (8x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x Tankers from USA) – Mendocino (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x Tankers from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (4x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (2x CP) Coast of Philippines – Bismarck Sea (1x CP from Honolulu) - The Marianas (1x CP from Honolulu)


This would change the reserve to 1 Tanker and 4 CP. And you would be able to save 2 Oil per turn.



_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 174
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 5:12:40 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns


Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 (Turns?) where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are :

a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are not worth to be built. Really not. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. so IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be build, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Idealy, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.


I’m flexible and not immune to having my proposal changed.

This is what I was looking for constructive criticism. I am trying to set forth some ideas on an AI and appreciate your input


_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 175
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/19/2011 6:55:29 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		I do not think it is automatically a bad idea for the US to build its synthetic oil plant.

First, having the extra oil means one more lendable resource that the US has which doesn't cut into its own production (the US can either lend an extra oil without sacrificing its own oil or lend an extra resource and use the SYNTH for production). Whichever other Allied power gets hit the hardest by the Axis will no doubt appreciate the extra lending (assuming the US has the means to deliver it, of course).

Second, in the first two to three turns of play where the US might build the SYNTH (I suspect that building it later is too late or will screw with gearing too much), it is probably too early to tell what the Axis is doing. As time passes, sufficient Axis pressure or good search rolls could crimp the CW ability to maintain convoy lines further afield; the extra oil will come in handy feeding the CW in such a case.

Third, the Western Allies can consume prodigous amounts of oil from 1943 on. Having the extra oil means it is less likely that the US or its allies will be forced to choose between producing more or reorganizing more units (or using them in the first place). Giving up a production point in 1943 or later is giving up a spare pilot, FTR2, or two spare CVP or CP. Having the extra oil available from late 1940/early 1941 means the US will be saving extra oil during each of the early turns of the war after its entry when it has not built up enough to be a net oil spender.

If you want to avoid screwing with gearing too much, want the SYNTH, but don't want it sitting on the map for a year doing nothing (although lending resources to allies hardly counts as doing nothing), you can always set aside 1-2 bp per turn and build it in the summer/fall of 1940 so it will arrive right when your oil saving/spending is about to ramp up.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 176
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/20/2011 12:54:15 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		As I've written elsewhere before, the greatest USN the game has ever seen riding the production spiral won't save the Allies when the Germans are at the gates of Chelyabinsk, and more than a few Allied players have lost the game because of that.

A build plan is an amusing thing to create when not playing World in Flames. But during an actual game you have to stay flexible to respond not just to enemy strategy, but enemy successes and allied miscues.

I always build the Synth plant, and then I work on getting ready to help Russia in various ways. I build enough to hold Pearl and invest in the USN some but that comes along more slowly, aside from plenty of lift.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 177
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/22/2011 11:32:47 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Strategies

Maintain at least 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool and 1x US entry marker Ja entry pool to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

The entry and tension pools

The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.

The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1 US entry marker Ja in the entry pool.

Asia first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.



Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns


Scrap all: BF2C, F3F, SBC-4, P-26, and P-35.


Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns



quote:

Original: Froonp (Edited as I am understanding it)
Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 (Turns?) where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are:

(a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are really not worth building. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

(b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

(c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. So IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be building, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Ideally, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First and a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. But in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.


(a) In your opinion the 2x P40c FTR (8 range), 1x P40b FTR (8 range), 2x F4F-3 FTR (9 range), B-17E LND (8 range), PBM-1 NAV (15 range) are not worth building? (This information is from the spreadsheet at your site)

(b) Pilots take 3 turns to build so they may as well be three turns. A production plan for the AI is one of the things I am trying to establish here.

(c)You sound like you are strong advocate of Japan first. Using the 3 strategies how would you split the gearing limits by percentage?


quote:

13.6.6 Gearing limits
In a turn, your major power can build (and repair) as many units of a particular class as it built (and repaired) in the previous turn plus 1. This is a gearing limit.

Naval units count as being built whether they come from a force pool, the repair pool or the construction pool.

Exceptions
On the first turn of any scenario or campaign there are no gearing limits.

Neutral major powers are not subject to gearing limits on the turn that a major power declares war on it.



Set up

East Coast 1x CV, 3x BB, 8x CA, 7x CL

West Coast 3x CV, 10x BB, 9x CA, 10x CL

USA
4x TRS
3x Sub

Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns

Construction pool
BB Wyoming
CVL Langley

Nov/Dec 1939
CL St Louis [fu]
CA Houston
CL Helena [fu]
Sub [fd]

Mar/Apr 1940
CV Wasp [fu]
5 CP
1 CVP
-4 CP

May/Jun 1940
BB Washington [fd]
BB North Carolina [fd]


< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/22/2011 11:34:18 PM >

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 178
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/23/2011 12:33:11 AM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline 		There are endless ways and opinions on US build strategy and how to conduct warfare in the Pacific. But no matter how you cut the cheese US production needs to be flexible enough to counter axis progress in Europe or you risk throwing away the game.

So in a 41 Barbarossa US must support an early CW invasion threat to take heat off Russia.

US production should deter Adolf from lauching a Sealion or at least be able to support Winnie.

Finally US production should be adjusted to fight in the Atlantic against Axis surface fleets and SUBS in a Gibraltar gambit.

Here is my minimum requirement for maximum flexibility:

US will want to keep Marines in the Pacific and the at start AMPH so the only real early help to invasions in Europe are a PARA stack with ATR and cheap INF - you need white print INF in the Pacific anyway. And those pesky FTR with their excellent range can support invasion fleets in the critical 3 box against axis air power so they are also needed.

If US need to help against SUBS even those rubbish early NAV's are going to be very helpful. You have to built most of them anyway so you can always use them to take a DX in air combat in the Pacific later on or just use the pilots in better planes. The 22 range NAV is wonderful to have in UK as it can react into the 4 box and find Axis SUSB/Surface fleet on 50 % chance and just as important halves axis probability to fight your convoys.

And of course US needs to built a substantial reserve of CP for supply in the Pacific and even more for Europe if the SUB menace is true.

In practial terms the expensive PARA and ATR should wait until war appropriation bill have been chosen where their cost is more affordable while aircraft and INF type units is a matter of gearing limit and convenience. Naval gearing is of course crucial.

Just a note on the level of navy built for the Pacific. It doesn't matter whether you go for a Japan first, Germany first or a more balanced approach what kind of navy you need to build with the USA. That's dictated by your preferred style of play. If you attack Japan early in a Japan first strategy you will cause early attrition which will keep Japan relatively weak and therefore you don't need an especially large fleet. It makes sense anyway to at least spend the first year or so with most commitment in the Pacific as your activity limits and number of units supports primarily naval and combined impulses.



< Message edited by hjaco -- 1/23/2011 12:36:40 AM >

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 179
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/23/2011 12:44:01 AM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.


To follow up my recent post I will illustrate my point about navy size by comparing Froonps and mine style of plays which is radical different (and both can work perfectly well). I only built 41 Essex carriers and the 5 at start BB. The 42 Essex are built to the construction pool and only finished if necessary. I built all CVP, FTR, NAV, SUB, AMPH and a few TRS.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> AI Opponent Discussion >> RE: AI for MWiF - USA Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   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

2.047