Subject: Fw: A&A (Europe) Michael Sandy wrote in message <20000514174800166029@pm3-01-03.cvo.du.teleport.com>... I recently got into Axis and Allies (Europe) and started searching for a forum to discuss it. In alt.games.axisandallies, there is very low volume, and on rec.games.board there is huge volume, but very little on the topic I wish to read. So, in hopes of drawing a few more people to alt.games.axisandallies ... I read some of the old posts on rec.games.board about the game balance. There were a number of threads that I found interesting and would love to go into more detail on. On turn 1, Germany can and should attack the British fleet and occupy or pass through British and Russian convoy centers. Questions: 1) The Germans can attack every British Destroyer group in the Atlantic, 3 Subs v Davis Strait, 2 Subs +1 Bomber vs Celtic Sea, 2 Fighters + 1 sub vs English channel, 2 subs + 4 fighters versus the North Sea. However, this passes up occupying a British 3 IPC convoy zone and since both subs sent to the North Sea will likely be chosen as casualties, the Germans will probably not be able to stop the Russians from retaking their convoy zone on the Russians second turn. 2) Since the Germans have such a potentially devastating attack, should the British do anything about it? What happens if the British start with a sub in the Celtic Sea (in order to retake a 5 IPC convoy zone on their turn), or in the North Sea? A related topic: How do the Allies rebuild their fleet, and begin to put serious pressure on Germany, without getting their fleets destroyed piecemeal by the German air force? One possibility is for England to build subs on turn one instead of a surface fleet. During the Cold War, the best way to counter a submarine was with another submarine. It seems kind of weird to use submarines to escort merchant ships against submarines, but this is an option that protects the English fleet from being smashed repeatedly. Of course, this strategy is really only worth trying if the entire British fleet got sunk on turn one, because otherwise the Germans will just concentrate more effectively on the remaining surface fleet. If the Germans build subs in the Danish Sea, those subs can hit any sea zone adjacent to the British Isles. Build a sub every turn and extend the life of the German airforce in anti-naval build up duty. What level of priority should be given to retaking convoy zones as distinct from invading German territory? If the Allies are sending lots of fighters to Russia, they can possibly forgo a direct attack on German territory for a while in order to build up large forces. A while ago, on rec.games.board, there was discussion that Germany could build so many tanks that even if Russia counter-attacked vigorously then Germany could just outproduce Russia and overwhelm it. So my question is, over a full turn, what kind of loss ratios can the Germans tolerate vs Russia? For example, I like starting the Germans with an extra Artillery in Rumania and attacking Ukraine. 3 Inf, 1 Art, 2 Tanks, vs 4 Inf and 1 Artillery. The Germans are certain to lose whatever they actually take Ukraine with, and they will take slightly more casualties vs Baltic States and Eastern Europe because the two tanks were diverted to Ukraine, and some forces will also be diverted to Bessarabia from Hungary. Is killing 16 IPCs worth of Russian worth losing 23 IPCs (gaining a 2 IPC territory)? Should Germany only attack where it can get overall even losses, (including the Russian counter-attack), or should it try to drain Russia quickly? Should the Germans _encourage_ the Russians to counterattack, because Germany will kill whatever the Russians move in with? Should the Russians counter attack in great strength in order to destroy Germans (at good odds), being careful not to actually take the territory, or should the Russian attack with such a marginal advantage that only a few Russian units will end up in the contested territory for the Germans to kill? Michael Sandy Subject: Fw: A&A (Europe) Michael Sandy ... I would like to address the subject of the 12 IPCs both sides get at the start. I have a number of suggestions, and criticisms: 1) British: Infantry in Malta. The purpose is to protect the fighter from a cheap Amphibious attack. If Germany uses the Battleship against Gibraltar then Britain will actually have a temporary force advantage versus the German fleet there. 2) German extra Artillery on the Russian front. Kill an extra Russian stack on turn 1. Problem, the Russian can just counter by putting extra infantry in the Ukraine. 3) German transport in Tyrrhenian Sea. I like this one a lot. Unless the British go overboard in putting extra infantry in Malta, you can still swamp Malta with two transport loads. Alternately, if the British put _lots_ of troops into Malta, bypass it and move into the Central Mediterranean. Two transports worth of infantry will make it hard to attack Libya _and_ sink the German fleet. One or the other. If the British attack the fleet, they give up a chance to attack Libya with numerical parity, (3 Inf, 1 Art, 1 tank, 1 fighter). 4) British sub Celtic Sea. (Or North Sea) The former pretty much guarantees the British instantly regain the 5 IPC convoy zone there, the second may allow the British to regain the Russian Convoy Zone on turn 2. 5) German Artillery Finland. Here the goal is to get the Finnish Infantry adjacent to Leningrad, and incidently kill a Russian Inf in Vyborg. If the Germans then decide not to hit Leningrad on turn two, they still have a formidable attack on Karelia. A variant on this is to ship two Artillery from Germany to attack Vyborg. The idea is to have as many threat axes as possible for the Russians to defend. With a strong tank force in Eastern Europe, the Germans can potentially hit Leningrad or the Ukraine with a huge force. They are not going to be strong enough to be positioned to evict both. Once the Germans take Karelia, it becomes worse. They can attack Leningrad from Karelia and the Baltic States and _retreat_ to Karelia! This puts a huge stack next to Archangel, completely on the other side of the Russian defenses. 6) Russian Artillery Byelorussia. Here the purpose is to counter attack into the Baltic States in order to guarantee holding Leningrad long enough for British planes to be converted into Soviet Patriotic fighters. 7) British. 4 Inf Egypt. The Middle East is the single hardest place for the Allies to reinforce. If the Germans leave their transports exposed, and the British can get a momentary advantage in Africa, they buy themselves a lot of time. 8) German transport, Danish Sea. Purpose is to get England worrying about a turn 1 attack on England. The odds aren't great, 2 fighters, 1 bomber, 2 artillery, 2 Inf vs (from memory here), 6 ground troops, 1 bomber, 2 fighters, and an AA gun. Or 18 attack points among 7 units vs 21 defense points among 9 units. Also, the Germans can take Leningrad on turn 1 with 2 Inf and 2 Artillery. This prevents the Russians from building Inf in Leningrad, and pretty much guarantees that the Germans can take it on turn two. Also, Russia is forced to make an expensive counter attack into Leningrad. Expensive because they can't also attack the Baltic States, so the Germans will kill whatever moves into Leningrad. The British have to think defensively in case Germany builds two Destroyers and 2 Transports in the Baltic, because that force would probably down a British Bomber and 2 fighters for a loss of only 3 transports. I think that covers most of the good IPC placement strategies. Michael Sandy