brianlala

They also make good amphibious troop convoy defenders & good pickets for your capital ships (battleships & carriers). Then again, subs are also good pickets & amphib. troop convoy defenders.

Has anyone experimented with a Sealion in 1940 to take the UK out & then combined that with a Japanese attack on the Soviet Far East in 1941? I tried something like that against an opponent & having Japan hit the Soviet Far East can be helpful in either causing the Soviets to have to weaken the western front or else allowing Japan to take something like 40 MPP producing cities from the Soviets. This strategy does force Japan to weaken their navy somewhat but the Japanese forces needed to cut off all of those Soviet cities in the east & then build a defensive blocking position is not huge either. I wonder if this is a viable strategy to help out the Germans if they go Sealion.

Happycat: I'm interested in hearing how your winter offensive in the Minsk area is going. That 'reconnaissance in force' of those tank units probably put the Abukede into a difficult strategic position. He either has to divert away from the Leningrad front to blunt your offensive or ignore your offensive & risk his whole northern front. I know you probably can't answer this for strategic reasons but have you thought about some minor British diversionary amphib landings in Europe? If you pre-scout his defenses surely he has undefended costal cities such Copenhagen or Bordeaux. Lightning raids with divisions to take the city and then retreating would indirectly weaken his eastern fronts by forcing him to react against these attacks.

That's a pretty neat idea. I like it. Japan gets a garrison unit once it captures Singapore & Japan proper (Honshu, Hokkaido, etc.) gets free units to defend it once the allies approach but you're right that it would make for a more dynamic game if there were more of these garrison units & divisions either popping up or available for purchase to protect key island islands.

Early on at least, just accept that you are going to take some convoy losses. My favorite tactic is to guard the high value spots & once your patrols stubble onto a sub to surround it without attacking. Here's how my rounds go: 1) move destroyers around until they stumble into a sub 2) once sub is found, they box it in so that it cannot move 3) if #2 is impossible then setup some cruisers & battleships around the sub a few hexes away 4) then bring in the destroyers to attack it 5) you might not destroy it completely on that turn but the goal is to get it to run into your other ships when it tries to flee so that you get a second turn to pounce on it

I agree but it's a noteworthy strategy in case the French player does something like pulling its units out of Africa. I guess I enjoy the fact that there's a counter to France loading up units as speedblocks against the German invasion of France proper. These choices are what makes the game interesting to me.

Hi Clausewitz, It's an interesting idea but I have to second Mike's (mcaryf1) thoughts. I think operation movement as it is currently handled is pretty nicely done. If the allies want to stop Germans from moving troops from the east to defend against something like a dday event, strategic bombing Paris & Lille cuts the rail links in those places & gives the allied player the space that they need to land & not have to face immediate German reinforcements. If you really want to make a dday defense pretty futile, hit Amsterdam, Cologne, Kassel, Frankfurt, & Stuttgart with some naval units (Amsterdam) & strategic bombers. It won't even cause a huge outlay of MPPs to prepare for such an offensive if you give yourself 2 turns to cut the rail links to France in these locations (unless I'm missing some shortcut into France that also needs to be bombed). If you do this maneuver, German reinforcements will have to make the long trek into France from Berlin or Nuremberg. To get to Normandy from those locations will take the German player 3 turns (1 turn to operational move & 2 turns for normal movement over land). The ability to halt operational movement by partisans & paratroops zones of control or strategic bombing seems like a fair counter to operational movement. This type of rocks/paper/scissors simplicity is what I feel makes the Strategic Command series so elegant & fun to play. Cheers, Brian

This is directed more for multiplayer games: In 2 ongoing games (admittedly a very small sample size) playing as Japan, I'm wondering if others think China seems to be a little bit too easy of a pushover in the early years. Maybe this will reverse itself in middle years (1942 & 1943) and the later years but it seems like Japan has an overabundance of powerful attacking units sitting on the map at the start of the game. What I've been doing in the first couple of turns is shipping in armies & special forces from Manchuria & the islands onto mainland China. This makes it easy for Japan to cut through Chinese forces. It seems to be a combination of a few too many Japanese army units, too few Chinese army units, and too few Chinese MPPs. Perhaps taking out some JN armies in Manchuria & replacing them with corps and/or downgrading some other JN armies for corps will tone down JN. Alternatively, replacing some Chinese corps with armies might also help. Mitigating some of this perceived early advantage is that this might reverse itself in later years as I'm seeing that a failure to invest in naval units by Japan early on is pretty painful once the U.S. comes into the war. JN seems to get less freebie naval units in this incarnation of SC & obviously has more area to patrol. Another possible mitigating factor is the lack of resources in China means that the JN player isn't as rewarded for pushing China into the north & mountains as in prior versions of the game. I'll have to play some more multiplayer & AI games before becoming more dogmatic on this issue but I'm curious to hear what others think about China's ability to fend off Japan. ---------------------- Some other random thoughts on Japan because I think it's interesting: 1) The AI US Allied player is challenging me really nicely. I pulled a pearl harbor & the US promptly brought their carriers into play & sunk 2 of my carriers the following turn. I returned the favor & sunk the 2 US carriers the following turn but JN can ill afford the losses. A couple of turns later, my convoys from Manchuria were bringing me 0 out of 30 MPPs because the U.S. has stuck 1-2 subs on that route. This is a problem because the U.S. took out 1 of JN's 2 starting destroyers & my other destroyer was sub hunting British/Indian subs near Singapore. If the British AI coordinated their India-based navy better, I'd be in a pickle naval-wise. Overall, a pretty neat turn of events & different from the more restrained US AI of the past. 2) As China, one strategy that looks promising is to slowly pull back behind rivers & mountains if you see JN is about to launch a large attack from prepared positions. The prepared attack bonus (the bonus that a player gets for launching an attack without moving first) would be negated & that's what seems to help JN the most in preventing large losses in China. 3) I'll be curious to see how the Chinese communists come into play later in the war & if they get a bunch of units to start offensives against Japan. It'll be hard for both the AI Chinese player & a human player to break out of those northern mnts to get to Japan if they do build up in northern China. 4) The trick to playing as Japan against China is to make sure you hit China hard every turn so that their MPP losses are above replacement level (look at the MPP graph to confirm you are meeting this objective). If you can keep this disparity up through 1941, China will probably be on the ropes due to lack of replacement units. 5) If the U.S. hits JN hard (maybe a Pacific first strategy) and consistently, JN will be challenged due to low MPPs earned each turn. I think a U.S. strategy to keep JN's MPP losses above replacement level is feasible & will cause JN to crash. Finally, I should mention that I'm really enjoying this incarnation of Strategic Command against both the AI & humans. It's a blast! Aside from the WW1 version, I think it's the best value (dollars cost vs. hours I will play it) out of the whole SC series.

Who's to say that wasn't my goal I'm rooting for you...the underdog in this fight. 800 MPPs to get Spain makes for an interesting decision on the Axis side. It's probably worth it but that hit is really going to hurt in the short-term with Barbarossa around the corner. I'm curious to calculate how much of a MPP boost Spain gives each turn in order to see if it is worth it to ally with them through this event.

I agree that it's a great move. What makes it particularly painful for the Allied player is that he was spending MPPs on diplomacy in Spain. I wonder if that was what caused Abukede to decide to choose this route.

Oh neat Abukede. I bet you said no to Vichy to get Spain into the Axis fold via that decision event. Having Spain voluntarily in the Axis is going to mean a nice net gain in MPPs over the course of the game. This also probably means you are doing an Axis attack into Egypt since you will be able to capture Gibralter & close off the med to the Allies. Pretty powerful move.

In the manual, decision event 502 states that the following occurs if you fail to create Vichy: France continues to fight, with Algiers becoming her capital while she receives units in Algeria, French Polynesia, Noumea, and air units (a tactical bomber and a strategic bomber) manufactured in the USA. Free French units may also arrive at a higher percentage chance. Syria, French West Africa, French Equatorial Africa and French Polynesia will all swing 80-89% towards the Allies if Germany forces the surrender of France from Algiers. Once Algiers falls to the Axis, Germany is presented with DE 503. Decision Event 503 is then where the choice to bring Spain into the Axis comes into play.

I was reading the manual's list of decision events & came across an interesting event #DE 503: If Axis don't create Vichy & then fights it out until French surrender, they have the option of allying with Spain for 800 MP assuming Spain is still pro-axis at the time (there are other rules that have to occur but will surely be in place at the time of event firing). Additionally, Spain gets a tank unit & an army with this event. Allied Free France has a higher probability of getting more units. Several smaller countries like Syria & West Africa will likely join the allies. This pathway seems like a potentially better choice as Axis than spending mucho MPs on diplomacy if you want to get Spain into the Axis. Of course the 800 MPs is probably similar to what would have to be spent on diplomacy to get Spain into the Axis but this is sure-thing event & your German troops will get to build up experience beating up on the weaker French units. Anyone ever tried this pathway or have any thoughts on using it versus spending the MPs on diplomacy to get Spain into the Axis (assuming you are targeting getting Spain into the Axis)?

Hi AshesFall. I'd be interested in a game if you are up for it. I can meet those turn restrictions unless I'm on an 2-3 day business trip (happens about once every quarter) or vacation. I'd be happy to play either side & I'd say my skill level was beginner as well. Let me know what you think.

It sounds like you are unhappy with the level of difficulty & abstraction that Battlefront uses in these games. May I suggest upping the difficulty level if you are playing solo. I think the AI is not good when the difficulty is set at the standard intermediate+ no experience bonus but I get a good match out of the AI when the difficulty is at advanced + 1/2 star experience bonus. Try something like that before you dismiss the difficulty. I'll leave my comments regarding the abstraction of the scenarios because there's no real way to argue for or against that.