Terif

Axis turn 5 (January 7, 1940): Since Allies built 2 HQs and go for airbattles, they have not enough ground forces in France. Elbow was empty and taken by Germany. Now a major offensive along the coast starts with the veteran troops from Poland. 2 french armies destroyed, german tanks move forward, 4 french hexes conquered in total now, 2 german units only 2 hexes away from Paris, french army in the Ardennes heavily damaged.

Axis turn 4: Estimation was correct, 2 UK AFs in and around London - attacking a german corps to force intercepts and to use the AA bonus. German troops enter France and destroy an enemy army in the process, both UK AFs intercepting. Only a cheap corps placed in the first bloodhex, french attacks on it expected...

Axis turn 3: Denmark surrenders. French HQ spotted, french line takes some damage, german air busy in Denmark and repositioning towards Paris. Only 1 UK corps in France, probably Monti has been built. Italian readiness rises, so Malta AF should be in England.

Axis turn 2: LC and Poland surrender. Polish AF was intercepting from London. Denmark corps survives at str 1. German subs surprise a british battleshipgroup in the Atlantic - Rodney sunk. No allied attack on Ireland.

Bidding process finished. I will play Axis with bid 215 (215 UK, 1075 USA, 4300 Russia). All games will count for both Panzerliga and PBEM League. Anti-aircraft research is allowed. [ November 23, 2004, 02:08 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Yes, if you loose all 3 games, then it is only best of 3 (no point in more games). If you are lucky to win at least one game, then it is best of 5 (so not luck will decide the overall result ). - So you want to play with AA research ? - All games count for both the PBEM League and Panzerliga ? I will meet you tomorrow at 11 am GMT+1 (ICQ).

Hmm, Zapp is getting overconfident and cocky....I am just in the right (christmas-) mood, have time this week.... and it really itches me to ´crush´ a certain person . So let´s see if there is something behind Zapp´s big mouth and if he really can beat me today... Here my offer: We can play 3 games. In case you are lucky and win one of them, we will play another 2 games. So after a maximum of 5 games it should be clear who would win the next games and there will be no need to play again in the foreseeable future (i.e. until SC2 comes out...). - Standard settings - Rules: no landings during the first turn of DoW in major nations (Russia, Italy) - optional: no Anti-air research (only the starting levels for UK/USA). With veterans I play only with AA rule in the meantime to have a more land based, better and longer game, but here it is up to you. - Bidding system 1:5:20 (or alternatively 1:5:30, up to you). - For the official records they should be league games for both Panzerliga and the PBEM League (sorry, no ISCL since this league is too small, a victory there means not much with its ping-pong system and it is unlikely that it survives very long...like its predecessors) - AARs here at Battlefront. This week I should be able to play: Today+ - Tuesday-Friday: 11 am – 5 pm european time (GMT+1)

In my games it is perhaps 50/50. Especially between veterans the no landing rule is frequently used since there a game has more competition aspects and therefore most players here prefer limited options so there are not so many surprises and they can prepare for a standard game. As long as Allies are not allowed to attack Italy amphibiously (and the Axis player knows how to play), they have no real chance to hold the Med or to do - successfully - major attacks in this area. To have more fun and variety I can only recomand to play without a landing rule for Italy . In my eyes only the no landing rule for Russia is a really good rule, since this opens more options for Russia. Without landings they are able to hold the Riga-Minsk line for some time and so have the necessary breather to prepare their own offensives (e.g. Finland, Skandinavia (both impossible/unlikely without Riga) and Turkey + middle east - or a defense of the motherland...etc). To battle for the Med can be very interesting . Allies can destroy the italian fleet by a preemptive strike and can buy some turns until Axis has reconquered the italian mainland cities. So Allies are able to launch a war for the Med (conquering Tobruk/Tripoli, Iraq, eventually Greece) where both sides have the chance to win it. Nevertheless Allies have to be cautious not to commit too many troops in the Med or England will be open to Sealion. So usually by the start of Barbarossa they usually are only able to keep Egypt+Iraq. In case of an italian gambit, as Germany it is essential not to follow the temptation to go directly to Italy - except there is a good opportunity to trap some carriers in the eastern Med... . First Axis have to finish off France, the most important target. Then they can reconquer Italy while not neglecting Skandinavia. Skandinavia should have a higher priority than Italy to conquer the necessary income base for Axis. Then Axis can start to battle for the Med and since with Skandinavia they have enough mpps, they are much likely to beat Allies back to Egypt/Iraq. In the end: An italian gambit changes the game totally which results usually in much more fun and a very interesting game. It is a risk for Allies and has its advantages and disadvantages (read e.g.: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=003800) , but it doesn´t really change the chances to win, only the necessary way to go and the strategies both sides have to use - which is a good thing in my eyes .

@Avatar: Yes, this is only a game that should make fun. It is not a profession and not a duty. So nobody can be forced to play someone else - Neither did I accept it in the past nor will I accept it in the future. Zapp tried to force me since around a year, he never stopped and obviously never recogniced when it is time to stop... telling a lot of - I can´t call it something else - bull****. And yes, I am VERY annoyed of him and his different campaigns here in the forum and elsewhere. Don´t expect me to be willing to spend even more time with this guy by playing him ever again.

As every strategy, it depends on the opponent . Against Rambo and some others it is surely a good strategy, against others it is not . Rambo himself said at several occasions that he is a comparable weak allied player - he always plays very aggressive without much caring about how much enemies are standing in his way. As Axis this is not bad, but as Allies it is deadly if the enemy operates enough units to the current battle - so against him, operating the air has a good chance to work .

Tja, invading and holding Denmark as the Allies is possible - against the AI . As I saw in the other thread Gundolf is only playing the AI at the moment and against the AI it can be done . Liam talks about multiplayer and playing against human opponents - and there invading Denmark is not a good idea or even simply impossible since Axis will attack it in turn 1 and can protect it afterwards. Most threads are about multiplayer if there is nothing else said - AI and human opponents are 2 totally different things . BTW: Liam, you can operate your german air 2-3 ways and still win - but only if you play against the ´right´ opponents (or if you have already won the game, so even a bad strategy can not bring your victory into danger any more) . It is like with every strategy, if the enemy knows how to counter... At least against me it is a bad idea and when my opponents start defending France with air, the end of the Axis is near (against UK air/carriers with jets 2+ they have no chance and operating is expensive too...). Strangely most players make this mistake despite loosing every game a few turns after operating their air . Perhaps this is because the axis side is not used to be in the defensive at one front and always want to be superior everywhere and is not willing to give up some of their conquered territories in order to avoid defeat...or perhaps because this strategy works against other allied players - but it works only as long as the allied side doesn´t react appropriate .

Yes, carriers are not undestructable and there are counterstrategies - which one is good or bad depends on how Allies use their carriers and ships . If you leave a few fighters in southern France/Germany so Allies can´t destroy them doesn´t really help. It only gives Allies the opportunity to drain Axis ressources by constant air losses too - additonally to the ground losses. Only if Axis places a lot of air there it can delay/stop the allied invasion. But then there is the old problem that Axis is not strong enough for Russia any more and so they will sooner or later be killed from the east . In SC you have to concentrate your forces on the important targets - if you split up your forces, then the enemy can beat/kill them one after the other. Logically this depends on the enemy...if he makes similar mistakes or uses a strategy where this splitting up is the counter to, then it can - despite the above mentioned - be a good strategy .

Claim whatever you want - you know (if you would be honest) that you would not win a SC battle. Little crying kid with the short memory...grow up [ November 01, 2004, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Carriers are ships and AFs use their naval attack/defence value against them. So with jet technology the carriers greatly improve their combat value against AF´s, while AF´s can´t get stronger vs carriers during the course of the war . So carriers have the positive effect in the game that Allies are weak at the beginning - so Axis can conquer a good part of Europe - but after a few years with jet/LR technology + experience Allies will grow stronger and stronger, so they have the potential to defeat Axis in the later stage of the war. From mpps Axis are often in the advantage, so from this point of view, time is against Allies. But with increasing technology (and due to the catch-up effect both sides WILL increase their jet technology nearly for sure to lv 3+ sooner or later), Allies get very powerful units compared to Axis, so here time is in favour of Allies and they have the chance to liberate Europe if they make right use of them .

Experience is not the only thing . More important for carriers are Jet technologies (+ some LongRange). Carriers are very vulnerable when they have no jets (so it is not a good idea to use them during the first french campaign). But with lv 2+ (better 3+) they become dangerous for enemy air - even if they have no experience. Carriers are mobile and can be used to move close enough to the enemy air to destroy them, where the own AFs are out of range. To destroy or to drive away the enemy air is the first and most important task of the carriers, after this goal is accomplished, they can train and collect experience for the anti-ground combat. Naturally it is usually deadly to fight against the whole german Luftwaffe, so between France and Barbarossa they can only do some fast raids when there is not much resistance in an area. But when Axis attacks Russia, the time of the carriers is coming... Then Axis have to decide where to use their AFs. - They can leave them in France (i.e. Allies should stay defensive in the West), but then they can´t conquer Russia and Russia will get stronger and stronger until it will kill Axis from the east. - or they move their air to Russia, then Allies can start invasion without much enemy threat and it is the usual race who is faster in the east: Axis in Caucasus/Ural or Allies in Rom/Berlin. BTW: if Axis operates its air from one front to the other in the middle of the war, it is usually the beginning of the end since then they will loose them very fast against a good opponent and end up in the defensive at both fronts . - or they split their air between east and west, then the allied air in the west should be much stronger than the axis one and will make short process with them. Usually 5 UK/US AFs, + 3 carriers, each carrier is worth 2 AFs - i.e. the equivalent of 11 allied AFs against perhaps 5-6 german AFs - if there is more axis air, then Allies can build up and wait with the attack since in Russia are not much axis forces . And when UK has Jets 2+ they can kill the axis air in France without much problems with the help of the carriers. And that´s why it is very bad to loose the carriers early: they are needed to establish air superiority over France (or Skandinavia) after Barbarossa to enable invasion. Without carriers Allies have a problem since the better weapons (=ships/carriers) are their main advantage in the later war. Axis have enough mpps for an attrition war, so Allies need their carriers to be able to kill the enemy air instead of only exchanging mpps 1:1 . [ November 01, 2004, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Hmm, cultural differences... Where I live, "hihi" means what "haha" means for you while "haha" is often used in a not so friendly way. It can also mean to laugh (usually when it is combined with "hihi" ), but depending on the situation/pronounciation it is more likely to have the meaning of disbelieve or mocking/a mocking remark .

Hehe :mad: :cool: :eek: hihi

´ To spread´ is perhaps the wrong expression (although for the GF it could be the right one, but that´s the purpose of the GF, so there it is nothing bad ). But you know pretty well how to stir up battles from the past in the SC forum too whenever you are bored and want some action (= every couple of months... ). Simply by asking a few ´innocent´ questions (best used in different threads, so you can say the current question is harmless ) Same applies for Kuni - and I don´t have to look very far from this thread...hihi . Since both of you are intelligent, expressions like "all I asked for was..." are a bit unbelievable/ridiculous since from past reactions I am sure you know what will most likely happen when you ask such ´innocent/harmless´ questions :cool: . But nevermind - you reached the goal (partially ). Hope you enjoyed the entertainment . Till next time when one of you is bored and wants some smack wars - hopefully far, far in the future...

Bah, you can claim to be whatever - or whomever - you like. Be it Roger Rabbit, president, master of the universe, god... whatever...that doesn´t make it real even if noone defends his ´title´ :eek: . If even nearly 50 losses against one player and many, many more against others don´t show you the reality, then nobody can help you . BTW in SC there is no title to defend. Play a good game and have fun with it. If you are a good player be happy, if not then learn and improve so you can give a good fight in the future.

@ Dragonheart: Hmm, why do you want to replace the Bid system ? It is tested since several years and can balance the Fall Weiss scenario nearly perfectly. If bids go too high, so UK will be too strong at the beginning, then it is easy to change e.g. from 1:5:20 to 1:5:30. But if you introduce a totally new system with rules which countries to DoW and when to DoW them, then it gets complicated and until this would be balanced too you would need a lot of time and tries. Besides, if it is balanced depends highly on the experience of both players and so you would need different sets of rules for all kind of experience levels. However, if your opponent agrees you can always use every house rule you want and can also try these DOW rules - but I am sure the first dozen games one side will have a clear advantage (in the current version with veteran players Axis will surely win except Germany is killed in France ). For competition games not useful, in fun games and if it doesn´t matter for you if you loose some games, no problem. If you want to play something different than Fall Weiss with bids, I can recommand Amona´s Fall Weiss Mod2. It is very balanced for veteran players and there are a lot of possibilities for both sides including Allies beeing able to hold the Med if they want to. Some major problems I see with such a DoW system: - Allies get the main advantage at the beginning (high income if Axis have to DoW all the countries), so there is again a high incentive to try to crush Germany in France. If it fails Allies have lost, since in the long run Axis have no real disadvantage by the forced DoWs (only temporary until they are conquered), but Russia/USA have no additional mpps, so Allies are toast if Germany can conquer France. - Ok, Axis will not get Spain before Barbarossa, but this is also no real disadvantage from the mpp point of view. It only limits the possible Axis strategies since then they are forced to defend France until they have conquered Spain - a bad effect in my opinion. - and this limitations of possible strategies is another heavy problem in this system. Allies are forced to defend France with all means since every turn they can hold it is extremely valuable with this system, so they can´t use other strategies. And Axis have to decide which way they go at the beginning and can´t change strategy any more to adopt to the situation. E.g. if Allies are uncautious in a normal game with bids or too aggressive, then Axis can choose to go for sealion. A sealion is only possible in the right situation and Axis can´t know in the beginning if such a situation will occur - but when they have to DoW the countries at the beginning, then they can´t choose any more. And with all other strategies it is the same, with the countries DoWed they have no choice any more and the game would go a certain way. But in a normal game the strength of SC (and what I like most ) is to be able to change strategy (including which country you DoW and when) according to the enemies actions and to adopt to the situation. Surely, this is still possible in some aspects, but the main path would be predetermined with this DoW system. [ October 31, 2004, 05:23 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

If you only forbid the Rome invasion, then it usually means you are not allowed to take Rome during the first turn of the allied DoW on Italy. After Axis had the chance to react, Allies can´t take Rome any more as long as Axis protects it - so after the first turn it is allowed to conquer Rome. But the normal italian gambit - i.e. destruction of the italian fleet and conquering of the other italian cities - is allowed in this case. For some more details you can e.g. read: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=003518

Well, I don´t WANT to take part - but if I am forced to then I fight and don´t surrender . Nevertheless I hope this can be my last ´contribution´ to this ´topic´ . If someone wants smack wars, just go to the General Forum. There you can start them or bring back old fights and enough people who have fun in this kind of activities will take part. I prefer to use my time to play a good game of SC. So with your last sentence I totally agree : Stop this nonsense [ October 30, 2004, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Sorry, no new war Kuni - at least not from my side. Only a clarification. Perhaps you and Rambo should search for a new hobby if you are bored by SC instead of setting fire with such threads and starting forum fights I have read some of your smack threads in the general forum - impressive how you both can start uproar and fightings and how you are able to create hatred and bad feelings in the forum - but that´s nothing for me or where I want to take part of. Please don´t try it here in the SC forum too. ...would be better you play some good games to have fun - without quitting after some turns when it doesn´t go the way you want.. hehe . Much better use of your time [ October 30, 2004, 07:11 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Hmm, it has nothing to do with beeing afraid. I have no reason for beeing afraid with nearly 50 victories against Zapp, a 99% overall win percentage (>500 games played, only 5 losses in total )and many other players regularly beating him too... But it seems he wants it again black on white - so in short: - like other players already pointed out: If you don´t trust a player, then don´t play him. A very good advice . - I play to have fun and not to get another meaningless victory. So I play with the people I trust and where I know it will most likely be a good game that makes fun . I certainly could crush Zapp without any problems, but this would be only a duty thing and lastly a waste of time...I could (just to show him some modern strategies ), but will not do it because of - the most important reason: after what happened in our last games and later in the forum I promised not to play Zapp ever again...and I stay to my word OK, for me this topic is finished, if someone wants details or new fightings (I guess that was the purpose of this thread, eh Rambo... ) - we have enough threads in the archive .

You have 3 possible results (-1, 0, +1) and AFAIK the chances for each one are the same (i.e. 1/3). So e.g. the chances for a polish breakthrough with only the 3 HQ supported ground units are 37,04 % . Naturally this is only the long-term chance. If you take only a single event, you can have a wide spread, so short term luck matters. Therefore if you play e.g. only mini-games, then luck can have a huge influence on the outcome . But if you play the whole game, then luck nearly doesn´t matter any more since it evens out in the long run and lastly only strategy determines who will win - that´s why my overall win percentage is >99% hehe - luck fortunately doesn´t matter in SC as long as you don´t surrender too early . And if you remember your 2 victories against me: you had good results, but that was not the real reason why you have won them. In the first game I had chosen the wrong strategy - again Spain gambit after I just did it several times and you were prepared to counter. In the second you developed a new strategy (your RACK-carrier strategy) and surprised me totally - was a really good move (I already sacrificed large parts of my fleet and didn´t do GLR research - the standard combat doctrine at that time, but RACK never worked again after I was prepared ). [ October 30, 2004, 03:21 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]