steel32

Being my 1st AAR bear with me as I am not experienced in detailing this out. However Overall Plan: Beginning: 1. Knock down to size HQ units and leave frontier soviet formations in low supply 2. Take out easy targets of the soviet air. I am not a big believer in air in this game but they are easy targets. Airs big priority in this is to knock down entrenchment, and some low soft targets. 1941: 1. Take Leningrad. This is a must to allow consolidation of northern units for operations elsewhere. 2. Take down the soviet army as much as possible to neuter any possible 41' winter operations. 3. Take the south all the way to Rostov, including Sevastopol. 4. In order to do this HQ must move a minimum of 3 spots each turn to keep up with the advance. 5. Relentlessly move forward as I would rather fight with weak units and continue to degrade the soviets than give them respite and opportunity to entrench. 6. Take out all light tanks as fast as possible to keep the advance non-threatened as much as can be. North: Ashes appears to want to delay the advance all across the front, which somewhat slows advances in some areas, but I believe this will work to my benefit in later stages as the Germans are consolidated at this point and can punch holes where needed and continue to move forward. With this in mind I have moved towards Riga with minor forces surrounding a few units along the way and knocking out that low supply in position to take Riga next turn. His delaying action saved 2 tank units for one turn but I am certain they will fall next turn. Central: Ashes heavily moved units up to try to protect his light tanks, and delay the advance. It does not work as my armor moves out in unison and takes the town before Minsk. 2 infantry divisions are fast marched forward to help support and take Minsk next turn. 1 armor unit is left in a little dangerous position but quite sure it will not fall, or even get hit too hard as he can not have too many armor beyond what is already there. South: It appears again Ashes wants to defend at the frontier and possibly attack near Romania. I actually welcome this as this continues to weaken his units and hits my satellite formations which are no more than fodder for the most part. My initial plan of combining the 2 section from Germany and Romania has worked as they have combined in the northern sector are in position to strike a flank of any attack. So far so good down here as the south can be tricky. Overall a very destructive turn as the initial turn was made to setup the destruction laid this turn as no less than 24 ground units fall with almost all in low supply.

Hello Ashes, Now that I speak probably have not faced a warrior such as yourself. However let's give it a go. Send me your email. Mine is on the top of the search for opponent list. Regards Steel

AshesFall, I am not heard much on Battlefront due to my location. However playing this game I have never loss with either side. Important is having an initial plan as all state and sticking with it with slight alterations where opportunities arrive. But the opening turn is very important. It is not all about destroying units but destroying units to a point where supply is low. Air I use to think were primary, and they still are somewhat but light armor is truly a destructive force waiting to hit you. You do not need to destroy the 1st or the 2nd turn or keep in a position where you can before they get away. Speaking of the same thing is to focus on the light tanks wherever and whenever you can and keep an eye out for them. I use my armor not hit 1st but destroy units when possible but infantry always move forward to provide protection even if needed to fast march. This provides a layer to your armor protection and the infantry are somewhat expendable. This also keeps your armor as strong as possible. HQ need to move 3 moves each turn, otherwise you are not maximizing your advance. This takes advance thought and protection, but if the soviets in the end are willing to launch just to hit HQ's then they or you are not maximizing your situation. Artillery must move forward and who cares if fast advance as there real use is to reduce entrenchment, they are also hard to destroy. From my point of view but others are different is that the axis can not let the allies recoup and this means constant forward movement and keeping the allies moving. Once they get a chance to reinforce, and entrench the odds get higher. Just points from someone who personally has had luck but perhaps not against the best. I am up for a game if you want me to show you, perhaps you could show me a thing or two? Steel32

Looking for a game. steelman3250@hotmail.com I am pretty good at this game.

Looks like Isnogud is going to win the tourney from what I see from his and Pacesticks game. Pacestick let me down, just kidding. My game with Pacestick was a 2 point victory for my axis but currently looking at a 1 point loss in early 46 with Isnogud with me the allies. Isnogud got off to too good of a start and I will not be able to fully catch up, however I made a good comeback but with 1 1/2 years left will fall well short of Japan. A lot of fireworks in our game though. I am not able to provide any pictures but perhaps Isnogud would like. Due to my location not able to upload let alone get on the website most of the time.

I am aware of thread and aware of the possible counter, my perspective this should not be allowed for majors. UK can counter if lucky 1 per turn, whereas axis can 2-3 if they want. You can say France/China can but can they really with their situation and MPP, and even at that they get 3%. From a realistic approach and I am not formal believer in realistic conditions it would never happen. Unless Germany went to their original borders pre 39 or Japan withdrew from China the US and for that matter Russia would always look at Germany, Japan as a threat. Geopolitcs come into play more so than any unrealistic MPP value given to each country for the reason to give a more realistic equal scenario of the war leading up to 41. But this is my opinion and you have yours.

Playing a game right now against an opponent and have a really good allied start. However my opponent has purchased diplomacy the last 3 turns with Japan against the US and hit 2 of the last 3 turns. #1 - this is very lucky #2 - it perhaps ruins the game #3 - very unrealistic that unless Japan pulled out of China that any improvement in US relations would ever happen. I have never been a fan of diplomacy, but with majors it's a game killer as it based on industrial output and nothing realistic as in current affairs and political standing. And in this regard the allies have no chance at all to compete.

To me one of the only ways the Germans truly had a chance of winning or say not losing in WWII was to take this approach. They could of took Egypt, Malta, the Middle East and not even have fought the soviets but got what they wanted out of pressure and strategic position. But perhaps that last point is not correct as a war between the 2 was almost inevitable from one side or the other.

Ihughes41 I am neutral on Caucasus as I can see it both ways. Supply was just as bad for the Russians in the mountains as it was the Germans. I definitely try to defend and fight at the river until the German #'s are in their favor then retreat to the mountains. Once retreating to the mountains it is imperative that the Russians have a HQ down there to keep supply in their favor. Getting thru the mountains for the Germans can be a task if they are not prepared to bring the #'s down there needed. And Russians can still bring in some units through the port left. If Germany goes strong down there this opens other areas for Russia to defend easier and perhaps a chance to cut them off down there. A strong defense in the hills in front of Kharkov, and forests/hills behind the river here can offer a force to hold and perhaps strike down to Rostov if the Germans go down to the Caucasus and if they do not strike their flank. 41' is definitely in the German favor but with proper terrain/entrenchment the Soviets can stretch the Germans who can not be strong everywhere and then with time strike somewhere in the soviet favor. However 42' must see some other western demonstration and eventually a major effort in the west/Mediterranean to fully able this. Otherwise on their own Russians probably will fail.

I agree with Al and Seamonkey. The situation is far from hopeless as the Russians. Supply is in fact better for the Russians on their own ground with especially with cities providing supply and German supply terrible in 41' until towns/cities regain strength. Using terrain, entrenchment, and supply is key for any defense. With the Russians I tend to follow Al's way though at times and give ground in 41' when units approach and known to be easy prey when Germans set next to them for prepared offense and/or artillery and multiple bombers in range to prepare the attack. Russia has lots of good ground to defend around the line running from (Rostov, Kharkov, Kursk, Vyzama, Kalinin, Novgorod, Leningrad). But need entrenchment to allow best defense to hold out until and thru winter, so always prepare a turn or 2 ahead.

Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Personally do not care how long it takes as long it is right! Thanks for your support.

A more realistic overall approach is needed. I am not a big believer in loops but believe some balance can take place from ideas given. Perhaps loops with a delay after to allow some respite to the Japanese or other force to act against. If loops perhaps they suffer hits to morale and strength. If no loops perhaps naval units need greater distance.

Altaris, I fully agree as you know from our experience that everything can be of use! Nothing is a waste if used properly. Light tanks can open up at times or further and advance to continue a fast pursuit of a retreating German army. I do believer there are a lot of options open for this game but for consideration for future use light tanks if used in packs of 8 or more can be devastating.

Good comments Strategicalayabout and agree! Who said that air transport is not also magical Seamonkey but addressing the subject at hand is loops. I agree with your point in this respect. If there is a problem with naval distance then increase. Make the complete game more realistic than adding loops or variables to compensate for certain inconsistencies in the game. Making 2 wrongs does not make 1 right.

Hyazinth, To be honest I can not see the German website due to complications with my internet here in China, just will not let me on as Battlefront in the past (even though I been a player since the beginning). My approach to AOC and most SC games is Helter Skelter across the board to keep the initiative with the Axis, stop entrenchment, and not allow the allied player a second to think. But with AOC from what I have noticed is it is more important. From what I see from Battlefront you have kept a southern approach and looks good. I differ and keep a northern and at the same time multi-approach. Love to join with the Fins, and by doing strength seems to be drawn from the central/southern routes. But then again who knows! Each game is different, and to each their own, and who am I to say what is right without trying other approaches.

Hello Ashes, Great campaign as always and glad to see another run between Will and you. Looking good so far despite losses as they can be entered back in quickly if in supply. I would be wary of allowing too much time for Will to build up entrenchment. Entrenchment/morale of Soviets in this game more than AOD can be a real drag on the hitting/defending power of the axis advance the further it goes. Now's the time to run and perhaps pull off some encirclements with his tanks down.

Operation Flatiron same situation where there does not appear to be a surrender script when both capitals are taken in Iceland. This one was a lot tougher to take than Brilliance. Tough to get a foot hold on inside the perimeter. However on both games rather than going to a more defense stance to defend the allies in both scenarios either sent transports to Spain in Brilliance and amphibious kept coming in Flatiron even though in Brilliance it was clear that Africa capitals were threatened and even to the last turn in Flatiron where I was on the verge of taking Iceland. Might be tough to do as the setup for the game is actually to have the allies attacking but if the scripts are capable of going both ways then they switch tactics until at least being able to protect their capitals. Perhaps not capable with the mechanics in the game though.

I like your thinking Von Lourens. Perhaps at least until the game is out of control, I feel there can be excitement gathered in an attempt to try to defend at least the end of the game. One of my favorite games was Panzer General II and playing people online with the worst possible scenarios for the Germans and seeing if I could hold out beyond the victory conditions. Again if it is clear there is no stopping an opponent then yes I completely understand the urge to give in. Of course any opponent of mine wants to withdrawal anytime from a game I am always gracious and play them again as long as they give a heads up that they are withdrawing.

Al, I am not a big fan of the loops. It allows for faster, unhindered, unspotted time travel that is unfair to the axis. To much surprise and able to arrive unharmed. The loops are a major advantage for the allies in several spheres. It is a magical way of Allied navies appearing right at the most critical spots out of nowhere. It negates the ability of the Japanese to surround Australia/take the islands for spotting/defense. It negates the German sub ability to do major harm. It allows surprise attacks to occur with amphibious units 1/4 of the world away. In the case of India 1/2 the world away.

Hello Bill I just played Operation Brilliance and noticed 2 things: 1. When all capitals are taken by the axis the game does not end. 2. It seems odd taking objectives in Africa would end the western powers attempt at re-taking Europe. Especially when the US falls 1st then all their units disappear and then it's left to England. It would seem that either both powers could still use the last remaining capital or perhaps there is an island somewhere where they can still resist an put up a fight such as representing Canada or the US. Just does not seem to end right. Steel32

Hyazinth I would actually say Norway was the key as it sidetracked the axis from the real objectives. Keeping the allies off the mainland and keeping the initiative is the key for the axis in any game. By going to Norway the axis fought at point of weakness whereas the allies can afford to give up quite a bit of naval units along with 2 armies, compared to multiple air units and the loss of a good part of an army.

Hello Bill, Actually for new purchased aircraft placed into abandoned trenches they will keep the trench. Not sure if a bug or not for newly purchased units. Steel32

Overall I do agree with your feedback guys but the problem is how to tweak all areas to make a more realistic game with other possibilities depending on action take during the game. This includes the complete unrealistic advantages of the allied air arm always getting thru the fighter protection as long as they have their own fighter arm to protect. Russia in the beginning not having anything comparable to the size of the army they had in the real war. German subs not having a chance if defended against of making it out into the Atlantic if the Brits put a blanket on the approaches. Current game though If you do want a quicker ending, take Netherlands/Belgium in the winter to have your forces in an advantage on knocking out the French in the spring/early summer. I also do not like the move to Bordeaux when it is clear that the French are defeated. If this was done in the real war the French would only of done this if the British committed their reserves. This could be replicated as a decision that drastically can hurt British ability to fight in Africa or in Sealion, perhaps a large MPP drain on the British which also takes away their reserve pop-ups if England is invaded or even part of their Anzac/Africa force. Expendability of troops/navy you have some good ideas and if done this way in hari kari should/could be some adverse or positive outcomes if not. But believe we all do it with all countries if possible. I try to get anything easy with Polish forces remaining rather than defending longer myself. Beyond your ideas perhaps also a bigger Free French force given when Africa is free or landing in France later is an idea. In the real war the Free French got quite large towards the end of the war as they are not really represented in this one. Naval question of Italy can be changed in the current game by keeping Italian ships in harbors where only subs/AC can have minimal impact on them and if under axis air fighter protection then can be defended. A tactical bomber or 2 down here can also be very devastating to the British, just ignore the French and do not go into open water. Another way this could change could be for the Italians to enter only on the last turn or 2 to not allow much of a chance for an attack unless a decision is given where they choose to enter on their own part. Another point to put here is that harbors altogether should be more protected from all naval attacks vs naval attacks. Still need the reduction factor as this is already replicated in enough losses when attacked. Russians I played a few PBEM games and learned not to defend the borders to allow defense in strength, otherwise it is hard to get any type of late 41' attack or even 42' until their MPP cranks up. Germans just run right thru anything in their path in the beginning with a clear armor advantage, which they really did not have beyond tactics/quality. Something could help is more light tanks for the Soviets as is done in AOD/AOC. Subs I rarely get embroiled in this war unless terms dictate for the fact if the British want they can just blanket the approaches. There needs to be an easier way to get out. Perhaps the approaches to open water the destroyer automatic hit is much less in certain areas to allow them to get out. The reality is the water approaches are quite large and the subs could get out into open water, without Enigma being cracked it would of been much easier. Bombers should still have a chance of being hit by German fighters at least a % in the air war and not immune as it is in this game. Overall however as always I believe the Strategic Team has done a great job as always with a well balanced game overall if played within the terms of the game. Difficult to make balanced with any one single change and even more difficult to predict against those who find ways to exploit as it is done with any game.

A good tactic in this version is to retreat when the Germans approach, wherever possible to save units. Especially in the south with the way your situation looks at this time you must be low on units and will want to avoid moving anything from the north. Winter will come soon enough and keeping your army in good enough shape will pay dividends in 42'. Besides the German supply situation does a good job of reflecting the real war and is really lousy for the Germans unless HQ's are in cities/towns. This flips when the Russians start going on the attack. Like your northern strategy though. Good luck Ashes, always good to watch you 2 bash each other to pieces:)

Thanks Hubert! Never knew and always just dealt with it as I thought it was.