Strategiclayabout

Hi woverby1963 , Another explanation can be "unintended bad moves" as it can be easy to click wrong sometimes with a lack of practice or just slippy fingers, bad mouse, spilled coffee or whatever. Quite tempting to reload when you send units on "suicide missions" or mismanage swap moves and leave a critical tile wide open, especially at the start of a turn. There is also the fact that even experienced players can de surprised by the deep pool of script-events with one move having veeeeery bad consequences .

Haha, Thanks for your support ! Let's call the whole bunch "Les Boches" then, nobody will be jealous . So 1 spot taken, 2 remaining, you don't need to be a veteran we just need some pals to push the bodies and test the idea so come in volunteers !

Hi steelwarrior77 , You probably attack with battleships and cruisers. Those units have a strategic attack value (like carriers, bombers, recon bombers and airships). So if they attack a port they will target first its supply value. Those units will only be able to attack directly an unit sheltered in the port once supply is down to 0. That said any attack on supply has a small % chance to also deal damage to any unit in the port. Your best choice to attack units in ports is from land (very effective) or by using submarines (decent naval attack, 0 strategic attack value, high demoralization factor) with sub tech upgrade (increased naval attack). Otherwise you can reduce port supply to 0 first using bombers (best base strategic attack with 3) or battleships (strategic attack of 2). Airships can help with long range but base strategic attack is only 1 (like cruisers). Better avoid wasting upgraded battleships and cruisers vs port supply because naval upgrades cost a lot and increase naval attack but not strategic attack. * Also take a look at ports statistics: Naval defense: 2 Sub defense: 2 Air defense: 1 (apply to supply points vs strategic attack) Naval defense bonus: 6 Sub defense bonus: 6 Carrier defense bonus: 1 Soft defense bonus: -1 (vs land units) (apply to naval units defending in port) * Naval attack: Battleship: 4 (7 with upgrade) Cruiser: 2 (5 with upgrade) Destroyer: 1 (only antisub upgrade) Carrier: 1 (only long range upgrade) Submarine: 3 (+1 per sub tech uograde if I remember well) Infantry corps: 3 Hope it helped .

Hi everybody , INTRO Looking for three other people to try a WWI Break 1.05 4 players game (1914 Call To Arms campaign). After some testing I feel it should be playable with some home rules. They mostly state the obvious so don't panic over the wall of text: a) Only use your own MPPs/units Any agreement can be made to use/lend specific units Basic settings would be the following: * I TEAMS 1) CP team Player 1: Austria (& Turkey) Player 2: Prussia 2) EN team Player 1: Russia Player 2: France, UK (& Italy, USA) (any activated minor will be played by who controls their unit pool) * II TURN SEQUENCE 1) CP team Player 1: (launch EN Player 2 save game) (play & decide any event) (save own turn and email to CP Player 2) Player 2: (launch CP Player 1 save game) (end turn and decide any event) (wait start of EN turn, save and email to EN Player 1) 2) EN team Player 1: (launch CP Player 2 save game) (play & decide any event) (save own turn and email to EN Player 2) Player 2: (launch EN Player 1 save game) (end turn and decide any event) (wait start of CP turn, save and email to CP Player 1) * III KNOWN ISSUES 1) Password Of course it will take more time to complete a turn/campaign but each player turn will be shorter ingame. And obviously game engine wasn't designed for that as you can't save an ongoing turn in Multiplayer-Email. That said we can use save with Hotseat, players from the same side will just have to use the same password. One problem is on first turn CP team Player 2 will have to decide/enter EN team password making it useless . 2) Saving turn Another problem with hotseat turn ends is you need to wait for the following turn's start to save. That means Fog of War will be lifted while Player 2 save the turn before sending it to the other team's Player 1. However it will be limited to the area of the map onscreen if you don't wander around and just save the turn. Those issues make it a no go for tournaments but should be ok between friendly players . 3) Events Having to share turns also brings some bad consequences as decision events/strategic advices happen when turn starts or ends. That said several events can be considered no-brainers even if decided by the "wrong" player of each team. Discussing more strategic choices is ok but not practical unless you have "instant" communication or do it beforehand. On the good side it will bring some uncertainty and simulate a bit the difficulty to coordinate efficiently with Allies/GHQs. 4) Deployment phase With Austria starting the game Prussia won't be able to deploy freely those units (HQ, 2 infantry, 2 cavalry, 1 artillery). Agreement can be made beforehand between CP players to deploy units as they wish. CP Player 1 can use auto-deploy or manual deployment. CP Player 1 will make the decision in the end. * IV GAMEPLAY 1) Unit use general rules Player 1 of each team should only use his own MPPs though he has the ability to use Player 2 ones (turn start). Player 2 of each team should only use his own MPPs even if he has the ability to use leftover ones from Player 1. Player 1 of each team should only move his own units though he has the ability to move all Player 2 units (turn start). Player 2 of each team should only move his own units even if he has the ability to move leftover ones from Player 1. 2) Unit use special rules Player 1&2 are allowed to use allied units located in their own territory if needed. Player 1&2 are allowed to use allied units without an HQ located on a front they control (majority of units). Emergency moves or attacks using adjacent/available allied units are allowed at the end of your turn. Any agreement can be made between teammates to use allied units here and there. 3) Victory As in regular WWI Break we will first have a CP or EN win following usual rules. A Player lose if all of his controlled countries National Morale fall to 0. Once a winning team is decided, the two remaining players decide final winner by comparing NM %. If a player controls several countries, I suppose it's better to calculate an NM % average. * CONCLUSION I hope this test will help create more fun as each Player will have to protect both the team and his own NM. You'll also have to balance help requests as losing control over your units can result in big NM hits. Use of allied units can also be tricky as you'll need allied MPPs to operate or reinforce them. Diplomacy should also be quite interesting as teammates can decide to put their chits on different countries. Anyone interested ^^ ?

Yes though dowing on DEI will give a huge boost to USA mobilization % and activate Burma, Singapore and Brunei for UK so I don't think that's such an issue plus DEI takes 5 turns to produce a convoy once conquered.

Oh that gave some interesting options , - What about making those cities have an effect on DEI mobilization % instead ? It starts at 25% axis and already has an event where it falls when Japs DOW on Indochina. It it reaches 0% or below (Allies leaning) ressource convoy stops (maybe it can even start working for UK). - 4th Bn 66th Reg also has a good idea with land/naval choice. Maybe an event forcing jap player to make that decision at some point (more or less after the fall of France, when they get a pop window about weakened Indochina) ? - It would give less MPPs but increase unit pool/numbers for land OR navy to what they are now from reduced starting ones. Another option would be to tie free jap pop units coming in the Pacific (all those SF/ships) to that event. You'd get free land units/HQs OR free ships/planes for xx MPPs per turn. Of course the naval option would be ùmore interesting because of costs and production delays for ships/planes . - A more radical approach would be to get rid of armies for China and Japan. Transfer the names to corps pool and increase their number to match. That would reduce offensive power on both sides and better reflect actual number involved in China. Still we could retain a few elite armies at start or by event but once they're lost it's forever (no pool to rebuild). That would also make those experienced units as precious as they truly were. Nice discussion :cool: .

Thanks for your answer Duke of York , - It's more the second case I think though having anti-USA diplomacy toned down at the same time was a nice perk too. - I agree that with things as they are Japs will conquer China if they want to. The problem is in 95% of the games I played or followed Axis destroys China early then it's USSR-Siberia turn. - I see no reason not to go heavy on land as Japan. It costs MPPs yes but in the long run having China out or badly crippled is a net gain. Japs also get big experience increases for HQs and units plus higher NM. - Actually some players don't even bother to build up IJN early, they just go for IJAF instead to speed up chinese collapse (including ground attack/heavy bomber techs and even motorization for land units). * - So in a way yes I find it too easy for Japs to roll over China (though the Kunming change next patch should help). But I also understand it's good for unexperienced Axis players to have big guns at start. (Actually I tried once with 8 or 9 less jap armies at start, keeping elite ones, and it was pretty ok with a slower pace though I admit doing that was quite extreme) - What made me think is that there are many US diplomacy penalties in the West (Germany going for Belgium, Egypt, Gibraltar, UK...). Japan has some too (Nanning-Indochina-Thailand) but can mostly ignore them by concentrating on China. (the oil embargo event hit on jap income is good but not related to jap advances so it can also be "ignored") - On the other hand, US mobilization rise mechanism already exists at/for Nanning. That's why I was thinking of extending it instead of using more heavy measures like eliminating units, diplomacy vs major or reducing jap income. Only my opinion as always so discussion is wide open .

Hi everyone , - Was thinking a bit about the usual Japs rampage in China when I saw US mobilization rise after Nanning fell (ongoing ladder game). Then I considered using a similar mechanism for all chinese cities (not towns). Something like a random 0-4% increase for each captured city would lead to a more interesting early game for both sides. - I think it would simulate pretty well US pressure and political infighting: 0% = isolationists block further measures to help China or anger Japan 1% = isolationists dominate political debate but humanitarian help is allowed 2% = political draw as no action is taken but hostility towards the Yellow Peril keeps growing 3% = war advocates make the most of jap advances to push open military aid 4% = war advocates obtain to issue an official warning to Japan * - There are 15 chinese cities under China's control at start: 2 in the center (Chengchow, Sian) 6 in the south (Ichang, Changsha, Nanning, Chungking, Kweiyang, Kunming) 7 in the north (Paotow, Yenan, Lanchow, 3 in the desert and Kashgar) - Of those 15 around half have a good chance to fall before USA war entry in most games: 1-2 in the center (Chengchow possibly Sian) 4-5 in the south (Kunming being a little harder to reach) 1-2 in the north (Paotow and Yenan being near the front) * - At worst USA mobilization would gain 36% (9 x 4%) at best 0% (9 x 0%) with average being 18% (9 x 2%). That would force Japs to balance their agression level depending on US reactions to their advances in China. It would also make the anti-USA diplomacy move more logical and give some help to China while making a full naval strategy a bit more tempting. - If Japs are lucky USA will more or less ignore them and they'll be able to grab most of chinese ressources. However each new conquest will increase the risk to awaken the sleeping giant. If they're unlucky they'd still have several choices to keep going in China but will have to change their plans accordingly. * - In both cases anti-USA diplomacy can be used but it won't have such a massive effect as before. It will mostly keep US mobilization % where it is or limit its increase. That is unless Japs decide to play quiet in China and go for full naval strategy while teching up and producing as many units as they can. - Of course Japs can still keep China's head low by attacking around cities without taking them. However Japs would still have to roll the diplomatic dice as some of them (Chengchow, Nanning and Changsha). It also makes strategic bombing a more interesting option to reduce chinese capacities while avoiding US wrath. Would like to know what other players think ? Thanks for reading !

- I agree with sokulsky too here: the choice should be between helping Russia at start with those +30MPPs turn or gaining a free BB. Some kind of strategic choice with a small gamble about how many MPPs Russia will get in the end. - Given the price of a BB, around 10 turns without OE at war already balances things quite neatly so I don't see the need for an extra diplomatic penalty when UK lets the ship go. - Another point to consider is that BB can be a burden for OE's economy as well as a NM bomb waiting to explode (ship sunk). Sure it can be dominant in the Black Sea but Russians have the means to answer in kind.

- Yep I second that, first we found air units useless in this campaign (low strategic bombing ability, weak soft attack) safe for some long distance recon (not worth the MPPs). - But then I realized victory conditions allowed ANY unit from the relief force to work so I decided to try and operate UK airship to Kut: as said above BAM game over ! Turks don't even have a turn to answer the move. Honestly at this point that's not "a bit gamey" that's just a game killer !

Hi Chris, At worst you can uncheck the "sound" button in the game settings (1-2-3 button bottom right menu). That should get rid of it but you'll also silence combat/movement sounds.

- Yes Germans get forst chance though there is a catch because the port starts at 0 and Axis units staying on the island will rise USA mobilization % each turn. - So once you get the gold most players will disband the unit there. That's also why they use small units (mostly GAR) to grab the gold: not a big loss when disbanding in low supply. - You have the same problem when landing as Allies if the port starts at 0 supply: it will raise Vichy Axis leaning A LOT. So keep an eye on that if you don't want to give Vichy for free to Axis. * - About how to avoid it:the only way is to destroy axis transports before they reach the port. If they reach the port you'll need a carrier to sink them before they land and grab the gold. - In my ongoing ladder game vs Isno (Axis): he naval transported 2 italian GAR from East Africa to Dutch Guyana (he delayed the conquest of Holland to get a working port at supply 5). - I sunk one of the GAR but the other was one turn away from Fort-de-France. Then he delayed the Fall of Paris to get Vichy/gold event at the best time. Had three cruisers nearby but couldn't stop the transport as he used Kriegsmarine to scout the way. - I sunk the carrier when it popped and damaged some Kriegsmarine units but the gold was lost so you definitely need a naval group with a carrier if you want to stop the nazi counterpart of Kelly's Heroes .

Hi Catacol , (playing Isno if hat question was for me) - Germany didn't invest in diplomacy and did nothing in Africa safe for a paradrop to grab Tunis (?). Vichy came late (Paris left open) but Hitler is going for the french gold so I'm not sure Russia (21% mobilization at the end of 1940) will have it that easy . - UK already on the offensive in Africa but given the diplo cost to keep USA afloat (5 chits or 750MPPs...) I'm lacking everything. Axis also have subs lvl 2 already so not getting the free DDs would have been a disaster. * - That said I agree we can just wait to see how it goes in ongoing games. Still nice to brainstorm a bit about diplomacy strategies. One I forgot is UK can let USA go and use chits on USSR to try its luck or say a more affordable Turkey. - Anyway the main concern was if Axis gets two hits on USA and takes it down to 0% mobilization early. There isn't much Allies can do to get out of this hole. I think creating Vichy raises it again (USA back to 14% but then only 15% with french gold event, no luck) but otherwise Yankees will mostly be sitting on their hands. - UK can still go on a minor country rampage and grab Ireland and some others but dowing Thailand or Brunei will lead to war with Japs: very dangerous to do that early with USA bleeding MPPs. EDIT: A small update to say Isno got an italian GAR in Fort-de-France port raising USA mobilization to 18%.

- Update from my game: Axis stopped diplomacy vs US at 5 chits for Japan and 1 for Italy with 1 japanese hit (vs 5 chits for UK). USA mobilisation gained 6% to 14% thanks to Vichy allowing the destroyers for bases event to kick in (October 40). - So it's possible to counter though it weakens UK for a good while. I invested in diplomacy as UK because I was quite convinced there wouldn't be any Sealion but otherwise... @ Bill: - The 175 MPPs would be nice I think but going from 5 to 3 chits may cause problem with axis diplomacy against minors. That would left only Italy to make a difference (UK = Germany + Japan = 8 chits). However China/France can still chip in taking some risks to cancel that. - By stocking MPPs to invest in one go Axis can gain several turns of advantage though. 8 chits = 40% the first turn if UK counters right away that would decrease by 5% each turn vs Majors but 10% against Minors (assuming UK income is around 150 MPPs). * - So maybe: 1) reduce only by 1 chit from 5 to 4 (20% chance with all chits) 2) keep 5 chits but at 4% chance instead of 5% (20% chance as above) 4% would put them between USSR/China (3%) and UK/USA (5%) - It would be 45% chance with all german chits so you would need at least 1 italian chit to get 50%. * - One thing to consider in favor of only 3 chits though is Allies can only guess where Axis chits are invested before the first hit and even then there is no guarantee all chits are on the same country. - Then even with only 8 chits for Germany + Japan Axis has a great diplomatic punch for first hit but the windows can close pretty fast against minors while 1 hit can be enough to cripple USA/USSR economy for a while. Would be glad to hear other opinions on your proposal :cool: .

Hi Bill , Thanks for the answers !

Hi again there , - Ah there is one thing UK can do against that strategy but it makes for an entirely different game: if USA mobilization is at 0% that means UK has more or less free hands to attack minors including those in the Pacific (think Ireland, North Africa, Brunei, DEI...). - So it's a balance between investing in diplomacy to get a favorable "burn rate" for MPPs and/or trying to last enough to get those free destroyers. Axis need at least 2 diplo chits = 10% to have decent chances of a diplo hit then another chit to keep pressure going (that's 3 chits for 450 MPPs). - So UK have 3 options I think: 1) invest nothing and focus on its own build up to attack high yield minors 2) invest 1-3 chits to delay hits/build US industry for later/burn more jap MPPs 3) invest at least 4 chits to force Italy or Germany in Thanks for the strategic brainstorm 4th Bn 66th Reg and crispy131313 .

- One thing I forgot: you can try to use chinese or french diplo chits to help but it's very hard given the cost and the lower 3% chance. - In my ladder game Axis did as you say waiting first diplo hit on USA to invade Holland. And yes it makes it pretty impossible to defend Hawaï and the West Coast if USA fall at 0%.

Hi , - Playing that campaign by email we had the surprise to see Townshend besieged (and supposedly starving) forces able to multiply themselves by recruiting new units while being isolated. Is that normal ? - Another thing is that all units production delay is the same = 0 turn so they arrive the same turn they are purchased on or near any supply source. Same question is that normal ? Thanks for reading !

One update since I meet the exact same situation in the ladder. Was only thinking about japanese/german chits and forgot Italy as they start neutral ^^ . - Japan invested chit after chit on USA (now 5-1=4) got 1 unlucky hit to bring USA mobilization down to 8% in March 40 (Benelux invaded, Denmark annexed, Norway neutral, Indochina invaded, Thailand neutral). - I used counter diplomacy with UK (4 chits, industry 1) but always trailed behind and now Italy just invested 1 chit too (I kept Benito out of war as long as possible). USA got industry 1 this turn to reduce losses but I'm still starving. * - So maybe we have problem here as if Axis diplo USA from the start the probability they will fall to 0% mobilization is near 100% even if UK cancel all research chits on turn 1 to buy 2 diplo chits early. - UK has 8 chits and can even out Japan+Italy (5+3) but Germany is still there to tip the scales. Furthermore that means no tech or unit investments for at least 6 monthes while Axis will always have the lead and a chance to hit. - Of course there is a cost for Axis but I find it only gives bad choices to UK. If you play the diplo race you can't do anything else. If you don't USA won't produce any MPP for at least a year if not two with the late war entry and Axis will get this result for only 450MPPs. Well at least USA won't go below 0% .

- Not sure Japan needs any more help in Asia, Amadeus. If you need to reduce units it's jap armies in my mind but discussion is always open on that point . - The problem with Kunming was once you lose China's first capital you can't send any reinforcement/new unit in the south. In all my games Kunming falls and I'm at the point where I don't even bother to defend the area safe for 1 or 2 units to delay Japs. - You'll also lose an experienced lvl7 HQ for sure as you can't evacuate it. And probabaly in low supply on top of that. I managed to save it once by attacking in the center and moving north but that weakens southern defenses a lot. - It's also historical to do so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunming#Modern_history "Kunming was transformed into a modern city as a result of the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937 when the invading Japanese forces caused a great number of east-coast Chinese refugees, some of whom were wealthy, to flood into the southwest of China. They brought with them dismantled industrial plants, which were then re-erected beyond the range of Japanese bombers. In addition, a number of universities and institutes of higher education were evacuated there. The increased money and expertise quickly established Kunming as an industrial and manufacturing base for the wartime government in Chongqing." * "During the Second World War, the city of Kunming was prepared as a National Redoubt in case the temporary capital in Chongqing fell, an elaborate system of underground caves to serve as offices, barracks and factories was prepared but never utilised." * "Industry became important in Kunming during World War II. The large state-owned Central Machine Works[7] was transferred there from Hunan, while the manufacture of electrical products, copper, cement, steel, paper, and textiles expanded."

- It's true it's hard for UK to keep up the MPPs race. It seems that strategy is spreading lately as at least one hit is nearly guaranteed when Japs diplo USA first usually halving their mobilization %. For USA/UK/USSR you can disband some starting research chits to invest in industry early. * - Maybe it would be interesting to consider increasing diplo chits cost vs Majors for Japan. After all they pay 100 vs 75 for minors but 150 vs 150 for Majors. Not sure but if I remember well it was 200 at some point but nobody used jap diplomacy vs Majors then because it was too costly . - Then perhaps make it 175 for Japan and/or 125 for UK. Would somehow make sense that Japs have more difficulties to "persuade" USSR and USA of their "pacifism" than UK given raltions between those countries .

- USSR will also gain mobilization % each turn in 1941 as historical Barbarossa approaches. - The diplomacy against Allied Majors is a good strategy but has its downsides because of the costs (150 MPPs per chit). - There are several ways to counter it: 1) defensive: use UK chits against Axis ones while investing in UK industry 2) "attack" first by investing at least 2 chits quickly on USA or USSR (you'll have a decent chance to hit early despite the low 10% chance with 2 chits) 3) put 3 chits in industry for USA and USSR early to reduce the MPPs hit 4) keep Axis busy enough so they can't invest in diplomacy - Remember that buying 3 axis diplo chits on a major equals 2 panzer units or a carrier and delays tech investment if done early. So it will weaken Barbarossa or the Pacific offensive. - Also majors won't have big swings like minors (with sometimes 30% diplo hits ouch) so as long as you stay in the diplo race it's manageable. 1 UK chit vs 2 Axis chits (or 2 vs 3 and so on) will be only a 5% chance to hit for Axis. - Of course there is a lot of mind game available there: 1) stock MPPs as axis to invest 4-5 chits the same turn so UK has to decide if it's worth catching up. 2) invest 2x75 on a minor to fool Allies thinking you used a 150 chit 3) invest with Japan early just to burn UK MPPs while preparing Sealion with Germany 4) and other devious evil plans

Ah wanted to ask the same question but you won the race . Will make defense in the Kunming mountains a viable option, thanks Hubert !

Isnogud (axis) vs Strategiclayabout (allies) game started (Dec 39) Strategiclayabout (axis) vs Luke (allies) game started (Feb 40)

Hi again lhugues41 , - Sorry for the late reply but in my opinion that was all the point of the change: there is no way Belgium would do nothing after a german invasion of Holland (especially after what happened in WWI). - So it's better from an historical point of view but I also think it balances a bit the early game in favor of Allies as most players used to transfer panzers to the West before the end of Poland's campaign. - Now Germans will need more forces but a 1939 gamble is still possible (but you'll need to spend MPPs to operate units) since you only need to grab the two capitals after all. It also gives a bit more incentive/time to send UK help to France. * - The effect on USSR is nearly nothing when most Axis players pour everything in industry/tanks/Barbarossa anyway so a 5-6 turns difference won't change much summer 41 order of battle. - As for Africa it's just a death trap for Axis anyway unless you plan to support Italians from the start (or UK don't do anything there). Any RN concentration in the Med with all carriers is enough to clear the way to Tunisia by the end of 41 if not before. * - Overall I think it makes early game a bit more exciting for Allies because the usual Holland grab between a turn of snow and one of mud in the middle of winter was just a bit too much (what about the "Drôle de Guerre"?). - One last thing is that Belgium doesn't join Holland right away. It will join on Allies turn so Germany actually have to Dow to attack which is nice. You can still go only for Holland but Allies will have a chance to advance in Belgium which can be good or bad (historical move didn't work so well there ). - I suspect many players will continue to hole up in Paris for a while even if Germans give them a chance to advance in Belgium but it makes for more options and bold strategies on both sides instead of the usual french border massacre followed by a siege of Paris ^^ .