Tyrone (Axis) vs Cohen

[tyronec]

Bat turn for me, so many rail hexes in Russia cut by partisan attacks (more than by partisan units) that most of my front line was out of supply.
Looking tight to take Moscow before the winter.

British building up in the Netherlands. Going to wait until they have a few more units there before I attempt to wipe them out.

[tyronec]

Two hexes from Moscow, should fall next turn.

[tyronec]

Moscow falls.

[AlbertN]

Time for me to resign.

Tyronec has played it very well - and he plays Axis better than I for sure by a far shot. How he keeps the losses so low it's something I fail to grip.

What I feel that needs some sorting - in terms of game mechanics - is first and foremost how Escort works. It's okay in early days to get Merchant Shipping sunk, BUT with '42 Escorts, that 8-10 escorts do 0 damage to the submarines very often it has turned worrysome to the extent Britain was simply building merchant marine, merchant marine, merchant marine. Carriers have not found them once (That is okay though, CVs were not antisom). The Anti-Som spec Strategic Bomber on the other hand has found them neither. That is supposedly an antisubmarine unit (by tech designation and which stats it gets).

In other games with UK I could have done -loads- because of Axis not building submarines.

From there - it followed up that Soviets could not receive Lend Lease (Given Soviets had to build their own merchant marine because they cannot use Allied one. Not that UK had merchant marine to spare in this game).

It's not about Taking Spain or things like that.
It's that UK cannot protect adequately its sea lanes.

Soviet Union - there I do not feel to speak as I am not that practiced with Soviet Union. When I play Axis I am easily stopped - so I desume it's just me not having had grasp of ground combat adequately. (Given I tend to prefer games where I -know- how things precisely work, as per, combat tables like WiF).

Thanking Tyrone for the experience but the Soviets ended up way too mauled to be able to even counterattack in the Winter and after Moscow fall, their production is drastically reduced as well.

[Flaviusx]

No shame in resigning, I would have done so as well. Tyrone's early game is very strong and it kind of snowballs from there. Somebody may want to try this with a strong BEF in France, but I remain skeptical this would make much difference.

I keep coming back to the way the low countries can be picked off one by one before May of 40. With such an advanced position, even with UK units helping, it's going to be very hard for France to last past June.

I thought subs were very strong before, and think they are even more so now. Obviously the business in Canada is silly, too.

[battlevonwar]

Flaviusx,

the low countries can be picked off if weather permits pre France which will change the whole makeup of the game. It's a bit decisive in that campaign.

You also have to take Greece and probably be ready for Spain in July to do Spain properly and with a quick thrust to Gibraltar too. Considering the damaged rails and Vichy first and getting into place and not giving up N.Africa.

BEF never were present in France... they could of extracted 50-100 Luftwaffe Losses. I just seen Alvaro do it to me. I did it to him as well. That is a requirement for if not the Axis have extra Production for Subs, time for Spain and Greece together and preparation for Barbarossa. It may not be that Barbie is imbalanced but rather the perfect Low Countries-France and subsequent consequences are the major factors in deciding 40-41. (how many losses should the Allies take out of the Axis? What Date is acceptable for France to Fall? Strip Africa, throw all your air in forget the Uboats for now what can you get in return?)

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

No shame in resigning, I would have done so as well. Tyrone's early game is very strong and it kind of snowballs from there. Somebody may want to try this with a strong BEF in France, but I remain skeptical this would make much difference.

I keep coming back to the way the low countries can be picked off one by one before May of 40. With such an advanced position, even with UK units helping, it's going to be very hard for France to last past June.

I thought subs were very strong before, and think they are even more so now. Obviously the business in Canada is silly, too.

[Flaviusx]

You are welcome to try this against Tyrone and see how it goes.

[battlevonwar]

I would Flavius, I'm sure Sousa will rebalance i.e. Strengthen Allies if need be or strengthen Russians if need be. If enough of us clamor for it. Just have to be cautious of the level of skill vs the level of balance too. I have no clue at this point who has all the skill or technique. Cohen admits tyronec is a bit more skilled I wonder if they had mirror matched what the case would be?

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

You are welcome to try this against Tyrone and see how it goes.

[AlbertN]

That's why I pointed out of the Convoy business.

That is not related to skill! Max 10 Escorts fight - but I've seen way too often no damage being done at all by Escorts.

The snowball is there as UK needs to build more ships - way more ships that if Germany just keeps to 3 subs - and thus is unable of real offensives in late '41 (Which by itself is actually good and positive that UK is not really offensive capable in terms of invasions in late '41).

It may be premature to say - but with Soviet being trashed (Which may be imputable to misplay on my end as well) .. I also noobed and got Archangel invaded which stalled Lend Lease for a few turns (but it was a negligible lend lease anyhow due to UK situation).

[tyronec]

Time for me to resign.

Tyronec has played it very well - and he plays Axis better than I for sure by a far shot. How he keeps the losses so low it's something I fail to grip.

What I feel that needs some sorting - in terms of game mechanics - is first and foremost how Escort works. It's okay in early days to get Merchant Shipping sunk, BUT with '42 Escorts, that 8-10 escorts do 0 damage to the submarines very often it has turned worrysome to the extent Britain was simply building merchant marine, merchant marine, merchant marine. Carriers have not found them once (That is okay though, CVs were not antisom). The Anti-Som spec Strategic Bomber on the other hand has found them neither. That is supposedly an antisubmarine unit (by tech designation and which stats it gets).

In other games with UK I could have done -loads- because of Axis not building submarines.

From there - it followed up that Soviets could not receive Lend Lease (Given Soviets had to build their own merchant marine because they cannot use Allied one. Not that UK had merchant marine to spare in this game).

It's not about Taking Spain or things like that.
It's that UK cannot protect adequately its sea lanes.

Soviet Union - there I do not feel to speak as I am not that practiced with Soviet Union. When I play Axis I am easily stopped - so I desume it's just me not having had grasp of ground combat adequately. (Given I tend to prefer games where I -know- how things precisely work, as per, combat tables like WiF).

Thanking Tyrone for the experience but the Soviets ended up way too mauled to be able to even counterattack in the Winter and after Moscow fall, their production is drastically reduced as well.

Agree that there is no point in continuing. Has been a good game and different with how things developed. Great to be able to get several moves a day, especially during the quiet periods of the game.

Despite the sillyness of Axis invading Canada in the end the Allies dealt with it effectively and it cost me two infantry corps and a battleship for almost nothing. That is not to say it should have been possible, the game mechanics ought to rule it out.

Concur with Cohen's comments on the sub war, will do a post on the main forum.