AI for MWiF - USA

[Extraneous]

Well done you showing some well thought out routes here.
 
But shouldn’t we be using the term from the RAW  “convoy lines”?
 
"Convoy Plan" instead of “Route” would seem a better title.
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
 
At first I was concerned about Route 2 to the Philippines. But after checking the FAQ at ADG it stated that the resource convoy lines could also be used as supply lines.
 
 
 
I know everyone is going to consider this nitpicking but I consider this important.
 
When using rule 22.4.19 Convoys in Flames (CoiF option 76) you might want to mention how many ships in the “convoy lines” would be Tankers.
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
 

[Extraneous]

Standard USA set up

World in Flames: Global war (see 24.4.7)

24.1.6 Setting up
After you have finished setting-up, you can make naval moves out to sea with your naval units. Treat this as a naval action you conducted last turn, so the units must finish their move, then drop to a lower sea-box section as if they had stayed at sea last turn (see 13.4). Neutral major powers can only make these moves with convoy and tanker points.

CoiF option 76: Up to half the convoys specified to be set up in each location may be tankers. For example instead of setting up 7 convoy points in Italy, you could set up 0 to 3 tanker points in any ports there with the remainder being convoy points.

USA – 12x CP (6x CP, 6x Tankers)
Honolulu – 15x CP (8x CP, 7x Tankers)


Japan-USA Trade agreement
1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco
2 Oil resources to Japan (8x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x Tankers from USA) – Mendocino (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x Tankers from Honolulu)
2 resources to Japan (8x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x CP from USA) – Mendocino (2x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (2x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x CP from Honolulu)

Venezuela-USA Trade agreement
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Mobile
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea - Port of New Orleans
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Saint Louis

Alaska
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Alaska - Gulf of Alaska - Port of Tacoma


Japan-USA Trade agreement 6x CP from USA; 6x CP from Honolulu; 2x Tankers from USA; 6x Tankers from Honolulu
Venezuela-USA Trade agreement 3x Tankers from USA
Alaska 1x Tanker from USA

Total 12x Tankers, 12x CP

Reserve 1x Tanker, 2x CP (The Reserve can start in USA instead Honolulu by changing the Gulf of Alaska Tanker and the 2x CP from Mendocino from USA to Honolulu)

[michaelbaldur]

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Route 2: Philippines

Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?

No, then nearest US CP starts in Honolulu and it is 4 sea areas to South China Sea, so it needs the make a stop at the way. It reaches the China Sea, but China does not control any port with a railway line to a Factory in that sea area.

china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees

17. Lend lease to China - Each Allied major power can give up to 5 build points a turn to China (see 13.6.4 Lend lease). The US can use its convoy points to transport build points to China from the USA. This entry option can only be chosen if you have already chosen entry option 9 Resources to China.


13.6.1 Resources
Transporting resources by sea
A chain of convoy points across one or more sea areas doesn’t all have to be from the same major power.

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other major power on the same side. Neutral major powers can only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA and 13.3.2 US entry options, option 9 Resources to China).

(A)Neutral major powers’ convoys cannot transport resources or build points to other major powers unless the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA, 13.3.2 US entry options, options 9 Resources to China, 15 Resources to western Allies, 17 Lend lease to China, 19 Resources to USSR, 27 Lend lease to western Allies and 30 Lend lease to USSR).

True, if the following US entry options have been chosen:
Option 9 Resources to China
Option 17 Lend lease to China (requires Option 9 Resources to China)


(A) can be read two ways:

(1) The USA cannot transport resources or build points to French Indochina at all unless it has selected Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies.

(2) The USA can transport resources or build points to French Indochina as long as the resources or build points are going to China with French permission.

According to the map France will have to use a CP to complete their end of the convoy line.

And the USA would of course have to have 3x more USA CP to get the convoy line to Hawaii and use the reserve CP/Tanker located in Hawaii to complete the convoy line.


As long as the Japan-USA Trade agreement is intact.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees

17. Lend lease to China - Each Allied major power can give up to 5 build points a turn to China (see 13.6.4 Lend lease). The US can use its convoy points to transport build points to China from the USA. This entry option can only be chosen if you have already chosen entry option 9 Resources to China.


13.6.1 Resources
Transporting resources by sea
A chain of convoy points across one or more sea areas doesn’t all have to be from the same major power.

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other major power on the same side. Neutral major powers can only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA and 13.3.2 US entry options, option 9 Resources to China).

(A)Neutral major powers’ convoys cannot transport resources or build points to other major powers unless the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1 Trade agreements ~ Japan-USA, 13.3.2 US entry options, options 9 Resources to China, 15 Resources to western Allies, 17 Lend lease to China, 19 Resources to USSR, 27 Lend lease to western Allies and 30 Lend lease to USSR).

True, if the following US entry options have been chosen:
Option 9 Resources to China
Option 17 Lend lease to China (requires Option 9 Resources to China)


(A) can be read two ways:

(1) The USA cannot transport resources or build points to French Indochina at all unless it has selected Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies.

(2) The USA can transport resources or build points to French Indochina as long as the resources or build points are going to China with French permission.

According to the map France will have to use a CP to complete their end of the convoy line.

And the USA would of course have to have 3x more USA CP to get the convoy line to Hawaii and use the reserve CP/Tanker located in Hawaii to complete the convoy line.


As long as the Japan-USA Trade agreement is intact.

(A) only covers when the resource is transported by convoys. Therefore it has no relevance on wether the resources can be transported by rail through French Indpchina. Alternative (2) is the correct one when one reads the rules covering transporting resources by rail.

In order for USA to send a resource to China it is easiest to return one Convoy Point to base in the Phillipines. The Phillipines has to be in supply so the CP can be reorganized. After that USA can move out the CP and send the Phillipines resource to China. If the route through Frech Indochina is closed then Burma road can be used (if open) but then there need to be more CP sent to the Phillipines.


Cut from RAC: 13.6.1 Resources
.....
Transporting resources by rail
You transport a resource to a factory in the production step by railing it
from its hex to a usable factory. It must move along railway lines (roads
count as railways for this purpose). It can also cross a straits hexside
from one railway hex to another. Each resource cannot cross more than
1 straits hexsides.
This move does not count as a rail move and the resource does not have
to start its move at a station.
The move can only pass through:
• hexes you control;
• hexes in neutral minor countries; and
• hexes controlled by another major power, but only if it allows you.
Allied major powers (except the USSR) may only trace resources through
Soviet controlled hexes while the USSR is at war with Germany.
The resource’s move can only enter or leave a hex in an enemy ZOC if
there is a friendly land unit in the hex. Its move must stop when it enters
an enemy ZOC. If the resource is in the same hex as the destination
factory, it can be used there regardless of enemy ZOCs.


RAC: 13.3.2 US entry options
....
41. US reinforces the Philippines - You can’t move Allied land and
aircraft units to the Philippines until either you have chosen this
option or an Axis land unit has entered the Philippines. Thereafter,
there is no restriction.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets



Can't you also set up so the Philippines resource goes to China?

No, then nearest US CP starts in Honolulu and it is 4 sea areas to South China Sea, so it needs the make a stop at the way. It reaches the China Sea, but China does not control any port with a railway line to a Factory in that sea area.

china is allowed to receive lend lease though France indo china. if France agrees

ORIGINAL: Orm

(A) only covers when the resource is transported by convoys. Therefore it has no relevance on whether the resources can be transported by rail through French Indochina. Alternative (2) is the correct one when one reads the rules covering transporting resources by rail.

Is the USA (a neutral major power) allowed to use convoy points to send a build point to French Indochina without selecting Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies? The answer is NO

Is the USA (a neutral major power) allowed to use convoy points to send a build point into French Indochina without selecting Option 27 Lend lease to western Allies and then rail them to China if Option 9 Resources to China and Option 17 Lend lease to China have been selected?

Using the map the Philippines is in supply since there is no restriction on using the Japan/USA Trade agreement convoy line as part of a supply line (see peskpesk’s post #154).

[Extraneous]

Strategies

Maintain at least 1x US entry marker in both Ge/It and Ja entry pools to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

The entry and tension pools
The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.

The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

Asia first strategy: 1x US entry marker in the Ge/It entry pool, 2 US entry markers Ja in the entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry markers in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry marker in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.



Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns


Scrap all: BF2C, F3F, SBC-4, P-26, and P-35.


Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

[michaelbaldur]

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...

[hjaco]

Yes USA has plenty of oil until the midgame [8|]

And what about the Brits if Adolf goes for Gibraltar and SUB heavy? This means cutting the convoys to Africa and you simply doesn't know at the beginning of the game.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...

Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


[X(] You forgot about my production spreadsheet [X(]

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns

[michaelbaldur]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...

Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


[X(] You forgot about my production spreadsheet [X(]

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns

still think you are wrong ... when a synth comes on the map. USA have 11 saved (4 start + 7turns) and by that time they don´t send to Japan ... so they have a free oil.

I really think that is wrong..... USA don´t need it when it is build and sentiently don´t need it when it arrives

from start
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japan -1 save) = 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan -1 save) 37pp = 9,25 = 9bp +1 bp from japan
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japa ) = 39pp = 9,75 =10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan) 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan

after option 13 and 22
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japan -1 save) = 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan -1 save) 38pp = 19 = 19bp
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japa ) = 40pp = 20 =20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan) 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp

after 23, 31 and 34
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(-1 save) = 41pp = 31bp .... 1 free oil
with out phi 42 -( -1 save) 41pp = 31bp .... 0 free oil
without saved oil
with phi. 43 = 41pp = 31bp 2 free oil
with out phi 42 = 41pp = 31bp 1 free oil

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Strategies

Maintain at least 1x US entry marker in both Ge/It and Ja entry pools to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

The entry and tension pools
The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.

The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

Asia first strategy: 1x US entry marker in the Ge/It entry pool, 2 US entry markers Ja in the entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry markers in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1x US entry marker in the Ja entry pool. New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.

I somehow completely disagree with that, and I thought I had to say it and say why.

It is true that you can have one of these 3 strategies above.

But, whatever the strategies, for me you absolutely need to have at least 2 US Entry Markers in the Ge/It Entry Pool. You can't have less.

This is for many reasons :

a) Whatever your strategy, the goal is to reach a tension of 11 and an entry of 22 against all foes as soon as possible. You just have to put the 1 chit per turn for 3 turns in the Ja pool to reach equality between both pools, so the 3 initial chits are irrelevant for the goal of reaching the Gear up. What is relevant is how many chits you have in all 4 pools after some turns.

b) Having too few chits in the Ge/It entry pool remove freedom of action from the allied side on the first couple of turns : They can't DoW Italy early if they want of have an opportunity (risk of loosing 2 chits), they can't claim East Poland the Baltic States and then DoW Persia in all security (risk of loosing 3 chits).

c) You have no actions that you want to do that risk you loosing chits against Japan, so having 0 chits against Japan at setup is not a problem.

So my conclusion is that all chits should be in the Ge/It Entry Pool. To be less extreme, I'd advice that at least 2 of the 3 setup chits are placed in the Ge/It Entry Pool.

As a last remark, I'd also say that, using my advice, you don't give up your strategy at setup.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are :

a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are not worth to be built. Really not. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. so IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be build, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Idealy, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur



building a synth is just stupid ... USA have plenty of oil ....

USA :40 f /41 R
Venezuela : 3R
Mexico  1F / 3R
Brasilia 2F/ 1R

total: 43 factories / 48 resources ..... + 5 oil ....and around 10 saved oil ...

it would make more sense to build a factories ...

Mexico and Brazil supply nothing to the USA at the start of the game.

USA

41 factories (14 red and 27 blue)

2 Oil to Japan
2 Resources to Japan

3 Oil from Venezuela
17 Oil from USA
22 resources from USA (plus one resource in the Philippines if you can get it out)
Total resources 42 (43 if you can get the Philippines)

Thats one saved oil a turn.

Mexico 1 red factory; 2 oil; 1 resource
Brazil 1 red and 1 blue factory; 1 resource


[X(] You forgot about my production spreadsheet [X(]

Correction USA starts with 10bp (forgot to take out oil and resources to Japan)

So Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns

still think you are wrong ... when a synth comes on the map. USA have 11 saved (4 start + 7turns) and by that time they don´t send to Japan ... so they have a free oil.

I really think that is wrong..... USA don´t need it when it is build and sentiently don´t need it when it arrives

from start
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japan -1 save) = 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan -1 save) 37pp = 9,25 = 9bp +1 bp from japan
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(4 to japa ) = 39pp = 9,75 =10bp +1 bp from japan
with out phi 42 -(4 to japan) 38pp = 9,5 = 10bp +1 bp from japan

after option 13 and 22
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japan -1 save) = 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan -1 save) 38pp = 19 = 19bp
without saved oil
with phi. 43 -(3 to japa ) = 40pp = 20 =20bp
with out phi 42 -(3 to japan) 39pp = 19,5 = 20bp

after 23, 31 and 34
saved oil
with phi. 43 -(-1 save) = 41pp = 31bp .... 1 free oil
with out phi 42 -( -1 save) 41pp = 31bp .... 0 free oil
without saved oil
with phi. 43 = 41pp = 31bp 2 free oil
with out phi 42 = 41pp = 31bp 1 free oil

To get the resource from the Philippines requires a 6 CP convoy line to the West Coast. You have 3 reserve CP’s at the start of the game. If you use them all this would get the convoy line from the Philippines to Hawaii and you would require 3 more CP’s.

Do to gearing limitations you can only build 2 CP each turn (Every 5 convoy points is 1 naval unit; SiF option 9: Every 2 convoy points (or any spare point) is a naval unit).

So in order to complete the convoy line from the West Coast to the Philippines would require 9bp and 6 turns.



But here is an idea on peskpesk’s post #154. (Feel free to flame me on this bit of Rule Lawership)

5.1 Trade agreements
Japan-USA
The USA and Japan start the game with an agreement in place to exchange a Japanese build point for US resources. The USA must supply Japan with 4 resources each turn. Two of them must be oil resources. These amounts can be reduced, or avoided entirely, by certain US entry options (see 13.3.2 US entry options). Japan must lend lease the USA with 1 build point a turn until the USA embargoes strategic materials (see 13.3.2 US entry options, entry option 13 Embargo on strategic materials).

To avoid US entry penalties (see below), the USA must have enough convoy points in the West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific ocean sea areas to transport the resources to Japan. Similarly, Japan must have enough convoy points in the Japanese Coast sea area to transport the build point to the USA.

Ship the resources from the Philippines to Japan using the 2 CP.

Japan-USA Trade agreement

1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco

2 Oil resources to Japan (8x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x Tankers from USA) – Mendocino (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x Tankers from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (4x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (2x CP) Coast of Philippines – Bismarck Sea (1x CP from Honolulu) - The Marianas (1x CP from Honolulu)


This would change the reserve to 1 Tanker and 4 CP. And you would be able to save 2 Oil per turn.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns

Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 (Turns?) where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are :

a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are not worth to be built. Really not. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. so IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be build, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Idealy, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.

I’m flexible and not immune to having my proposal changed.

This is what I was looking for constructive criticism. I am trying to set forth some ideas on an AI and appreciate your input [:)]

[composer99]

I do not think it is automatically a bad idea for the US to build its synthetic oil plant.

First, having the extra oil means one more lendable resource that the US has which doesn't cut into its own production (the US can either lend an extra oil without sacrificing its own oil or lend an extra resource and use the SYNTH for production). Whichever other Allied power gets hit the hardest by the Axis will no doubt appreciate the extra lending (assuming the US has the means to deliver it, of course).

Second, in the first two to three turns of play where the US might build the SYNTH (I suspect that building it later is too late or will screw with gearing too much), it is probably too early to tell what the Axis is doing. As time passes, sufficient Axis pressure or good search rolls could crimp the CW ability to maintain convoy lines further afield; the extra oil will come in handy feeding the CW in such a case.

Third, the Western Allies can consume prodigous amounts of oil from 1943 on. Having the extra oil means it is less likely that the US or its allies will be forced to choose between producing more or reorganizing more units (or using them in the first place). Giving up a production point in 1943 or later is giving up a spare pilot, FTR2, or two spare CVP or CP. Having the extra oil available from late 1940/early 1941 means the US will be saving extra oil during each of the early turns of the war after its entry when it has not built up enough to be a net oil spender.

If you want to avoid screwing with gearing too much, want the SYNTH, but don't want it sitting on the map for a year doing nothing (although lending resources to allies hardly counts as doing nothing), you can always set aside 1-2 bp per turn and build it in the summer/fall of 1940 so it will arrive right when your oil saving/spending is about to ramp up.

[brian brian]

As I've written elsewhere before, the greatest USN the game has ever seen riding the production spiral won't save the Allies when the Germans are at the gates of Chelyabinsk, and more than a few Allied players have lost the game because of that.

A build plan is an amusing thing to create when not playing World in Flames. But during an actual game you have to stay flexible to respond not just to enemy strategy, but enemy successes and allied miscues.

I always build the Synth plant, and then I work on getting ready to help Russia in various ways. I build enough to hold Pearl and invest in the USN some but that comes along more slowly, aside from plenty of lift.

[Extraneous]

Strategies

Maintain at least 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool and 1x US entry marker Ja entry pool to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

The entry and tension pools

The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.

The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1 US entry marker Ja in the entry pool.

Asia first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.



Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns


Scrap all: BF2C, F3F, SBC-4, P-26, and P-35.


Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

Economic option (may be substituted for any of the above strategies): Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns

Original: Froonp (Edited as I am understanding it)
Once again, I do not agree.

Assuming you speak about the first 6-10 (Turns?) where the USA produce at 10 BP, then whatever your strategy, IMO what you wrote above is wrong.

The reasons are:

(a) US Air units of 1939 & 1940 are really not worth building. The ATR are exception through, as are a couple of LND (A-20 & A-22), but this is 5 BP wasted IMO.

(b) Air units are built in 2-3 turns, so assuming the war starts in late 41, you should start building air units massively only from 1941. In 1940 you should only build the ATR you need with your PARA (assuming you build PARA), and maybe a couple of other planes, but no massive investment. You should also build CVP enough to man the Carriers you are building.

(c) The USA have virtually no Navy in S/O 1939. IMO the USA can't afford to not invest on a Navy to fight back Japan, because no major power can afford to **not fight** on a theater. So IMO the USA will **have** to fight in the Pacific, and to fight they need a navy. So the Navy needs to be building, and the USA should start this from the first turn. IMO 80-100% of the USA BP should be on ships for the first turns of the game. Ideally, the USA should have already prepared a production plan from S/O39 to N/D41, so that he knows what he will have to fight.

In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First and a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. But in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.

(a) In your opinion the 2x P40c FTR (8 range), 1x P40b FTR (8 range), 2x F4F-3 FTR (9 range), B-17E LND (8 range), PBM-1 NAV (15 range) are not worth building? (This information is from the spreadsheet at your site)

(b) Pilots take 3 turns to build so they may as well be three turns. A production plan for the AI is one of the things I am trying to establish here.

(c)You sound like you are strong advocate of Japan first. Using the 3 strategies how would you split the gearing limits by percentage?

13.6.6 Gearing limits
In a turn, your major power can build (and repair) as many units of a particular class as it built (and repaired) in the previous turn plus 1. This is a gearing limit.

Naval units count as being built whether they come from a force pool, the repair pool or the construction pool.

Exceptions
On the first turn of any scenario or campaign there are no gearing limits.

Neutral major powers are not subject to gearing limits on the turn that a major power declares war on it.

Set up

East Coast 1x CV, 3x BB, 8x CA, 7x CL

West Coast 3x CV, 10x BB, 9x CA, 10x CL

USA
4x TRS
3x Sub

Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns

Construction pool
BB Wyoming
CVL Langley

Nov/Dec 1939
CL St Louis [fu]
CA Houston
CL Helena [fu]
Sub [fd]

Mar/Apr 1940
CV Wasp [fu]
5 CP
1 CVP
-4 CP

May/Jun 1940
BB Washington [fd]
BB North Carolina [fd]

[hjaco]

There are endless ways and opinions on US build strategy and how to conduct warfare in the Pacific. But no matter how you cut the cheese US production needs to be flexible enough to counter axis progress in Europe or you risk throwing away the game.

So in a 41 Barbarossa US must support an early CW invasion threat to take heat off Russia.

US production should deter Adolf from lauching a Sealion or at least be able to support Winnie.

Finally US production should be adjusted to fight in the Atlantic against Axis surface fleets and SUBS in a Gibraltar gambit.

Here is my minimum requirement for maximum flexibility:

US will want to keep Marines in the Pacific and the at start AMPH so the only real early help to invasions in Europe are a PARA stack with ATR and cheap INF - you need white print INF in the Pacific anyway. And those pesky FTR with their excellent range can support invasion fleets in the critical 3 box against axis air power so they are also needed.

If US need to help against SUBS even those rubbish early NAV's are going to be very helpful. You have to built most of them anyway so you can always use them to take a DX in air combat in the Pacific later on or just use the pilots in better planes. The 22 range NAV is wonderful to have in UK as it can react into the 4 box and find Axis SUSB/Surface fleet on 50 % chance and just as important halves axis probability to fight your convoys.

And of course US needs to built a substantial reserve of CP for supply in the Pacific and even more for Europe if the SUB menace is true.

In practial terms the expensive PARA and ATR should wait until war appropriation bill have been chosen where their cost is more affordable while aircraft and INF type units is a matter of gearing limit and convenience. Naval gearing is of course crucial.

Just a note on the level of navy built for the Pacific. It doesn't matter whether you go for a Japan first, Germany first or a more balanced approach what kind of navy you need to build with the USA. That's dictated by your preferred style of play. If you attack Japan early in a Japan first strategy you will cause early attrition which will keep Japan relatively weak and therefore you don't need an especially large fleet. It makes sense anyway to at least spend the first year or so with most commitment in the Pacific as your activity limits and number of units supports primarily naval and combined impulses.

[hjaco]

ORIGINAL: Froonp
In my opinion, the difference between a Europe First or a Japan First strategy is that in the first case you will build "only" a dozen carriers, whereas in the latter case you will build as much as 15 CV plus some CVLs to reach a total of 20-25 carriers in 1945. but in both case, you need to build ships, and ships and ships in 1939 and 1940. There are also TRS & AMPH that are needed, Iowa class BB, some Baltimore cruisers and a lot of SUBs too.

To follow up my recent post I will illustrate my point about navy size by comparing Froonps and mine style of plays which is radical different (and both can work perfectly well). I only built 41 Essex carriers and the 5 at start BB. The 42 Essex are built to the construction pool and only finished if necessary. I built all CVP, FTR, NAV, SUB, AMPH and a few TRS.