Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 07:39:10 -0500 
From: Erik Lauer <el0g+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: I think the AXIS may be able to

oberland@vax.sonoma.edu (joe) writes:

>What the strategy does:

As I see it the only new parts of your strategy are:

1: build a transport instead of more land units with Germany
2: Retreat out of Eastern Europe on turn 1, making the retaking of
Ukraine (if the allies play their cards right) by Germany on turn 2
impossible.
3: Playing with no Russian first turn attack (a good step towards
balancing the game).
So lets see how this affect the rest:

>1: forces UK to loose/leave Asia open.  NOT a single piece coming out of
>Africa(they have to fight through ME(Germany) to even get TO Asia).
>Easy walk-in with EVERYTHING from Japan racing towards Russia.

The difference here is the rule change.

>2: no IC option in Asia for Allies, PERIOD.

This was always a bad plan

>3:Germany has 40IPC to spend if it works correctly, 39 otherwise for
>the first turn, and about the same the next turn, and turn 3!

This is close to typical anyway.

>4: Allied bombing of Germany delayed until turn two or three
>  They get to USE all that $$$ against Russia... 8A for 2 turns will
>  turn Russia into an open wound.  Also, the Japaneese are able to
>  REALLY make a difference, since Russia has to fend off invasion of its
>  capitol by turn 3 or 4, and Germany is still hammering them with 35-40
>  IPC per turn(vs their 8-11 infantry).

Allies usuaally wait till turn 2 anyway, they need their bomber to
attack the remaining German fleet near Uk.

>5: delays Allied action for one round.  This round is enough to make Russia
>  NOT receive the help it needs on turn two and three in adequate amounts.
>  This delay has proven to make life VERY difficult for the UK and US, and
>  critical to Russia.

This is the rule change / poor opponents / excellent dice rolling. 
Britain take Syria, Russia takes E. Europe, Ukraine, Caucuses before
your turn 2.  Also, all British planes land in Karelia.  Soon the units
in Finland will be destryoed.  I don't know what actions are delayed, or
how much more help Russia needs on this turn.

>6:  If Japan takes Hawaii, the US now has to waste $$ in the pacific, or
>  risk invasion of W. US or Mexico, Panama, or Alaska.  Every little
bit helps,
>  and hitting the UK *SO* hard makes the US almost have to forget about the
 > Pacific to the point where Japan need spend little, if ANY effort there, 
 > and maybe even take 2-6 territory.

Yes this is good, but is not a new plan at all.  It is rather what Japan
gets to do if it is not creamed before it goes (i.e. attacked both in
Manchuria and Kwangtung).  Once again the rule change.

>7: Germany owns the Suez, more often than not.  This makes the UK HAVE to
>  waste that transport to block it, or risk invasion in S. Africa next turn.

Uk takes Syria away.  Germany must choose where it is hitting next turn
since it has lost so many spaces.

>8:  Defending against invasion on turn 3 or 4 is a joke.  Just
>  send a I or two there for the first few turns.  Hm... 7/8I in W europe and
>  double that defense in Germany will NOT fall on turn 3.

Sure, I am not sure how building fewer land units, or getting so many
units destroyed on turn 2 helps this.

>9:  This saves the German air-force until turn 3.  By then, frying the fleet
>  to hinder invasion until turn 4 is worthwhile.  Russia should be crippled
>  and ready to fall.

I am not sure what saves the German air-force until turn 3, it is
normally fine till then.  The airforce should not be enough to "fry" the
fleet, and I don't see why you can get by Karelia, especially after
trading your airforce for 6-7 transports on average.

>10: forces the Allies to choose between reinforcing Russia *OR* attacking on
>  turn 3 and 4.  Either way, they are going to have a harder time of it come
>  the following turn(esp if I bomb their split fleet).

The allies are silly if they split their fleet, then the Germans
demolish it.  Turn 3 they dump land units on Finland.  Turn 4 land units
walk to Karelia, and more land units are used.

>Seems like it *is* different than "normal", afterall...

Sure, but you still have not explained why giving up E. Europe, and
building another transport are good ideas.  I am not sure which one of
these advantages come from these changes.

>Joe


Erik
---=