Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> After Action Reports >> Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 7:50:30 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
After Sugar Resigned I took a few screenshots




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 7:52:21 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
Algeria was attacked by Sugar to get Spain on Axis side.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 2
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 7:55:15 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
Sugar tried to drive the allies out of Iraq.
I could not stop him but I slowed it and he had to use strong forces which he needed for USSR




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 3
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 7:59:09 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
Russian counter offensive in the south.
Heavy losses on both sides.
With USSR around 1200MPP losses could be easily replaced.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 4
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 8:00:50 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
Axis attacks on Moscow and Leningard could be stopped.
USSR tank force liberated Finland and takes now pressure from Moscow.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 5
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 10:50:54 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
No much action on the western front.
Two amphibious landings from UK to force Germany to take some counter actions.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 6
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 1:19:51 PM   
nnason


Posts: 411
Joined: 3/4/2016
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Status: offline
Fafnir,
Would be interesting to see diplo status, tech status/MPPs for both sides, and country morale.
What was the date of the end game.?

Hopefully there will be a remnatch.
Noah

_____________________________

Live Long and Prosper,
Noah Nason
LTC Field Artillery
US Army Retired

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 7
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 1:59:35 PM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
Game ended 12/24/1942.
MPPs are shown in the picture, they were about the same the last few turns on the report.
Tech can also be seen as most units were fully upgraded. I had amphi level 5 with the US but Sugar resigned before any major US actions.
Spain was close to joining the axis (around 80%) but with max diplo on allies side no futher hit was possible.
Therefore Sugar tried to get Algeria which would lead to an Spain war entry if fully conquered.
NM was around 100% for all, except Italy 40%.

I am always open for a rematch

--
corrected to 1942

< Message edited by Fafnir -- 11/24/2018 2:37:59 PM >

(in reply to nnason)
Post #: 8
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 2:11:50 PM   
Rannug61


Posts: 117
Joined: 1/14/2018
Status: offline
How did you stop Sugar in Russia? You never lost any of the 3 major cities...

_____________________________

"En svensk tiger"

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 9
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 2:12:55 PM   
Schokolokos

 

Posts: 78
Joined: 1/29/2018
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Game ended 12/24/1942 obviously. Im impressed tech lvl Tank and Aircraft 5...

(in reply to Rannug61)
Post #: 10
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 2:13:54 PM   
nnason


Posts: 411
Joined: 3/4/2016
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Status: offline
And I think you mean 12/24/1941 or 1942?

_____________________________

Live Long and Prosper,
Noah Nason
LTC Field Artillery
US Army Retired

(in reply to Rannug61)
Post #: 11
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 2:50:58 PM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rannug61

How did you stop Sugar in Russia? You never lost any of the 3 major cities...


I was waiting for a full attack at least on one of the major cities and prepared the
counterattack around Stalingrad.
Heavy fighting was done for Dnepropetrovsk and I could kill some offensive units and
slow him down until reenforcements arrived.
I guess Sugar waited for a all out attack until his airforce was available.
Most of it was bound in Iraq killing the allied airforce and some units.

I was also surprised that he did not use most of the airforce in Russia.
Maybe Sugar can give some insight why he did not make Russia top priority.

(in reply to Rannug61)
Post #: 12
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 3:14:16 PM   
LLv34Mika


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/29/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fafnir

Game ended 12/24/1942.
MPPs are shown in the picture, they were about the same the last few turns on the report.
Tech can also be seen as most units were fully upgraded. I had amphi level 5 with the US but Sugar resigned before any major US actions.
Spain was close to joining the axis (around 80%) but with max diplo on allies side no futher hit was possible.
Therefore Sugar tried to get Algeria which would lead to an Spain war entry if fully conquered.
NM was around 100% for all, except Italy 40%.

I am always open for a rematch

--
corrected to 1942


How did it come that the Italian NM went down to 40%?

It is also rather surprising that you were able to stop the Axis in Russia. Did you have so early breakthroughs in infantry weapons and advanced tanks? Usually the Axis cuts through soviet forces without problems until end of 1942 and then at least Leningrad and or Moscow are gone.

Your British technology is also extremely surprising. Infantry level 2 and advanced fighters 4!!! You even researched ASW. You have the units, you have the technology, you have everything. Even the US has infantry in Asia and North Africa that seems to be able to stop the Axis.

Seems as if your research was pushed by some early breakthroughs in almost every country.

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 13
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 4:56:33 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 732
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
- Diplo has been a catastrophe, no hit for more than 1 year, with 15% chance in Spain (went to 70% before), and 5% at the US.

- I was waiting for the last 2 hits in Spain until sept. 41 before starting Barbarossa. I met lvl 2 inf, lvl 2 AA, and lvl 3 tanks (same lvl as my own, and after 2 turns lvl 3 inf. At predictions of 1:1 tanks against russian inf. the advance went very slowly. I expected to lead the tech race, since Fafnir didn`t research Int. with all 3 majors, but I only succeeded in the aerial research.

- sinking of the RM in ports, mostly by battleships, and therefore without retaliation. Chances varied officially from 10-20% to achieve a hit, but in fact more than 50% hit, and 2 hits are enough to sink any ship. I faced this tactics before by many opponents, none of them succeeded.

- unbroken brit. naval superiority, followed by countless landings all over the coastal lines. Estimately 45% of the missing italian NM were caused by landings.

Allied income has been the double of the Axis since the US joined, nevertheless I continued playing while doing more damage to the Allies than receiving. I had to take more risks and to achieve the advance with less troops due to the necessary reaction forces to counter landings, leaving all forces vulnerable to counterattacks.

While the course of this game has been similar to KZ's, Fafnir is far superior on a tact. lvl., as well as using his opportunities, including using scripts to his advantage. Alltogether this defeat has been expected, I've never been able to beat Fafnir in the predecessors iirc.

He`s simply the better player, and I expect him to lead the ranking without defeats within very short time and forever. Congratulations!




(in reply to LLv34Mika)
Post #: 14
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 5:10:24 PM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
I invest in technology before buying any units. Industrial tech is the first priority.
I did not buy any UK units early (except AA) and get fighter 4 late in 42.
The MPP situation for UK was very good since Sugar did not use his subs for raiding.
So all convoys from US to UK and USSR did not have any losses.
I could hold Iraq quite long wich give +70 MMP for UK/round.

In 1942 only US land units were in Asia or Africa which the US had for free.
Same goes for Russia. I avoided anything which lowers the Russian activation.
So you have enough MPP for research once ind. tech increased.
I do not resarch any air force related tech with Russia (except AA).

In Italy I could get some unguarded NM objectivs, this hurts Italy a lot since it has not that much NM.
Also the Royal Navy smashed most of the italan one.

To me a mystery too is why Sugar did not advance faster in Russia.
Until 42 he was much stronger in units and tech than Russia.


(in reply to LLv34Mika)
Post #: 15
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 6:09:50 PM   
LLv34Mika


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/29/2017
Status: offline
the tech thing is still the bigger riddle for me
advanced fighters are my top pick for UK and no matter what else you do it shouldn't be so much difference.

In my game vs Fenndon we have December 42 and I just reached advanced aircraft 3 with the UK. And I always invested in that tech as soon as possible.

I really think you got some really really good research results. You get 2% - 7% per chit so it could make a huge difference when you are lucky enough to get some 7% hits and a breakthrough. I know Sugar is a big fan of spying/intelligence so he may be ahead in tech and if you do the same investments you get even an 1% catch up bonus. Anyway... might be a good example how big a difference can be from one game to another despite the same early investments.

Not buying any units except AA might be pretty risky btw. if someone notices that GB is empty and ready for takeover. And as soon as Egypt falls you will have a hard time. Yugoslavia will also join, Spain probably to and if you are very unlucky even Turkey might join the Axis that way. Even without Turkey that makes the German war economy extremely dangerous.

I wonder if that would have worked...

Congratulations btw!

(in reply to Fafnir)
Post #: 16
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 8:15:16 PM   
nnason


Posts: 411
Joined: 3/4/2016
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Status: offline
Sugar,
You are a gracious winner and now a gracious loser.
Thanks to you and Fafnir for sharing some of your winning ways. As for me your pointers have helped but not enough yet but soon I hope.
Noah


_____________________________

Live Long and Prosper,
Noah Nason
LTC Field Artillery
US Army Retired

(in reply to LLv34Mika)
Post #: 17
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 9:24:36 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 732
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
quote:

the tech thing is still the bigger riddle for me


What happened is: the Allies had breakthroughs in Int. 1 + 2 at first, but the Axis in Int.3. That`s why his research especially with Russia was so fast. I reached tanks and fighters lvl. 5 at first, but that`s been too late to turn the tide. Russian Inf. at lvl 3 is ridiculously strong, the effort to destroy one of those ultracheap units is immense.

That itself wouldn't be decisive nevertheless, but not getting Spain, allthough already at 70% leaning very quickly, and therefore not being able to close the Med. overstretched my possibilties. It`s nearly impossible to conquer Casablanca against a capable opponent and allied sea superiority.

My air superiority has also been of limited use, he used his strat. bombers even without escorts, often being able to avoid damage, but dealing heavy damage to fighters who sadly lack this same ability. Imho too many decisive actions are depending on luck, and with the overall diminished attack values, also the randomisation of combat dices are increasingly annoying, turning a 0:1 prediction into a 1:0. This has been critizised through all the series, and in fact has been the reason I don`t play BreakthroughWW1 anymore in PbEM. Results simply shouldn´t differ more than 1 point from the prediction. We played more than half a year without randomization, and nobody complained.

But to make it clear: even if I had been a little luckier, stays the fact Fafnir is the better player. I couldn't name any area I'd prevail, neither tactical or strategical. I also refuse to read scripts (this is really ridiculous, either describe possible outcomes exactly in the manual, or leave it at all. I'd prefer the latter.), and try to avoid naval combat whereever I can. The latter is the worst part of the game ever since, and the reason is the lack of spotting opportunities. Ships can`t, and 2 mar. bombers are to few to scout and attack in the same turn. This is nevertheless not reflecting balancing, the Allies have their own issues, especially regarding Seelöwe.

Haven`t said that, SC3 is by far the best WW2 grand strategy game I know. It has also hugely improved compared to the predecessor, and it's been worth every single penny.

(in reply to nnason)
Post #: 18
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/24/2018 9:41:44 PM   
Dorky8

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 10/31/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LLv34Mika

the tech thing is still the bigger riddle for me
advanced fighters are my top pick for UK and no matter what else you do it shouldn't be so much difference.







The man just beat someone who hasn't lost a game since the game started and you critique his decisions. funny

Congrats Fafnir and thank you both for the follow up and good game play.

(in reply to Sugar)
Post #: 19
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/25/2018 5:05:25 AM   
LLv34Mika


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/29/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dorky8


quote:

ORIGINAL: LLv34Mika

the tech thing is still the bigger riddle for me
advanced fighters are my top pick for UK and no matter what else you do it shouldn't be so much difference.







The man just beat someone who hasn't lost a game since the game started and you critique his decisions. funny

Congrats Fafnir and thank you both for the follow up and good game play.


I think you got something wrong... according to the manual there are only a few things important for research.

- how many chits (only one possible for advanced fighters) / 2 - 7% per chit
- spying/intelligence (may improve you or slow down your opponent)
- is your opponent ahead so you get a bonus?

so if I always invest in that tech as soon as it is available (again) the rest is just maths and there shouldn't be such a big difference. If there is any I am missing something and that was what I was asking for. There was not a single sentence about criticizing his decisions.

(in reply to Dorky8)
Post #: 20
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/25/2018 6:59:42 AM   
room

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 1/6/2011
Status: offline
Congratz to both players! Awe material !

(in reply to LLv34Mika)
Post #: 21
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/25/2018 11:04:12 AM   
Dorky8

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 10/31/2015
Status: offline


I will say that Fafnir had an advantage because some of Sugar's strategies are well documented here in the AAR. That being said everyone else had the same advantage and couldn't beat him.




< Message edited by Dorky8 -- 11/25/2018 11:21:17 AM >

(in reply to room)
Post #: 22
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/25/2018 2:04:55 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1431
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
That would make a heavy early UK Tech investment at the cost of (nearly) not buying any units less risky.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Dorky8)
Post #: 23
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 11/25/2018 2:58:38 PM   
Dorky8

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 10/31/2015
Status: offline
Correct

If you pull back the BEF there isn't much need for more than the AA (a handful of garrisons maybe an army). Need AA research @ 2.

Upgrade to Monty.

< Message edited by Dorky8 -- 11/25/2018 2:59:40 PM >

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 24
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/8/2018 12:38:25 AM   
KorutZelva

 

Posts: 1236
Joined: 2/4/2017
Status: offline
well ****.

(in reply to Dorky8)
Post #: 25
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/12/2018 5:26:04 PM   
bfcj


Posts: 103
Joined: 4/10/2018
From: Tampa, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:


Original: Sugar

Russian Inf. at lvl 3 is ridiculously strong...


What am I missing here? My understanding was that Russian Inf units were inferior to equal-level units of other nations. I got this from stats like below:






Attachment (1)

(in reply to KorutZelva)
Post #: 26
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/12/2018 6:40:58 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1431
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
You are comparing effectively equal levels with the IT army at 2 and the Russian at 3.

The IT has a better hard attack (by 1), and the Russian is 0.5 better on defense against Tanks/light armor.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to bfcj)
Post #: 27
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/12/2018 7:00:42 PM   
bfcj


Posts: 103
Joined: 4/10/2018
From: Tampa, FL, USA
Status: offline
Right, so what's with Sugar's comment "Russian Inf. at lvl 3 is ridiculously strong..." ? Is it the +0.5 tank defense?


< Message edited by bfcj -- 12/12/2018 7:08:02 PM >

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 28
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/12/2018 7:13:23 PM   
bfcj


Posts: 103
Joined: 4/10/2018
From: Tampa, FL, USA
Status: offline
What's funny about Fafnir not maintaining a strong garrison in the UK is that when he beat me (destroyed, humiliated, ...) he had German troops in the UK before he'd finished dispatching France.

(in reply to bfcj)
Post #: 29
RE: Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) - 12/13/2018 5:40:44 AM   
Fafnir

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/20/2016
Status: offline
That has multiple reasons.
- Surprise - most players do not expect a UK invasion if the battle for France has not ended.
- It delays the fall of France. Once France has fallen, the US gets a mobilization bonus
- Some players move after Sealion France units to UK. This may be an opportunity to get whole France.
- Not sure about this: If London falls before Paris it will not get the french fighters from the US.

On the downside you have to deal with that nasty France navy.

(in reply to bfcj)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> After Action Reports >> Tourney game: Fafnir (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis) Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148