@P@nther:
So in my scenario the defending sub can submerge and avoid taking the hit ???
No. The decision to submerge is made in the “Press Attack or Retreat Step”.
This is before rolling the dice again.
Ah! Enlightenment. Many thanks :-)
Another look at the SAF IC
-
@Nix:
For the record, the SA IC strategy went 0-2 in the 2vs2 Tournament Semifinals. The Axis won both games.
Not entirelly true.
I did put one in in “my” game in 2vs2 tourney. It did fall, but we won the game, I built it to Lure Japan into africa and ease the pressure on Russia.
Al thought i hoped it would last 1 more round then it did :(
I stand corrected, Nix, you did win the game, but definitely NOT because of the South African IC. At least, not in the way you intended . . .
Yes, they did. As a matter of fact, the one I participated in failed rather spectacularly. However, I’m almost positive that it can be viable if implemented properly and only under certain circumstances which is reason for the thread. And it’s actually refreshing to rehash old dead strategies with a new twist.
U-505, you’ve definitely given me food for thought. I don’t go KJF that often, but if I were to, it would definitely be nice to be able to contest Africa with Britain alone without having to strand the British navy in sz12. It’s still tricky, though, and you’re right - Uk must play the first turn very defensively. And actually killing the Med. fleet would also help IMMENSELY with a KJF – any KJF, for that matter.
-
I’ve taken to landing the entire RAF in W. Russia if I can on Round 1. From there I can hit the Med fleet with 3 fighters, bomber on UK 2. That’s plenty to kill the transport and probably enough to kill the battleship too. (Yes the BB is worthless without a transport, now what German player cannot afford a solitary transport on round 3?)
Assuming, of course, I didn’t lose the fighters in SZ 5 (assuming, of course, I attacked it.)
Only problem is it almost forces me to buy submarines on UK 1. Still, 3 submarines, 2 infantry is decent.
-
Bear in mind that 2 things have to happen for (a South African Industrial Complex) to have any appeal to me.
At the end of G1, Germany’s Med fleet has to be in sz15 after supporting an Egypt landing instead of sz13 and the Baltic fleet is not reinforced. If either of those 2 conditions are not met, it would probably fail or at least be a bit harder to implement. Also keep in mind that it has an added twist in that I am perceiving it as being a KJF manouver to insulate the IC from a combined Axis assault.
And do you also assume an Axis bid of 7 for infantry and artillery in Libya, leaving possible 1 inf 1 art 2 tanks in Anglo-Egypt at end of G1? Because that can make rather a difference.
1. Build 1 IC SAF, 5 inf UK.
2. Strafe the Baltic fleet with with the UK aircraft stopping only after losing 1 fighter and then landing the fig in WR and the bomber in Persia.
There’s only a 1/18 chance of the Germans knocking out 2 UK air units in the same round, but that is considerable enough that you should take it into account.
3. Do NOT hit Egypt with the India units. Move the whole Indian Ocean(hereafter known as IO) fleet to sz33, landing 2 inf in Kenya plus moving the inf from SAF up, as well as adding the IO fighter.
Short version - the optimal short-term UK counter to a J1 invasion of India is 2 infantry at Persia. However, with the Japanese transport at Kwangtung and the alive and well, the Japanese can respond with four ground units plus bomber and fighter to India on J2. UK cannot afford to recapture India again, as by J3 the Japanese navy will be back in range.
4. Attack the Japanese SS in sz45 with the UK SS in sz40. Do whatever you want with the sz40 TP but I thought it would be best to try to move it unloaded or with 1 inf from NZe east toward Africa just to spread out the Japanese a little more if they want to hit it.
5. Land 2 units into Algeria with the intent to reinforce with the sz10 US supporting fleet+ground landing and the E US fighter going to UK for a 1 turn defense to return to the Pacific on the next turn once the UK is safe from invasion and a UK CV is built(or not) on UK2 to cover the UK Atlantic BB/TP’s.
Building a carrier at London is slow business. Are you planning on building ground units only at South Africa?
6. Retreat the remaining inf+AA from India and T-J to Persia possibly supported by Russia if you are concerned with a German armor+air blitz there which I wouldn’t really be worried about but you might be, depending on who you’re playing. I’m not mentioning any names (Nix).
The way it should look is:
3 inf, 1 fig Kenya. Germany likely wouldn’t risk a 1 bmb, 2 arm attack there on G2 which is the maximum Germany can bring short of a 3rd bid armor placed in Libya.
1 bmb, 3 inf, 1 AA Persia. Now, the UK not only has 2 units available from the IC every turn but also has 2 rounds of landings with the sz33 TP to unload in Kenya for added early defense or possibly into IEA or even Egypt from sz34 to slow Germany down until the IC is self sufficient.
2 inf or 1 inf+ 1 art/arm in Algeria plus US forces. The 3rd African front to help harass Germany’s African units from all sides (Alg, Per, Ken).
If the German fleet moves to sz16 to attack Europe or sz15 to unload another couple units into Egypt or T-J it will be threatened by the bomber in Persia, and 1 fig each from WR and Kenya, both of which can land either on the CV from sz33 moved to sz34 if the Med fleet is in sz15 or Caucasus if the Med fleet is in sz16. Even moving the Med fleet to sz13 or sz14 would offer no protection as it will come under threat from the UK fleet in sz12 supported by the Persian bomber as well as the US sz12 fleet. At that point, it wouldn’t really bother me to trade the UK Atlantic navy for the German Med fleet anyway, because in a KJF, Africa is always a big Cha-ching for Germany and the UK BB is likely to survive to take a German fighter with it in a counterattack so it would be more than worth it to probably secure Africa for good. And once that happened, the IC wouldn’t be wasted as the UK would be able to drive armor up into Asia or Europe or add units to the IO fleet and begin harassing Japan from the opposite side of the Pacific as the US.
Alternately, you can forego the Baltic attack if Germany builds a CV there or even if you just don’t want to risk your aircraft and move both UK fighters to WR and instead keep the IO fighter on the CV in sz33 and not move the SAF inf to Kenya. That would give you the option of bringing a 3rd fighter to sz15 or sz16 which can land in Persia or Caucasus or using it to counterattack Kenya with the SAF inf+2 transported Persian inf if Germany blitzed Egyptian armor there.
Even if you do have to move the UK fleet (1 CV, 1 DD, 1 or 2 fig +/- 1 TP) from sz33 to sz34 to land the fighters on UK2, it could be formidable enough to keep the Japanese from attacking it on J2 as they might not have enough units to safely attack it without losses they probably can’t afford as well as drawing a portion of their fleet at least 1 turn away from the Pacific where they would be badly needed to to fend off the oncoming US.
I think with a little tweaking, that this opening could even be used with a KGF strategy as well. Again, with a priority placed on defense of the IC and destruction of the Med fleet, you could let the UK fight for at least the Southern half of their African IPC’s while the US prepares to make their landings through Norway instead of the Algeria landings and the slow crawl through north Africa. As long as Russia can at least keep trading Persia with Japan, the Japanese fleet wouldn’t be able to land in Kenya right next to the IC without having to spend extra money to set up a rotating transport system from India. And the remaining UK funds could be used to buy TP’s and ground units for Norway, with the TP’s covered by the US fleet, or to buy strictly air units for added defense of the IC if need be.
1. You leave the Jap Kwangtung transport alive. Japan will exploit that.
2. You spend 15 IPC on an industrial complex and abandon India to the Japanese. This allows the Japanese and the Germans to make a push on Caucasus. Controlling the interior of the Mediterranean is not feasible for the Allies early, considering that the Axis can simply buy a carrier in the Med to effectively stop almost any Allied aggression.
That is, you accelerate Japan’s progress in the east, sink IPCs into an industrial complex and a carrier, and split UK’s forces between London and South Africa. Japan can claim India, and should the German attack stall, Japan can attack South Africa; if successful (probable), the Axis will probably retain control of Africa as well as Asia for a long-term economic win for the Axis. Remember that Japan has two battleships to use for battleship bombardment; I don’t see how UK can withstand that plus Japan’s air force plus transported units.
I don’t say a South African IC is unfeasible. However, I wouldn’t say it is necessarily a strong option for the Allies in most games either.
-
i dissagree gamer, nix placing the ic in saf is what beat us, even though it did eventually fall, japan was way to slow in getting to russia which is what nix and randmacts intended
-
NPB,
I did take the bid into account. I even assumed a 1 arm bid to Lib possibly giving Germany 3 armor in Egypt on G1. That’s why I suggested landing India units into Kenya giving the UK 3 inf, 1 fig there. Even if Germany did attack Kenya with 3 arm, 1 bmb the average result is the bomber being the only surviving unit and that means the IC is safe from German attack since the the closest German units afterward would be the inf or art surviving from the G1 Egypt attack which wouldn’t reach the IC until G4, giving the UK 2 full turns of building for defense.
I also took into account the fact that the UK can lose 2 aircraft in an attack on the Baltic fleet. The Baltic fleet strafe isn’t neccesary. If the prospect of losing the 2 fighters in the first round puts you off then you don’t have to do it because sinking the Med fleet on UK2 is by far the bigger priority.
The reason I don’t worry about the Japanese is because I envision this as a KJF strategy. With the IO fleet(1 CV, 1 DD, 1 or 2 fig, 1 TP) as a blocking force in sz33 it would take the Japanese until J3 at the earliest to mount even a token attack on the IC. It would also require at least 1 BB, 1 CV, 2+fig, 2 TP and maybe even the bomber to do it and even then they are likely to take a decent amount of casualties(they would have to lose aircraft to preserve the TP’s) with the remnant not getting back to the Pacific until J5. Against a KJF, I don’t think Japan is capable of diverting half of their capital ships for 5 turns to capture the IC without giving the US an immediate opening to advance into the Pacific.
Also, buiding a UK CV was just a noted possibility in case the UK wanted to land units into Europe after the Baltic fleet was nullified. Other options are to land units into Algeria with just their starting Atlantic fleet covered by the US DD, 2 TP or even use the UK to strictly build aircraft for use as a defensive measure for the IC or Russia. Everything is situational depending on the board layout so the CV build isn’t neccesarily the best option at all.
As far as India goes, Japan usually has control of India by J2 anyway, so I don’t see it as bad to give it to them early for the prospect of adding UK units to help challenge Africa.
I agree that it puts Russia in a spot having to defend without any early help from the other Allies, but in a KJF, Germany makes around $50 with uncontested control of Africa so I see it as a good thing to fight for the African IPC’s because it helps keep the UK income up and I’d rather Russia have to face Germany making only half or less of the income from Africa and forcing them to divert units to holding those IPC’s rather than just allowing them to control Africa for next to nothing.
-
This might be a bit crazy, but I’ll throw it out there anyways……
How about landing those UK ftrs in french west africa?what is germany going to do… take 2 tanks and a bomber on them?
You could put three UK ftrs there (from the sz 35 a/c).
If the US lands in Algeria… the German africa korps will have lots to do besides take such a risky battle.
-
On the surface, I agree this is a good way to stop Germany from quickly over running Africa. Further, i agree that Japan’s getting India no matter what anyway, unless you seriously invest in it’s defense and/or force Japan to turn it’s attention elsewhere (or if you have Colonial Garrison, which means Japan cannot possibly take India if you don’t want them too.)
I don’t think you need to strafe the SZ 5 fleet, though. You might be happier just landing in W. Russia and hitting the Med fleet on UK 2.
Also, people seem overly paranoid about the SZ 59 transport. It lives, so what? If it lives for 8 rounds that means Japan has gained 1 IPC a round. If it lives for 16 rounds, that means Japan has gained 0.5 IPC a round.
What’s more important is that England saved 2 transports, submarine, destroyer, carrier and fighter. 58 IPC. To get the same return on investment for England you would have to have England survive a game for 116 rounds!
-
This might be a bit crazy, but I’ll throw it out there anyways……
How about landing those UK ftrs in french west africa?what is germany going to do… take 2 tanks and a bomber on them?
You could put three UK ftrs there (from the sz 35 a/c).
If the US lands in Algeria… the German africa korps will have lots to do besides take such a risky battle.
That is crazy. :lol: But if you put the US and UK bombers in there, as well, to give you additional chances for the 3rd hit on the German bomber you could definitely make it a risky proposition for an attack and be in a decent position to have complete air superiority in Africa from the beginning.
The only issue that I would have is that the best chance for the SAF IC’s survival(I think) is to position the UK aircraft and navy to threaten the Med fleet on UK2. Having the UK aircraft in FWA gives the Med fleet safe havens in sz14 and sz16.
-
NPB,
I did take the bid into account. I even assumed a 1 arm bid to Lib possibly giving Germany 3 armor in Egypt on G1.
Yes, I thought you did take the bid into account. There was no explicit mention, though, and you know how I like explicit details. Secksy.
That’s why I suggested landing India units into Kenya giving the UK 3 inf, 1 fig there. Even if Germany did attack Kenya with 3 arm, 1 bmb the average result is the bomber being the only surviving unit and that means the IC is safe from German attack since the the closest German units afterward would be the inf or art surviving from the G1 Egypt attack which wouldn’t reach the IC until G4, giving the UK 2 full turns of building for defense.
Mm. I know. I wouldn’t debate that Kenya’s pretty secure.
I also took into account the fact that the UK can lose 2 aircraft in an attack on the Baltic fleet. The Baltic fleet strafe isn’t neccesary. If the prospect of losing the 2 fighters in the first round puts you off then you don’t have to do it because sinking the Med fleet on UK2 is by far the bigger priority.
Mm. Again, I thought you PROBABLY had something like what you just wrote in mind, but I like those explicit details. Secksy.
The reason I don’t worry about the Japanese is because I envision this as a KJF strategy. With the IO fleet(1 CV, 1 DD, 1 or 2 fig, 1 TP) as a blocking force in sz33 it would take the Japanese until J3 at the earliest to mount even a token attack on the IC. It would also require at least 1 BB, 1 CV, 2+fig, 2 TP and maybe even the bomber to do it and even then they are likely to take a decent amount of casualties(they would have to lose aircraft to preserve the TP’s) with the remnant not getting back to the Pacific until J5. Against a KJF, I don’t think Japan is capable of diverting half of their capital ships for 5 turns to capture the IC without giving the US an immediate opening to advance into the Pacific.
Well, it IS a KJF strategy. I don’t really think a South African industrial complex can successfully apply to a KGF.
But Japan doesn’t HAVE to attack the South African industrial complex, and Japan CAN send at least one battleship west on J1. What I’m thinking is that 2/3 of the time the UK attack on the Jap sub at Solomons fails, leaving the Japs with 1 sub 1 destr 5 fighters 1 bomber going against Pearl, anticipating 2 loaded carriers and the Japanese battleship from east of Japan at Solomons. Meanwhile, Japan takes China with mass infantry plus 1 fighter, the Japanese transport at Japan can take Burytia preventing the UK bomber from attacking unescorted transports east of Japan and landing in Burytia, and the Japanese transport at Kwangtung can offload infantry from Phillipines into French Indochina. (Unless you want to stipulate that Russia keeps 3+ infantry at Burytia; what do you propose as the Russian move on USSR1 anyways?) Plus if I read the original post correctly, India was abandoned, allowing Japan to capture with 1 infantry.
So at the end of J1, I think Japan controls China and India, Japan controls two loaded carriers and 1 battleship at the Solomons that the US won’t attack. There’s two infantry on French Indochina, and a battleship and a transport in the waters around French Indochina. UK must recapture India on UK2 with infantry from Persia plus assorted air or see a Japanese industrial complex plus fighters on India on J2. I hope I’m not assuming too much by that.
Also, I will say that Japan gets 3 transports and 1 tank on J1. Again, I think that reasonable.
US1 sees a Pacific buy. US can’t make any real progress yet.
UK2, I don’t see the board position changing much unless there’s a major naval buy at South Africa.
Japan recaptures India on J2 with infantry from French Indochina plus air, and moves its Solomon fleet to East Indies, Borneo, or New Guinea depending on the US1 buy. Japan has five transports, so there should be 10 more ground units in Asia now - mostly pulled off islands. Also, Japan has seen the US1 Pacific buy, so Japan starts to purchase fighters and infantry.
Now what happens on US2? Depending on the positioning of the Japanese fleet, the US isn’t in position to do much. If the US bought a lot of transports in the Pacific on US1, then the Japs should probably have positioned their fleet at Borneo or New Guinea, either of which prevent early US landings, but also threaten the waters around India. If the US didn’t buy a lot of transports (probably US bought carriers and fighters and/or subs), then Japan can take up a more active position at East Indies that lets the Japs threaten Anglo-Egypt through India on J3.
Again, I don’t see the board position changing much on UK3 without a naval purchase at South Africa.
So on J3, I think the probable situation is that the Allies control Africa, Japan has a pretty good grip on a deal of Asia and India, German infantry is marching into Ukraine (remember, if the Germans didn’t buy anything to reinforce Baltic as stated in the original post, probably the Germans should have purchased 10 inf 2 tanks). US is just beginning to progress in the Pacific. However, I predict that the Germans should be able to take the Caucasus, and Japan will be able to reinforce through Persia. The US will be trying to break into the Pacific, and they will succeed, but possibly too late for Russia, considering the lack of reinforcements.
Also, buiding a UK CV was just a noted possibility in case the UK wanted to land units into Europe after the Baltic fleet was nullified. Other options are to land units into Algeria with just their starting Atlantic fleet covered by the US DD, 2 TP or even use the UK to strictly build aircraft for use as a defensive measure for the IC or Russia. Everything is situational depending on the board layout so the CV build isn’t neccesarily the best option at all.
Mm hm. I really think a carrier’s just too slow for the Allies. Gives the Axis more time to push on Russia. Always dangerous.
As far as India goes, Japan usually has control of India by J2 anyway, so I don’t see it as bad to give it to them early for the prospect of adding UK units to help challenge Africa.
I agree that it puts Russia in a spot having to defend without any early help from the other Allies
I think it’s quite some time before Russia gets help from the Allies. US has a fleet in the Pacific (doesn’t help). UK has units in South Africa (doesn’t help). UK and US aid into Europe is minimal, and the German infantry stack can counter. The German Med fleet does NOT necessarily go down as early as UK2, especially if Germany just captures Trans-Jordan from Anglo-Egypt, in which case you have 5-6 German ground units in Trans-Jordan (3 from surviving G1, and 2 more from Balkans), which means that Germany can reinforce its Med fleet as late as G3 or even G4, allowing Germany more time to press into Russia.
, but in a KJF, Germany makes around $50 with uncontested control of Africa so I see it as a good thing to fight for the African IPC’s because it helps keep the UK income up and I’d rather Russia have to face Germany making only half or less of the income from Africa and forcing them to divert units to holding those IPC’s rather than just allowing them to control Africa for next to nothing.
When fighting for those African IPCs, you spend 15 IPC for an industrial complex and put more industrial production certificates into producing units where they cannot be of any help to Russia. I don’t say it is the WRONG move to put a South African industrial complex down in a KJF game. However, I do not see that a South African industrial complex is necessarily a superior move.
-
This might be a bit crazy, but I’ll throw it out there anyways……
How about landing those UK ftrs in french west africa?what is germany going to do… take 2 tanks and a bomber on them?
You could put three UK ftrs there (from the sz 35 a/c).
If the US lands in Algeria… the German africa korps will have lots to do besides take such a risky battle.
Hell yeah I would do that. I trade tanks for fighters? Where do I sign up?
-
This might be a bit crazy, but I’ll throw it out there anyways……
How about landing those UK ftrs in french west africa?what is germany going to do… take 2 tanks and a bomber on them?
You could put three UK ftrs there (from the sz 35 a/c).
If the US lands in Algeria… the German africa korps will have lots to do besides take such a risky battle.
Hell yeah I would do that. I trade tanks for fighters? Where do I sign up?
I know, it’s a bit crazy.
If there were only 2 tanks, it might be worth it for UK
personally I might attack AES trying to get Germany to zero ground units, then land in FWA :)
I did say it was a bit crazy, but if you give germany multiple targets, they often times can not hit them all.
-
The only issue that I would have is that the best chance for the SAF IC’s survival(I think) is to position the UK aircraft and navy to threaten the Med fleet on UK2. Having the UK aircraft in FWA gives the Med fleet safe havens in sz14 and sz16.
As opposed to those UK ftrs landing…. where?
SZ14 is safe regardless of where they land.
Think Germany would go to sz16?Then they’re not adding to Africa… wasn’t that you’re goal?
-
The only issue that I would have is that the best chance for the SAF IC’s survival(I think) is to position the UK aircraft and navy to threaten the Med fleet on UK2. Having the UK aircraft in FWA gives the Med fleet safe havens in sz14 and sz16.
As opposed to those UK ftrs landing…. where?
SZ14 is safe regardless of where they land.
Think Germany would go to sz16?Then they’re not adding to Africa… wasn’t that you’re goal?
With the UK fighters in West Russia, the bomber in Persia, the IO fleet in sz33, and the UK/US fleets in sz12 on UK1, all of the Med sea zones are threatened. sz13 and sz14 are threatened by the sz12 fleets and the Persian bomber, sz15 is threatened by the bomber and the WR fighters which can land on the IO CV moved to sz34, and sz16 is threatened by the bomber and the WR fighters which can land in Caucasus.
That’s the biggest part of the strategy. Threaten the Med fleet on UK2 no matter where it’s positioned. And even if a UK fighter(s) survives an attack on sz15 and the UK is forced to move the CV(plus the rest of the IO fleet) to sz34 putting it at risk by the Japanese, 1 CV, 1 DD, 2 fig(Kenya fighter can be added if only 1 fig survives) 1 TP is a pretty solid fleet for the Japanese to attack.
What would you think Japan would have available for an attack there, anyway. I’m thinking not enough to risk high value navy or aircraft when faced with a KJF. And if the Japanese have significant enough naval and air units to destroy sz34 without decent enough losses then the UK can use the DD or the TP to block them in sz35 and force an ill advised air only attack to do it.
-
I think the original idea of W. Russia is superior to landing them in Africa, IMHO.
They help defend the Russians and then can attack almost any place Germany puts ships on UK 2. If no attack available, they can always land on the British Carrier in the IO and add threat to Japan.
-
I think WR is best, too. Anything short of Germany moving to sz14 and buying a CV for defense should likely result in the Med fleet sunk on UK2. But then the UK/US can just move the sz12 fleets up to sz6, build a CV for defense and neutralize the Baltic fleet with their aircraft and they are positioned to start landing UK units into Norway with the US DD, 2 TP used as defensive fodder and to move UK units as well without having to build more TP’s. The SAF IC can just be used to contest Africa while the main focus of the UK is shifted to landing in Europe. Down Norway, getting less than maximum income from Africa, and having to divert at least 2 inf toward Africa every turn, Germany’s income devoted to Europe should be easily covered by Russia and the few units UK is able to add through Norway every turn.
-
Well, if Germany DOES buy an AC in SZ 14, that probably means they’ve just bought an AC in both Germany 1 (SZ 5) and Germany 2 (SZ 14) and now have 4 out of 5 fighters defending fleets, not defending land against Russians.
That almost sounds ideal for the Allies. (Ideal would really be just the sinking of both German fleets by UK 2, but let’s not have wet dreams, eh?)
-
NPB,
I don’t think Germany can get into Ukraine all that fast, though. By G3 at best, and even then it seems a bit fast. I’ll go along with that just for the sake of a “what if” scenario. If the German fleet had landed in T-J on G2, it should be sunk on UK2 with the IO fleet moving from sz33 to sz34 to pick up any surviving fighters and the Kenya fighter to fill an empty spot on the CV.
You also have 4 fig on CV’s in the Solomans and 1 fig on Wake after the sz52 attack. That leaves 1 bmb, 1 fig, 1 BB, 2 TP maximum against 1 CV, 1 DD, 1 TP, 2 fig in sz34. I doubt that you would attack that fleet on J2 because it’s not that certain of a battle and if it goes wrong, you can’t retreat because the BB would be subject to counterattack by what’s left over and with bomber support from the mainland before you could reinforce it. Even if the UK loses both fighters in sz14, I won’t have to leave sz33 with the UK fleet then. The Japanese BB/2 TP in sz36 have no real defensive support so I don’t think that Japan would be interested in advancing within range of the sz33 fleet+air any more than the UK fleet would be to move closer to Japan so it becomes a standoff. But the UK can afford to be patient. Eventually, that BB/TP fleet will have to move back toward the growing US fleet and with the Med fleet sunk the UK can immediately begin building to bolster the fleet and prepare to start walking units north from the IC or landing units directly into Persia from Kenya to be used to beef up the Caucasus defenses or help fight off the Japanese coming out of India.
And that is not even taking up half of the UK’s income or considering the sz12 units. I’d have to see what kind of opening Germany would be allowing the UK up north before I would be able to say for certain where I’d be allocating the remaining income or those extra forces.
-
@Cmdr:
Well, if Germany DOES buy an AC in SZ 14, that probably means they’ve just bought an AC in both Germany 1 (SZ 5) and Germany 2 (SZ 14) and now have 4 out of 5 fighters defending fleets, not defending land against Russians.
That almost sounds ideal for the Allies. (Ideal would really be just the sinking of both German fleets by UK 2, but let’s not have wet dreams, eh?)
I’m not sure if I would try this strat if Germany builds a Baltic CV on G1 but I suppose it could work.
If Germany built 2 CV’s though, the fact that Germany has 4 of it’s fighters not defending the land is not nearly as significant as that they would have just purchased 32 IPC’s in navy in the first 2 turns. Seems Germany would be kind of lean in ground units in that case.
-
@Cmdr:
Well, if Germany DOES buy an AC in SZ 14, that probably means they’ve just bought an AC in both Germany 1 (SZ 5) and Germany 2 (SZ 14) and now have 4 out of 5 fighters defending fleets, not defending land against Russians.
That almost sounds ideal for the Allies. (Ideal would really be just the sinking of both German fleets by UK 2, but let’s not have wet dreams, eh?)
I’m not sure if I would try this strat if Germany builds a Baltic CV on G1 but I suppose it could work.
If Germany built 2 CV’s though, the fact that Germany has 4 of it’s fighters not defending the land is not nearly as significant as that they would have just purchased 32 IPC’s in navy in the first 2 turns. Seems Germany would be kind of lean in ground units in that case.
Hence the statement, that it almost sounds ideal for the allies.
Germany’s out 32 IPC from it’s collection of 82 IPC (I’m assuming Ukraine was liberated, Karelia and Egypt were taken on Germany 1.)
That leaves a mere 50 IPC for ground units instead of 66 IPC. Add to that the fact that 67-80% of your fighters are now sitting on the water instead of as anchors in W. Europe, Germany and E. Europe against invasion (if Ukraine was lost, it’s 80% if not, then 67%) and that’s a rather large chunk of the German forces not present.
-
NPB,
I don’t think Germany can get into Ukraine all that fast, though. By G3 at best, and even then it seems a bit fast. I’ll go along with that just for the sake of a “what if” scenario. If the German fleet had landed in T-J on G2, it should be sunk on UK2 with the IO fleet moving from sz33 to sz34 to pick up any surviving fighters and the Kenya fighter to fill an empty spot on the CV.
G1 10 infantry 2 tanks buy. G2 10 infantry into Eastern Europe. G3 10 infantry plus German Med transport infantry into Ukraine. Also by G3, Japanese fighters can land in Ukraine. Realistically, Germany shouldn’t be able to take and hold Ukraine until G4, but I don’t see it NOT happening.
(edit) - That is, I think it’s feasible that Germany may be able to take and hold Ukraine on G3. However, I think it very likely that Germany will be able to take and hold Ukraine on G4.
Right, I forgot about the UK carrier being able to pick up UK fighters. Thanks for that correction.
Still, there are any number of ways for Germany to prevent the loss of the Med fleet, easiest being to stay in Southern Europe’s sea zone.
You also have 4 fig on CV’s in the Solomans and 1 fig on Wake after the sz52 attack. That leaves 1 bmb, 1 fig, 1 BB, 2 TP maximum against 1 CV, 1 DD, 1 TP, 2 fig in sz34.
Damn, lad, would you reference islands instead of sea zones? It sure would make life a lot easier for a certain crotchety poster that can’t remember sea zone names . . .
I don’t know where sz 34 is offhand, but I imagine you’re talking about either the sea zone east of Kenya or the sea zone east of Anglo-Egypt. If that’s the case, keep in mind that I’m not thinking about attacking there that early. What I’m concerned with is the Japanese threat to the waters off India. (On J2, you can bring all sorts of Japanese air there; 5 fighters 1 bomber 1 battleship 1 transport at least, even if Japan did take Burytia).
I doubt that you would attack that fleet
Well, I attack ANYTHING on the slightest provocation. Got to keep up that berzerker reputation. But probably I wouldn’t attack . . . yeah . . . See above.
on J2 because it’s not that certain of a battle and if it goes wrong, you can’t retreat because the BB would be subject to counterattack by what’s left over and with bomber support from the mainland before you could reinforce it. Even if the UK loses both fighters in sz14, I won’t have to leave sz33 with the UK fleet then. The Japanese BB/2 TP in sz36 have no real defensive support so I don’t think that Japan would be interested in advancing within range of the sz33 fleet+air any more than the UK fleet would be to move closer to Japan so it becomes a standoff. But the UK can afford to be patient. Eventually, that BB/TP fleet will have to move back toward the growing US fleet and with the Med fleet sunk the UK can immediately begin building to bolster the fleet and prepare to start walking units north from the IC or landing units directly into Persia from Kenya to be used to beef up the Caucasus defenses or help fight off the Japanese coming out of India.
And that is not even taking up half of the UK’s income or considering the sz12 units. I’d have to see what kind of opening Germany would be allowing the UK up north before I would be able to say for certain where I’d be allocating the remaining income or those extra forces.
I haven’t changed my mind about what I wrote earlier. Doesn’t mean I’m right, just mean I haven’t changed my mind. :lol:
Suggested Topics
