Mmm… I am not english born (I am Italian and this is a bad thing for speaking english… in the best case I speak english-ian, english + italian :-D) but I suppose that coordination should be a stronger way of cooperation.
According to my dictionary:
coordination = harmony, accord; working together
cooperation = working together
(so in the weaker form they are the same thing but coordination on average is a more strictly cooperation)
English born people opinion will be appreciated here… :-)
However, I agree with you about Allies needing more cooperation, or even more coordination, to win.
At same time Axis may benefits by cooperation. Axis coordination could be really a deadly thing.
Sure, Axis may win also without cooperation/coordination, playing almost individually, but I am still convinced that the more efficient Strategy are those involving cooperation.
stay on topic. Discuss strategy not the philosophy or epistemology of language semantics.
As you get a bonus for conquering Baltic, East Poland & Ukraine, it`s obvioius to attack all 3 territories. Karelia certainly is not a good idea as you need the airforce for something else.
The biggest questin is really Egypt. With the bmb, you have a 61,3 % chance of taking it with arm, bmb (74,6 % to win). But in 19,4% you even loose and the UK-fgt survives and you certainly loose the trn. The trn can be whiped out in any case if UK sacrifices the bmb that lands in TRJ.
What you gain by EGY is 2 IPC fot the territory and UK looses a bonus of 5 and the average gain is 4,7 IPC in unit (calculated with Revised price of bmb, so it`s even more).
The opportunity costs are that you miss the bmb in other fights, that you have a 19,4% risk of loosing the trn “cheap” (with UK-fgt) and a certain 100% risk of loosing it anyway if UK desires.
If you do not attack EGY, attacking cru, des at Azores is a must as otherwise your Italian fleet could be attacked by des, cru AZO + fgt EGY + bmb GBR which has a 53% chance of winning and therefore whiping out both the german and italian trn.
I think the idea is leaving Egypt and Karelia for G2 because it would not prove well enough in the exchange of new IPC if you ignore the other attacks while trying to get them both.Its pretty much either going after those two or all the rest and id rather get all the rest wiped off.
What about Germany taking Gibraltar on the first turn? Then if Italy can take Egypt OR Transjordan, then he should get 21 or 22 IPC at the end of his first turn because of getting both of his 5 IPC bonuses. Of course taking Egypt is much better, not only because of the IPC difference, but also because of taking away England’s bonus, but it may not be feasible on Italy’s first turn. I realize that the UK bomber can take out the German tansport, but the tradeoff may be worth it, because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.
because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.
Sorry, this is complete nonsense. Gibraltar borders sz12 (AZO) in the new map and therefore it is easyly accessible for both UK and USA. You would loose it very quick!
because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.
Sorry, this is complete nonsense. Gibraltar borders sz12 (AZO) in the new map and therefore it is easyly accessible for both UK and USA. You would loose it very quick!
I diagree with you. I DO agree that it would not be too difficult for the Allies to take it back, but I think that it would be one of those things where there would always be something better to do than take back a 0 IPC territory.
Ya really when you are u.s.a d you go to southern islands then japan i think not you send your fleet head to head in the northern pacific to save both of your main spots.
This is really true! (I would alos pion tout sometimes making o ipcs 1 just for the conquerer makes them really want it!)
Right now I like 8 inf and 1 bomber for Germany.
Hit the British Battleship in sz 2 with the Subs, Bomber and Norway fighter for a clean kill.
Baltic sub and 1 fighter to UK destroyer in sz 6 (with inf and art to back Norway or NW Europe). 1 Fighter to strafe Baltic or W. Poland (land NW. Europe to cover sz 8 ), 1 to strafe/take Ukraine (land in Bulgaria to back the Afrika Corps/Egypt round 2.) 1 tank and 1 inf from France to Libya. Most of the Armor can be used to secure France and Northwest Europe, since the major counter push against Russia doesn’t need to happen for another round anyway. AA gun, 3 inf, 2 tanks, 2 fighters in NW. Europe; 3 inf, 2 tanks in France. This basically scuttles the Baltic fleet, but provides a very strong incentive for the British to trade what remains of their own surface fleet, giving the Italians more breathing room. I think with that much air in range (the bomber and fighters at Norway/Northwest Europe, and the new Bomber in G), you might be able to force the Brits into a naval save, rather than risking a counter strike from the Luftwaffe in the second round, or bomber Blitz on London.
Not 100% on this one yet, but it feels pretty good right now. The Eastern Front seems like a rather different sort of game than what we saw in Revised, since G is so short on fodder, and Russia has no punch in the first round. Going to be like a 2 or 3 round build up before the war kicks into high gear. Even if our info isn’t 100%, I like what I’m seeing so far. This game should be a lot of fun for the first 6-8 months here.
Will be interesting to see what everyone else comes up with. :)
Ya really when you are u.s.a d you go to southern islands then japan i think not you send your fleet head to head in the northern pacific to save both of your main spots.
This is really true! (I would alos pion tout sometimes making o ipcs 1 just for the conquerer makes them really want it!)
I would agree, that is the way the war was won. But is nice to try different stratagies from time to time.
Ya but anyways the germans will need to work with/for the japanese (let the u.s.a do kgf then japan all asia )
allies lose russia falls
after studying the actual setups for 1941 i come to this conclusion.
German builds will use her bomber force and pulverize USSR with 3 bombers, while keeping technology rolls going each turn to maximize the value of spending income for this. Infantry are needed to support loses and use 2 to land 2 from Baltic each turn. On G2 i think if your fleet survives you need to buy a carrier and fighter because 4 fighters wont get the job done.
AA50 German strategy for 1941 scenario:
Purchase: 2 bombers 2 Infantry-
Note: If using technology, then 1 Bomber, 1 Technology, 3 Infantry, 1 tank.
Attacks:
Land:
5) attack Baltic States (3 Soviet infantry) with 3 tanks, 1 art, 5 infantry ( army group north)
6) attack Ukraine ( 2 infantry) with 3 tanks, 1 art, 2 Infantry ( army group south)
NCM:
3 Infantry, 1 art to Poland ( army group center)
Watch Norway threats because your Bomber will land here and you may need to shift some infantry from Finland to Norway or pick up infantry with transport and land.
G2 targets are: (3 out of 4 of the following)
Karelia
E Poland
E Ukraine
Caucasus
I like the idea of hammering Russian production with bombers. If Germany could stop units from Stalingrad and Leningrad then they might have an easier time in Russia, but as it is now Russia makes almost as much money as Germany but starts '41 with very few offesnive weapons so they need to build a tank corps to make Germany bleed and if they are constantly fixing their factories fir say 10 IPCs a tyurn thats 2 less tanks they can build and this puts them on the defensive entirely.
I’ll try this in my next game, if I play Germany.
I like that German attack except I would bring a tank and Inf on the TR to Egypt instead of two Inf.
I really don’t want the UK fig to survive. He would kill the Ger. TR and fly to India.
I modified it to reflect this.
I really think sinking that BB/AP in sz2 is a must.
Unfortunately it pulls the bomber off of the Egypt raid. I can’t seem to figure out a good attack on Egypt.
The German bombers are amazing. With all the crazy money flowing around I built a bomber per turn and had a huge strike force that was able to keep the Atlantic free of UK/US shipping for several turns.
Yea german bomber needs to be in SZ 2 fight.
The big problem for G1 is that you need the Bomber to be in 2 places at the same time, because both Egypt and the SZ#2 BB & TR are very important.
What is the solution? Why Long Range Aircraft, of course! :-D
If you are playing with techs, I would probably purchase 1-3 research tokens on the first turn on the off chance of getting Long Range, because, with Long Range, I can probably take out the entire Allied Atlantic fleet! If I got a tech, but not Long Range, my moves would be changed accordingly.
No, seriously. I know that going for tech is very chancy, so I don’t assume that I will get Long Range. It is nice when it happens though. I have played Germany a couple of times, and I did get Long Range on the first turn one time.
So, assuming that I didn’t get Long Range, or another tech which would alter my first turn move, I have to say that I believe that the following moves are the best for G1.
Purchase units phase:
Assuming that I spent 10 for Research Tokens, my G1 buy would be 7 Inf, although I might buy 3 Inf and 1 Bomber instead if I feel like it.
SZ#9 Attack UK DD and AP with 2 Subs.
SZ#6 Attack UK DD with CA and SS.
SZ#12 Attack UK CA and DD with 3 Fighters.
Egypt(2 Inf, 1 Art, 1 Arm, &1 Fighter) Attack with Bomber, Libian army(1 Inf, 1 Art, & 1 Arm), 1 Infantry and 1 Tank from France on the SZ#13 AP. (I changed using the Infantry from Morocco-Algeria to using one from France, because the Fighters landing there need a little support defense-wise, but if anyone is worried about losing France on UK1, then just use the Morocco-Algeria INF rather than the French one.)
The above moves, I feel very good about, but the following moves, I may tweak just a little more.
Baltic States(3 Inf) Attack with 2 Inf, 1 Art and 1 Fighter.
E Poland(2 Inf) Attack with 2 Inf and 1 Art.
Ukraine(2 Inf) Attack with 2 Inf and 6 Arm.
(You can switch the units attacking E Poland and Ukraine. I still haven’t decided which I like best, the central location of E. Poland or the pressure on Caucaus of Ukraine. Because of the non-combat move to Finland, to put pressure on Karelia, I am leaning toward my current move setup which will probably stress Russia out over worries of first Italy, and then Germany nailing Caucaus. Depending on what Russia does, Germany may move those Tanks back to E. Poland or to Baltic States on G2.)
Non-Combat:
Move 2 Inf from Norway to Finland and 1 Inf / 1 Arm from Poland to Finland on AP.
Move 1 Inf from Northwest Europe, 3 Inf from Germany, and 1 AA gun to France.
Land 2 Fighters on France. (At least 1 should have surrvived the SZ#12 Battle.)
(This will leave a total of 5 Inf, 2 Fighters, and 1 AA gun to defend France against the maximum of
1 Inf, 1 Arm, 2 Fighters, 1 Bomber, and 1 BB Shore Bombard.)
Land any other remaining Fighters (if any) from the SZ#12 battle on Algeria.
I followed IL’s plan of attack last night and it works fine for destroying most of the Royal but it seems like my territories bordering the Russians are going to be severely depleted, there is enough Russian Inf to sacrifice against the Army Group North, and Army Group South if the Russian player was feeling lucky, his lone tank can even reach one of the territories. And Finland will most likely fall also as when I was following the strategy, I had to pull an Inf from there. I also had to change the Purchases on G1, I bought 5 Inf and 3 ARM because I just couldn’t justify the 2 bombers, I just didn’t feel safe. France and NW Europe only had 1 Inf on them each at the end of the round, so I would have to re-stock them too, just doesn’t seem like enough Inf to go around. Did I screw that up? The Egypt attack wen’t along smoothly, I was left with 2 Tanks.
IDK, just curious to see what people think of the strat.
Thanks :mrgreen:
hey krupp.
I seriously modified the German attacks in the thread ‘1941 strategy map’. Its a PDF of the map with all the movements.
The German bomber thing was broken for the reasons you mention
