nothing great, but Chang Kai flexes his remaining muscles
Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB
-
@trulpen so something like this move? Not sure exactly about your Tobruk plans. UK option.tsvg
-
followed by 3 or 4 planes to Gibraltar and moving the fleet to SZ92
-
Something like that. I’m considering moving the fleet down to z80 instead though and skip the Gibraltar ab for now. I want to buy bases as late as possible.
One of the ideas with the mIC in Cairo is to allow for the russian grab of Iraq. I’m still keeping that open as an option, if it’s advantageous. It’s not forced, but a nice possibility.
If that happens, we want to have built the Cairo mIC as early as possible. With Tobruk obliterated Italy shouldn’t be able to compete for Cairo, even with 2 trannies.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
followed by 3 or 4 planes to Gibraltar and moving the fleet to SZ92
I’m considering securing the UK fleet in z109 instead. Would mean a des purchase instead of an ac and not hitting the sub in z110, blocking both z119 and 110.
Unless the fleet can be secure enough without blockers, but I doubt it. 6 figs to scramble could be the thing though.
-
@Omega1759 said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
We don’t have much of a bid in the Pacific but we have to take risks.
Sometimes, yes, but I believe in trying to solidify a material advantage instead of risking it. Atleast when it’s not called for.
-
@surfer said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
Actually, since he didn’t land in Holland Belgium, France can be useful and take that territory so the German ftrs can’t land without buying a CV. Buying 2 will still be a 1-99 battle against 4 ftrs + ships. I would consider it a win for the Allies if Germany spent on 3+ CVs this early in the game. BTW (3 CV is only 33-67% battle)
I will post a suggestion for UK soon.
My suggested purchase for UK-EU is 1 sub, 1 fig, 1 mIC and for UK-Pac 3 inf, 2 mech (with perhaps changing that to 5 inf).
-
The quote above was meant to emphasize the need for G to buy carriers if a successful strike on z109 is to be prepared. I think nothing less than 3 ac will work, and that’s simply just bad for G. The eastern expansion will be seriously halted. Don’t think G can afford that, so won’t go for blockers.
-
TripleA Manual Gamesave Post: British round 1
TripleA Manual Gamesave Post for game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition, version: 4.0
Game History
Round: 1 Combat Move - British 1 destroyer moved from 111 Sea Zone to 110 Sea Zone 1 destroyer moved from 109 Sea Zone to 106 Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from United Kingdom to 106 Sea Zone 2 fighters moved from United Kingdom to 110 Sea Zone 2 fighters moved from Scotland to 110 Sea Zone 1 armour, 2 artilleries and 2 infantry moved from Alexandria to Tobruk 1 armour and 1 mech_infantry moved from Egypt to Tobruk 1 submarine moved from 98 Sea Zone to 96 Sea Zone 1 fighter moved from Malta to Tobruk 1 tactical_bomber moved from 98 Sea Zone to Tobruk 1 fighter moved from Gibraltar to 96 Sea Zone 1 submarine moved from 91 Sea Zone to 110 Sea ZoneCombat Hit Differential Summary :
-
Here’s the suggestion. Check it out and comment, especially if you see any flaws.
The bs in z37 will go to z54.
-
Thinking of bringing the art from Cairo to Persia. The tr from Calcutta can go empty to z72.
-
@trulpen guess you aren’t a fan of the FIC strafe.
You might need the SZ98 transport to ferry soldiers to Egypt. Check the battle calc.
-
I’ve missed a lot of the comments preceding but I think it is a mistake to put the China air in Burma. That maybe too late and I suppose the hope would be to protect it with UK land. But I still think it is not a good risk to take.
I probably would have done the airbase build because it puts the UK in a position to go either way and the airbase supports the move of air into the Middle East. And the fleet loses mobility if it retreats to 81. I might consider a 109 fleet build since that might be more dangerous for the axis to trade air against and speeds up the joining of the units in 111. But agree with ABH’s concern on that too.
I would only do Tobruk if you are fairly certain that Egypt will be quite safe. I assume the air is landing there now. But 4 land units, bombardment and a bomber might still pose a risk. The extra units you have bid for there + the stacking at 92 + the transport and units in Persia could protect Egypt for another turn if Tobruk produces more risk now.
The 96 attack looks risky. You want to make sure that transport gets hit I think and so I think you need one more air.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
@trulpen guess you aren’t a fan of the FIC strafe.
You might need the SZ98 transport to ferry soldiers to Egypt. Check the battle calc.
It’s simply too risky. The short-term benifit of further dissuading a japanese all-out air-strike on Yunnan is countered by the long-term disadvantage of losing air. I believe the latter is heavier in this instance.
Do you mean from Tobruk? Yes, that’s a good purpose, but shouldn’t Cairo be rather safe with 3 inf, 1 fig and 1 tac? Italy can’t reach with more than 2 inf, 2 art this turn, right?
-
Often I move the Malta forces to Egypt on UK1. While Cairo is safe this round, a combined German+Italian strikes might take it down in another couple of turns. That extra inf+AA makes a big difference.
What are your plans for the Malaysian units? If they move up to Shan State, they will get killed by the FIC forces + planes. If they stay in Malaysia, they will get killed on J3. That is why I am a fan of strafing the FIC forces to protect the Malaysian units. Those three ground units are so helpful in extending the life of India.
-
@farmboy said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
I’ve missed a lot of the comments preceding but I think it is a mistake to put the China air in Burma. That maybe too late and I suppose the hope would be to protect it with UK land. But I still think it is not a good risk to take.
I probably would have done the airbase build because it puts the UK in a position to go either way and the airbase supports the move of air into the Middle East. And the fleet loses mobility if it retreats to 81. I might consider a 109 fleet build since that might be more dangerous for the axis to trade air against and speeds up the joining of the units in 111. But agree with ABH’s concern on that too.
I would only do Tobruk if you are fairly certain that Egypt will be quite safe. I assume the air is landing there now. But 4 land units, bombardment and a bomber might still pose a risk. The extra units you have bid for there + the stacking at 92 + the transport and units in Persia could protect Egypt for another turn if Tobruk produces more risk now.
The 96 attack looks risky. You want to make sure that transport gets hit I think and so I think you need one more air.
The idea is to block z37 with a des.
I think the z98-fleet will gain mobility towards the east, if need be. Japan did a DOW1. Needs to be countered efficiently.
Not stacking in z92 means the ab would be a liability. I like the mIC better here. Being able to build 3 inf next turn in this cornerstone of Egypt is pretty strong. Not to mention fleet eventually.
A sub and fig should suffice. Agreeably bit on the low side. We need the fig and tac for Tobruk. An alternative is to go in with either another sub, but that seems like a waste, or a sb, which we would like to allocate rather to z110 to make a clean strike.
-
@trulpen said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
@trulpen guess you aren’t a fan of the FIC strafe.
You might need the SZ98 transport to ferry soldiers to Egypt. Check the battle calc.
It’s simply too risky. The short-term benifit of further dissuading a japanese all-out air-strike on Yunnan is countered by the long-term disadvantage of losing air. I believe the latter is heavier in this instance.
Do you mean from Tobruk? Yes, that’s a good purpose, but shouldn’t Cairo be rather safe with 3 inf, 1 fig and 1 tac? Italy can’t reach with more than 2 inf, 2 art this turn, right?
They can reach with 2 inf, 1 armor, 1 art, and a bomber. And that assumes that lose in 96. That is likely but I’d want to be more certain.
-
Sure thing. We need to maximize Tobruk. How solve it?
-
@trulpen If you are very committed to going for it, I would still take another sub to 96. 110 can afford to lose one. If you didn’t go for it, I think he might be able to stack Alex with German support such that he couldn’t be dislodged. But I also don’t see him having much success taking Egypt as long as you kept the air in reach, brought the Malta units back and had the India transport take an inf to take Persia.And he would need that German air back in Europe after a turn or two. I haven’t calculated the risk of that, but I think it is likely the case.
-
@farmboy Maybe pull down the bomber then for z96? I prefer not putting valuable fleet as sitting ducks. In z110 they can’t be attacked due to lack of des. The first strike is also rather nice.
-
I’m talking gibberish. The bomber is used for z106.
Taking out those 2 subs is about tempo. I don’t want to have to chase them in some obscure spot in the Atlantic. And I certainly don’t want them to make it to home base.
Suggested Topics
