The problem with not attacking sz12 is that if the Egyptian fighter isn’t destroyed, it immediately presents the UK with the option to attack the Italian fleet with 1 bmb, 1 fig, 1 CA, 1 DD. Even if you lose everything in exchange for the 2 CA’s, the BB would be a sitting duck to US aircraft in the next couple turns.
The problem with not attacking sz12 is that if the Egyptian fighter isn’t destroyed, it immediately presents the UK with the option to attack the Italian fleet with 1 bmb, 1 fig, 1 CA, 1 DD. Even if you lose everything in exchange for the 2 CA’s, the BB would be a sitting duck to US aircraft in the next couple turns.
Thank you, 505.
That’s exactly why I don’t attack the SZ 2 fleet. You are right, Captain Jack (who btw I think is EXTREMELY cute! Glad he has his own spin-off!) It is very difficult to pass up sinking the SZ 2 or even SZ 9 fleet since it reduces England’s transport capacity. But the prospect of saving the Italian fleet is too important to me.
I’m still trying to figure out a balance on what I can send to SZ 12 to make up for not sending the bomber that way I can send the bomber to Egypt. But honestly, you almost need all 4 fighters to take Karelia in round 1 or you may as well pass up taking it altogether.
@Cmdr:
I’m still trying to figure out a balance on what I can send to SZ 12 to make up for not sending the bomber that way I can send the bomber to Egypt. But honestly, you almost need all 4 fighters to take Karelia in round 1 or you may as well pass up taking it altogether.
Perhaps I haven’t read all the strategic posts, but you seem to be one of the very few who advocate a Karelia attack on G1.
Personally I think it is best to wait to G2.
@Cmdr:
The problem with not attacking sz12 is that if the Egyptian fighter isn’t destroyed, it immediately presents the UK with the option to attack the Italian fleet with 1 bmb, 1 fig, 1 CA, 1 DD. Even if you lose everything in exchange for the 2 CA’s, the BB would be a sitting duck to US aircraft in the next couple turns.
Thank you, 505.
That’s exactly why I don’t attack the SZ 2 fleet. You are right, Captain Jack (who btw I think is EXTREMELY cute! Glad he has his own spin-off!) It is very difficult to pass up sinking the SZ 2 or even SZ 9 fleet since it reduces England’s transport capacity. But the prospect of saving the Italian fleet is too important to me.
I’m still trying to figure out a balance on what I can send to SZ 12 to make up for not sending the bomber that way I can send the bomber to Egypt. But honestly, you almost need all 4 fighters to take Karelia in round 1 or you may as well pass up taking it altogether.
I understand, and you’re right. The games that I’ve played; the Allies have always used the fig in Egypt for India, and the bomb in UK (along with the 2 figs) for the German navy, so in that case the Italian navy hasn’t been in any real danger right off the bat. I guess I just wasn’t thinking about the UK1 attack for Italy.
Nice G1 opening btw. I agree with you that a G1 Karelia attack would be devastating to Russia, and incredibly helpful for Germany. I would say it’s probably worth the risk IMHO.
Thanks.
There are a few reasons I advocate the Karelian Attack on Germany 1.
1) It costs the Russians 19 IPC in lost units (1 of which is one of their only 3 offensive pieces they start with!)
2) It forces Russia to consider liberating Karelia or giving Germany an IC right on their front door.
3) It prevents Russia from taking Finland which is on their path to a 10 IPC National Objective and hard for Germany to liberate
4) It gives you a 3rd National Objective (this assumes you do the other attacks I mentioned) which means Karelia is really worth 7 IPC to you.
5) Honestly, with only 4 AA Gun shots, there’s a 33% chance you won’t lost ANY fighters give or take. (I just used LL to estimate the chance.) Even if you do lose one, and I wouldn’t expect to lose more than one, with a 50+ income for Round 2, I think you can afford the replacement fighter!
6) Russia is now down 4 Territories for a combined total of 6 IPC. It’s not a lot, but they only have two offensive pieces left and only one is in range to hit any of the territories you just took.
Maybe playing with Strategic Suggestions (National Objectives), then it makes sense to try for it. Otherwise, I think sinking UK shipping is more important since everyone has less money, so replacement costs are higher, making the Navy more worthwhile to sink.
Granted, if you are not playing with National Objectives then hitting Karelia really is not as effective if effective at all.
However, honestly, playing without technology or national objectives really, REALLY makes the game too strong for the Allies, perhaps a 21-24 IPC bid for the axis would fix it.
@Cmdr:
Granted, if you are not playing with National Objectives then hitting Karelia really is not as effective if effective at all.
However, honestly, playing without technology or national objectives really, REALLY makes the game too strong for the Allies, perhaps a 21-24 IPC bid for the axis would fix it.
I can not agree nor disagree with this just yet. I prefer the base game at this time.
When we tire of those playouts, we’ll add the National Objectives and see how that changes the game. I imagine about another 4 games should do that (6 total)?
No idea, Axis. All I know is that without NO’s the game is significantly in favor of the Allies (since the Allies lose NOs and the Axis gain NOs which means the only team penalized are the Axis.)
@Cmdr:
3 Infantry, Artillery, 4 Fighters, Cruiser vs 5 Infantry, Artillery, AA Gun in Karelia
3 Infantry, 2 Armor vs 3 Infantry in Baltic States
2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor vs 2 Infantry in E. Poland
2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor vs 2 Infantry in UkraineSure, Karelia is risky, but Russia is reeling if it goes decently (Baltic States, E. Poland and Ukraine should be hands down wins for you with probably one infantry lost in each and Russia unable to liberate any of them.)
If you do Egypt, like I do, 2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor (not even good odds, but good enough to do serious damage to England.)
SZ 6 would be Submarine vs Destroyer (50/50)
SZ 12 would be 2 Submarines, Bomber vs Cruiser, Destroyer (good odds, since he risks Sneak Shot if he sinks the destroyer first!)
Indeed Karelia is risky, but let’s say you take here with 1 ground unit. On R1 Russia must (and will) counter with 4 inf and 1 arm. Also Russia can counter Ukraine with 5 inf, 1 rtl against 1 rtl, 2 arm (or maybe 1 inf, 1 rtl, 2 arm). This could end up with both sides losing all, but then how much does Germany have after R1 on the Eastern Front? Only troops in the Baltic + Eastern Poland. That’s about 3 inf, 1 rtl, 4 arm. I don’t see how you would get a breakthrough with that on G2, which leaves you on G2 with not much choice except consolidating the front and waiting for reinforcements…
So you took all that risk in Karelia, and let’s not forget Egypt either which is a big gamble IMHO, but how much did you really gain…
Meanwhile, the UK has a fleet remaining of 1 BB, 1 DD, 2 trns + her buy of UK1…
Now that I think of it, you could even opt to have UK liberate Karelia, which leaves Russia the opportunity to attack Ukraine even harder.
Driel:
How much does Russia lose attacking Ukraine? You just out laid a major portion of the Russian army to kill two tanks in Ukraine (Inf, Art, 2 Arm probably.)
Meanwhile, Germany has a 50+ IPC paycheck to spend on round 2. She has a significant enough army to attack with in Round 2 and probably 3 fighters and a bomber to support them (yes, I’m assuming one was shot down in Karelia.)
@Cmdr:
Driel:
How much does Russia lose attacking Ukraine? You just out laid a major portion of the Russian army to kill two tanks in Ukraine (Inf, Art, 2 Arm probably.)
Meanwhile, Germany has a 50+ IPC paycheck to spend on round 2. She has a significant enough army to attack with in Round 2 and probably 3 fighters and a bomber to support them (yes, I’m assuming one was shot down in Karelia.)
I am attacking Ukraine with 5 inf, 1 rtl. That’s 8 pipes vs 8 or 10 on average. So in worst case I end up with 5 inf lost, hell maybe I lose everything as long as I kill the German armors.
The idea is to take maximum advantage of the fact that Germany doesn’t have reinforcements until turn 3. I know,I know, if you buy only tanks you have reinforcements on turn 2, but I still consider that a buy that will lose Berlin to the allies at the same point as you might take Moscow.
You can only attack Ukraine with 5 Infantry, 1 Armor on Russia 1. That’s 1 Infantry from East Ukraine, 4 Infantry from Caucasus and 1 Armor from Russia.
If I have 1 or 2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor there you have a 65% chance to survive, but probably with just the armor and maybe with an infantry with it.
Germany could easily kill that the next round.
Honestly, it’s my opinion that you just plain don’t have the resources for that, since you need that only armor of yours to attack Karelia or risk Germany building there next turn.
@Cmdr:
3 Infantry, Artillery, 4 Fighters, Cruiser vs 5 Infantry, Artillery, AA Gun in Karelia
3 Infantry, 2 Armor vs 3 Infantry in Baltic States
2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor vs 2 Infantry in E. Poland
2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor vs 2 Infantry in UkraineSure, Karelia is risky, but Russia is reeling if it goes decently (Baltic States, E. Poland and Ukraine should be hands down wins for you with probably one infantry lost in each and Russia unable to liberate any of them.)
If you do Egypt, like I do, 2 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor (not even good odds, but good enough to do serious damage to England.)
SZ 6 would be Submarine vs Destroyer (50/50)
SZ 12 would be 2 Submarines, Bomber vs Cruiser, Destroyer (good odds, since he risks Sneak Shot if he sinks the destroyer first!)
Jen - what about using 1 arm (instead of 2) in both E.Poland & Ukraine; then during non-combat move 2 arm from Poland to fortify Karelia. Now Karelia should have (at least) 1art, 2arm that Russia will have to counter. They only have 4 inf and 1 arm that they can get there. What do you think?
Also, I’m interested to know how you fortify France from a British attack? If you grabbed the tank from France (and maybe an inf?) and dropped it in Egypt, you only have 1 or 2 inf left, and only a couple in Germany.
Thanks.
Sounds like an idea. I’ll try it next time.
In reply to the original question, put them on France :-D
Honestly Germany does make enough money to go all armor on Russia and win, eventually. Especially when they buy a bomber a round. The key is not to push to fast on Russia and get trapped or forced into a really bad trade. Just get your NOs.
I basically did this move (inf/art, 1 turn tank/inf, 1 turn all tanks) in my last game as Germany and I only failed to take Moscow because I got diced HARD. Having infantry (turn 2 buy) and aircraft available on turn 6 after the Moscow attack provides a solid counterattack if Russia retakes or if the first fails.
@Cmdr:
There are a few reasons I advocate the Karelian Attack on Germany 1……
Honestly, with only 4 AA Gun shots, there’s a 33% chance you won’t lost ANY fighters give or take. (I just used LL to estimate the chance.) Even if you do lose one, and I wouldn’t expect to lose more than one, with a 50+ income for Round 2, I think you can afford the replacement fighter!
Have to smile at this one. I tried this on G1, and the KAR AA gun took out three, I say again, three of my fighters at the opening. Who would have thunk? :?
Needless to say, the loss of 3 ftrs and my amphibious force does not bode well for Germany’s prospects. Maybe next time….
