Bombers can threaten both the UK naval and russia, its not like building bombers is a compelte neglect to russia. Its only a partial neglect.
I understand that. The bombers will help in trading territories and keep the Russians from being too aggressive in pushing a big stack toward Germany. But, the 800 pound gorilla in the room isn’t being addressed. Every turn that Germany builds a bomber to threaten the UK fleet, the Russians will be outproducing them in ground units. Every single turn. And the longer it goes on, the bigger the gorilla gets until even those bombers won’t be able to help stop the Russians from pushing into Europe.
The Russian front is critical to Germany. Losing the ground war, even if it is a very slow process early, eventually becomes a snowball that gains speed as it moves. First, they lose the [Cauc, Kar] NO. Then they have less money to keep the Russians from preventing them from gaining the 3 out of 5 territory western Russia NO. After that, it goes quicker because once Russia can get units into Eastern Europe they will start earning the big $10 NO while Germany would have it’s hands full just holding onto their core territory NO.
Add up the units that the Russians and Germans have within 2 territories of East Poland. I will include the Norway and Finland units as well as the France armor to give Germany an extra boost. I’ll tell you what the total is: Russia [24 inf, 2 art, 1 arm] Germany [14 inf, 3 art, 7 arm]. Looks pretty even right? Maybe favors Germany a bit? It does until you notice that there are only 3 infantry left behind to defend both France and NWE. That would crumble without defensive reinforcements. Where are those reinforcements going to come from when you only have $19 left to spend on G1 after buying the bomber? Don’t forget that Russia will be dumping $30 into their army on their turn and they also have 4 inf in Novo and Kaz that I didn’t count. That situation gets ugly fast if Germany wants to keep building bombers.
I’m not too worried about England sinking the Italian Fleet.
First off, it’s going to cost you 4 bombers, probably. (2 Cruisers, Battleship ~ 4 Bombers in power so it’s almost 50/50 without running any numbers on a sim.)
Secondly, Africa is nice and all, but you’re still losing that National Objective when Japan takes Australia and India on Japan 2.
Thirdly, I view Italy as Germany’s little brother, he’s responsible for protecting France, not taking Africa. If he can take out some African nations and waste Allied power liberating them, great, but let’s not get too heavily invested here! (No way Italy can stop America and England from taking Africa, not possible.)
That said, I do sometimes save up the cash and get a Carrier for the Italian fleet. I’ve found it useful to really annoy my allied counter-parts, problem is, the fleet has to live to round 2. hehe.
I’m with U-505 (and TG) on this one. CA’s with the UK can be devasting.
Germany goes before the UK, so unless Germany buys a preemptive bom the UK gets the jump on the naval build and after that, the Axis can’t compete.
It is quite easy to get to 4-5 very early. Turn 1 - 3 CA, 1 trn, supported by any surving UK ship (probably DD off Can) and US Atl ships.
The UK doesn’t need trns, they have a building cap of 8 and likely won’t have income topping 26-32 after a few rds. That means you only need 2-3 trns until you are seriously ready to hit Ger, and you are likely to have one survive G1. But if you are buying 1 heavy hitter a turn (ftr/bom/dd/ca) you’re not going to need more than 8 spots (probably 6 for ground units). Plus since trns can’t soak up fodder hits, it does no good to over produce them, they just get wasted.
So UK has 43 to spend rd 1, and 30ish Rd 2. That is enough for 3 CA (rd 1), 1-2 CA Rd 2 with 2 inf (or inf + air).
US/UK DDs act as fodder and US AC can be stationed off Alg. If I counted right Germany is looking at 3-4 dd, 4 CA minimal in Sz 6. But don’t forget Geramny has a lot to attack and counter if making gains against Russia which means all her ftrs are not necessarily in range of the Allied fleet and the Allies can adjust accordingly if there are a bunch of planes on WE. Which means a Heavy Afr landing in Rd two, and you save some cash and then make another moster purchase on UK 3 as you move your ships to Sz 6.
I should say I also wouldn’t object to a UK 1 of AC + 2 CA (or 1 CA + other stuff). Then stacking in CAs after that.
If Ger wants to sack its air trying to take out DDs and CAs (no AC scenerio), I’m all for it as an Allied player. But you also can’t assume an Allied player is going to leave himself open to a devasting attack when Germany moves prior to both the UK and US.
The US can either buy the ACs or the supporting DDs on US 1-2, leaving the UK open for the Heavy CA strat. CA’s aren’t as helpful for the US since the UK usually makes the first strike. I’d top out at 4-6 CAs enough for 2-3 trns. I have 5 in one game, but I’m looking at trying 4 with an AC in future games.
DM:
Theoretically, England would be well off with 8 Cruisers, Carrier or two and full decks of fighters to support their 4 transports, then they could hit the ground each round with 8 cruiser bombardments. (Yes, I’m assuming that somewhere along the line you lost the battleship. Either first round before you go, or later.)
Realistically, the British Empire loses money FAST. All it takes is Egypt or Australia to go down and you’ve lost a National Objective. If you ignore Japan, there’s no way yo are getting the objective there, and Italy/Germany can make quick work of protecting France stopping you from getting THAT objective. So it’s safe to assume, you’ll be earning in the upper twenties, lower thirties each round while Germany and Japan will be earning in the upper 50s and Italy maybe in the low twenties.
Just something to think about. I’m not saying anyone is wrong about England and fleet. I’m not saying anyone is wrong saying that Germany, with modest tech investments in hopes of Jet Power or Heavy Bombers, is wrong about air power. I just want you to think about what you should realistically have and need to do to stay in the game.
A last thought, I’m tired of hearing (mostly from C-Subbers) that SBR is broken or is too risky. Both sides in this game can afford to SBR and both sides in this game can avoid paying for the damages (or mitigate them through technologies) of SBR campaigns. If England decides to go Cruisers, by necessity, you are not going bombers and that means you are not sinking the Italian fleet and you are not SBRing Germany. If Germany decides to counter your cruisers with some bombers, they can be hitting England for up to 16 IPC a round in damages.
Just something to think about.
Tech changes everything, so I think it is safe to assume no one has tech. Obviously if Germany Gets HB, LRA or Jet Ftrs, that changes everything.
England doesn’t need a lot of income. All they need is 18 ipc per turn, that fills 3 trns, anything over that is a bonus. This of course assumes you have units already on the board from round 1 and 2.
NO’s are fine and all, but I still value position over them. Japan can have Aus/Ind and Fra is overrated. I’d never attack there just to get the 5 extra ipc. There better be a bigger strategic value, like I can actually
hold it through the G/I counter or I’m killing a bunch of G planes for UK Inf. I’ll galdly sacrifice NO’s if it means I control Kar to Belo to Mos.
The reason the Gemany and Japan incomes in the 50’s aren’t that bad is b/c:
1) German build limit of 10 units.
-Germany needs to take/hold Kar or buy another IC, otherwise they only place 10 units per turn in Berlin.
-UK and Rus can match with ~12-16 units per turn that jumps up to 20+ if US joins in
2) Japan build limit of 8 units.
-In order to take Adv of 50+ you’ll need at least 2 IC
-The Allies don’t need to buy any extra ICs
3) Japan to Mos is longer.
-Japan to Mos is 6-7 turns
-UK to Kar is 1 turn, UK to Mos is 3
-US to Kar is 2 (from Ecan), 4 to Mos (from Ecan)
4) It is still cheaper to defend
-I’ll take a slightly lower income if it means I control the center of the board (Kar to Mos/Cauc and Alg to Egy). Once I feel safe in that, then I’ll pick off the outlaying areas.
It is much easier to recover from losing Ind/Aus/Safr or other NOs in the first few rds then it is losing Kar or Cauc in G2 or G3.
As for 8 CA, that would be great and all, but I think that’s probably overkill.
Now I’ve only played 2 games as the Allies but you probably only need 1 AC per sz you intend to hold. So I’d go 1 to Sz 12 and 1 to Sz 6 (then moves to Sz 5 when ready).
But you don’t necessarily need the one in Sz 6 which is when you can employ a CA heavy strat. To kill 4 dd, 4 ca Germany needs 8 ftrs. They’d probably clear with 2 ftrs give or take. That is a pretty heavy investment into air for Ger. Throw in just one more dd and UK wins outright. The UK can always match Ger air buys with dds, although I try to keep the DD level down since they are pretty useless once you have naval supremacy so I like to keep just enough for a first wave and prefer if the US buys them. The US can at least use them for Ita or the Med as fodder if they aren’t needed in the North that way the UK can get more bang out of its buck with say 4 CA vs 6 dd.
I find the benefit of the multiple CA (say you have 6), is you can now legitimately attack 3 ter with 2 inf, 2 CA shots and reinforce one ter (probably kar) with 2 inf. It essentially deadzones NWE, Pol, BST and make for a powerful assualt on Kar when you can go 8-12 inf (0-4 inf from Fin), multiple CA-shots, then only subject 1-2 ftrs, 1 bom (if planes are needed) to AA fire. It also forces more Axis inf to Fra. It is is better to see inf there then on the boarder of Russia.
Darlin, 50 IPC into 10 Units can be 10 Tanks. that’s pretty bad. Also, many players (myself EXCLUDED) like a complex in France (+6 units). And of course, there’s Improved Factories making it 12 Units cap in Germany.
Just some ideas.
All tank buys won’t win you the game. 8-)
The Allies will chew those up with strafes. Welcome to my lair said the spider to the fly.
And again successful tech changes everything, so it can be excluded.
No, but all tank buys can break down Russia pretty fast. Besides, I’d probably break that 60 IPC (which is where i find Germany often enough) into a few research dice, maybe an aircraft or two, some tanks, and infantry with the odd artillery thrown in for fun. (Or a lot of artillery if I get Advanced Artillery!)
Has the All Tank Build worked out as a viable strategy? Statistically speaking, After Action Reports show the German Tank Rush working ONCE. Out of 30 games.
I’m not saying Tank Rushes don’t work, but they certainly haven’t proven themselves yet.
From my experience I say it is normally foolish to push tanks into Moscow unprotected. I’ve had several of my own sectors closed by Russian counterattacks due to a lack of infantry support. 10 Tanks seems like a VERY risky buy.
I have played about 6 games now. And 5 times the allies have won(the more experienced players on the axis). We played with tech but without NO’s. I have to disagree with the original poster. Without NO the game is far from balanced.
The one game that the axis was won on turn 1. The UK bought two IC’s one in India and one in Africa and Russia bought two researchers and 4 tanks.
I don’t think Jenn was advocating an all tank buy. She was merely pointing out that only having the German IC and earning 50 or so a turn is not really a problem. The problem I see is peoples minds are still stuck in classic. The only thing that defends worse than infantry is a bomber nothing else attacks worse. And no I am not advocating NOT buying Infantry I am pointing out that buying ALL infantry aint worth a flip.
And as far as Japan having to buy ICs that is no problem for them and they should have done so buy round 3 at the latest. It isn’t like they are strapped for cash.
No, I am not advocating an all tank buy. Just mentioning that if you are limited to 10 builds, 50 IPC can be spend on all tanks. As I clarified in my original post, I’d probably be breaking that up and getting some research too, (unless I had all the techs I personally wanted.)
Very well then, you may proceed.
About tech: it happens too randomly to derive a go-to strategy from it. Most of the techs are worthwhile, so you do get your monies worth out of them. But I would refrain from mentioning specific techs as talking points since it’s so difficult to target each one.
@Cmdr:
Darlin, 50 IPC into 10 Units can be 10 Tanks. that’s pretty bad. Also, many players (myself EXCLUDED) like a complex in France (+6 units). And of course, there’s Improved Factories making it 12 Units cap in Germany.
Just some ideas.
I don’t like the France IC either. I opposed it being provided to Germany as a gift IC because I thought it would be too powerful for Germany’s G1 opening but, as a purchased IC, it’s anti SBR benefit is offset by the fact that it is further from the front than the Germany IC and it makes France even more of a must defend territory than it already is.
I prefer the Poland IC build. It is closer to Russia, it is protected from landings from sz12, it is defended by inf/art moving from the Germany IC toward Russia, it’s cheaper to repair than the France or Germany IC’s, and it is the perfect defensive strongpoint to hold back the Russians when the Allied war of attrition begins to collapse my fronts because it helps protect my core territory NO.
And with 13 units to build, if I’m earning 50+, I have the luxury of building a fighter or bomber if I feel like it or large numbers of art/armor if I feel otherwise. But, even when I’m pushed out of Russia, I’m usually making enough income to keep it at least partially operational.
I find it easier to bomb France than Germany. But I like the Allied SBR campaigns. :)
I also do not find tech to be erratic. Sure, you won’t get the one you are looking for all of the time, but almost all of them are good to have and you can narrow your focus by eliminating half the choices right off the bat. (Chart 1 or Chart 2) As you fill in a chart the odds of getting the one you want increase dramatically.
1 in 6 for the first
1 in 5 for the second
1 in 4 for the third
1 in 3 for the fourth
1 in 2 for the really unlucky
guaranteed for the insanely unlucky
The question is:
How many techs do you unlock before the game “ends?” (Defined as the point where one side SHOULD concede).
Probably 1 or 2 with the upper limit at 3 and a lower limit at 0. So you’re odds are 20-25%, which isn’t that good.
So yes, unless you invest HEAVILY in techs, unlocking specific techs ARE erratic.
Depends on the country I have been seeing the higher income countries having around 3 or so by about turn 6.
I’ve been routinely getting 1 a round for each major nation (Germany/Japan and USA/UK) from Rounds 2 through 6 or 7 so that’s what, 8-12 per side? Maybe an extra one for Russia? (Sometimes I hope to get Advanced Artillery for Russia, but I don’t use lots of cash for them.)
Depends on the country I have been seeing the higher income countries having around 3 or so by about turn 6.
Yes, Round 6 is normally the end game.
I’ve been routinely getting 1 a round for each major nation (Germany/Japan and USA/UK) from Rounds 2 through 6 or 7 so that’s what, 8-12 per side? Maybe an extra one for Russia? (Sometimes I hope to get Advanced Artillery for Russia, but I don’t use lots of cash for them.)
Then you must be incredibly lucky. I have yet to play or even hear about a game where each side unlocked the full tech tree. Has anyone else here?
I am starting to see games go well past that now. People are starting to get a better feel for the game and some strategies and such are starting to emerge.
Here is an example this is in turn 9
Improved Artillery: UK, Russia
Rockets: none
Paratroopers: Germany
Improved Industry: Germany
War Bonds: UK, Russia
Mechanized Infantry, Germany
Super Subs: US, Japan
Jets: none
Shipyards: none
Radar:none
Long Range: none
Heavy Bombers: UK
It is Italy’s turn and the only country with a researcher is currently Russia.
Keep in mind that this is online play and some of us have 5 or 6 games going at once so that is why some of our observations may seem way different. I have played around 20 games already.
