I agree with you Unknown. Would be fun to try but I think an experienced player could easily thwart it.
I firmly believe that any major German naval build is a complete waste of time, unless it is done after and only after hevily fortifying the Eastern front. And then only to support Italy in the mediteranian little by little!
Mediterranean… wait a moment…
G1: 1 IC in France, 3 Tanks, do the usual German attack (3 British Fleets sunk and 3 Russian Territories captured), with an emphasis on holding Ukraine. Move Italian fleet to the Sea Zone South of France and have them capture Gibaltrar. Have them build a Transport
G2: Build 6 Transports south of France, while positioning enough Infantry/Tanks (such as the 3 you just built) in France/Algeria to use them. Build a Carrier and 4 Transports if Britain still went Bomber happy (given that you got an IC, that’s probably a yes). Focus your eastern front forces even more in Ukraine. Italy lands units in Ukraine, or lets Germany load units in its transport/s, then moves to Caucasus
G3: Invade Caucasus or UK, probably the Caucasus. Landing 14-16 ground units in Caucasus, along with a large ground force and possibly air force, should be rather difficult for Russia to handle. In the mean time, build 6 Infantry in France and more Infantry+Bombers in Germany, blocking a UK invasion.
Now we’re getting somewhere, I still think 6 transports might be too much in one turn but the complex idea along with maybe a few transports a turn might work and the odd warship.
It will allow you to capture africa, threaten the caucasus and potentially threaten England. Now you’ve got some defense for your fleet with the Italian support.
This could be effective
I was messing around with this in solo play and I came up with something interesting on the japan side of things. This might work well with the german transport idea or just as a separate japan strat to give a regular Germany an easier time of things. Basically you start this out the same as mentioned for japan, except instead of hitting mainland USA you send all their boats and invade Hawaii, and Philippines and Alaska. This puts you with about 4-5 ground troops and a lot of planes(you move all carriers east) in strike range of west US. This forces a US reaction. Then on turn 2 you just move everything back west and then take Aus and the other islands with all the troops in the Pacific. What this does is slows down your china a bit(but you still can take a few countries) and denies US 5 via loosing Hawaii as well as locks down your 5 ipc no in short order. You also stalled 1 turn of US production, or at least 70% of their production, which then has to walk across to Eastern USA which will take 1-2 turns depending on what they built to counter you. If they built all tanks they will have too many tanks for how many transports they have which is another plus. You also get the income from Alaska and Hawaii on round 1. There is room to grab one of the 4 ipc British islands on round 1 as well I believe. Hopefully it messes up their supply lines to Africa for a bit! This is just a neat idea, and not necessarily the end all be all strat. You could even consider killing the the US carrier on J2(is it close enough given a range of 3 for fighters on a carrier that moves towards its target?) to give Italy more breathing room for its navy.
Ok, now suppose you’d be capable to take the US succesfully. At what costs would it be achieved? If you needed to build up during two or three turns (and have to pull back ground-forces and fighters), the eastern front is completely lost imo. This is because you have no airforce left. Any counterattack you plan vs the SU, will be done by armor, which leaves them vulnerable to a counteroffensive. You might be capable to take out the US, but lose Germany herself. China will be invincible and the UK-powerhouse thanks to their empire gargantuesk.
Therefore even if you managed to take and hold the US, Germany would be confined to the Americas at best. You now find yourself in a situation where: the US is down, both SU and UK have all (or almost all) their NO’s. Germany and Italy will probably be lost or find themselves confined to Western Europe/Germany at best (losing a NO and having only 10 unit-production-capacity).
I think you missed what i was saying. This is a feint. It forces a reaction but you never plan to attack. You feint and grab their NO at the same time as making yours easier to get. Its a cash grab not an actual assault on US. after this you are pretty much done with USA. Unless of course they don’t respond and you can take WU on J2.
@kendrick
I was commenting wodan’s ideas.
Your strat seems pretty sound at first sight.
A few problems with that idea.
UK can probably retake alaska or atleast weaken your forces there with 1 inf 1 arm.
US keeps there NO because they’d have midway, wake, and Solomon.
You best keep your destroyer alive or else a sub drop alone will secure there coast (just the fact they can sink your carriers in response)
US can easily shift 1 inf, 1 art to central US, pull back the AA gun, and keep there planes in range to retake LA, stalling them at most 1 turn from africa.
I think you’d be better off hitting Hawaii and buying 2 transports + DD and shift the cruiser to japan, then threating a turn 2 grab of alaska + western canada and setting up for a train. The interesting thing as well is if you move the BB to wake and have all 3 carriers plus your DD and within range and hit Hawaii there is absolutely no fleet purchase the US can make that can survive an attack on J2. Not sure what can be done to capitalize on that but hey.
