@nubnumber1 just like a fighter unit in A&A is meant to represent many aircraft,think of a destroyer unit representing a group (flotilla I think is the term) of destroyers.Military history has many examples of small,yet determined, forces delaying the progress of larger forces. eg 101st airborne in Bastogne dec 1944
How to best threaten German Baltic fleet?
-
You don’t have to sink the German fleet, just force them to shelter behind Denmark for safety.
If they actually have a fleet large enough to stand toe to toe with the Allied Atlantic fleet, the Allies have won concur it means Moscow won’t fall for a very long time. Having multiple German carriers is a guaranteed L for the Axis.
-
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in How to best threaten German Baltic fleet?:
You don’t have to sink the German fleet, just force them to shelter behind Denmark for safety.
If they actually have a fleet large enough to stand toe to toe with the Allied Atlantic fleet, the Allies have won concur it means Moscow won’t fall for a very long time. Having multiple German carriers is a guaranteed L for the Axis.
That fleet does allow it to keep trading norway so sinking the fleet is not required but it does help.
-
It’s only a problem if you’re attacking Norway, like if you’re focusing on the Mediterranean or Japan.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato and Norway is nearly impossible to capture and hold against a skilled Axis player who leaves a big stack in Finland and can support the counterattack with the German Air Force. The Allies to do a KGF strategy and the Axis needs to be focusing on capturing Moscow for the Norway landing to succeed.
Otherwise Normandy, S France, and Greece are much easier beachheads.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris
If the units are in finland they are not near moscow.
If the airforce is used against finland its not used against russia.Having that fleet there allows the germans to just move units from W-ger to norway to trade and to use those finland troops to attack moscow. They are a lot closer.
But even if you have a big stack in finland and no navy whats stopping me from dropping 2-4 inf and 1-2 AA guns in norway? Either your big stack moves in and its gone next round. Or you airforce is used and risks losing a plane or 2. Its not like the AA in London is doing anything anyway.,
-
@shadowhawk you are talking about 2 or 3 loaded transports with 20-30 PUs of value. Germany takes it back losing a plane and a couple ground units. Maybe doesn’t even lose the plane.
Better off trading units in Normandy where you can adequately protect those transports instead of a suicide mission. The Allies can come out ahead in the exchanges.
-
It depends on the size of your fleet, the 3 fighter scamble isnt always that big a difference.
Attacking norway + denmark also requires him to trade both or lose the NO as well.Also it gives you a staging ground for going to leninggrad which causes him to lose even more NO income. He can ignore Normandy as you cant do much from that location, its only 2 ipcs not a big deal.
Norway is 8ipcs lost.So its not 20-30pu its more like 6-12pu, as the AA guns from london are basically free.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in How to best threaten German Baltic fleet?:
You don’t have to sink the German fleet, just force them to shelter behind Denmark for safety.
If they actually have a fleet large enough to stand toe to toe with the Allied Atlantic fleet, the Allies have won concur it means Moscow won’t fall for a very long time. Having multiple German carriers is a guaranteed L for the Axis.
I couldn’t disagree more. That fleet keeps the allies from landing troops in Europe if it’s big enough. Except it’s not supposed to be big enough to go toe to toe, it needs to be big enough that it can’t be moved.
Yes Russia survives longer, but if you know what you’re doing with Japan that’s a non factor.
Instead of investing in land units to fail
miserably at defending the dozen or so places an allied fleet can strike without reprisals put those IPCs into a navy and prevent the landing in the first place. -
Then the Allies can just hit the Mediterranean instead, while there wouldn’t be enough German units to defend Rome. In my experience it’s quite hard for the German fleet to advance into the Atlantic, away from land-based air support.
And German units don’t have to be in those dozen territories. Per AndrewAAGamer’s principles, you just need German units in a small number of areas to counterattack:
Western Germany (covers Holland Belgium, Northern Italy and Denmark, also Southern France and Normandy Bordeaux for mechanized units)
Paris (covers Holland Belgium, Northern Italy, Western Germany Normandy Bordeaux, and Southern France, also Denmark for mechanized units)
Southern Italy (protects Rome)
Norway (Scandanavian flank)
-
Let them move into the med. US has to truck transports in a chain which would need to be protected at Gibraltar AND in the med. A large German fleet full of carriers just dumps the air power to the med. Fighters can reach from sz112 to the Italian coast. They can’t cover both.
If both Germany and Italy invest heavily in fleets from the start the allies have to push in with their fleets to protect the transports exposing a weakness in the supply chain. With heavy German naval power you have the flexibility to cut that off and the allies can’t push or sustain an attack. They get one or two dumps of troops but not enough to keep the beach head. It will fail without continuous reinforcements.
It’s minimal investment for Germany to build that navy. They start with most the fighters. USA has to build from zero. If the axis remove the transport protection that buys them 3-4 turns until they face another significant threat via invasion. That’s enough time to make another second push on Russia. They’ll make no more money because Japan ate up Central Asia and is bombing their factories to oblivion from Khazikstan.
Give it a try, plus when allies push their navy into the med Germany can just convoy the hell out of UK freely. I’m telling you go HARD navy with Germany.
You gonna spend all that money on German land units on the continent that are just gonna die. Allies can just pick the weakest part. Spend it on ships and fighters instead. Production wise it’s hard to keep up with just a ground war.
Trust me I’ve been playing with this for years and I can’t find a reliable way to push it. Best I can do is find 40% odds victory to establish the beach head with allies and those are not good odds to stake the game on. Fail at that and it’s over, there’s no coming back. Allies get one shot at it.
-
@Pinch1 i must say you have a solid point.
When germany has a fleet of a BB (repaired Bismarck) and its G1 fleet purchase of a destroyer, carrier and sub, parked left of denmark that is a problem for the allies.
If he buys a sub a turn he has enough to attack a pretty strong allied fleet next to gibraltar.
Yes russia will be stronger but Japan will grow and a steady german march of 10 or more inf buy per turn starting G2 will ultimately push russia back.I struggle for a solution and have been thinking of chucking US troops to the middle east via West Africa.
It is out of german range and fast units can reach egypt in 2 turns from there.
This needs to be combined with a sub warfare against germany and italy. -
@Pinch1 i have made a topic on the forum called the Sahara express
-
Yes that’s my typical buy for Germany round one. I like to park that initial fleet off sz109 to convoy the UK for a turn or two.
Same thing for Russia, you just need to pump 10 infantry, or a combo with some artillery, but 10 of those for a couple turns will do the trick to push Russia back u til turn 6 or 7.
If you follow GHG’s method for floating bridge you can have 2 BB and Three loaded carriers ready to go for turn 4.
It doesn’t take Germany much to match that. They have the one BB already and most the planes. US doesn’t want to take that. The matched carrier fleets favor the defender. Even still I like to have one more carrier and BB than the US. The fleet is big enough to withstand a suicide run by UK, repair and repel the US. All that money you might spend on land units to defend Scandinavia and Germany can go into fleet instead. It just does a better job covering the north. A single stack on France can react to landing attempts from the south and the Italians can hold their own for the initial push.
It really is a big problem for the allies that I can’t quite work through. Normally time factors the allies but if allies ignore Japan they will have flipped the economic advantage to the Axis and all of a sudden the tables have turned.
-
@Pinch1 UK can always put a blokker in 110 so Ger fleet can´t reach the allied fleet. And with some fighters on london Italy can´t can open those away but that is not a long term solution.
Trying to convoy italy and germany by sending subs into the Med and chucking troops via West Africa to middle east to fight there might be an answer?
-
It helps but it’s not a reliable win condition. The blocker in 110 only works if you sit the fleet in sz112. If Germans have a powerful enough fleet they can keep it in sz110. Which can still be blocked but with 4 or more carriers the air power still threatens the transports left behind. One or two landings getting through are not a concern. I think the Axis can handle losing Italy for a turn even.
The beauty of the large German fleet and the mid sized Italian fleet is that if the Allies want to commit to Rome its a hard battle and you can see it coming. The German fleet covers any meaningful advance to the North. Normandy, Holland, Western Germany, Denmark and Norway are safe. It can be completely empty of troops. The middling Italian fleet will lose but it will hurt the Allied fleet to the point it would get destroyed in a fight with with the German fleet. It’ll get trapped in the Med cut off from reinforcements.
Its ok to let the Allies in the Mediterranean. They will land a few amphibious assaults into mainland Europe but it will peter out. I tried stacking troops in Africa to draw from but the issue again is that takes time and the Axis can prepare. Germans don’t need to worry about protecting the northern half of Europe so they can fly some planes down south or convoy the crap out of UK. All the Axis land units in southern part can cover Northern and Southern Italy. It’s not too difficult to stack those two territories enough to survive the initial wave.
There’s always a chance of success but the point is it’s low. Like 20-30%. Japan can even land planes in Italy via Ukraine or something if needed. Japan can spare a few planes.
Its a tough nut to crack. I tried multiple options:
1: Suicide run with UK air power to weaken the German fleet for the Yanks. FAILURE. Germans can just sit their fleet next to Naval base and tank hits in carriers and battleships. Planes land in territory. Germans go before US and repair, fleet back to optimal, Axis lose maybe 30 or so IPCS in cheap subs/destroyers, allies lose over 100 IPCs in expensive airpower that was vital for covering the fleets and will take a long time to rebuild.
2: Americans stack West Africa over time then move all transports into med, land 3 or so larger waves of troops into southern Europe. FAILURE! Takes too much time and is highly telegraphed. Was able to move enough troops to stack the odds in favor of Axis for Amphibious assaults. Allies landing in Southern France with all of UK’s and America’s available airpower. Beachhead lasted several turns but enough troops to cover Italy. Managed to liberate and trade France a few times, Eventually the troops ran out and the yanks had to pull back to protect the reinforcements.
3: Spanish Beachhead. This was interesting but ultimately too slow. I liked how Allies can easily stack a lot of airbases to cover Gibraltar so protecting the reinforcements is cheap. What I dislike about it is it opens the middle east up more to the Axis and Germany can just roll tanks and mechs through Turkey and dominates the middle east. That is if Japan hasn’t done so already. The economy tips drastically for the Axis and it’s basically GG at that point. Allies don’t have the positional strength to overcome the economic deficit.
4: Tried a big full fleet buy of submarines for US to see if that’s enough to push the German fleet. FAILURE. It’s possible for the Germans to build up enough to withstand. And with the sacrifice of purchasing land units for boots on the ground just gives the Axis another turn of breathing room to build defenses.
The one thing I haven’t tried is full on abandon Europe and lay waste Japan. I don’t think that will work either but you never know. Germany will probably just convoy London without the threat of America and crush Russia. Germany becomes the new Japan if it’s ignored. It needs the pressure to force the spend away from Eastern front. It it’s allowed to spend towards the east Russia doesn’t stand a chance.
I started running this with Axis in response to GHG’s call to battle Floating bridge combined Middle Earth with Allies. I couldn’t find an answer to this for a while. I kept getting owned by the floating bridge no matter what I did because the Allies had COMPLETE tactical freedom over all of Europe. No matter where you defend on land, there will always be a chink in the armor and the Allies can dismantle Germany piece by piece if you give them that strategic freedom. On a whim I decided to try buying HARD German navy. It was like “what if I took all the IPCs I put into defending land into defending the seas instead” and the results were surprising. It is “THE” counter to Floating bridge Middle Earth combo. moving into the Med seems to be the only option for the Allies. I’m sure there’s a way to get reasonable odds in there, just not overwhelming balance tipping. I feel like the large German navy strat is tipping the balance.
-
@Pinch1 I don’t think @Arthur-Bomber-Harris was quite right to say the carrier buy is a guaranteed L for the axis, but the problem he points to is a real one. If Germany is buying significant naval early, it is not buying land units. And if it’s air is in 110 or 112, it can’t threaten Bryansk or even Belarus. It makes it very easy for the allies to block them in Bryansk and prevent them from getting their objectives in the USSR. They can try to make up for it later but they will be doing so with less income than they otherwise would have and against a soviet union that has more income than it otherwise would have. It will typically be easier and safer to drop carriers in 112 when you are making 80 ipcs than doing so early and trying to keep up with UK/US naval spending on one side and Soviet spending on the other.
-
I don’t find it much of a problem. Its only a problem if you lose patience and deviate from the game plan. Initial German buys of about 20 infantry is all you need to contain Russia until about turn 6-7. That’s 60 bucks out of the 250 or so you get for the first 5 turns. The rest goes into stacking the navy. I typically find the German advance becomes deadlocked at Ukraine-Bryansk until later in the game. It requires intervention from Japan circa turn 5-6 once they’ve dealt with China to keep Russia back.
A wise Soviet will retreat and consolidate, gathering strength until they can push the front back. even if they do this, it’s 2-3 turns before they breach enemy territory. By that time Japan has secured economic parity for the Axis.
The Ultimate objective is economic superiority before the Allies gain foothold in western Europe. Germany just needs to keep Russia in a pocket. Japan will handle the rest. By the time Russia is ready to push back Japan is eating up Siberia and is knocking a the back door of Moscow. Once India is dealt with a small stack of bombers can hammer Russian factories erasing their income entirely. Without reinforcements The Germans will overcome Soviet defenses. It’s just a matter of time.
The real paradigm shift is once Japan become so strong the tempo of the game shifts, and all of a sudden time favors the Axis because the money favors the Axis. Even if the economy is the same the Allies need to cross oceans to succeed, an endeavor which requires increased spending for naval dominance. This will be something they have already failed to achieve. Japan will have enough naval assets to rival the Americans 2-1 and Germany will be matching. By that time it’s insurmountable.
Russia can hold on and fight Germany for 10-15 turns if it likes. It doesn’t matter because Japan has probably won the game by then.
-
@Pinch1 one thing you could do is try this in a league game and see how it plays. There is a range of skill levels there, it is easy to join, and fun. And the best way to assess how well a strategy works is to play it of course. Games are typically played with a significant allied bid which is meant to balance against the innate axis advantage in the OOB game.
I’ll just say that in my experience, the strategic choices the axis make have trade offs and a way the allies win is by recognizing what the costs of different axis choices are and exploiting them. If, for example, Japan focuses on Russia, it becomes harder for it to take/hold India and the money islands. Or if it can do that too, it means that the US is focusing on Germany which will make the German naval builds harder to defend. And if Germany is not putting sufficient pressure on the Soviets to get into caucasus and volgograd, it both impacts their income (making it harder to match US/UK spending in the atlantic), and makes it easier for the Soviets to deal with pressure from Japan too (which at this point in the game is going to be a small fraction of what the Germans and Soviets have). The Soviets don’t need to break through Germany early, they just need to keep them contained before they get in reach of Volgograd and Caucasus.
-
What I’m finding is Germany has no issues keeping up with American naval build. It’s quite the opposite.
Take the floating bridge by GHG for example, a fleet 2 BB and 3 full carriers, a destroyer and cruiser, a few sets of loaded transports is pretty much the first 5 full turns of purchasing for USA. Factor in American needs to replenish the landing forces every turn, if that is 4 seats of transports it’s a minimum 28 IPCs spent on ground forces. Doesn’t leave much to build the fleet past turn 5.
Germany needs 1 BB and 3 Carriers and 1 fighter to match. 80 IPCs where USA had to build from scratch. Carrier fleets are defensive by nature and thus USA needs to overspend to overcome and still have protection to cover transports. Anything America builds Germany has 2 turns to prepare for before it’s in a position to affect them. If the troops never land, Germany doesn’t care how long it takes put Russia in a box. If USA tries to outpace the Germans enough it sacrifices too much in the Pacific to overcome Japan and it loses Hawaii. The economy become favorable for the Axis by turn 8-9. Allies have up until turn 6 to have purchased everything they need to affect the outcome in Europe which is not enough.
As far as a bid is concerned, yeah that changes things, but OOB this has been my most sound observation. It’s the most heavily tilted strategy I have seen for the Axis. The use of going hard German navy has been really effective for me. I used to pay GHG’s floating bridge middle earth combo and that was killer. I could beat the Axis every time, no bids. I agree that there are tradeoffs that the Allies need to exploit. I’m just having a hard time seeing the exploit in this variation. I’m not saying there isn’t an answer, I’m just saying I’m not seeing it yet and I have a pretty good eye for the exploits. You’re welcome to try it.
Suggested Topics
