Thank you soooo much. You have no idea how frustrating that has been. I’m sure more problems will come up but you have made this game 10x easier to play now. Thank you again.
Hardcore Axis Player, I have a lot of questions
-
2. I, personally, believe that it is a MUST to take Egypt first turn and build an industrial complex there as soon as possible. You can pump two units into Africa per turn from here. This, in my opinion allows you to easily combat a US advance into Africa. It’s more work for America to get into African than Germany at this point. And if all else fails, turtle up in Egypt and stall, while Japan finishes off Russia.
Probably all the vets of Revised and Spring 42 will agree on the necessity of taking Egypt G1. BUT, a complex there is folly. That’s 15 IPC’s spent just to be able to place units in Egypt. Then there’s the continued commitment to Egypt of probably 6-10 IPC’s/turn. German income is likely in the low 40’s and with those investments, Russia may get out of hand and certainly won’t be on her heels. Meanwhile, the Allies can overwhelm Germany’s measly two units/turn. It’s not uncommon to see ~8 US units march through Northern Africa on a given turn. Holding Egypt as long as possible is a smart goal to have but a complex is not the way to do it. Conserve Germany’s units in Africa, land more units there while the med ships are still afloat. Have Japan reinforce with troops and fighters. A complex will do more harm than good and the Allies can certainly crack Egypt before losing Russia.
-
@Fleetwood:
Probably all the vets of Revised and Spring 42 will agree on the necessity of taking Egypt G1. BUT, a complex there is folly. That’s 15 IPC’s spent just to be able to place units in Egypt. Then there’s the continued commitment to Egypt of probably 6-10 IPC’s/turn. German income is likely in the low 40’s and with those investments, Russia may get out of hand and certainly won’t be on her heels. Meanwhile, the Allies can overwhelm Germany’s measly two units/turn. It’s not uncommon to see ~8 US units march through Northern Africa on a given turn. Holding Egypt as long as possible is a smart goal to have but a complex is not the way to do it. Conserve Germany’s units in Africa, land more units there while the med ships are still afloat. Have Japan reinforce with troops and fighters. A complex will do more harm than good and the Allies can certainly crack Egypt before losing Russia.
Hmmm… I can definitely see your point there. You ARE right. It is impossible for Germany to hold Egypt long enough with an IC for Japan to take Russia. I agree with you here. I wouldn’t advise the IC in Egypt.
-
Hey guys I am brand new to these boards. I love playing the Axis, I love the uphill battle. I love being the underdog, being on death’s ground, being forced to play aggressive. That being said, I have a ton of questions.
I’ve played several games and I got the basics down pretty well and I want to start working on strategies:
- How Do I Deal With A Super Defensive Russia:
I play my dad sometimes and he’s always really defensive with Russia. He’ll use 2 turns buying just infantry, and he won’t attack on R1 he’ll just stack guys up in Moscow and protect Caucasus and either Karelia or the adjacent territory if I have taken Karelia. He doesn’t put much pressure on West Russia, which I feel is a mistake. But how do I capitalize and break through the wall? Right now I’ve found mild success with spending G1 and G2 building infantry and bombers, and then using G3/4 to build tanks while the bombers attack their industrial faciltiies. I am not sure if theres a better way.
2)Africa
It seems like the entire game revolves around Africa. If I secure most of the UK territories in Africa I can usually hit magic 84 easily and draw the allies into a war of attrition and win. However my question pertains to securing the area. If the US puts an industrial facility in Brazil and pushes eastward, how should I respond?-
Western Europe
I’ve been tempted to put an industrial facility here and build a navy, but I am not sure if its worth the cost trying to hold off both the UK and US? Would a fighter coastal defense be more suitable? -
Siankang (spelling?)
As Japan I always find this dilema. When I play, the US always puts an industrial facility in Sianking and I am never quite sure if I should push hard to take it, or spend my time trying to take india and come up from middle east? -
How Vulnerable is the US to attack by Japan?
I’ve always been curious about this. If the US makes a hard push for Germany, is it feasible to attack Alaska/Canada with Japan? In this situation I’ve been considering taking Canada as it would allow me to attack either coast with ease. However given how small the US is (3 territories across) it seems difficult to attack because troops can move back and forth easily.
1. Tank rush, on Russia send as much tanks towards Russia as you can
2. Use your med navy to take care of them.
3. Your air force will take care of their landings.
4. Put an industry in Kwangtaung and transport stuff from Japan
5. Well if your playing a long game, yes do it, but put an industry in Alaska. If your playing a 9 city game don’t you needBerlin, Paris, Rome, Tokyo, Manila, Shanghai, Calcutta, Leningrad, and Moscow.
- How Do I Deal With A Super Defensive Russia:
-
I agree with Fleetwood Dan. One variation I use but have not stress tested it enough is adding to the German med fleet. I normally add a CV and transport on G1 but I find it leaves Germany a bit weak initially and allows the russians to push them around a bit early on. I might add to the fleet on G2 but most likely, germany attacks Egy on round 1 and 2 requiring the navy to be in SZ15. G2 might be too late to add to the fleet while they are in seperate sea zones as you might not be able to defend both depending on scenario. Usually on G3 I park my fleet in Sz14 in anticipation of the allies wanting to go into Sz12, I might even have added a sub or two. If you can force the brits to wait until their second turn to build a fleet on Sz8, the US will reinforce it meaning both will move to Sz12 and land in algeria on turn 3 or want to……It takes a big navy to defend against what germany should have, 4 ftrs, 2 bombers (build 1 on G1), 2-3 subs to start and the battleship. The reason for 2 transports is to stack some infantry on Libya while also getting a few tanks on Egy to drive in and out of surrounding territory. The idea is you want to be able to hit the landing in algeria with your Lib infantry, tanks from egypt, air support from europe and if required, a landing with troops from tansports. Most likely this forces the allies to have alots of transports to ensure a large enough joint landing to prevent a german attack. So you pull back to egypt and make them move to Libya which is the kill zone. Again, the allies might have to do a second drop in algeria just to be strong enough to advance. Or they go to Waf but this is much less efficient, the brits require 2 turns for each landing and the americans can’t get there in one turn from the IC. With strategic withdrawl the germans can be in africa for many turns and require a huge investment in resources to disloge them by the allies.
-
Everyone talks about the importance of Germany hitting Egypt on G1. How is this usually done and for what reason? It’r not an easy fight to arrange for germany (especially on G1) and this doesn’t seem like a critical move to me. So what’s the importance of closing the Med? Is this to prevent UK’s destroyer from escaping to the India fleet? I just kill it. Is this to prevent the UK fleet from retreating toward the Med? Usually our UK players move aggressively against the Japanese instead…
So what’s the deal?
-
Everyone talks about the importance of Germany hitting Egypt on G1. How is this usually done and for what reason? It’r not an easy fight to arrange for germany (especially on G1) and this doesn’t seem like a critical move to me. So what’s the importance of closing the Med? Is this to prevent UK’s destroyer from escaping to the India fleet? I just kill it. Is this to prevent the UK fleet from retreating toward the Med? Usually our UK players move aggressively against the Japanese instead…
So what’s the deal?
Well other then Egypt the only defense now is one Inf. Take 1 Bomber from Germany, 1 Fighter from Italy, 1 Inf and 1 Tank on transport to Egypt. Egypt has fallen blitz your way now, it’s worth the 10 or something IPCS
-
Everyone talks about the importance of Germany hitting Egypt on G1. How is this usually done and for what reason? It’r not an easy fight to arrange for germany (especially on G1) and this doesn’t seem like a critical move to me. So what’s the importance of closing the Med? Is this to prevent UK’s destroyer from escaping to the India fleet? I just kill it. Is this to prevent the UK fleet from retreating toward the Med? Usually our UK players move aggressively against the Japanese instead…
So what’s the deal?
Here’s how the attack is arranged. Germany moves the inf, tank Libya to Egypt. They send two units by transport escorted by the German battleship from z14 to z15 to offload into Egypt pending the naval battle. Because of the importance, most people will also send a fighter from Balkans and I’d send the Ukraine fighter as well if it survived.
What’s essential about taking Egypt on G1 is closing the Suez Canal and starting an attack on the British paycheck. The Allies have a significant economic advantage and to help mitigate this, the Axis must make some early gains in Africa to boost their income(because Germany has little to gain in Europe, she’s initially being pushed back). Allied troops will be needed to liberate Africa and those troops aren’t going to Europe, it’s like an essential diversion. The Allies can’t afford not to liberate Africa. The tank and fighter guarding Egypt are also valuable units to destroy. Many players will counterattack Egypt from India, accelerating Japan’s advance.
Let’s say Germany didn’t attack Egypt G1. The alternatives I see are doing nothing or bridging units to Libya in the central med, building naval units in the central med, or attacking the cruiser and taking Gibraltar(to prevent 3 UK fighters from attacking). If Germany stays put, they are vulnerable to an attack by possibly a destroyer(West Med) and for sure 2 fighters(one Egypt, one India seazone) and a bomber(UK). If Germany moves for Gibraltar, they better have taken out the destroyer and taken Gibraltar or they can expect an attack. I can’t see any of these as more productive than attacking Egypt, although the Gibraltar move might not be all bad with the additional pressure it brings in the Atlantic.
-
I have never actually tried polar express. How would you go about doing this (in 1942 and/or revised)? Is an Alaska IC a good idea for this strat?
-
I have never actually tried polar express. How would you go about doing this (in 1942 and/or revised)? Is an Alaska IC a good idea for this strat?
For US: Umm unless it’s too obvious Japan will land there.
For Japan: If you get your hands on it, build and industry as soon as you can. -
Fleetwood,
Thanks for the description… it’s a good move. I usually attack on G2 but it’s a tougher fight at that time.
-
Fleetwood,
Thanks for the description… it’s a good move. I usually attack on G2 but it’s a tougher fight at that time.
Not attacking Egypt on G1 is missing a window of opportunity for G to take Egypt and keep the fleet alive for 1 or 2 more turns. With 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 fighter from Balkans the Germans have 87% odds of winning.
If you don’t attack the UK can attack the Germans on Libya (unless you disembarked 2 units to Libya it but in that case the German fleet can be sunk on UK1). Or the UK can move the DD to SZ14 to prevent an amphibious landing on Egypt (if the G fleet has moved to SZ13 to take Gibraltar) while fortifying it with up to 2-4 inf, 1 arm, 2 ftrs and 1 bomber (you can guess what happens to the German fleet on UK2)EDIT: corrected mediterranean SZ number.
-
Exactly. If there isn’t an attack on Egypt, how does the Med fleet survive UK1? UK would have a dd, fig and bomber at its disposal to attack with.
-
Fleetwood,
Thanks for the description… it’s a good move. I usually attack on G2 but it’s a tougher fight at that time.
Not attacking Egypt on G1 is missing a window of opportunity for G to take Egypt and keep the fleet alive for 1 or 2 more turns. With 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 fighter from Balkans the Germans have 87% odds of winning.
If you don’t attack the UK can attack the Germans on Libya (unless you disembarked 2 units to Libya it but in that case the German fleet can be sunk on UK1). Or the UK can move the DD to SZ6 to prevent an amphibious landing on Egypt while fortifying it with up to 2-4 inf, 1 arm, 2 ftrs and 1 bomber (you can guess what happens to the German fleet on UK2)Uh oh… I’m sensing that my buddy and I have got some rules wrong. The way we have been playing it is impossible to amphibiously attack (or drop troops upon) egypt on G1 as the destroyer is blocking the sea zone and must be destroyed first. If I had another infantry and tank the fight would be a breeze. So it’s possible to move the transport and battleship into that sea zone and have only the battleship participate in the destroyer fight and then you can drop the troops from the transport onto egypt in a subsequent amphibious landing in the same combat round? If so we have had this wrong…
-
Fleetwood,
Thanks for the description… it’s a good move. I usually attack on G2 but it’s a tougher fight at that time.
Not attacking Egypt on G1 is missing a window of opportunity for G to take Egypt and keep the fleet alive for 1 or 2 more turns. With 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 fighter from Balkans the Germans have 87% odds of winning.
If you don’t attack the UK can attack the Germans on Libya (unless you disembarked 2 units to Libya it but in that case the German fleet can be sunk on UK1). Or the UK can move the DD to SZ6 to prevent an amphibious landing on Egypt while fortifying it with up to 2-4 inf, 1 arm, 2 ftrs and 1 bomber (you can guess what happens to the German fleet on UK2)Uh oh… I’m sensing that my buddy and I have got some rules wrong. The way we have been playing it is impossible to amphibiously attack (or drop troops upon) egypt on G1 as the destroyer is blocking the sea zone and must be destroyed first. If I had another infantry and tank the fight would be a breeze. So it’s possible to move the transport and battleship into that sea zone and have only the battleship participate in the destroyer fight and then you can drop the troops from the transport onto egypt in a subsequent amphibious landing in the same combat round? If so we have had this wrong…
Yes, you can do that, but it blocks bombardment
-
Fleetwood,
Thanks for the description… it’s a good move. I usually attack on G2 but it’s a tougher fight at that time.
Not attacking Egypt on G1 is missing a window of opportunity for G to take Egypt and keep the fleet alive for 1 or 2 more turns. With 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 fighter from Balkans the Germans have 87% odds of winning.
If you don’t attack the UK can attack the Germans on Libya (unless you disembarked 2 units to Libya it but in that case the German fleet can be sunk on UK1). Or the UK can move the DD to SZ6 to prevent an amphibious landing on Egypt while fortifying it with up to 2-4 inf, 1 arm, 2 ftrs and 1 bomber (you can guess what happens to the German fleet on UK2)Uh oh… I’m sensing that my buddy and I have got some rules wrong. The way we have been playing it is impossible to amphibiously attack (or drop troops upon) egypt on G1 as the destroyer is blocking the sea zone and must be destroyed first. If I had another infantry and tank the fight would be a breeze. So it’s possible to move the transport and battleship into that sea zone and have only the battleship participate in the destroyer fight and then you can drop the troops from the transport onto egypt in a subsequent amphibious landing in the same combat round? If so we have had this wrong…
Yes, you can do that, but it blocks bombardment
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
-
@Dylan:
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
You can send the bomber but just the 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr give you 87% of winning Egypt on G1. I prefer to send the bomber instead to attack SZ2 .
-
@Dylan:
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
You can send the bomber but just the 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr give you 87% of winning Egypt on G1. I prefer to send the bomber instead to attack SZ2 .
I just (sometimes) send in the fighter from Norway, to kill the transport.
-
@Dylan:
@Dylan:
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
You can send the bomber but just the 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr give you 87% of winning Egypt on G1. I prefer to send the bomber instead to attack SZ2 .
I just (sometimes) send in the fighter from Norway, to kill the transport.
In Z2?
-
@Dylan:
@Dylan:
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
You can send the bomber but just the 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr give you 87% of winning Egypt on G1. I prefer to send the bomber instead to attack SZ2 .
I just (sometimes) send in the fighter from Norway, to kill the transport.
In Z2?
yeah.
-
@Dylan:
@Dylan:
@Dylan:
Damn it, I was doing that (bombarding after the fight,) but I then just send the bomber instead I guess.
You can send the bomber but just the 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr give you 87% of winning Egypt on G1. I prefer to send the bomber instead to attack SZ2 .
I just (sometimes) send in the fighter from Norway, to kill the transport.
In Z2?
yeah.
If you want to kill that transport, you have to kill the battleship first and have at least one attacking unit survive. So, sending just the fighter is unlikely to do the Axis any good.
Suggested Topics
