What happens if you SAVE your money G1?

[Andi]

I see! Good explanation. Thank you!

[Young Grasshopper]

@Gargantua:

There are still more questions…

what happens if you JUST build the acc?  And save 14?  or some other combination like the sub?  Does that provide you with any extra advantage?

German income for G2 is spoken for with 10 transports, therefore, the only reason I would save $14 is for a tac bomber and an infantry, but that won’t help me as much as a sub and destroyer when I will need to bust through a SZ during the invasion.

[JeffM]

On G2 if you DO decide to go Sea Lion it must be staged in SZ 112 to prevent blocking by the British Navy; HOWEVER, the German Player can build additional attack ships in SZ 113 on G2 which can be used to assist in Sea Lion as well… if 112 is occupied by the German fleet, any ships that you build in 113 can also participate in the invasion due to there being now way to block them.

[shadowguidex]

Young Grasshopper…again, maybe you didn’t understand the point of this idea…this isn’t a Sealion strategy where you have to build the exact same units you’ve always done…it’s not a Sealion strategy at all…it’s a flexible idea that allows you to react with Germany in response to allied moves rather than the other way around.  If UK does maximum protect against Sealion then don’t spend the money to commit to Sealion, it’s that simple.  Why are you trying to gameplan around a maximum Sealion protect from UK, that’s totally against the point of this idea…you only Sealion if UK doesn’t max protect.

If UK pulls their ships out of the Med giving up the NO to Italy when Germany hasn’t built much fleet, then it’s win-win…Italy can then take control of Gibraltar easily and Germany can gear up for Barbarossa and didn’t waste money on a CV that isn’t necessary.

Also, in case you do have a ripe situation for Sealion (maybe Taranto raid occured, or Italy sinks the Med fleet) and UK didn’t build 9 INF, then you might not even need 10 TRN to take control of UK, maybe only 4, 2, or 7, or maybe UK totally botched and you only need your initial TRN.

[Gargantua]

A great Axis and Allies general once said - when facing the National Advantage “Joint Strike” in revised.

“There is no greater threat to German security than the joint strike. As the allies save thier pennies, the Germans are FORCED to defend against any logistically plausible attack. **It’s like fighting invisible units, with a combined IPC value that can morph into whatever is needed.**”

This is not a Sea-Lion or Barbarossa strategy, this is a “What holes can I poke in my opponents defense after his build” strategy.

It works JUST aswell against the Russians, as it does the British.  And for the Record, the only person who is going to suffer from the “Only build 10 units”  Are the allies….

Germany can build in WGR, and GER  - 20 units, that can if required, be placed in Sz113 and Sz112, and still make it to England.

The British if they don’t build 10 men, are facing some serious challenges, and you haven’t locked in your entire german purchase into Navy. The Russians are also in trouble if they don’t play Leningrad correctly.

More thoughts everyone… please.

[Young Grasshopper]

Ya…. Maybe I didn’t understand, or maybe I’m so pro-Sealion I’m blind. However, I will make my point once more and than shut up. If Germany holds their income G1, it will restrict their chances of being able to invade London from within their choice of 2 different sea zones, hence if you take away an option, your overall strategies become hindered. Where is the flexibility in that? I get that it is advantageous to wait and see what your opponent does, but the window for sealion is small and every UK player I play against, defends London First and does everything else second. So in the words of the great Forest Gump… “that’s all I’ve got to say about that”.

[Bischoffshof]

As UK why not just hold your IPC’s round 1 as well? It’s not as if Germany will be able to attack that very next turn. If Germany can wait so can you. You are essentially in the same position as you were on turn 1 just you both have larger amounts of money.

[Clyde85]

God, I have been on the recieving end of this one before and its has got to be one of the most annoying games of 1940 global I have ever played! The problem was that my opponet was doing this for the enitre axis, except Italy( kinda hard not to spend 10IPC) and it really created a problem for me as the allies.
        The issue, and why this worked for him in the end (or atleast got him close, we couldnt finish the game due to an accident) was because the Axis powers already have large armies on the board. If you were to compare the total IPC value of the Axis armies against the Allied armies, the difference is quite staggering. Japan espically, their armies value is enormous and dwarfs the total IPC value of all forces against it in the pacific, including the Soviet forces. This does, in theroy, give the Axis a bit more flexabilty with their buys on their opening turns. Now, in Germanys case, they have the abality to grow their economy by quite abit on G1. Germany can easily jump from 30IPC to 42IPC (conservative estimate) by the end of its first turn. Add to this the 19IPCs it gets for taking Paris and 10IPCs for having 2 NOs, and at the end of G1 Germany has a cash in hand value of 101IPCs!!! In my game the player use this as a reserve and was able to replace losses, repair faculities, and place huge builds in any area of the game he wanted. When the US got into the war he was able to match it build for build with Germany.    
        He also had mild success with this same stratgey as Japan, being that Japan dosnt start the game at war with several major powers with large economies. Granted, China is annoying, but its no Britian, although its no France either, which is a good and bad thing. Either way, Japan isnt threatened right away, so can afford to do this a bit more with out as big of a risk to screwing itself over long term. It takes Japan about 2 turns to reach the resever level of Germany, with 104IPC by the end of its second turn.
   Needless to say that the Axis being able to throw down such large forces, aimed at any front for their choosing is a major advantage, and makes it difficult for the Allies to counter. One of the odd side effects is that it forces the allies to spend all of their IPCs every turn, needing to have the forces ready incase the axis strike out of nowhere. It will turn your game into a series of massive and intense axis offensives, and where or if their offensives run afoul, it will become a long drwan out slug-fest

[JeffM]

@Bischoffshof:

As UK why not just hold your IPC’s round 1 as well? It’s not as if Germany will be able to attack that very next turn. If Germany can wait so can you. You are essentially in the same position as you were on turn 1 just you both have larger amounts of money.

UK can only buy 10 units per round with its major factory… if they held off and did not buy anything the first round and it turned out that Germany was going to go for a Sea Lion, the best the UK could do on turn 2 would be to buy 10 units, which would not be enough to hold off the invasion on Germany’s turn 3.

[JimmyHat]

My concern is that the Axis, Germany in particular hold the initiative.  Now you want to wait and see what UK does so that Germany can respond?  I don’t understand why you would want to cede that control?  The Axis are on the clock, saving money doesn’t seem to be a wise idea unless we are talking about Italy saving for a major fleet purchase I2.

[shadowguidex]

@JimmyHat:

My concern is that the Axis, Germany in particular hold the initiative.  Now you want to wait and see what UK does so that Germany can respond?  I don’t understand why you would want to cede that control?  The Axis are on the clock, saving money doesn’t seem to be a wise idea unless we are talking about Italy saving for a major fleet purchase I2.

Too each their own, you don’t need to use this tactic.  It forfeits a bit of initiative in favor of flexibility.  To me, the unseen unspent IPCs are more worrisome than units on the board.

[Gargantua]

When talking about “Initiative”  think about the bigger picture, in the smaller picture.

Is adding 3 units, with NO attack value (acc 2x transports)  G1 instead of G2 (or a different G2 build)  Really losing the initiative?

It’s one aircraft carrier, because the transports basically don’t matter.  OMG you are on the clock!  Say you are right, where ON AVERAGE, is your acc on G2?  PROBABLY SZ 112!

If you plan an ALL barbarossa, and don’t want to build the ships, this is “a” way to go.  And if your opponent gaffs england and falls for this, even better!  Thank you for input everyone.

[JeffM]

@shadowguidex:

@JimmyHat:

My concern is that the Axis, Germany in particular hold the initiative.  Now you want to wait and see what UK does so that Germany can respond?  I don’t understand why you would want to cede that control?  The Axis are on the clock, saving money doesn’t seem to be a wise idea unless we are talking about Italy saving for a major fleet purchase I2.

Too each their own, you don’t need to use this tactic.  It forfeits a bit of initiative in favor of flexibility.  To me, the unseen unspent IPCs are more worrisome than units on the board.

I completely agree… I don’t think that you really give up anything by holding your cash on G1, and it gives you a lot of options depending on what the UK player does on their first turn.  I am going to try this in my next game.

[shadowguidex]

@Gargantua:

When talking about “Initiative”  think about the bigger picture, in the smaller picture.

Is adding 3 units, with NO attack value (acc 2x transports)  G1 instead of G2 (or a different G2 build)  Really losing the initiative?

It’s one aircraft carrier, because the transports basically don’t matter.  OMG you are on the clock!  Say you are right, where ON AVERAGE, is your acc on G2?  PROBABLY SZ 112!

If you plan an ALL barbarossa, and don’t want to build the ships, this is “a” way to go.  And if your opponent gaffs england and falls for this, even better!  Thank you for input everyone.

Exactly my point.  It’s totally upside.  I’ve always hated the “requirement” that everyone has to build a CV on G1.  The CV is in support of Sealion, but if Sealion isn’t your plan anyway, how do you still get UK to spend on INF…you keep your cards and don’t show them on G1, that’s how.

[suprise attack]

By not spending your $ or very little of it on G1 then the Allies have to guess what your up to and if they guess wrong then you could take advantage of their move. Like what Garg said Leningrad and London would have to make deployments  to cover them selves, in the event that Germany on 2 could do to them (smash either one or both)
  At first I was Skeptical, but after reading this thread I believe it could work out rather well

[Jennifer]

I still say, as England, I am going to blow 2 rounds of money on Homeland Defense and just end the threat of Sea Lion once and for all.

[gsh34]

@Cmdr:

I still say, as England, I am going to blow 2 rounds of money on Homeland Defense and just end the threat of Sea Lion once and for all.

Agreed.  Unless you are one of those UK players that want to bait the Germans into doing Sealion.

[Jennifer]

@gsh34:

@Cmdr:

I still say, as England, I am going to blow 2 rounds of money on Homeland Defense and just end the threat of Sea Lion once and for all.

Agreed.  Unless you are one of those UK players that want to bait the Germans into doing Sealion.

Then I am buying warships off S. Africa and evacuating England…(by that I mean flying away.)

[shadowguidex]

@Cmdr:

I still say, as England, I am going to blow 2 rounds of money on Homeland Defense and just end the threat of Sea Lion once and for all.

Great!  Then I don’t need to waste money on Naval buys, I can just do the TRN or skip Sealion and go right to Barbarossa.

[Omega1759]

@Cmdr:

Shadow, why not move the puny British fleet in SZ 98 out and get it to SZ 39?  (Not the aircraft, the fleet)

I have seen that done and worked surprisingly well for the British…

I find this discussion thread very interesting… Very interesting even!

Looking at the fleet battles, there is really no reason to go crazy about defending 112. Let’s assume for a second that the English fleet is wiped out except for the cruiser in 91 and the destroyer from 109. Although, Normandy will survive… So in that case, why not going for not 1, but 3 sub ($18 IPC)

So UK will have 4 planes attacking with the destroyer and cruiser. Since the attacking destroyer is present, the subs can serve as fodder.

4 planes at 3 + 1 destroyer + 1 cruiser against 1 damaged battleship, 1 cruiser, 3 fighters and 3 subs is not a good bet at all, even with option to retreat… Then, what’s next for UK?! Cannot build fleet, too many subs. Need to build infantry and put fleet out of range of all the subs (if not, that’s crazy). Next turn, one sub gets to work in 109, 1 in 119. 2 more subs get to 118  and 108 (assuming 1 sub survived the naval battles of first round)  and the other one gets to work in (with or without the rest of the fleet).  How will the UK get out of trouble with this? The best they can do is to kill one of these four subs (with the 109), and they will lose the destroyer after the first turn. They can’t build fleet again either so they go land. Then, just starve them off with subs!

And with these 3 subs, how about adding a bomber? If Italy takes gibraltar, the bombers can come in quite handy!