@burmaboi The rules consistently use the term “into” when referencing the ending space of a unit’s move and “through” when referencing spaces passed through along the way. So, an air unit must conduct combat if it moves “into” an enemy-occupied space, but not “through” one (other than being fired upon by AA guns). Also, on page 14, the rules mention AA guns in “flown over” territories, which indicates that enemy-occupied territories may be moved through, and the Official Rules Clarifications make the same reference on page 2 in point 6 regarding AA guns.
Royal Air Force
-
Here’s an idea for UK that I wanted to throw around:
First round: Build 2 fighters, have the US build an AC and 2 trn, send existing fighters to Russia.
Second round: send fighters to Russia, build 2 trn and 1 fighterFor every subsequent round, just keep building 4 inf and fighters whenever you can, sending all the fighters to Russia, to make it more difficult for Japan to take territory there. The fighters could be sent to Karelia or Moscow or even Novo. The 4 inf build per round can be used to help the US take back Africa and take WEU and also reiforce Karelia via Norway.
By the time Japan has enough forces to seroiusly threaten Russia, there will be so many UK fighters there that Germany will fall from US shuck-shuck first.
-
Well, I think it could work. But I don’t think it is the optimum approach because it is always nice to have a 1-2-3 UK, US, USSR punch against Germany. But since there won’t be as many UK infantry, the UK punch will be weaker despite having more fighters (i.e. less infantry to soak up hits during the 1st strafe against E. Europe). I usually like having 4 transports and sending 8 inf. each turn to the continent although I have done only 3 transports before.
-
Yeah, this could work, although I don’t think you need the ftr on rd 2.
I think you go 2 ftrs rd 1, 3 trns rd 2, then 6 inf (and save IPC till you can get another ftr).
With 2 ftrs you’d have 5 on the board with Russia’s 2 that is 7, which should be good early on, plus US ftrs.
I agree with Baker, I usually like 4 trns, but 3 can work out good esp if there is a fight in Afr or Middle East. You only need 17-18 IPC to fill 3 trns.
An added Benefit though, is when Ger pulls its AA from WE, you won’t have to worry about losing tanks.
But I perfer the 1-2-3 on EE, rather than 1-2 on WE.
-
An added Benefit though, is when Ger pulls its AA from WE, you won’t have to worry about losing tanks.
But I perfer the 1-2-3 on EE, rather than 1-2 on WE.
I also prefer EE over WE, but if WE is weakly defended then I’ll go there. But this plan also weakens your attack on WE (with only 4 inf instead of 6 or 8 ).Â
The important point really is that the UK does the first strafe or attack after Germany’s move and will therefore take more losses against the German defense (even with more attacking hits). You don’t want to be losing fighters in an attack when you can lose infantry instead.
-
Yeah, I’ll pick off WE if it is lightly defeded 1-2 inf, but otherwise I like to load up in Kar with US and UK so I can help out Mos, Cauc, Ukr, and EE.
And you can also easily help out the Middle East (via Cauc) if nec.
It may take a turn longer to reinforce Kar, but I think it just gives you many more options than if you committed a large stack of UK-US troops to WE, while leaving Russia on her own.
-
This is actually a more viable approach than you might think. As Baker points out the lost infantry weakens the punch of the Brits when they do attack but the added fighters increase the amount of territories in Europe they can hit. The corresponding pressure on Germany’s backside ie WEuro and Deutschland becomes very great quickly. Consider that by turn 8 the UK could have ~10ftrs against these squares. This in conjunction with the usual US pressure and the danger of a 1-2 amphib punch means the Germans have to commit more to defense which means less against Karelia and the fronts and therefore a much lower risk from a lurch. Essentially the question is where is the law of diminishing returns for inf purchases with 24ipcs the UK can buy 8inf or 4inf ftr(5units) and lose only 3 units and 4pips a turn. At the same time they are spending much less on naval units so for at least 4-5 turns this will be a net gain for the Brits as their air will be offset by less naval expenditures. Additionally, if the UK sneaks its IndianSz trn all the way back to Europe then they can purchase 1 less ship in the Atlantic.
However, I would caution anyone before trying something like this that a similar law of diminishing returns works for any ground unit including armor and so Britain could take advantage of the same hole by purchasing 5trns and then buying 5arm a turn. With this configuration along with strong Russian play the Brits can keep the Japs out of Novo almost indefinately b/c Russia can attack take losses and the UK armor can clean up the left overs ie the armor and ftrs. Further if Britain has a small inf force say ~12-18 units combined with an ever increasing stack of armor it makes Germany’s ability to stack EEuro increasingly problematic b/c they have to worry about a Brit strafe of EEuro in order to soften up for Russia and the US. Either way this works not b/c ftrs, arm etc are any better units but b/c there is a diminishing return for inf on offense and defense and a good offense by one one of the Allies can soften up an Axis opponent for another of them. In essence this is about team work which is how to win with the Allies.
-
:-o
By the Beard of Zeus!
-
Very good analysis AgentSmith. I might just try this some game.
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
-
I think it’s a great strategy! I’ll be sure to try it out next game.
-
Try using tanks first to exploit this weakness of the IPM as the Allies then move on to planes b/c doing it with planes takes a great deal of skill and game knowledge and there is not a great deal of margin of error in terms of purchasing. If you buy too many planes too quickly you can get in trouble and if you buy a few over a very long period this unique ploy might be made irrelevent. With tanks you have more options and its easier for a lower skilled player to enact it adequately. If you are worried about losing Africa dont. If the Brits slide their tanks into Cauc they can shield SEuro from the Japanese and delay a full takeover by them. Also when the Japs move a large fleet into FICSz to threaten Africa you can take Turkey with the armor in order to threaten a retake. In essence you defend Africa with but a few guys, I go as small as 2-3 or even 1. Japan is too weak to afford a press on Russia and a lurch for Africa and if Britain can reatake it immediately then it does no good. Of course British steel in Cauc and still hit EEuro and Novo, but if the Japs have gone “all in” to FICSz then you know they have to “crap or get off the pot” meaning they either have to go back to Japan on the next turn or go to Africa. If they go to Africa you make sure you have enough tanks to overwhelm(Japan shouldn’t be able to go with much more than 16inf so 3inf 20arm some air should be able to take with ~17arm, enough to withstand most counterattacks. That is unless Japan backs off troops f/Sink to India for just this, but in that situation Japan is costing them not 1 but 2 turns of reinforcements to Siberia so Russia should be able to push Japan back quite a ways there and the British steel can help.
Suggested Topics
