Lots of questions on Germany and UK

[aequitas-et-veritas]

Of course, this game gives you the opportunity to do it your way, alternate history and perform something new if possible.
BUT!
If you are not considering to take out the RN on G1 ,you will need a solid plan to keep the Western Allies at bay.

The RN will shut down most likely the channel and Gibraltar.

With Gibraltar shut down, the Italian ships can’t sail into the Atlantic anymore to support any German activities there. The RN will start to built up a solid bridgehead for the U.S. wich will join them sooner or later.
Any subs you will built to try to blockade any landings will simply vanish against the huge amount of shipments the Allies now have.

That means your plan must involve a quick built up of massive forces to crack Moscow Round 5,6 or 7 as the latest and starting a build up in France meanwhile arround Round 4,5 or so.

If you consider to destroy the RN on G1 then you will have a pressure relief for at least three turns with little German and Italian Navy build up to secure the Channel and Gibraltar.

You are making it harder for the Allies to invade quicker and forcing the U.S. to budget the money/IPC’s for spending into the Atlantic or the Pacific. You’ll see it triggers a small slowing down effect on U.S. side.
The U.K. can’t do much on it’s own, it needs the U.S. .

As for German spendings:

Everything you loose on G1 and G2 is not a big deal in relation to your achivements but G3 you should start calculate everything you may loose and be able to replace if neccessary.

If you loose one or two bombers on G1,G2 ok ; you will be able to replace them with your income ,but G3 and so fort you need to calculate your risks your taking and be more ecconomicly.

Very good posts Herr KaLeun, enjoyed reading them.

[WILD BILL]

I agree that you shouldn’t attempt an SBR run on London G1. You need to concentrate your air power on the Royal Navy in sz110 & 111. Bombers are like flying battleships in sea battles attacking at 4, and you can send in plenty to protect them (much better use then SBR at this time). Send subs after the Canadian mini fleet, and the cruiser off Gib (1-2 each battle), and forget the sz 109 dd/transport. I think it is better to overpower the Royal navy, then to entice them to scramble (until you get more acquainted to the game anyway). I have seen both success, and failure for the Germans when the UK scrambles, it gets too dicey for my liking in the first round. It could loose the game for either side, and the dice have a bigger impact in larger more even battles with expensive units (very little fodder).

With that said, I get what KNP is saying about trying to draw out the RAF into the sz110 battle (might be able to also kill of the RAF). Watch what you wish for though, because this risky strat could be devastating for the Germans as pointed out above, and I wouldn’t suggest it for a newbie. In this attack you are sacrificing air even if he doesn’t scramble, and the Germans need to keep the Luftwaffe in tact IMO to continue to threaten the the allies (or defend). BluGerman your attacks also intentionally invited some scrambles. The difference being that once the UK scrambled they had the advantage in sz110, where KNP still kept an edge for the Germans.

For Pete’s sake you have to take the French loot G1 to build up for Barbarossa (or Sea Lion). You need that 19 IPCs to buy ground units for the Russian assault end of story.

I would also try to take S France G1 for the IC (although the French ships will convoy you LOL). This will allow you the option to build German ships in the Med if you want to G2 w/o the expense of buying an IC. I have found it better to supply a German carrier (if you can do it safely) to beef up the Italian navy protecting Italian transports when they leave the safety of their harbor (instead of buying German transports that will need protection). Early German subs builds in the Med can be cool, but you have to be sure that the UK can’t kill them before you get the chance to use them (do they still have a dd in range). This could push the UK out of the Med, or keep them from re-entering when combined w/Luftwaffe.

I have bought a German IC for Yugo in the past, and it can be helpful to the Italians, and allows you to drop both Italian and German ships in sz97 (but spending too much German income in the Med will stall your Barbarossa).

As for the Romanian IC build G1, there are 2 trains of thought here. I’m not convinced it hurts you as far as what you can bring in, but it defiantly tips your hand to the allies G1 (Barbarossa). The thing is that once you make that choice, and let them know it G1 you have to follow through, and not get too distracted from your goal (like spending too much in the Med).

1. If you build a Romanian IC G1 you can produce slow units G2 (maybe G3), and faster units in the later rounds. Then push into Ukraine (Russian IC) for builds there as well, and the 2 ICs can compliment each other. You can still build fast units in Germany as well to catch up.

2. Building all inf/art in Germany G1 will get more slow units to the Russian border G2 w/o the expense of the IC, and doesn’t tip your hand to the allies. Faster units will take one more turn to get to Moscow from Germany IC, but you can produce more to make up for it (w/o the cost of the IC).

3. What can also work is waiting to build an IC on Russian soil at either W Ukraine or Rostov to get more units at the front, and it doesn’t tip your hand to the Allies G1. A competent allied team can usually stall your Barbarossa at some point (like RAF headquartered in Moscow) so having another IC on Russian soil 2 spaces from Moscow can help finish the push. We have seen IC’s built in Romania G1, and W Ukraine once Germany gets there along with the captured Russian factories. The thing is that the Germans can have a hard time keeping production up in all these IC on Russian soil (and defend W Europe), so the Romanian IC is generally not used as the Germans close in (so was it necessary?)

The heavy loses your Luftwaffe took in the naval battles around England (too risky because of the SBR attempt), not getting the French loot, and buying a second minor IC is what doomed you (and the others have spelled out the same story). Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t think that based on this experience (mostly bad decisions) you should be tinkering with the rules, or NO’s yet.

[Spendo02]

G1 Purchase: 1 SS, 1 DD, 1 CV
G1 Combat:
2 SS, 1 Ftr (Norway), 1 Tac (Germany), 2 Bombers to SZ111
2 SS, 1 BB, 3 Ftr, 3 Tac to SZ110
1 SS to SZ106
2 Inf, 2 Art (Via Holland) to Normandy
All remaining ground units able to invade France do so, including the 3 Arm from S.Germany and 1 Tac from Hungary
All ground units capable of hitting Yugo do so, leaving 1 Inf behind in Romania to NCM to Bulgaria

G1 Combat decisions:
1. My aim is to sink the UK fleet, not destroy their Ftr.  I’ll not trade a Ftr for a Ftr with UK, so if all that is left are Ftr and I’m going to trade a BB and/or Ftr to finish them off, I’ll retreat.  If I get them all in one fell swoop, I’ll take it.  Note in some cases the BB can retreat with a single hit on it to SZ112, which bolsters the fleet you’re about to place there.
2. I generally prefer to strafe Yugo.  I’ll roll combat for one round and then retreat back to Romania.  Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn’t and I take Yugo.  Both are acceptable results.  I prefer the strafe because Italy can use the IPC on mainland Europe in the early rounds.
3. I know many people say to leave Normandy alone.  I see the merits, but I’d rather collect 2 IPC for 4-6 rounds than have to leave units behind to keep the French from liberating Paris or taking Holland / S.France.  To me, its a staging point for the UK/US to both land Ftr on.  I’d rather see-saw ownership of it for multiple turns than see 4-8 Ftr land on top of 20 ground units combined between the UK and US in the middle rounds.

G1 NCM:
Fly the Ftr from Poland down to Rome.  An extra Ftr scrambling may save some of or all of the Italian fleet.
Step 1 Inf from Norway to Finland, place the 4 units
Step 1 Inf from Romania to Bulgaria, place the 4 units
Leave the Inf/Art Stack in Berlin
Leave 1 Ftr (from Norway) and 1 Tac (from Germany) in SZ112 to land on the CV.
Land all remaining Ftr/Tac/Bombers in WGr
NCM the CR + TT to SZ112

G1 Place units:
Place your SS, DD and CV in SZ112.  You could have as much as 1 SS, 1 DD, 1 CR, 1 BB (tipped), 1 CV + 1 Ftr/Tac and 1 TT in SZ112 with 3 aircraft capable of scrambling over it.
Note:  This creates a formidable defensive wall for a few turns, which keeps the UK squarely on London or building in Canada.  Eventually this fleet will be sunk, but you may be able to suicide it with a component of bombers to sink everything the Allies put off of Gibraltar if they don’t pay attention.  Keep that in mind, as you could set the Allies back 2+ turns if they get loose in defending a navy out there.  
Note 2: You’re also in a good position with this fleet for a G3 Sea Lion as you may not have to send any aircraft to protect TT on the Amphib part of the invasion.  I generally don’t Sea Lion, but its good to keep the options open if UK plays silly.

Lastly, there’s a million ways to play Germany.  Mine isn’t 100% correct, or the best.  There are better players on this forum than me that can tell you that.  The dicey battles include SZ111 (retreat once ships are sunk), Normandy and you can risk losing the Tac in Paris to AA.  SZ110 can also get dicey if there are 3 Ftr scrambling.  I’ve seen it played both ways and from experience the odds are you’ll retreat after sinking the navy or face trading aircraft with the Allies.  When I’ve played as the UK I generally let the fleet get sunk (its inevitable) and save the aircraft to land on CV once Germany is fully committed in Russia.  This also allows the UK to build an Armor/Mech in S.Africa early which seems to be a constant thorn in the side of the Italians while also building 6 Inf in London in case Sea Lion materializes.

Some comments on your OP:  
1. Don’t build factories as Germany.  Build units that can take the Russian factories.  I’d rather spend 12 IPC on 2 Arm that can take and hold Ukraine’s minor than building one in Romania.  Use the units from S.Germany + Bulgaria to make it highly expensive for the Russians to try to hit your soft underbelly.  The only thing I’d consider building regarding infrastructure is an AB in E.Poland if you have an opportunity to sack Moscow early and can use the additional air power to minimize losses.  Note that Bombers can reach Moscow from E.Poland, so realistically E.Poland is your launching pad for just about everything and keeps the Russians worried about which way you are actually going to go (Arm/Mech move there from Berlin each round you purchase them).
2. My brother and friend both call it the “water balloon” effect.  In short, never get caught thinking throwing a water balloon on the board that explodes everywhere is good.  In the short term you may gain a few extra IPC, but you lose momentum as you have to dry off the board and regroup - which inevitably means you’ll sustain losses in both units and territory you just gained.  Is it really worth taking Baltic States for 1 IPC when you’re going to lose 10 IPC worth of units to do it?  In short, always think ahead 2-3 turns when considering fighting over a small potatoes territory.  How soon can the enemy counter attack there, what kind of losses will I sustain to both take and hold it, is there a total economic benefit for doing it?  If not, is there a strategic benefit worth the cost (answer is usually, “No.”).  So be wary of water ballooning, it almost always comes back to haunt you.  And if you really want to understand it, play as Japan.  Their opportunities are boundless to water balloon, but when you start losing all your TT and stranding units on islands, you’ll realize its better to be a slow moving ball of destruction versus an exploding water balloon.

Good luck!

Germa

[knp7765]

Spendo02,
Very interesting observation on the “water balloon” effect. I have to admit, Japan has a tendency to do that in our games. While it sometimes works for them, often times it becomes a real problem, especially in losing the transports like you pointed out.

[Spendo02]

I’ve had the most success with Japan in a “slow” play that is methodical, overpowering and highly calculated.  The times I struggle with Japan are when I try to take all the DEI by J3 and end up losing TT and stranding units.  There’s no way I’m sending a TT to go get those units off the island, the cost is very prohibitive in time and resources to protect one to simply pick up 3-7 IPC worth of units and they don’t defend overly well or at any bonus for being stranded either.  In short, losing an undefended TT at a DEI costs you 10-14 IPC, and stops further expansion of those units for potentially the entire game.  As the Allies, I’d be excited to wipe 10-14 starting IPC off the board for free from an undefended TT.  Even if its lightly defended and I can sink more ships, it’s still a win for the Allies.

So, I’d rather take 1-2 DEI per round, solidifying each holding and challenging ANZAC and the UK to suicide against heavily defended landings.  It may take an extra round or two, but you’ll spend 3 rounds and too much IPC to simply recover from a lost TT by water ballooning.

My friend swears by it, and things get dicey for the Allies in the Pacific when he plays Japan, but each time I sink a TT, I’m winning the battle because its stops further expansion - which is the key for Japan.  Eventually the tides turn and expansion comes to a halt.  Problem always is, did he make the US spend enough in the Pacific that they are delayed in arriving in Europe?  I’m a better player as the US in the Pacific than I am in the Atlantic - mostly because my playgroup does not play Germany well against Russia so I tend to stalemate there.

[cyanight]

We played 2 games this weekend but only finished one.  The first one went like this for Germany. We played with Tech tokens so it was a fun game.
Turn 1: Germany  - economy (30)
Purchase:  1 IC(Romania) and 2 Tanks,  1 Tech dice. (Misssed Tech on round 1)
Attack:
• SZ :110 2 Subs, 3 Fighters, 3 Tact, Bomber
• SZ: 111  2 subs, Battleship, Fighter, Tact, Bomber
• SZ:106  1 Sub
• France: Everything from Holland, West Germany and 3 tanks from Southern Germany.
• Yugo: Everything left from Southern and the 3 tanks on the east front plus fighter and tact. Land them in S. Italy.
Activate – Norway and Bulgaria.
Non Combat – 1 inf and art to Norway. Stay in SZ  112.

Italy – economy(10)
Purchase: 1 Fighter
Attack:
• Southern France : 2 inf + 2 art + Tank
• SZ:93 – Sub + 2 fighter + Bomber
• Tunsia: inf + art + mech + tank
• Greece: 8 inf + 1 tank + BB + CR + CR barrage.

Turn 2: Germany – economy (68)
Declare war: Neutrals
Purchase: 10 mech 3 tanks, Tact
Attack:
• Sweden – 9 inf + 1 art + 1 armor + 2 bombers  with CR barrage
• Spain: 3 mech + 6 tanks +2 fighter +2 tact
• Normany: 2 fighters + 2 tact + 2 art + 1 mech
Italy managed to take Turkey on round 2 with the units in Greece and using their 3 fighters, bomber and BB, 2CR barrages.  Italy also sends tank to Gibraltar.  The next turn Germany blitzes through Turkey into Caucasus and gets Jet Power.  Germany builds an Air Base in Spain with 6 tanks, 3 fighters, and 2 art from Italy.  Wish I would have got a photo of that round.  I switched my fighters from 109’s to 262’s, hehe.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=744531928900816&set=oa.303817613101077&type=1&theater

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=744531958900813&set=oa.303817613101077&type=1&theater

That complex in Romania really helps send units to Turkey quick which lead to a huge boost in economy for Italy and Germany.  Probably would have been a good game if USA would not have left their SZ:101 with only transports and no fighters to scramble which my German CR was at Gib with a transport and 2 inf.  I ended up taking his transports out and landed in central.  Germany had an economy of 80 that round. The allies surrendered after that.

[ItIsILeClerc]

Really like the ‘waterballoon’ comparison :D.

I love to go it slow for Japan as well but I must admit I sometimes go waterballooning on purpose -only I never called it that way ;-).

last time I played Japan and my German partner wanted to go Sea Lion versus a capable allied team so I decided to put a lot of pressure on the USA and I took J3:
Aleutians, Hawai, Midway, Wake, Johnston, Gilbert, Solomons, New Guinea, Guam, Borneo, Celebes, Java, Malaya and the Philipines. I also attacked the complete and combined USA and ANZAC fleets in SZ 54 AND I still managed to continue the usual offensives in Mainland Asia this turn (last turn of serious offensives for Japan here).

Perfect example of a waterballoon because after this turn Japan had only 7TRS left, plus the leftovers of its fleet. The upside: J4 the allies had no warships anymore (SZ54 was an allied mistake) and the USA had a very hard time deciding where to spend its IPCs, either in Europe liberating London or in the Pacific stopping me. Downside: China, India and Russia were on the offensive in no time, seriously threatening Japanese VC’s on Mainland Asia.

Edited: My mistake, I took those territories as part of the J4 offensives. Controlling all Pacific islands still looks awesome!

[Shin-Ji]

@Herr:

An SBR campaign against the UK early in the game basically amounts to spending German money to make the British spend their money. If you don’t plan to do Sea Lion as a counterpart to that bombing campaign, you won’t make any real progress as Germany. Russia will be smiling, and as soon as the US arrives, your bombers and subs will need to stop bothering the Brits or they’ll be destroyed.

Yep.  And if you’re not going to Sealion, why would the Brits even bother fixing their factories?  No reason to unless you need to use them.

[cyanight]

Great example ItIsILeClerc. I wonder what your economy was after that round.  How many transports did you max with? I always make the mistake of not keeping enough DD to block with Japan.

[ItIsILeClerc]

Hi Cyan!

First, sorry to post all this Japanese stuff in a Germany/UK discussion, but I think it can be useful still, as these are my experiences of a direct ‘cause and effect’ of a Sea Lion strategy extrapolated into Japanese actions (in an attempt to prevent the USA from liberating London)! Please note that my German partner and I decided on this after we saw the UK making a couple of blunders (not just 1, but ‘Taranto’ absolutely being one of them) that would lead to the fall of London should Germany launch a surprise attack on it.

To answer your questions:
I must admit I am too lazy today to calculate the exact income but I can make an educated guess ;-). I think I peaked at 71 that turn and I used 14 12 TRSs to get to it (and yes, I lost 7 5 of them). In this game I never managed to get more than this 71 IPCs income, as China and India quickly recovered and the Russians gave me troubles as well. They almost took Shanghai and Hong Kong from me but I managed to hold on to those VC’s.

I remember that I felt extremely Lucky my allied opponents had never seen anything like this before (they even took a picture in awe after all my CM’s J3) and China for example, very afraid of my previous game’s destruction of their entire army J2 at the cost of only 3 Zero’s, retreated towards the Russian border CH1 and CH2 so I had free offensives here at start. And I needed that, because I spent ALL my income on TRS and loaded them with japanese-at-start land units. The remainder, (nothing worth mentioning) was used to offend China and India :evil:.

This game was interesting for me because I saw proof of the potential for the Allies to KJF me and win the game. Fortunately, the allies did NOT see/do this and went Europe first which they screwed up in their panic as well. If the USA sees real threats coming on both sides it MUST keep its head cool and pick on 1 of the major Axis partners. Usually this has to be Japan because of the 6VC rule in the Pacific, but if it looks Japan does not get its hands on 6VC within the first 7 turns (meaning they go for India first) then Germany could be picked instead to get London back into the cart.

Edit: corrected some lazy miscalculations on my part  :lol:

[cyanight]

Hi ItIsILeClerc,

That is incredible… Its interesting how you maintained such a high income without the coast.  Holding the coast and the Dutch isles I usually peak around 65.

[ItIsILeClerc]

Ah,
But the coast was not yet taken from me J3 or J4 ;-). It never completely was. If you do the math, it looks like this:

26 + 10NO’s (outer perimeter + Hawai) + 1 (Hawai) + 20 (DEI) + 2 (Phil) + 8 (China) + 9 (SE Asia) + 4 (some Russian territories) = 80 max!

Later on I lost a LOT of ground in Russia + Asia, so from turn 5 the income went down quickly… I made a start invading Australian territories and contested some SE Asian territories back and forth and my guess is that by that time the Japanese income was indeed more between 55 - 65 IPCs a turn.
Compared to the 80 - 95 IPCs Japan can collect when going all in against Asia, Russia and Middle East this is peanuts, but the latter strategy puts the Axis in a time/tempo disadvantage (IMHO ;-)).

BTW, I have to correct myself. Repeating J1 & J2 in my head today I came to the conclusion I got some numbers wrong in my lazy guesswork some days ago ;-). I’ll correct them in my previous posts.