Not sure how this would work or if it would be worth it but here is the premise.
This assumes UK lost all navy aside from the DD+transport. UK purchases 1 destroyer, 3 transports, 3 inf, 1 arm. Placing it where Germany air cannot sink it.
On US one they place 3 of there fighters in Eastern Canada, purchase a carrier, another fighter, placing there 4th starting fighter on the new carrier. Also, purchases a few transports + units to shuttle.
On UK2 they purchase a carrier and other fleet elements to protect the transports, and units to drop next turn. All units land in France. Italy cannot retake it on there turn. On US2 they can land 5 fighters in France, plus 2 more units and prepare for the next turn drop.
This gives you at the end of turn 2 10 potential units plus 5 fighters on France, making it borderline impossible for Germany to retake if there going all out against Russia (i believe). Then you can just continue to shuttle over troops until you can take a capital. Japan would get beast but Russia should have some fight left in her to help out. This would work even better if a large amount of UK fleet elements survived turn one. Even if you decide to abort (if Germany keeps units back) you can hit Africa with the US fleet and pursue a general KGF. If you afraid of Italy destroying to many units with a counter attack you could even do this on northwestern Europe.
Good idea or terrible? Cant play till this weekend when I plan on trying it out.
I think it might work as long as Germany tried to take out four territories on the Eastern front during their first turn, causing their forces to be spread out too thin and allowing Russia to take out some German tanks. If Germany is more passive and sends all their tanks to Eastern Poland then UK and USA probably should focus more on keeping Russia alive than trying to secure France. If Russia falls, then Germany will be probably be able to take France back. It all depends on how aggressive Germany is.
I cant see that being all too effective because even with a German player who is completely focused on Russia, such a small force in france will just serve as a minor distraction
This is an excellent idea, even if Germany retakes France it would still divert valuable units from the Russian front. Plus Germany just lost 6 ipcs (11 if you have NOs) I can’t wait to try it!
There is no where for England to put it where German air cannot sink it.
@Cmdr:
There is no where for England to put it where German air cannot sink it.
Put what? The UK1 naval buy?
What does Germany have in Norway?
This plan depends alot on what Germany has left in the atlantic in terms of it’s subs/cruiser as well what UK navy is left. If UK has a BB left, adding a <loaded>carrier should be plenty.
I think if Germany pushes hard to Russia and buys mostly tanks, and UK can build a strong enough navy, this is a decent move. UK/USA does NOT have to actually execute the plan (take France strong) to achieve the desired result of pulling Germany back off Russia a little bit to give them some breathing room.
There’s always the option of moving just the ground units (and not the US ftrs) to make Germany commit some major troops but they won’t get a major prize (US ftrs).
Opportunity cost is a huge factor (always has been) in A&A.</loaded>
axis_roll:
There is no where England can put their newly built ships out of range of the Luftwaffe. Since the original post assumed all starting British Naval Vessels were destroyer, I am assuming Norway has at least a Fighter and a Bomber (at least) and the rest of the fighters in W. Europe. Also, since I routinely purchase a bomber for Germany, I will assume that every sea zone around England can be hit with at least 1 fighter, 2 bombers and most likely, the way I play, 3 fighters, 2 bombers (since one would be stuck in W. Europe after hitting SZ 12.)
@Cmdr:
axis_roll:
There is no where England can put their newly built ships out of range of the Luftwaffe. pt]Since the original post assumed all starting British Naval Vessels were destroyer, I am assuming Norway has at least a Fighter and a Bomber (at least) and the rest of the fighters in W. Europe. Also, since I routinely purchase a bomber for Germany, I will assume that every sea zone around England can be hit with at least 1 fighter, 2 bombers and most likely, the way I play, 3 fighters, 2 bombers (since one would be stuck in W. Europe after hitting SZ 12.)
Well you were close:
This assumes UK lost all navy aside from the DD+transport. UK purchases 1 destroyer, 3 transports, 3 inf, 1 arm. Placing it where Germany air cannot sink it.
Assuming the PROPER premise that bugoo listed.
In your case, I would build in SZ8.
I would gladly go 2 DD, A/C & 2 ftr on your ftr and 2 bombers as the allies.
Again, alot depends on what Germany has where (including remaining subs).
My point was that this is nto a bad plan to force Germany to at least take her mind of Russia for a turn. This idea is not new to AA50 either, but it still does apply here.
But it would be against my 3 fighters, 2 bombers (maybe 4 fighters if Karelia went smooth) not 1 fighter, 2 bombers, Axis.
Still, the premise is he wants to build the fleet where it is “safe” not where you can buy a bunch of capitol ships. He is buying Destroyer 3 Transports, so that’s 2 Destroyers, 4 Transports vs 3 Fighters, 2 Bombers (or AT LEAST 1 Fighter, 1 Bomber since they have to land in Norway after hitting Sea Zone 2.)
He doesn’t want to build warships until UK 2 and only to protect the transports after he moves into SZ 7 for D-Day.
@Cmdr:
But it would be against my 3 fighters, 2 bombers (maybe 4 fighters if Karelia went smooth) not 1 fighter, 2 bombers, Axis.
Your two ‘extra’ fighters can not be in position to hit BOTH SZ2 and SZ8.
UK would choose the SAFER zone.
Maybe I should fix Bugoo’s premise
UK can afford to buy 3 transports (21) and an A/C (14) and inf and tank.
That’s 4 UK transports that can be fully loaded for a France / Northwestern Europe landing. (8 units) defended by 2 DD’s and a loaded carrier in SZ8
or slightly worse position of 3 tpt, DD, loaded a/c in sz2
with US tpt and DD (UK tpt) in sz1 / sz9.
Bombers that go after the US and UK tpts by america are suspect to the 3 UK remaining transports landing on top of them with units (norway/NW europe/France)
Again, we’re arguing over what might be left and what is in position to hit what SZ.
My point is that this can be a doable thing for the allies. UK needs to look at the Atlantic (and how pressured Russia is) and make a go/no-go decision on this strategy.
If the numbers don’t look good… choose plan B :mrgreen:
Generating bombers and fighters to kill newly placed British naval units can only be sustained so long. Thats too much money that would other wise be used for combos in inf, art, and armor that should be heading east. I have found replenishing subs is a more cost effective way to deter the british navy along with you original bomber and 1 or 2 surviving planes. I also prefer to not let my planes get engaged too long i the west, when they should be used in lightning war tactics in east, especially when the majority of russian strats attempt to trade out units.
I think a bigger deterent to this for Germany and Italy is shore up France with tons of units, leave Northwestern Europe open or Denmark or whatever that is and move out of Norway. I usually go for the destroyer and transport rather than the battleship so i can slam 3 territories pretty hard with Germany. I just think that you should show the Allies France on turn 2 would really hurt to take and give them a few softer options, namely Norway and Algeria.
If the turn 2 D-Day is in Norway via US, supported by UK, that’s a nice place for a US IC buy on Round 3.
Yeah, I like IKEA.
Actually with the AC and you starting destroyer it would take 4 figs and 1 bomber to have odds on sinking your boats, a very common event I would think.
Nah, axis-roll’s idea of 3 trans, 1 AC, 1 inf, 1 arm is better and what i’m using now.
