@cornwallis No worries.
London or Moscow after J1?
-
My group is lost playing Germany if there’s a J1 attack… any advice for us?
-
As you know I am new but I will take a stab at it. I would try to have Japan pester the U.S. As much as posie to make it hard for them to spend anything in Europe, then on G2-G3 I would go for London quick and fast as the Russians will still be dragging their feet. That is if the Russians are not automatically brought in by a J1 attack on the U.S.??
I am sure I am missing something but even if the Russians are brought in first turn I would still try for London asap and then deal with Moscow. If the U.S. Are in Europe fast then I would change and go hard for Moscow. For me it would just depend on what the U.S. Do.
Hope that helped a bit?
-
Always easier to get Moscow unless the allies get slack on defending London
-
It is all about planning and coordination!
Before attacking the allies the Japs will have to get in a position were they can
a) overrun the “Treasure Islands” & Malaya in one turn
b) inflict as much damage to the allied fleets in the same turn as possible
c) bring their main fleet in a good defensive position (Phillipines) to counter an U.S. offensive and
d) do not forget to keep pressure on China. This includes to fake an invasion of Russia by keeping troops in Manchuria (which delays the arrival of the Russian 18 far-east Inf in moscow as long as possible)
meanwhile Germany
a) must threat the UK and Russia by positioning 3 transports in the North Sea (Threat to UK and Nenetsia)
b) build sufficient Inf & Art (cheap but slow) to prevent losses of tanks or planes on the Eastern Front
c) maybe build an IC in Rumania to shorten your supply lines
and Italy
should try to land forces in Trans-Jordan or Syriaso in general i think you could seldom achieve most of this on turn one. So it’s better to postpone a Japanese declaration of war to turn 2. (The Prince of Wales might escape, but it is worth waiting! America will get the 20IPCs of the UK-Battelship via her national objectives)
Concerning the question “London or Moscow”: go only for London on G2 if the UK-player didn’t build up enough troops in London or send all UK- fighters away on turn 1
-
Nothing changes, USA has to dedicate resources into the pacific or Japan will be really strong. Just do what your Germany normally does, it is not like USA starts out with much anyway.
-
I agree with Cow and Variance both. Some additional overall strategic notes:
-
If USA goes (K)JF (either only the first few turns or even >6 turns), killing London will (should) start an intense fight with Moscow, that Germany is not certain to win/Moscow can hold out very, very long and may give Italy a chance in Africa/ME in the long run because reinforcements from the UK dry out. Meanwhile the USA has an almost unlimited free focus on Japan. In total, not healthy for the Axis combined economies.
Going after Moscow instead (leaving London alive) forces the USA to not focus a nearly unlimited amount of time on Japan and divide its income sooner rather than later because Germany can grab Moscow easily and way before Japan is in real trouble, threatening a subsequent fall of London or Cairo (or both, even)… -
If USA does display a certain ‘focus’ on Germany (only first 2 turns because KGF is absolutely impossible in the 2nd edition and especially with a J1DOW), Germany has all the more reasons to go after Moscow first.
It seems to me that it is much more trouble for the axis (as a whole) to achieve victory if Germany takes London first, even though it looks like much less trouble for Germany to take London in the first place. With the exception of Germany spotting the allies making certain mistakes:
->Giving london away too cheaply;
->Throwing away US resources (spending on units/theatres that will not get the allies started anywhere).If this happens, taking London first will just result in a stunning success! I have seen this once because the USA focused on Germany indefinately but did not get anywhere because they built a wrong unitmix. Germany was able to take London, hold off both the USA and Russia, giving Japan an unlimited and absolutely free reign in the Pacific… But I think even with the right allied unitmix the axis would’ve won because allowing Japan free reighn in the Pacific for an unlimited amount of time will just win the game for the axis: Japan can win the Pacific way before Germany is in real trouble.
-
-
Note: I really don’t see anything but J1 games anymore (hence my post about what to do as America against J1), unless we’re playing with someone new (always the most fun games).
Anwyay, a bit late, but:
I basically agree with what Cow said, like I usually do. I wish I could find something I could disagree on with him, as it’s getting tiring :p
As the others said. Do what you’d normally do. Let’s go at this from the reverse side. Let’s say America does come to Europe:
If America immediately comes over to Europe to start fully messing with Germany, I mean 90%+ investment, that sucks, sucks real bad for Germany. I’ve never seen a KGF strategy in global, but I bet the US/UK/Russians could crumple Germany, like a wad of paper, to 35/turn or less by turn 5 or 6 with no problems at all (but definitely not take Berlin for a good while longer), and Italy is likely to be make crap-all as well. There’s just too many allied NPCs for the Axis to do anything about it. You just have to hope your Japanese player is doing his thing, and with that kind of game, my god, he can do whatever he wants. The Pacific victory is nearly guaranteed, actually.
So, since we have established that America can’t afford to do that, let’s assume a partial investment:
Don’t suicide yourself on a Sea Lion, but if UK leaves it super open, do it. Hopefully Italy can make some strong headway in the Med if you do. If America has to come over to liberate UK, and you’ve not hamstrung yourself by doing it, that’s fantastic for Japan. But again, only do Seal Lion if UK has gift-wrapped it for you.
I’d say the safest bet is just go straight for Moscow and keep your western flank as protected as you can. If you can’t take Moscow, at least shut down its economy, attempt to lock down some of the british airforce on Moscow to defend it, and get as much money as you can. Hopefully you’re taking either Moscow or the middle east by turn 7-9, depending on what all happens, so that you’re not completely relying on Japan. Remember, if you’re playing with partial but heavy (50%+) investment of America in Europe, you’re basically just playing A&A 1940 Europe, except you got 2 more IPCs from the fall of France, Russia made an extra 9 IPCs for the turns you weren’t at war (so declare war on I2 or G3, at the latest!), there’s one more inf in Egypt, and America is showing up to the party a turn earlier. Is it harder? Yeah, probably (depending on the level of US investment). Is it “hopeless”? Hell no. And with this kind of US investment in Europe, Japan is going to have an easy game.
The best part about it all is, since the US is always 2 turns away, no matter what they do, you’ll have an entire turn to do something about it. If you see heavy US buys in the Atlantic, you know you have plenty of time to keep your air force in range and to build some mechanized infantry in western germany to kick some invaders out (and defend your major IC). The US nearly always has to head to Gibraltar first. You nearly always have time to adapt.
Final note on the defense of Scandinavia:
As for the defense of Norway, I like to keep my Finns in Finland, only sending 1-4 Scandinavian infantry toward Stalingrad, depending. If they take Norway, you can use your little group of inf to smash into Norway (along with two units on your hopefully still-living transport) along with your air force. If they bring too much of a landing party for you to handle, especially if the British help, then you should at least be able to use your air, your cruiser, and hopefully some other surviving boat or boats (and the 1-6 new subs you bought in the Baltic when you saw the allies mass on Gibraltar or off the coast of the UK) to kill their navy, including their transports.
This should force the Allies into making a risky play, or having them go after Italy first, which is a better, or at least more workable, situation for the Axis than losing Scandinavia forever.
Added bonus: If the Allies do a neutral crush, you’ve already got people right there to claim Sweden. With the Finns and the Swedes parked there, Norway is basically a fortress for the rest of the game. If the Axis do a neutral crush, you’re already right there to hit Sweden (with the help of air, of course).
If you’re worried about a UK/US 1-2 punch on Denmark and then your Baltic fleet (and your 1-6 subs you just bought, see above), then Britain has spent a lot of money on boats or bombers, and Germany has lots of problems that will lead to faster crumpling. That situation is too complex to address here, but it’s still not hopeless. It largely involves praying that your Japanese player is winning :p
-
Not sure why the J1 DoW affects the London or Moscow question?
When playing against hard AI, G always succeeds against London in G4 or thereabouts, so its an easy play. But against a human opponent who does not make mistakes London is secure and Moscow is the more certain G play, probably with a G2 DoW on R.
Even if J suckers the US into a Pacific only focus I still think the UK can defend London on its own.
I am only in my 2nd and 3rd games of 40 Global against humans (although have played a quite a few against hard AI) so perhaps I am missing something?
Agree with comments from Hessian that a J1 DoW on anyone but R is probably a turn too soon. A key J1 focus has to be Yunnan and lining up for max impact elsewhere on J2.
-
The question on wether or not to do a J1 or J2 has already been answered among our group, the question we have is if Sealion can legitimately be threatened for at least the first round if Japan attacks turn one? I agree with going after Moscow but to keep UK from building an IC in Egypt UK1, the Germans may need an aircraft carrier which is a less attractive purchase when planning barbarossa… I’ve been leaning toward a “keep all my money” strategy G1, which could still suggest Sealion.
-
Saving 30 is nearly the worst thing I like to see Germany do as the allies.
Sea Lion is totally doable with a J1, but, as always, keep a close eye on what UK1 accomplishes. If they dump 8 infantry and an artillery in London, then you don’t do Sea Lion, same as in any other game. If they build a mIC in Egypt and spend another few IPCs in south africa, then it’s still option.
Really, it’s UK determines if a swastika is going to fly over Buckingham palace, not the Germans. Even if the Germans force an ugly Sea Lion, then all that usually gets them is a hammer and sickle over the Reichstag.
-
Well i normaly opt for a more balanced opening that has 1 bomber in it and a bit of fleet. destroyer + sub
you need that fleet to annoy/help against russia anyway so does the bomber help but they can also be used to bomb UK in preparation of sea lion.Since this does not point out Sea lion, but looks like russia first ( combine with a J1 ) the UK player might be inclined to not buy as much defence. 3 bombers can really do damage to a IC and with the transports you can buy round 2 UK is pretty much done for with limited resources.
But if russia gets funny that bomber can just as easy help with a important attack.
Would you keep the 4 IPCs or buy an artillery unit for a land, sea, and air purchase?
-
For the above question, I’m pretty sure I would just save the 4 IPCs for the next round rather then buy an art if I wanted 8 inf. However I would more likely do the standard 6 inf and a ftr def for UK if there was a J1 attack. You are still doing the responsible thing in securing your capital, but the ftr will be more useful when they go east.
Sea Lion can be a risky move for Germany when the US is kept out, but It becomes much riskier w/USA in the picture early. They could bring a lot of pressure by building to liberate London or go after your fleet etc…. With the above purchase you will still do damage if the Germans come a calling, but the ftr will be much more useful IMO if they don’t
-
The thing that really killed sea lion for me was the R threat. Perhaps you guys are masters of both taking London and holding R at bay?
Sure if London is begging to be taken, but no decent player of the UK would allow that to happen.
Clearly I have much to learn! :-)
Suggested Topics
