U.K airforce for Russia

You posted this in the 1942 section.

In that scenario, Germany should build a Baltic navy.
UK could be in danger of falling to sea lion.

I don’t think an isolated russia can hold out against a monster Germany / Italy.  By isolated, I mean no ground unit support from the allies.  The US navy may not put enough pressure on Japan fast enough.

What does Japan do J1 in your 1942 games?  If she pressures India immediately, it will be hard to get after her.  The only way is to ensure Japan is slow to expand early.  I prefer an IC in India for UK in 1942 if your goal is to get after Japan.

@Trisdin:

My overall goal is to go after both Germany and Japan equally, the American armada will fake an attack from the south on it’s way to hit the Italian fleet, however it will double back to hit Japans fleet. So there with always be a heavy American presence around India and if it was the Japs plan to go there than they will need their plan B. As for the German navy, I say all the more reason to buy aircraft. They can fly in and hit the German boats on their way to defend Russia. I still think Russia can generate the ground troops needed to defeat Germany as long as they are not swallowed up by territory pocket battles and that’s where the 10+ allied fighters come in. And if the UK can maintain 6>10 infantry on London, I believe that will deter Germany from trying Sealion. Agree?

I think you are assuming too much about the Axis player’s reaction to your plan. If somehow Japan manages to stall/slow down the US advance then the UK will suffer from a reduced income, while Russia will be losing its NO due to the presence of the UK planes. Meanwhile G and I should be receiving all of their NOs and are free to use them against Russia.

Generally speaking Trisdin, the idea of going after Japan and Germany equally is where you are going wrong.  Because while you are splitting Allied forces, Axis will be concentrating their forces (on Russia).  Axis will already be making as much as the Allies after Round 2, and if Russia is forced to turtle on Moscow then it won’t be long before Axis opens up a big economic gap.

Especially in 42.  Germany starts with more than twice the income of Russia, and with plenty of starting forces to push back Russia to Moscow and Stalingrad.  Without UK landings in Europe, Germany is well-advised to buy all tanks and go whole hog on Moscow.

Using fighters from one power to defend another power has a glaring weakness.  That is, those fighters don’t help you attack enemy armies in adjacent territories.  So Germany can march its army to Belorussia or Cauc, and then wait until they have overwelming force, and Allies won’t be able to counterattack.  Allies will only be able to defend Moscow for as long as they are able.  Moscow is a mere 6 ipcs…not that much in the big scheme of things.

Those are valid points–I see where you’re coming from.  But all the same, regardless of whether USA is KJF or KGF, UK needs to maintain a fleet in the North Atlantic.  The purpose of this fleet is not merely to land units in Europe and Africa, but also to force Germany/Italy to divert resources to defend territories like France.

And if Russia is in trouble, I guess that landing 8 units a round in Archangel should provide a better defense than 2 or 3 planes.

The point is that you do not need to stay in sz7 or sz6 with your fleet. Sz3, sz12, sz2 and sz4 are some nice places to stay according to what you want to do.

You go in sz7 only when you want to attack France (and you can buy some naval units to protect your fleet at the end of the turn if needed).

The main point is to threat important places like France, Italy or Germany, so that axis has to put units there for protection.

@Trisdin:

Exellent point Yoshi. I’m staring to come around although I still want Russia to be defended with alot of allied fighters, I will need to think out a good balance between both military arms. Does everyone agree that I shoud liberate the south pacific with a large US fleet and troops?

Sure, in 1942, USA CAN go toe-to-toe with Japan.

I mention the UK india complex as a key point to also defend for the allies.  UK need only add inf early, with some russian units, with USA initially funneling fighters into australia and then india.  Once the navy can get to the solomons, then to east indies, the ground based planes can help keep the Japanese navy from moving to threaten india.

As pointed out above, UK needs some navy in the atlantic.  At the very least to take norway and battle for finland.

It IS possible to do this, but it’s a tricky balance.

Sometimes the US must not be afraid to throw some units out for bait because they can be expendable.  The USA can bleed the Japanese dry if the chinese are doing well and there are some UK units in S.E. Asia.  I am not suggesting getting silly/stupid. but putting out a TPT with 2 inf and a DD to cover to grab an island may be well worth it to bait the japanese out of position.

Agreed that if USA wants to defeat Japan bad enough in the Pacific it should be able to, given that USA starts with about the same income and Japan needs to prioritize the mainland for the first few rounds.  The danger, however, is the possibility of losing Russia early in the game.  KGF seems like the only sure way to distract Germany and avoid losing Russia in the first 5-6 turns.  If Allies do both the IIC and the Pacific offensive then a skilled Germany should be able to defeat Russia if Germany marshals all its resources towards that goal.

Allies’ are in a pickle in 42–that’s for sure.  I can see USA going Pac and UK/Russia going Germany being a viable strategy…but so much depends on early dice…specifically on R1 and G1.

@Zhukov44:

Agreed that if USA wants to defeat Japan bad enough in the Pacific it should be able to, given that USA starts with about the same income and Japan needs to prioritize the mainland for the first few rounds.  The danger, however, is the possibility of losing Russia early in the game.  KGF seems like the only sure way to distract Germany and avoid losing Russia in the first 5-6 turns.  If Allies do both the IIC and the Pacific offensive then a skilled Germany should be able to defeat Russia if Germany marshals all its resources towards that goal.

Allies’ are in a pickle in 42–that’s for sure.  I can see USA going Pac and UK/Russia going Germany being a viable strategy…but so much depends on early dice…specifically on R1 and G1.

What can happen is a strong UK propped up economically by a USA pacific force can threaten Germany pretty strongly in the atlantic, at least to keep Germany honest.  Again, it’s a VERY fine line.  Japan played poorly enables USA to take their navy out, and then the Russian’s need not worry about anything BUT Germany and Italy.  This is part of the reason I support an Indian IC for UK UK1.  They need to be making lots of money to buy a navy strong enough to sit in sz3 or sz4 to support Russia thru archangel.

The reason that I am pro USA navy in 1942 and not so much in 1941 is the naval advantage is much smaller for Japan in 1942.  Also, China is a bit more than a mere speed bump like in 1941.  Combine that with a viable Indian IC, the workings for the allies controlling the early Japanese expansion keeps them from becoming unstoppable.

Not sure what your Russia 1 attacks are against Germany, but a big risk/reward battle (in my humble allied opinion) is to take the Russian bomber on sz13 and try for the German DD and TPT.  This will slow down Germany somewhat as well as help the allies get an Atlantic navy going.  Plus if the bomerb lives and lands in gibralter, it will be another battle for Germany to have to take (can’t just leave that bomber on it’s own?!)

Good luck with the allies, you’re going to need it (they have an uphill battle my friend!)

7th round, not too bad.
Hopefully it was the dice more than the strategy.

If not, perhaps you learned how to make the plan better.  At least that’s how I take a loss on a new(er) plan:  room for improvement.

Remember in both versions of AA50, the allies are the underdog.