Luftwaffe Strategy

@ericwool:

Do any of you find it cheap/annoying when an allied player lands on Spain in order to establish a Western front against Germany?  This has been a common tactic of mine, and I had a gamesbyemail player call it cheap just recently.  I haven’t seen that strategy criticized before, so I’m curious if others share the opinion.

As a strategy that move is so common it has a nickname: “Spanish Harlem”. I wouldn’t call it cheap, but I can see being annoyed by it if it kept happening to me.

There’s a few ways to defend against it, but most involve either Germany taking Spain first or stacking tons of troops in France for an immediate counter-attack.

-Midnight_Reaper

Well I think the likelyhood of Japan taking both China and Sinkiang is very low in fact.  If you think about it Japan starts with only 7inf on the ground and 3ftrs bmb for offense.  China with 2inf ftr is more dangerous than one would expect and because of this it is my feeling that you must send at least 3inf ftr bmb just to guarantee a good shot at clearing it.  Additionally, Sink can only be attacked with 2inf + some air and is a lesser priority so in fact it is safe to assume that one of these will go badly.  Further Japan spreading out its offensive ability on turn 1 is a high risk high reward move as you could also lose all these battles which will really slow down Japan.  Losing say 6inf just to kill an irrelevent 2inf ftr or an extra 2inf is not a good idea.  Further, if the Brits pull just 1 Indian guy or 1 Syrian back to Persia they will have an opportunity to attack the infantry put in India by Japan.  If the Brits can nibble at these forces while spread out, and the Japanese hurt themselves by spreading out then it is far easier to slow Japan down than if you play defense where Japan will maintain its relative strength by virtue of not attacking.

Secondly, what gain is there to moving 2inf from India to Sink anyway?  If the Japanese want to risk it they can still attack it, and if they do you risk losing more of what little strength in Asia you do have.  Additionally, Japan can still take India, and Britain is still left attacking with 1inf + air to clear it so what’s the difference?

Finally, your primary reason against abandoning India is that the IPC swing is too great but in fact even with a defense of India or Sink Japan can still attack one or the other, and for that reason the IPC swing is almost as great so in fact the vacating of India actually costs the Brits very little.  Whether the British are in India or not the Japanese should be able to take China and India or Sink which is a 10ipcs swing.  The difference is but only 1guy which is more than worth it for the British.

Well, don;t congratulate me too much yet.  I still need to play-test the consolidation of Japan strategies against various counters and against pre-emptive strikes.

The taking of Manchuria as a pre-emptive by Russia does not bother me (I actually think it is to Japan’s advantage to have Russia take Manchuria in R1).  But the Kwangtung Maneuver and the Yakut Consolidation could both create some glitches… Kwangtung requiring a shift of forces to re-take Kwangtung, a shift that splits the capital ship consolidation; and also opens up India to taking in J1.  Both of those open up holes in the Japan front leaving them strategically vulnerable, but also represent very significant tactical and economic victories.

I need to evaluate just how much Russia can send land forces to re-inforce Yakut and the K/N/E perimiter, and what counter-attacks may be possible on Sinkiang and how quickly Japan can reinforce Central Asia.  Allied land and air force shifts also need to be reviewed; both through Russia and through Africa.

What impact would a US Submarine Wolfpack being built in US2 have on the strategy?  Or Hawaii, surrounded by the initial US Pacific Fleet, stacked with 3 INF, and used as a BOMBER BASE would have (bombers to threaten Japan tranny’s if the capital ships fled, or to tilt the scales to allow the US PAC FLT, with strong air support, to sweep in and neutralize Japan’s stream of forces to Asia.  Or perhaps staging forward to Wake to allow those same bombers to SBR Japan?

Oviously this Japan strategy is not fool proof.  What it is is an example of a counter to a KGF strategy that just MIGHT force the US to pay more attention to the Pacific, or risk Japan and Germany linking up in the Eastern Med.

And preventing all  3 Allies from ganging up on Germany is the idea… Germany can beat Russia 1-on-1, and can stand toe-to-toe with Russia and an economically weakened UK in a defensive war.  The US is what tips the scales against Germany, so delaying that 3rd ally joining in Europe and/or moving forward so fast and so strongly that Japan is able to criple UK economically, as well as weaken Russia, are the only ways the Axis can win.

Well, here is one strategy I’ve used in the past that may help with Africa (RR, no bid). You won’t be able to keep Africa with this, but you might have a chance to at least take it for a turn or two.

On G1, sink the UK Navy in the North Sea as usual, but do not use the Baltic sea transport as fodder. Once all Allied ships there are sunk, take the Baltic sea transport and move either the Norway tank (my preference)or two Norway infantry to Morocco. Also land at least one of your fighters there as well. Instead of taking Egypt, simply move two infantry into Libya.

This sets you up fairly well for G2 in the following ways

The transport blocks the UK/US from an easy run through this area. The UK will sink this, but this will divert forces from other uses (i.e. if they use fighters, they will not be able to land in Karelia on UK1 - possibly making a G2 assualt there feasable). Probably the UK will also sink the German Med fleet (its really inevitable).

The extra forces in Morocco will delay UK/US forces from landing in Africa on round 1.

On G2, use all available forces to take Egypt. The extra tank and fighter(s) will help defeat any forces that may have been moved to Egypt on UK1 . You should also consider using the bomber as well if they have done so. Now the Allies either won’t have sufficient forces to effectively counter-attack, or you will have sufficient forces in Egypt to make a counter difficult at best.

On G3 and onward, you then use these forces to fight north-south. You should be able to reach S. Africa then retreat back to Egpyt to defend that against the Allies. Here you are just scrambling to keep as much as Africa in German hands as long as you can. The Allies are able to take it all back, but now they must devote more resources to do so. Also, it is possible for Japan to bring in reinforcements to help Germany, but I never do so since the Allies are closer to Africa than Japan and the Japanese forces are better used elsewhere, IMO. At some point you should probably conceed Africa and move the fighter back to the relative safety of Europe.

There are problems for the Germans with this (loss of a defensive fighter in Europe for a few turns, Norway is weakened, and the odds for this working as stated are not exactly a slam dunk) but you should try it to see how it works for you.

Is it possible to post strategies? if so, how? :oops:

“I want to eat your children” - Now that’s the Mike Tyson I know and hate! :smile:

Of course I like this one by heavyweight boxer Tony Galento

“I’ll moider da bum.”

In my personal Opinion, Japans main point in exsisting, Is to take some of the allies attention away from Germany, and to force russia into a two front war. Since Japan has a larger Pacific fleet then America does, after you deystroy the hawaiin fleet, the coastal fleet will run to panama with its tail between its legs. While japan attacks china, india and russia, this takes IPCs away that cant be used against Germany. Japan Is usually the turning point against The sovies.

whoa, i forgot the name of the subject itself!

sorry!