Why defend londen after taking it?

It’s not easy, you’ll probably lose most of China to the FEC, and you’ll have to start from scratch in South East Asia. You’re also giving the Americans free rein in the Pacific. It’s easier to take advantage of ANZAC’s low income to keep a small fleet in sz63, maybe conquer NZ and Solomons/NB, and keep them bottled up, while attacking Calcutta and US fleet.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@NoMercy:

It’s great that the Axis can try all these crazy strategies and likely succeed against Allies who haven’t seen them before; I just wish the Allies could do similar things…I find it a bit unfair that the Axis get to have all the fun.

I think that is just the way the game is, the Axis are the “aggressor” and need to attack to win; while the allies are the defender and need to react to the situations while keeping the big picture in mind. I think the allies are a lot of fun as well; with the UK being a lot of fun and involved everywhere and very important to the overall allied success.

Correct.

Mechs for mobility, they can get to the front faster, regular inf if the front is very close to the factory or if ur going hard defense

Except doing so meant, I’d give italy egypt, get rolled by japan and be totally out of the game, all for the sake of london.

I mean I bet I could have an easier time taking japan than reclaiming london at that rate lol.

If you try it out, you’ll see that the U.K. can’t sufficiently reinforce France, even with the additional 6 French troops, from having Germany crush it on round 2.  Even if every available plane is landed there, and the strafe leaves 2 tanks plus the fighter, it’s impossible to hold.  So all that landing planes accomplishes is wiping out the British airforce (and keeping France from falling to Italy).  The payoff isn’t worth it.

The biggest downsides I can imagine are that (1) it is much more difficult to hold off serious landings at Normandy by the US and/or UK.  Italy then has to protect Western Europe and the Med–although with Germany taking S France, they can dump ships in the Med as well if it comes to that (subs backed up by planes would be cheap).  And (2) delaying the war on the Pacific side until round 3 (which would make this work much better at times, depending on the US builds) means that UK Pacific can shuttle some troops over.

The really nice thing about this strategy is that it’s more efficient to have Italy be the 1 force in the Med, and not have to worry about building enough ships off the S France factory right away to protect them from UK planes.

I think it’s going to be the standard opening in our play group for the foreseeable future.

The counter someone mentioned above about making sure to buy troops in S Africa–either mechs, or infantry/artillery to go with transports, in combination with some shuttling from India, is probably the safe response.

Grover and I just started another game, with me being the Axis, and I’ve got to say I’m enjoying the big Italian boost.

Once Japans fleet is dead all america has to do is leave behind 20 subs or so, and convoy raid each one of Japans territories that can be convoy raided. Japan isn’t going to win in the pacific, and with the convoy raid Japan won’t be a super strong power. No need to take out Japan at this time. Send 100% toward the Europe board, and if Japan stars building a fleet again crush it. This is why you should have 20 subs off sea zone 6.

@Get:

Krieg, in the Alpha+ is it illegal for ICs to be placed on Japanese controlled mainland territories? I’m confused about the no ICs on foreign territories.

I’ll illegal to build MAJOR ICs