I was wondering why this was such a standard move - doesn’t the German player move in forces to oppose it? I always land 1 inf 1 art in Norway G1, normally G2 as well. That’s 8-9 inf and 1-2 art. Even if the US1 buy is 3 transports 3 inf 3 art, they still don’t have enough to land on Norway against that force US3. Can’t the German player also fly a lot of planes in to repel the invasion? Is the normal strategy a combined USSR then USA attack US3?
It is illegal now to build a major ic
I was wondering why this was such a standard move - doesn’t the German player move in forces to oppose it? I always land 1 inf 1 art in Norway G1, normally G2 as well. That’s 8-9 inf and 1-2 art. Even if the US1 buy is 3 transports 3 inf 3 art, they still don’t have enough to land on Norway against that force US3. Can’t the German player also fly a lot of planes in to repel the invasion? Is the normal strategy a combined USSR then USA attack US3?
Most of the time germany uses those forces to invade russia in the north so norway is mostly empty. Since there is also almost never a fleet in the baltic germany cannot really contest this move.
And it is nice place for an IC. As it takes away an NO from germany and germany cant counter it so that is +3 for the Us -8 for germany a good move.
Shadow I disagree with your presumption that the Germans rarely have fleet in the Baltic, this can be true in some games, but we generally see the Germans keep the Baltic fleet alive. There are several reasons for them to do that (see below). We see the Germans try to salvage the BB (maybe doing a hit & run G1), add a carrier and transport(s) at some point, plus have a very strong air force. It is somewhat of a standard for the Germans to have some navy (in our games anyway).
The obvious reason for the Germans to have navy is to force the UK to respond with a mostly defensive buy UK1. #2 is to threaten Leningrad through the Baltic (or via the White Sea) so they give it up w/o a fight, or you can crush what ever units they leave there to defend (that won’t be defending Moscow later). #3 is to protect Norway by either stacking it (probably not in there best interest) using transport(s), or retaining the ability to counter attack it with a combination of units from Finland and units floating across the Baltic utilizing the full force of the Luftwaffe. #4 is by keeping a naval presence in the Baltic you could delay an allied landing in the north. The allies may decide to attempt to kill your fleet before making a landing costing them time and resources. Your defenses in the north could very well divert the Allies to another landing spot.
And it is nice place for an IC. As it takes away an NO from germany and germany cant counter it so that is +3 for the Us -8 for germany a good move.
Those are reasons I see value in defending it.
Yes, it can be worth it to move the forces to Leningrad if it means you can take it down but you don’t want to surrender Norway and not take Leningrad. If you only have a single transport as Germany, it can be difficult to take it back but at least you can interdict forces in Finland and use survivors (if any) to threaten an assault on Norway. I guess it is whether that is a better use than landing reinforcements on Leningrad. Or perhaps you are using the transport to land troops on the UK.
This Norway move takes way too long to execute and doesn’t do much to cripple Germany. Under the best conditions, its US 4 at Gibraltar and US 5 at SZ112 to Norway, which is often a very dangerous place for you to put your fleet as the Allies. You could potentially be crossing to SZ 119, but that costs you a SeaBase and you are still only gaining the SZ 125 position.
The sad fact is that by the time you take this 8IPCs away from Germany, he has already got 60-70 income. You don’t really diminish his forces this way, as in most games the pieces that Germany had in Scandinavia have joined on the attack with Russia. Ideally, it is Russia that takes Finland and Norway rather than the Western Allies since that gives them a NO of +3, but of course that would require diverting critical troops.
It does potentially create a backdoor to revive Russia, but a relief fleet can reach Novogrod as well, which is a much more strategic position to be in with both your fleet and your land.
It is not really any more appealing for the Western Allies to attack the Atlantic Wall or the Mediterranean either, so attacking Norway may be a “best of worst” option since it is much harder for Germany to defend and could potentially diminish their income at a time when they need to build in many directions. But because they will be right at the door to Moscow at this point, you may not have your UK support fighters to count on, and in any event, it doesn’t seem like the Allies are capable of taking a well defended Norway AND attacking some other useful objective at the same time.
If that were the case (that you could take Norway with a small, sacrificial fleet and not be subject to any german counteroffensives) then do it. But it won’t usually play out like that and in order to safely build the MiC there you will have to bring all the US and probably all the UK pieces up there to do it.
Normandy can certainly be a better landing site, but it depends on there not being an adequate stack in Paris to counter attack. You get an already built IC then.
Taking down the soft underbelly in Italy can also be attractive.
Technically, with a J1 DOW, you can reach US2, but you won’t have a fleet to defend the sole transport. US5 is the turn you can always reach.
Just wondering if anyone goes north looking to invade Norway then pounce on a German held Leningrad? Was thinking if the US is sitting in sz91 off Gib the Germans will generally build a dd in the English Chanel to stop you from invading Norway that turn. Normally you move to england so you can add ships or transports then on to whatever……What if you kill the dd and move the combined (US/UK) navy 3 spaces to sz111 off Scotland which can give you some air cover, then have the UK build a naval base for Scotland. This gives you some options that the Germans may not be ready for. You still have the option of invading Norway, but the German counter will be weaker because you also could hit the Finns (so they prob retreat).
Leningrad is good a possibility, but so is one of the northern Russian territories where the Germans won’t have any defenses. Might even be able to time it right to take Leningrad after Moscow falls so you can use the free IC.
@WILD:
Just wondering if anyone goes north looking to invade Norway then pounce on a German held Leningrad? Was thinking if the US is sitting in sz91 off Gib the Germans will generally build a dd in the English Chanel to stop you from invading Norway that turn. Normally you move to england so you can add ships or transports then on to whatever……What if you kill the dd and move the combined (US/UK) navy 3 spaces to sz111 off Scotland which can give you some air cover, then have the UK build a naval base for Scotland. This gives you some options that the Germans may not be ready for. You still have the option of invading Norway, but the German counter will be weaker because you also could hit the Finns (so they prob retreat).
Leningrad is good a possibility, but so is one of the northern Russian territories where the Germans won’t have any defenses. Might even be able to time it right to take Leningrad after Moscow falls so you can use the free IC.
If blockers in 125/126 might be a problem you could put UK troops in scotland the turn before. Then do as you said but load Brits onto the US transports. US navy clears the way then the Brits land.
And of course Leningrad is a VC
@WILD:
Just wondering if anyone goes north looking to invade Norway then pounce on a German held Leningrad? Was thinking if the US is sitting in sz91 off Gib the Germans will generally build a dd in the English Chanel to stop you from invading Norway that turn. Normally you move to england so you can add ships or transports then on to whatever……What if you kill the dd and move the combined (US/UK) navy 3 spaces to sz111 off Scotland which can give you some air cover, then have the UK build a naval base for Scotland. This gives you some options that the Germans may not be ready for. You still have the option of invading Norway, but the German counter will be weaker because you also could hit the Finns (so they prob retreat).
Leningrad is good a possibility, but so is one of the northern Russian territories where the Germans won’t have any defenses. Might even be able to time it right to take Leningrad after Moscow falls so you can use the free IC.
Better take it earlier so germany has to send troops there to retake it ( leningrad and norway+finland represents 17ipc of production they cannot ignore that ) so they dont take moscow.
Also takes away reinforcements to the germans near moscow so helps russia survive longer.
Yea, I agree that invading Scandinavia or one of the Russian territories bordering sz127 (including Leningrad) could stall the attack on Moscow if timed right. The Germans wouldn’t be able to attack your landing force, and Moscow on the same turn (need air in both places). If they attack your landing force and lose it isn’t good for the Germans. Even if they push you back into the sea, chances are the cost was high in mobile units (dead or out of position) and air power (my landings always include some AA guns). This could give Moscow some breathing room.
To Variance, the Germans could maybe spare a cruiser (may not have a dd) to block you from getting all the way to sz127 depends on where the German fleet is (could be deep in the Baltic side of Leningrad).
Would probably just use UK transports, but that is good advice about using US transports for the UK units if the Germans can block (would need to load UK before hand though and would tip off the Germans). w/o the US ground units being able to take the territory the UK won’t be able to reinforce w/ground and land ftrs for cover so the Germans will easily take it back. However a light UK landing could force the Germans to use their limited resources to kill your Brits and it could be helpful. Maybe allows you to grind up some Germans next turn on the counter attack, or get them out of position to counter when you land somewhere else with your main force.
I have used US transports (once the US units have off loaded) to bring over UK units in latter turns. This works well when bridging the English channel to Normandy because the US transports wouldn’t have to move (constant air cover from UK air base in London).
Playing a little devil’s advocate here and my be off my rocker. Is it more beneficial to let the Soviets take Norway so they gain 6 IPCs from it (3 for Norway, 3 for NO of taking German owned territory)? You can add another 5IPCs (2 for Finland, 3 for NO of taking Pro-Axis territory) for the Soviets when they take Finland.
If you can take out the Noreigen/Finnish troops and the door is open ti the Siviets, take it. I don’t think that this is crazy. If the German player is taking their time and not threatening Leningrad, it makes sence to me. If nothing else, you have redirected German troops to ga back and take all of that back in order to get their IPC’s back. There are alot of avenues into Europe for the allies.
This Norway move takes way too long to execute and doesn’t do much to cripple Germany. Under the best conditions, its US 4 at Gibraltar and US 5 at SZ112 to Norway, which is often a very dangerous place for you to put your fleet as the Allies. You could potentially be crossing to SZ 119, but that costs you a SeaBase and you are still only gaining the SZ 125 position.
The sad fact is that by the time you take this 8IPCs away from Germany, he has already got 60-70 income. You don’t really diminish his forces this way, as in most games the pieces that Germany had in Scandinavia have joined on the attack with Russia. Ideally, it is Russia that takes Finland and Norway rather than the Western Allies since that gives them a NO of +3, but of course that would require diverting critical troops.
It does potentially create a backdoor to revive Russia, but a relief fleet can reach Novogrod as well, which is a much more strategic position to be in with both your fleet and your land.
It is not really any more appealing for the Western Allies to attack the Atlantic Wall or the Mediterranean either, so attacking Norway may be a “best of worst” option since it is much harder for Germany to defend and could potentially diminish their income at a time when they need to build in many directions. But because they will be right at the door to Moscow at this point, you may not have your UK support fighters to count on, and in any event, it doesn’t seem like the Allies are capable of taking a well defended Norway AND attacking some other useful objective at the same time.
If that were the case (that you could take Norway with a small, sacrificial fleet and not be subject to any german counteroffensives) then do it. But it won’t usually play out like that and in order to safely build the MiC there you will have to bring all the US and probably all the UK pieces up there to do it.
Some good points in here. I like to take Norway with the US (or UK early on if possible) but I do agree that if Russia can get in there it’s more worthwhile.
More games I play the more I like the neutral crush for the Allies. Hell, with a heavy enough EUS buy in round 1 the US can be in Spain as early as US2.
Having the US or UK get to SZ 127 sounds awesome, but the problem is that from SZ 91 you’re hitting Norway from SZ 112, which is an exceptionally bad place for the allies to be (no air base) and its also 3 spaces to SZ 127 with no port to use. That means that US 6 is too early, and that US 7 would be your first chance.
I may be wrong, but you also really can’t effectively use the transports the way you describe. If the transports have to move (rather than sit in SZ 110 and just bridge), it takes ridiculous logistics and time to move any troops. UK goes before the US, meaning that if the transports are empty, the UK can load (then move on US turn) then unload and attack on the subsequent turn but you cant repeat this maneuver, its one shot (because the transports are no longer next to the UK on the UK’s turn) and America cant use them while you are.
Worse, only the UK would be amphibing, and during the offense, the US units would sit idle. If Germany has a single fighter, it can scramble out over your invasion fleet (without an airbase) and none of the US warships can do anything about it. (Could be wrong here, but I think that’s what the FAQ says) With only UK fighters to help, range becomes an issue.
Showing up behind German flanks with a huge big stack of US units sound awesome, but it takes patience (US does nothing to stop the Axis for 7 turns) and I’m not that certain that you can stymy Germany with a single wave before it takes Moscow or everything around it.
More games I play the more I like the neutral crush for the Allies. Hell, with a heavy enough EUS buy in round 1 the US can be in Spain as early as US2.
I must not think outside the box enough. US can attack neutrals when not at war with the Axis and before they are brought in during round 4?
More games I play the more I like the neutral crush for the Allies. Hell, with a heavy enough EUS buy in round 1 the US can be in Spain as early as US2.
I must not think outside the box enough. US can attack neutrals when not at war with the Axis and before they are brought in during round 4?
No. Must be referring to a J 1 Dow.
in any event, in various games, my opponent has attacked turkey and sweden as well and they fall easily. There are not that many pro Axis neutrals to be gained (sweden, spain, portugal, saudi etc) after a few have been knocked out. You have to watch out for this stuff. ;)
More games I play the more I like the neutral crush for the Allies. Hell, with a heavy enough EUS buy in round 1 the US can be in Spain as early as US2.
I must not think outside the box enough. US can attack neutrals when not at war with the Axis and before they are brought in during round 4?
No. Must be referring to a J 1 Dow.
Correct. I should’ve clarified; since JDOW1 is very popular the US may have the chance to get over there as early as US2
Correct. I should’ve clarified; since JDOW1 is very popular the US may have the chance to get over there as early as US2
Not to change/hurt this topic but I do not have the experience many of you do so I don’t understand this strategy. Why is JDOW in round 1 popular?
Correct.� I should’ve clarified; since JDOW1 is very popular the US may have the chance to get over there as early as US2
Not to change/hurt this topic but I do not have the experience many of you do so I don’t understand this strategy. Why is JDOW in round 1 popular?
Plenty of people will chime in on this, but the general idea is that a JDOW1 is the most powerful Japan move, as you can wipe out some extra Allied units that normally get away, specifically the India BB, the sub and DD off the Philippines, plus reduce India’s income immediately.
I personally don’t like it. I’ve played it myself (following the guide written by Cow) without much success, and I’ve played against it with ample success.
