Air Defence

@Bunnies:

(And why am I always beating my favorite dead horse “look at the board, look at the board, look at the board”?)

Because it’s so unrelevant? Or maybe your horse is to slow? ;)

So, you say, you specified that a country was deadzoned and was being traded.  Ask yourself if that’s enough to formulate a grand strategy.  Of course it’s not.

Not? ;)
Don’t get me wrong, I know that my game will only some dilettantish moving of plastic figures as long I have no planning above the next three moves. Know yourself, know your enemy … all that stuff from all that books.
But I also must take a look on the little decisions I have to make, like that example above. If I make such little things wrong, no strategy can help me. And I think, an strategy must pay attention to the overall board situation (as you said; not a dead horse in my eyes), my own weakenings in gameplay and the player that sits on the other side of the table. To judge that situation right and create the adequate strategy is a thing that I have to do by myself, and all the postings on this board can only help a little. But for that little tactical decisions and tiny precious moves which the game have in store these boards are an eye opener for me. And that’s why I’m looking for such little, delimited solutions for a special problem and hope, I’ ll remember that solution in my next game.

Conclusion:  Germany has superior trading ability.  Germany may leave defense forces of 2 infantry or more per territory, particularly in Belorussia and Ukraine early (since UK/US probably can’t drop units into those territories early, unlike Karelia and Archangel).  However, Russia should avoid leaving infantry in territories if it can help it.

I’ll try to remember that.

Note leaving infantry behind is sometimes good re: Tim’s post.

Known, but noted again. :)

And: thank you for your post.

A further complication on calculating the required German defense of France vs the UK 1 - US 2. Do Germans need to count the ‘US 2’ as one normal transport wave (say 4 transports), or two cumulated waves (if US redirects the ‘shuck’ from Africa) with a pause next turn ? It resumes to the question: would US dare that ? or have interest ?

Also, if US shuttles to Africa, is it well for Germany to defend Italy with full force to hold it, or a similar wait and counterattack policy ?

I have found that in my first few rounds playing germany, I was much to aggressive.  Usually I get so burned out pounding Russia, that by the time that I am in striking distance or moscow i am unable to fend off US/UK assaults into WE, SE etc.  I agree with the previous posts that suggest a solid INF and FIG anchor.  Since you always have the advantage on the defensive, let Russia burn its self out on a what it think is a conservative germany, meanwhile you destroy/delay the US/UK shucks with a combine german fleet on SZ 12, with a FIG stack in WE.  Russia will be so tickled pink to get those extra 3-5 IPCs that it my become overly aggressive.  Whenever an ally sticks a vulnerable army out, you will be in position to lop it off.  All the while Japan weakens Russia, and moves in for the kill.  Of course this only works in a KGF came.  If Japan gets tied down Germany is living on borrowed time.

Just to be thorough and make the point:

Fricking subs…

I suppose I need glases.

But thanks for clearing this up ppl! :)

Air units can retreat from any combat, but must do so all at the same time.

If the land units retreat, then ALL remaining units must retreat.
Land units all have to go to the SAME TERRITORY, which must be a territory that at least 1 of the land units that fought in the battle came from.
Air units can land in any friendly territory in range (friendly as of the start of the current national turn).

Once air units engage in battle, they can hit and be hit by any unit in the territory.

The only exception of course is that SUBs cannot fire on FIGs or BOMs at all.

trying to hold Karalia with Russia is not smart unless Russia is rolling and Germany is crumbling.