Germany Strategy concept…

My purchase and exact unit allocation will depend on Russia’s move and how it went. I prefer to build only land units on G1. If I’m able to stack Karelia or Ukraine, I’ll build 2-3 tanks. No matter what, here’s what I attack in no particular order:

1. Gibraltar Battleship: sub, 3-4 fighters
2. Karelia: minimal force or full stack, depending on counterattack
3. Egypt: 2 inf, 2 tanks, maybe a fighter, bomber
4. East Med Destroyer: battleship, loaded transport, fighter

If Russia attacked Ukraine or Belorussia, I will always counterattack. An attack on Ukraine changes where I play my fighters. Attacking West Russia on G1 is a risky play that I’ll only consider if Russia had really lousy dice.

@Yoper:

I am especially interested in this simply because of how this will affect my use of it in the A&A tournament that I run.  Being that it is a timed event for the individual games, I am curious as to how the extra need for naval units will slow down the Allies in building up for their attack into Europe.

I’d say it can slow down the Allies from 1-3 turns. It really depends on how many naval and air units G has at the start of G2. It might be enough to sink the AC and 2 DDs that seems to be the regular UK buy for UK1, depending on where they are placed. It also depends if the US landed on Algeria on US1 or not and how Africa is going for the Allies.

Yes you’re right about japan shuttling units from Japan into mainland Asia.  Yes this will work, but only if Japan is left alone to focus completely on invading Asia.  If the United States and Britian keep the japanese fleet busy in the pacific and apply pressure on them by taking islands, Japan has to respond to that.

Tell you what……pull your Japanese fleet to Japan and focus on shuttling units to Asia.  Leave your islands like borneo, east indies, and new guinea alone to be taken by britian and the US.  You’ll lose 9 ipc’s and you’ll lose momentum with your offensive.  If the allies aren’t working together your plan may work.  I have played against this tactic and it doesn’t always work. Japan usually stalls out.  However, when I play with Japan, My first round purchase is 1 IC to be placed in kwantung, 1 transport, 1inf, 1 art.  my turn 2 purchases are 1 IC to be placed in Manchuria, and 3 tanks to be placed in kwantung.  Turn 3 I purchase 6 tanks.  Now I have plenty of aromor to use and my range has increased.  with a constant flow of tank each round I will be able to outproduce india, and break out all over Russia.  My japanese fleet would just be protecting my interests in the Pacific.  Transports are great, but it is expensive to maintain them.  getting a beach head and building there is best, and you can still shuttle units with your transports.

@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.

@mateooo:

and most importantly, the italians are better spaghetti makers than allies.  If you have a choice, pick anyone else.

Only we Italians are able to do spaghetti. Spaghetti made outside of Italy are good for gluing poster on the walls.

@AgentOrange:

Which is why I brought up this topic:  Would it be a good or a bad idea to allow Germany a first-round withdrawal?  :?

Ive done it before…and sometimes it works very well.  My method of retreating and regrouping is to simpy advance all my inf forward, cause I feel that I shoud at least make the russians pay dearly for advancing.  I retreat my art and arm…making large arm stacks in Eastern Europe and making a large art stack in the Balkans.

The main reason you could do that is because you took London on G2, so he couldn’t possibly increase his naval force (not to mention he lost a fighter off his carrier). Plus, the US didn’t really put any effort into co-guarding the UK fleet because he is trying to go after Japan first.

You made an excellent choice in this circumstance and it is a good example of what I think the German navy was designed for, but in normal circumstances the costs would have been greater and the benefits less if the US/UK had united in SZ8 and built some navy together (and not lose the capital  :lol:)

It was… and he lost :-D