Towards a General Strategic Framework - 11 Conclusions

Instead of escort @1 and interceptors @2 is now in BM escorts @2 and interceptors @2 ?
Then I agree with that. Promotes more bombing

In addition to Young Grasshopper’s point, you seem to be sending up outnumbered interceptors. Don’t do this. Leave them on the ground until you have probably more defenders than attackers. Defenders can be worthwhile on the ground in the sense of tying down the Luftwaffe though. If the odds are even, trading fighters for fighters is a negative for the defender in the event of a sea lion.

Alright, confirmed again! Thanks again for clarification, great to know you always get a competent reply asap!:)

@Spendo02:

Can I get a link to the rule you are referencing in regard to originally colored territories?

“Major industrial complexes can only be built on originally controlled territories (this includes upgrading minor ones). Likewise they may not be upgraded when captured. Major industrial complexes are reduced to minor when captured. The original owner of the territory may upgrade it if the territory is recaptured.”

Is all I can find on our “Alpha” ruleset.  I’m not arguing, I’m just curious if Japan can build a Major on Manchuria or Kaingsu - or if it has to include the national territory icon in order to be considered “originally controlled”

Again sorry for the wording of “originally colored territories”, it was a poor choice of wording on my part (as Little_Boot pointed out). A tt has to have your roundel on it to be considered one of your original tt’s. You can’t build a Jap major on Manchuria, or Kaingsu (they are Chinese original tt’s).

The difference with SBRs is that you are attacking future production versus pieces already on the board ready to do something.

You shouldn’t be doing SBRs because your bombers only face a 1 each when attacking  an IC with an AA versus attacking land pieces unsupported by ground troops.  You do an SBR when there is really nothing for your bombers to do and they are not taken out of position by doing the SBR, and potential losses won’t dramatically affect your next move.  If you really really need both bombers for next rounds attack on a navy that is threatening you, then maybe you don’t risk losing a bomber in an SBR due to the fact it will prevent the planned next round attack on the said navy.

Thanks, I thought that was right but just wanted to make sure.

I am in a Global game now.  We just finished Round 9 and decided on a break for a while.  I am playing Germany and the Russian player is also handling China.
Germany captured Paris Round 1, forced a Sealion Round 2 and was successful but at somewhat high cost.  Round 3 took the 3 big neutrals - Spain, Sweeden and Turkey - which also took a fair amount of resources.  Therefore, I don’t think I was able to build up enough in the east for Barbarossa like I would have preferred.  I had a good force by end of Round 3, but it certainly could have been better.
Italy really struggled with Britain in Africa and the Med.
Japan took a gamble by bringing USA into the war Round 1 by attacking Brits and the Philippines.
As for Russia, first three rounds she spent building a lot of infantry along the border with a few artillery and tanks.  Round 4 Russia actually attacked Germany, which I really was not expecting.  Sank all my transports and took an unoccupied Sweeden from me.  Round 5, she had destroyed all three army groups in Europe, took Warsaw and was only frustrated by Finland with a bloody repulse.  Round 6, she threw a massive army at Berlin.  Lucklily, the last couple of rounds of combat went my way and Berlin survived with just 1 fighter unit left.  Both sides were severely depleted but Germany still had her capital.
Fast forward to Round 9. 
Now Germany is getting strong again, starting to advance into Russia itself and threatening Leningrad.  German Navy has been sunk by the US Navy and they keep fighting back and forth over Spain, which US currently holds with a fairly strong force. 
Italy finally finished off all British and French troops in Africa and has a tank running around blitzing territories.  Most of Italy’s resources have been spent trying to help Germany with Spain and threatening Russia with a small force from the south.
Japan has all but destroyed China – 1 territory and 1 infantry unit left.  They have grabbed Calcutta and control Eastern Asia and the DEI.  However, both the Imperial Navy and the US Navy have been slugging it out and are almost non-existant.  Also, Japan has tanks creeping west toward Russia.
So, while Russia is still a ways from being “out of it”, they are in pretty bad shape.  I have seen this in other games as well.  Russia is just too dang big and can’t seem to get a decent number of reiinforcements to the front.  When they start a big offensive, if it runs out of steam then it seems like Germany always grinds them back.  Unless the US can get over there with a large enough force to really threaten Germany in Western Europe, Russia will be taken out and then Germany will have plenty of money to deal with the US and push them back out of Europe with help from Italy.

@kungfujew:

Sorry, that’s G40 Multi.  :)

I figured
:roll: