Wait, What? Oh my!

How about that famous situation where France actually fights and doesn’t get conquered?

@Caesar:

How about that famous situation where France actually fights and doesn’t get conquered?

That isn’t really a move though. Nothing the allies do can bring it about, unless the axis are trying Italy strong when they shouldn’t.

@PainState:

USA moves up to SZ 112 Takes Denmark and Norway and if the Axis are really sleeping at the wheel take out Western Germany.

You don’t need to take Norway. To move through the straits, only Denmark needs to be in Allied hands at the start of the British turn.

WHO PLAYS IN ROCHESTER, NY –---- RED_CASTLE_01@HOTMAIL.COM

Defend Berlin, leave WG and Denmark empty. Duh winning.

WG empty! That’s when you’re getting a bit desperate isn’t it?

No, Russia is important to take quickly. WG is trash, Berlin produces 10 units, more than enough, italy gets it back for you, bam 3 more, france is 3 more. How many units you need after Moscow is taken? You can use Karelia etc for air to support ground you make on berlin to take back west europe if it gets reclaimed. This is easy to do because you are fighting on your turf (and in order for the allies to shuffle 10+ units a round they need at least 10 transports if they are shuffling to spain, 15 if they are dropping in.  UK can’t produce middle east while dump trucking on europe at the same time (maybe 40 ipc tops of units)

So yeah you can take it back after.

Hmm.

You still only have a minor on WG after doing that move. That makes things more difficult for you. You can upgrade it but it sets you back 20IPC.

How are you defending Normandy while doing this? If you’re allowing USA on Normandy, that’s a few more units you need to worry about. Are you advocating leaving that with French ownership perhaps?

@larrymarx:

I’m going to call this one the “heavenly kingdom”.

More unorthodox than surprise, but still an interesting idea to consider and I like your name for it  :-D

I will keep it in the back of my head in case I spot a good scenario to test it in.

Maybe this could work if Japan is making a heavier than normal rush of land units in the early game and it’s obvious that China won’t be able to make a good exchange in Yunnan?

@wheatbeer:

@larrymarx:

I’m going to call this one the “heavenly kingdom”.

More unorthodox than surprise, but still an interesting idea to consider and I like your name for it  :-D

I will keep it in the back of my head in case I spot a good scenario to test it in.

Maybe this could work if Japan is making a heavier than normal rush of land units in the early game and it’s obvious that China won’t be able to make a good exchange in Yunnan?

This has been discussed before, see: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36062.0

Back then, people also agreed that it was probably not a great idea as a general strategy. There was an interesting post by Nerquen though:

@nerquen:

I found the strategy of saving Chinesse income working pretty well in my hands, see here for an example: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35735.135

I don’t strictly save all Chinese income from the very start. Instead I first buy as much as I can to hold Yunnan as long as I can. Once Yunnan cannot be challenged anymore and Japan is strong enough such that it is just question of time it will conquer all China I stop purchasing with China and simply back up into the west corner. Japan is still forced to send a large force to kill my remaining Chinese as he cannot know if I will not buy 10 inf last moment possibly reinforced from Russia. So if Japan sends too little force I place my 10 Chinese in west. On the other hand, if opportunity arise, as it did in the linked game, US sends a TT to Manchuria and China builds 10 inf on top, then anzac lands fighters and Russian forces from Amur join the party to form a mighty allied stack in the back of Japan. The stack does not have much offensive power but can’t be eliminated cheaply.

Thanks Herr KaLuen, I never saw your original thread  :-)

I don’t think I’d ever save China’s round 1 income (unless Japan did something truly weird) … but I absolutely agree with nerquen’s logic in the quote you posted.

I have used the Chinese save income trick before - but onlylate game, once china is in good control of its borders.

By saving the Chinese income you essentially end up with a “rapid response” force, and it’s a big stick to wave around; as placed units can be attacked or avoided, and are slow to respond, but a saved income can be anywhere on your next turn.

The only spot I defend is Berlin if I am doing an all in on Russia. Usually this is a g6 or bust type of thing.

If I am going income, well I am not all ining Russia now am I?

For a G6 all in on Moscow, how much do you divert your resources to fight the British, such as on the first turn, in the Mediterranean to counter Taranto, or pushing them back if they land two dudes in France, for example? I imagine there is a balance to achieve since if you ignore them completely you end up losing territories worth IPC’s that you could have spent on Moscow, but if you fight them too much you lose units you could have had in Moscow.

I have no doubt of that. I just wanted to know how necessary it is to cover your flanks, if at all, when you’re doing that and I figure he’s the one to ask.

He said the only place he defends is Berlin, and I wasn’t sure if that meant he also doesn’t attack anything else (like British fleets). I figure you’ve got to push them at least a little bit but if he says you don’t then I’ll take another look at it.

Italy can build infantry and some artillery to help garrison places in western Europe.

@simon33:

@Caesar:

How about that famous situation where France actually fights and doesn’t get conquered?

That isn’t really a move though. Nothing the allies do can bring it about, unless the axis are trying Italy strong when they shouldn’t.

Allies can do something about that and try to get there stuff on Paris as fast as possible.