this conversation doesn’t really go anywhere when one argument is essentially “Germany can do ALL the things!” and the other argument is “good luck with that”.
obviously having africa NOs is a good thing. but if you’re advocating spending 30+ IPCs of German money in the med, and there are 2 turns of the german air force is a non-factor in Russia, and you’re not buying Italian can-openers you are undeniably going to have a weaker Russian push especially during G3 and G4.
I’d be more convinced if you can show that what Germany gives up in Russia is outweighed by what it gains in the UK. I’m not saying it can’t, but you can’t just look at the pros of a strategy and tout its effectiveness without comparing it to others out there.
During the course of a game, if Germany is focused on Russia, the med becomes an allied stronghold, disrupting Europe from the south. If you take this out of the equation, and effectively defend Europe from a Russian advance, Russia will have to focus on the Middle East because the Axis powers will begin to push from both there and the West, along with Japanese forces from the East if they were successful. This creates a huge problem for Russia in late game. I only use this strategy every once in a while. I’m not saying that it is a sure-proof way to win with the Axis, i’m only saying that when I use this strategy I tend to win.
going egypt first as axis can be fun, i usually do a variation of this if italy still has the majority of their fleet on their first turn. With the current meta though usually most of the italian fleet plus most of the italian ground forces in africa are gone by the time italy goes. A decent strat to have in mind as a reactive strategy based on how the first turn goes… i’ve had italian money up to like 45/turn or more once when the allies left them alone on turn one, i gave italy egypt and the middle east and they were scary lol. Granted this was against inexperienced allied players so not the best test of the strat :P
Egypt is a situation dictates only strategy just like Sea Lion IMHO. I prefer either or both at the same time, but I never rarely spend for them.
Sea Lion:
For example, a typical buy for me G1 is 6 artillery/2 infantry or 5 artillery/1 fighter (if the UK bids a fighter to Scotland). This G1 buy doesn’t scream Sea Lion, but, if the UK player doesn’t spend much on London, well guess what, Germany has some options especially if other battles went right for Germany like SZ106. I don’t like to buy an aircraft carrier G1 even though Sea Lion is always my Axis fantasy. In a Sea Lion game, I buy the Carrier and maybe a destroyer the same turn as Sea Lion and place it in the channel on G3. Also, if doing Sea Lion, Germany needs a tremendous amount of ground units in order to properly manage Russia.
Cairo:
Just as Germany needs to a lot of ground to manage Russia in a Sea Lion game, so to does it if Germany spends on boats to get Cairo. If Cairo is taken by Germany through the spending of income on boats, I think a smart Russian player might have the chance to get NOs and become very strong in their own right. Anytime that Germany spends on boats like a G1 carrier purchase, Russia can to make lots of aggressive purchases.
I think it best to get Egypt with Italy not Germany and only under the right conditions…mostly achieved through poor dice on the part of the UK while good dice for Italy with minimal help from Germany. Otherwise the bite is not worth the squeeze IMHO. Also, if Italy is the one that gets Cairo and gets to place an IC there, then Italy actually has it’s own purpose besides the important can opener role.
I want to throw a challenge out there to anyone who does not normally take Egypt with Germany. Try it once. Look at the outcome for yourself, and evaluate the positives, as well as the negatives. Refine the strategy over the course of a few more trials, and you will be surprised at how effective this strategy can be.
If you watch GHG you will see that he has outlined a strategy called “Middle Earth” in which the UK uses South Africa, Egypt, and Persia to transport large amounts of infantry around. When Germany can spawn units in Egypt and use them to hit Iraq and Persia, leaving at least one of them for Italy, it creates a great deal of frustration for the allies. Once Germany has Egypt, they can use transports to move onto South Africa, and soon the Axis powers will own all of Africa and the Middle East, taking full advantage of the “Middle Earth” strategy only from an Axis perspective. It is a deadly strategy.
If you watch siredblood, he outlines a strategy called the “Cobra Kai” in which Germany targets southern Russia, which he calls the “Heart of the Game”. This is true, because most often the side that has a firm hold on the Middle East and Southern Russia will end up winning the game. There is alot of oil here which provides a great amount of NO’s for Germany.
This is an interesting thought
I’ve been reading the threads. It seems if you would want to disrupt the med. In my opinion (which is can be crapped on and probably will be) the best place to attempt to do it would be to put a factory in Yugo. Now this is my opinion but it does offer the opportunity to utilize the airbase in italy to scramble as a pseudo carrier to defend the fleet while you build up a nice transport fleet. You would likely already have an army ready to rock on over if you attack Yugo on turn 1. as well you could station your airforce there too even after a blast on UK Med fleet(required anyway with this strategy) This would require the factory on turn 2 which wouldn’t telegraph your plan to the other players and if you change your mind you can always use this as a place to build other stuff to go to USSR (use imagination here) or just not do it based on the turn 1 results. I don’t know if this is the best but i’m just speculating at this point and would have to see how to make it work.
Sean…
correction station your airforce on the airbase in rome should have been clearer on that. not in Yugo.
A better plan would be to take S France G1, build fleet and take Greece G2, build factory in Greece and take Egypt G3, build units and airbase (if needed) in Greece G4. The units can deploy to Africa more rapidly and the airbase can defend both the Adriatic and the Aegean. You also have the option of a Black Sea fleet should it ever prove advantageous.
If you watch GHG you will see that he has outlined a strategy called “Middle Earth” in which the UK uses South Africa, Egypt, and Persia to transport large amounts of infantry around. When Germany can spawn units in Egypt and use them to hit Iraq and Persia, leaving at least one of them for Italy, it creates a great deal of frustration for the allies. Once Germany has Egypt, they can use transports to move onto South Africa, and soon the Axis powers will own all of Africa and the Middle East, taking full advantage of the “Middle Earth” strategy only from an Axis perspective. It is a deadly strategy.
Of course Germany going hard against Egypt would be good against Middle Earth. GHG’s Middle Earth is designed to play effectively against the more “standard” play of Germany going hard against Russia, where the UK needs to find ways to make progress against Italy and help Russia. If a player commits/copies a strategy while ignoring what their opponent is doing, they’re not going to do very well :)
FWIW I’ve played building in S France and it generates some very fun games! Point is not that it’s bad, but when discussing it to bring up those weaknesses as well :)
Cow is correct.
The best way to force your hand in Egypt as Germany is to land heavy air Tobruk first turn (atleast 2 fighters). Build two bombers G1.
Italy moves into Alexandria I1 no issue, or obliterates the allies stationed there.
G2, Build all bombers again, and land ALL planes in Alexandria (or bombers in Rome). You should have 12-14 planes in Alexandria and upwards of another 5 in West Germany. Egypt cannot stop a G3 air blitz; and UK cannot counter the italians in Alexandria. At best the british can run. (which happens 3/4 times). Bombers can be used against the Russians G2 during attack if necessary.
If the british run, Italy walks into Egypt I2; Germany builds mech and continues terrorizing Russia. Land enough German fighters in EGY to hold against british counter attack.
If the British try to hold, Italy can strafe for a turn, or if it makes most sense - Germany alone pounds Egypt into dust G3.
The cherry on top - if you load a german infantry G2 into an Italian transport, it can land on a subsequent turn for the +5.
Yes - this manuever is expensive; and costs air power. But it also costs the UK it’s traditional airpower arriving in Russia, and gives the Italians a huge boost.
If America does not intervene, Italy becomes a monster. If America does intervene, Japan becomes a monster.
This is why I usually prefer to skip Taranto, and nuke Tobruk as allies now.
The best way to force your hand in Egypt as Germany is to land heavy air Tobruk first turn (atleast 2 fighters).
Its efficient if these planes started in west Germany, hit France and then landed in Tobruk. People have to stop being so scared of that silly AA gun.
Maybe you don’t sink z111 on turn 1. Get them next turn. How many times throughout a game do you face an AA gun? Does it stop you? Anyway, we are getting off track. The point is that its possible to give UK much harder choices if you use German air to reinforce Taranto and Tobruk, especially if you sink the Gibraltar cruiser with subs. You can then nuke Egypt like Gargantua and Cow explained.
We do the same thing in our 39 game. Land figs in Tobruk and planes in Romania to protect the Italy fleet. Can Italy afford a airbase on T1 buy ? We put that in Tobruk so figs can scramble and Ger planes from Romania to clean up ( Gar’s Bomber buys ?) if UK fleet attacks. It ends up pushing the UK fleet in the channel and out of the Med while Italy just brings down there fleet with ground landing in Tobruk.
Just some suggestions if any of it is possible for 40 game.
Sounds cool but Italy doesn’t have the funds for an airbase on turn 1 in Global.
I never thought of an air base at Alexandria. Heck, it’s $1 cheaper than a carrier and would be built in position.
Often the remaining Italian fleet on Turn 1 hits the remaining 2-3 UK ships in SZ97 while concurrently landing on Greece. Italy might be left with 1 cruiser / 1 transport in SZ97 protected under an airbase in s. Italy? So why not be protected under an air base located on Alexandria on turn 2 (the 1 inf/art from Libya walk in to protect the fighters/tacs.). Italy could save round 1 and buy an air base on turn 2 for Alexandria.
Also, an airbase purchased on I2 might be another way to protect a lone Italian transport, and especially important if it’s loaded at sea with a German Infantry.
I agree with Gar, Var, and Cow about the easiest or optimal way to get Cairo. Also, I think it’s better that Italy get it so that Italy actually has a much more important role. But if Germany spends on boats and then Italy gets Cairo, you really messed up. Germany at that point needs all 7 IPCs for Cairo and needs to be the one getting the middle east oil NOs to make up for the lack of ground units against a most likely more powerful Russian ground force.
Like I said, given that the UK player does a Taranto attack, the remaining Italian ships should instead focus on destroying the two French warships, which will put Italy in the sea zone that Germany would then be able to spawn ships on G2. On G2, German planes (that were in Rome) can destroy any UK ships that were left, and land in Northern Africa, in preparation for an attack on Egypt.
If you don’t sink the UK fleet, it can hide in SZ 109 with more stuff (and a buy) so that its out of range of the slower air. You can’t do the standard opener and this.
Once you get your air down south, then it has to fly back the other direction (probably without attacking because of the geometry), Germany typically uses all of its air together to create threat (the lightsaber…), so that’s not happening and Russia can stack.
You also can’t use the 1 Italian transport to move Germany men and Italian ones, its pretty high demand capacity since you need it to hit Greece, Syria, malta, Cyprus, Gibraltar, Alexandria, etc.
The combination of those two things means that UK has a somewhat useful navy, though it takes time for it to pressure Germany, and also that you’re not taking Moscow G5-6. All in return for breaking integrity and taking a territory worth 2. The UK empire falls apart more readily when japan can attack from behind and take all the land from the sea, but if Japan is headed that way anyways, it doesn’t need to be combined with this plan, that’s optional.
This idea pressures UK in a less direct way than SL where they have to spend their money to protect London, and it puts less pressure on Russia, so its a fun plan (like taking the germans to south Africa). Maybe give it a try next game when im stuck playing axis.
This idea pressures UK in a less direct way than SL where they have to spend their money to protect London
The 2 bombers build G1 puts sealion on the table every bit as much as a navy build. Maybe more so.
Requester45’s idea of Italy attacking the french ships and then germany building transports under their protection also works. It’s easier on the luftwaffe but expensive to buy transports and slower.
That’s true, UK always seems to get bombed when the bombers don’t have anything else fun to do, more bombers = more economic frustration. Germany gets so much money it can usually replace losses or change up what its doing (like not committing to the massive fleet until Russia holds/falls in the midgame)
Those ships almost always live because the Italians are busy mopping up the carrier planes and cruiser or not that are left over from Taranto, they also want to hunt the planes that attacked (Syria, Cyprus, malta maybe) but also wish they could smash Greece…its a lot to do in one round for a small power. If Germany can only build 3 units and one has to be a capital ship unless the Italians help…but their biggest ship left is a cruiser, its sometimes their ONLY ship left after the counterattack lol.
