I don’t mean to sound like a dick, take it as constructive criticism:
I really feel like you have played only with people from your own group, and not at all online. This is because you make some unorthodox decisions. Nothing wrong with that (great, in fact) but it helps if you provide arguments for those decisions. I couldn’t make sense of some of them, I’ve listed 3 below as an example.
“Germany should spread subs out to cover Norway, Normandy/Bordeaux, Morocco, French West Africa, and French Equatorial Africa.” It sounds like a large investment (30 IPCs) that doesn’t achieve that much. Subs give a threat of attack, but bombers give threat of attack as well + can be used against USSR. So why go for subs instead of bombers?
“buy two cruisers in Western Germany” sounds wasteful. 2 cruisers = 24 IPCs = 3 destroyers. Your purchase buys 2 units / 6 attack / 6 defense / +bombard. Destroyers give an extra unit with the same attack / defense values. You lose the bombard but that’s usually worth it. So why go for cruisers instead of destroyers?
“Another advantage that Germany has by having subs in sz106 is that on G4, when the United States is at war, but has not deployed troops yet, the subs can go into sz101 and sink any US transports. This will only work if the US has focused its IPCs on the Pacific, which is quite likely.” That scenario is very unlikely, a buy of 1 destroyer would do it since there’s already 1 fighter there ready to scramble. Not to mention that a turn 4 DOW on USA is pretty unorthodox these days. So why assume the USA would spend 0 IPCs in the Atlantic for 3 turns?
Hi all,
Germany’s moves and battles on G1 need to be designed around your long term game plan.
The options basically boil down to
A) a single fast strike (London or Moscow)
or
B) a more cautious and divergent strategy of economic and military supremacy.
If Germany pursues A it’s Western border is weak, if they pursue B, The allies may have time to recover from their initial setbacks and weaknesses. This, I guess is at the heart of what makes the Axis fascinating to play.
The problem I see in your essay is that you are trying to do too much. In this essay we have a submarine blockade from Norway to Africa, German cruisers in the Channel and Destroyers patrolling the Med. This is 3 very divergent strategies with no master plan bringing it together.
The first place I would start is deciding where I want to be on turn 5. What is the purpose of this navy?
1. Economic strangulation of Allies = build subs
2. Sink US carriers = build subs
3. Sink allied transports = build subs
4. Keep allies out of med = build subs
Given that it is entirely possible for the US to put together a 200 point fleet by turn 5, the Germans cannot maintain naval parity. a fleet of about 20 subs would be needed to achieve any significant results.
I would say a few subs per turn here and there might catch the occasional player off guard
If by turn 5 things are going well (income 60+) in Russia this could be ramped up to 5 subs per turn. However this could just as easily be 10 extra infantry per turn so you have to decide if its really worth it. Sometimes i completely ignore naval. If the Allies aren’t building enough escorts I might surprise them just to scare them away for a turn or two.
Hi AxisAndAllies1940 and welcome to the Forum.
You may wanna take a look into this fourm:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30167.0
Your thoughts and love for this game are welcomed.
How many games did you play allready and where have you learned about this game and especially about this Forum?
AetV
I need to update my Germany playbook there are a few strategies I need to add… For those that like to Dow J3, they might be interested in Germany making a play for Egypt with naval and transports.
The good old take southern France g1 take Gibraltar g2 and swing into the medit sea… You get can a big force to hit egypt.
Obviously pushing Russia becomes slower so you buy Arty g2and g3 mech later, but if things go as planned the income for Europe will be really solid and g8 or g9 Russia will be a thing.
I always j1 Dow and play for faster games but if I were to do an income style game I would try it here n there.
I always like your playbooks, Cow! I have seen the German Med strat work successfully for some of the top League players, although I have never mastered the nuances myself.
As a group we have laid out two “conventional” G1 buys:
Germany Naval Strategic Defensive
1 CV 2 TT
Germany Dark Skies Strategic Offensive
2 SB 1 Sub
Both of these are great choices, especially if you just want to keep things simple and easy.
Against stronger players, however, I have started to buy a few subs each round, and in some games, as many as I could afford and still send mechs a few tanks to Russia.
Germany “needs to buy breathing room later” Strategic Defensive
3 Sub 1 TT 1 infantry or 2 sub 2 tt 1 infantry (as an example) a dd can fit in there too to contest the Russian NO.
If you don’t buy any infantry, it comes off the stack that goes to the front. So both of the pat buys don’t take this into account some men will have to be diverted to Norway or wherever. It is very tempting to use the subs for economic warfare, do. But their best role is sitting in SZ 105, 112, 93 etc. ready to hit SZ 91. As long as you have your airforce intact and 5-6 subs lurking then they have to be very careful about when they cross to SZ 91, how that fleet is composed, and what UK is doing since it can’t go the water without getting shellacked.
It’s “Kriegsmarine”, not “Kreigsmarine” (German “Krieg” = “war”).
Dear AxisAndAllies1940,
I started reading your essay, I am happy to read anything new about AA strategies.
But did you ever played a game? This German sz-114-cruiser can’t reach any action in G1 except fighting the russian navy, but not the british one…
I view the essays as para-historical entertainment from someone who contemplates the board waiting to find an opponent.
Welcome to the forum and try the game online. It’s much more interesting than writing and speculating about the game. :wink:
