What is your first buy as UK (assuming baltic carrier)

1 send one bomber and two figters and you can shoot me down one fighter
the odds for 2 arent in your favour

if you want to loose units worth 28 for mine that worth 10 i will gladly say yes

But against 3 nations, that FIG cost Germany a lot more than those already replaced US units cost…

USA will send the same 2 TRN, 1 DST again in US2.  Germany meanwhile is shy another FIG that was probably not replaced…

i hope ill play against you soon, you with the allies and i with the axis
i think it should be a very interesting match

but yes in this if you want to call it KGF Germany doesnt have much stocks

but Germany has Japan which is by each turn growing bigger and bigger……

@ncscswitch:

But against 3 nations, that FIG cost Germany a lot more than those already replaced US units cost…

USA will send the same 2 TRN, 1 DST again in US2.  Germany meanwhile is shy another FIG that was probably not replaced…

Which means Germany, most likely, is now down 2 of 6 fighters, a third of the luftwaffe and round 2 isn’t even over yet!

ok i am just saying that germany can take moscow, hold berlin and rome while waiting for Japan to finish the work

@ncscswitch:

1 AC, 1 TRN, 2 INF.

Move existing fleet (inlcuding ECan) to SZ3 and attack Norway with 1 ARM, 1 ART, 2 INF, 2 FIG (and a BOM if Germany has force there, otherwise SBR or stragler naval attack).

Place new Navy in SZ3 and land FIGs on AC.  2 INF to UK.

On US1, US sends 1 FIG, 1 BOM to UK (possibly doing a stragler navy strike as well if needed).  If Germany has more than 1 TRN in range, 2 TRNs of units to UK.
On USSR2, the Russia SUB goes to SZ6 to block a combined naval/air strike on my SZ3 fleet.

Thanks Switch ! I’m using your strat against my next opponent in our private little tournament. I’m pretty confident he will just put a carrier in Baltic and do “standard” attacks with G1. If Germany doesnt send the rest of his fleet to Gib… is it safe to just buy transports with USA (4x4) ? I’m guessing yes with my BB and Panama Destroyer coming as reserves.

If you bring the 2 Pacific capital ships along, yes.

Otehrwise, I would want at least another DST to shield my TRNs that are going to be in or near SZ8 doing the run back and forth from North america to UK.  The TRNs on the Europe side of UK will be protected by the UK navy.

Basically, I think Amon Sul’s point is a pretty damn good one.

"Move existing fleet (inlcuding ECan) to SZ3 and attack Norway with 1 ARM, 1 ART, 2 INF, 2 FIG (and a BOM if Germany has force there, otherwise SBR or stragler naval attack).

Place new Navy in SZ3 and land FIGs on AC.  2 INF to UK."

So let’s say the Germans landed 4 fighters in W. Europe, bomber and fighter in Libya.  Now Germany threatens 2 inf 1 tank AA gun (remember the UK fighters are on the UK carrier) with 1 inf, 1 tank, 4 fighters, and a bomber.  I know Amon Sul said he landed two fighters there, but I’m not Amon Sul.

So the US sends destr two transports to UK?  Lands fighter and bomber?  Fine, Germany hoses the US fleet and trades 1 fighter for a destroyer and two transports.  German fighters are valuable, but 10 IPC for 28 is pretty good, especially since with a KGF, US MUST rebuild the transports.

But the German threat to UK is toast.

And the US sends ANOTHER 2 TRN and 1 DST to SZ8 the following turn (existing DST, 2 TRN built in US1).

So Germany is out a FIG (on average), further weakening any chance of a successful German strike on the UK fleet, their AF was tied up in a naval battle and not used against Russia or the UK forces in Norway.  UK fleet is intact, and UK is now landing 8 divisions per turn.

The US can pour money into navy and transportable units.  Germany can;t afford to pour money into FIGs and Navy.  And with the UK already having force in Norway, Germany will have to send land forces every turn to re-take Karelia (or risk a massive UK force there).  And that leaves Russia with a slight edge over the forces Germany will have left in the central and Southern areas.

Germany is down Norway, and has to dedicate forces to Karelia.  That means tehir income is both reduced and contained in Northern Eruope.  With Russia able to focus on central and southern Europe lines, they are going to be able to trade territories for quite a while, keeping Russian income high, and above what Germany is able to focus on Russia.

To make gains against Russia, Germany needs those FIGs in the east, not parked in Western.  Otherwise, Russia will be collecting over $30 each turn, cranking out 8-10 INF and 1-2 offensive units per turn… about the same as Germany;s production by G3.  And if Russia and Germany are even, and UK is landing 8 units, that is a major Allied advantage.

Why would Germany buy a navy?  One carrier and perhaps one or two transports is it.

Air force - Germany can’t afford to buy two or three fighters a turn, but it won’t need to if it can just bleed the Allied fleet out.  56 IPC for 20 is a great trade.  Against a KGF, Germany should just buy a fighter, or perhaps two, per turn, depending on the Allied navy strength.  The Allies have to pour more IPC into defensive fleet units, and Japan goes wild in Asia.  Germany tanks in, and Japan expands.

Fighters parked in W. Europe can still be used against Karelia and move back to W. Europe.

UK isn’t going to be landing 8 units a turn immediately.  In the proposed move, UK has three transports, and two infantry in London on the second turn.  Transporting eight units a turn isn’t going to happen until UK gets builds some infantry, and builds a fourth transport.  Of course, I know that you already know this, ncsswitch, I’m just clarifying.

Finally, UK either attacks the Baltic, or doesn’t.  If UK attacks and retreats, it can deplete the Baltic fleet, but will probably be killed by the Baltic survivors and German air.  If UK attacks to try to take the Baltic, the German air should be able to handle the survivors.  If UK doesn’t attack the Baltic fleet, Germany can suicide at any time supported by massed air.  Considering that UK’s attack power consists of a battleship, two fighters, and a bomber (with a weak carrier), any attack on the Baltic will be inefficient.  This last point ASSUMES A GERMAN BUILD OF A FIGHTER A TURN.  Germany MUST switch mentalities from trying to gain ground in Asia to trading territories with USSR and defending against the Allied fleet.  It is far simpler to control the Allied invasion with fighters that cost 10 and attack at 3, while the Allies are building transports that cost 8 and defend at 1, while Germany has a superior air force.

The 8 division drop starts in UK3.

You drop 4 in UK1, 2 in UK2, 8 in UK 3 and forward.

You also do not attack the Baltic fleet.  You let it come to you and face your AC and FIGs and two 4’s and a 3 instead of a 1 and two 3’s.  Parked in the Baltic, they shiled Eastern and Germany from direct landings.  Fine.  I know that move.  I use it all the time.  And I certainly know how to counter my own moves.

Pardon me if I do not go into more detai… I have 2 more rounds of a Tournament to play :-P

an interesting debate here

maybe switch is right but even with the sacrifice of 28 IPC to 10 i don`t see how can the Allies brake Germany before Japan expands rapidly

That depends on what the Allies are doing with the Eastern Soviet forces, what UK is doing with their Indian/Pacific ships and their Indian forces, and most importantly if the US is abandoning the Pacific, doing an IC in Sinkiang, or doing a “Big Gulp” (though I do not advocate a Big Gulp anymore)…

a Big Gulp???  :-)

Big Gulp is the name given by Jeff Bone (the guy who taught me Classic back in college) to a massive US naval build up in the Pacific to go after Japan.

It was a huge build up of capital ships, subs, and loaded TRNs that moved out from Western US about Turn 4, and just raided Japan’s Pacific islands, destroyed the Jap fleet, and laid siege to Japan (and prevent Japan from transporting forces to Asia).

Is that still viable/workable/thing that can be done in Revised now? Sounds interesting.

It may be, in certain games.  But the chances for success have been dramatically reduced for several reasons:
1.  The much larger Japan fleet (and Naval AF) to start
2.  The 20% increase in Japan starting income
3.  The extra SZ’s in the Pacific.
4.  The ability to build new naval units in enemy occupied sea zones

In Revised you can no longer park a US fleet in 1 sea zone that encompasses Japan and prevent any and all naval builds.  In Classic it was 1 sea zone, and you could NOT place newly built naval units in an enemy occupied sea zone.  In Revised, there are 2 SZ’s around Japan, and you can place naval units even if there are 10 BB’s in the sea zone.  Thus a simple fleet part at Japan does not create the complete isolation that it did in Classic.

Lastly, Classic had no IC build limits, so the most common strat was for Japan to just TRN everything from Tokyo, so if you blockaded Japan, they were DONE.  In Revised, Japan most likely has multiple IC’s on the mainland that can continue to build troops to fight in Asia… and build up a new navy to move in to attack the Yanks, or bypass them and land in Los Angeles…

You are missing the point Shadow Hawk.

In Classic it took only 1 ship surviving the Naval Battle to blockade Japan,  Reinforcements could be sent in in only a couple of moves, and probably a few were already staged half way there.  Japan’s ONLY option to attack those ships was air force, and FIGs were more expensive in Classic, and Japan had less income to start with.

There simply was no way for Japan to build enough FIGs fast enough to ever get ahead of US ships sailing across the Pacific.

But in Revised, that simply will not work.  First off, the US is weaker against Japan than they were in Classic, so it takes longer for the US to build up a fleet that can chalenge Japan.  Second, Japan has more income to start, and so can keep pace with the US easier.  Third, to break Japan’s economic might, the US fleet can;t go straight for Japan, they ahve to go for the Islands first, giving Japan a chance to counter with sea AND land based air units.  Fourth, if the US kills the Japan fleet with 1 ship left, Japan does not ahve to build FIGs to break the siege.  They can build SUBs, perhaps a DST, and drop them right in the middle of the US ships.  Now the US has to fight or flee.  THAT WAS NOT POSSIBLE IN CLASSIC.

Once US has gained naval superiority it is basically over for Japan … the islands are gone that is 17 IPCs gone (assuming Aus,NZ,Haw) and if Japan has to defend the mainland coast thats a lot of coastline drawing away from the drive to Moscow and if Japan has enough forces to take Moscow and defend the coast they didn’t put enough into navy and its their own fault because they coulda seen it coming.

Getting Naval Superiority in Revised is what is difficult… actually almost impossible… unless Japan allows it to happen.