German buys turn one

If I can chime in….

There are keys that were briefly mentioned but not taken into account:
1). Russias buy
2). The amount of russians left alive in West Russia and Ukraine.
3). Russias non-combat on R1

If Russia is pressuring the Germans out east, a fleet may not even be an option.
How good is the Russian player?  Does he recognize that the German fleet buy on G1 causes Germany to be ground unit poor, and now Russia can/should be willing to throw units at Gemany (even at a loss) to begin to bleed Germany dry.

When Germany buys a navy, you are not really forcing the allies to do all that much differently.  Axis game plans that force the allies to react usually work better.  The allies are going to build an Atlantic navy regardless.  But now Germany is not buying what she needs/usually will buy: ground units.

This is a tricky dance Germany is attempting… my experience has been that unless the allies mis-play their reaction to the German navy, or Russia is weak in the eastern theatre, then this is a poor long term game plan.

I’m not sure on that assumption on the Russian sub. If it moves to SZ 6 by itself, it’s a pretty nice target of opportunity for Germany in G1. I’d kill it with air (ftr/bom) and then there would be less Allied ships to interfere with the possible dash on G2.

Then, if the UK still moves into SZ 6, I wouldn’t attempt unification in G2. I MIGHT strafe to sink a few TRNs but that would be about it. Then as fleets move around during the game I might sneak down to SZ7 if the opportunity arose.

My whole strategy is based around not getting my units killed. I like to make my victory omelet with as few of my eggs as possible, though I don’t mind using the other guy’s eggs.

Are we talking about the tranny or the sub? Yeah, I guess it can move to block in SZ 6 in round 2.

I think the Baltic factory (if that’s what were calling it) is a good option, perhaps better than fleet unification. Of course, if it is, the allied player may NOT want to block unification just for the sake of allowing the German player to move if they want to.

@U-505:

Et Tu, jsp. My tourney partner. The wound cuts deep.  :lol:

Nothing personal, you’re just WRONG!  :evil:

Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY?  Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2?  I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.

Wow.  What a condescending post.  From a moderator, no less.

<shakes head=“”></shakes>

@jsp4563:

Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY?  Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2?  I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.

Well my “why” is to gain long-term control of the Mediterranean, to control Africa and really threaten Caucasus. If spending 16 IPC in the baltic allows me to eventually bring a 52 IPC navy to join the 40 IPC navy in the Mediterranean, that’s a good use of 16 IPCs.

I have yet to actually achieve this in a game though, so I’m just spitballing here.

And for the record, I have not advocated attacking the Allied fleet as being some kind of favourable exchange. As Germany is initially surrounded and outproduced, I don’t think simplification is as good plan for Germany - again, force conservation is my modus operandus.

@froodster:

@jsp4563:

Ya knows what’s missing from this whole debate is the WHY?  Why does Germany want to unify their fleet in SZ7 on G2?  I don’t see any strategic gain by doing so.

Well my “why” is to gain long-term control of the Mediterranean, to control Africa and really threaten Caucasus. If spending 16 IPC in the baltic allows me to eventually bring a 52 IPC navy to join the 40 IPC navy in the Mediterranean, that’s a good use of 16 IPCs.

I have yet to actually achieve this in a game though, so I’m just spitballing here.

And for the record, I have not advocated attacking the Allied fleet as being some kind of favourable exchange. As Germany is initially surrounded and outproduced, I don’t think simplification is as good plan for Germany - again, force conservation is my modus operandus.

If long term control of the Med is the goal, the a G1 or G2 purchase of 1CV & 1tp is a better option.  Trying to unite the fleets in sz7 for a move to the med will result in heavy losses to the fleet before they can get back to the med.

@Imperious:

If you want (you meaning others who favor it) to link up the fleets why not just buy a damm carrier and 3 trannys in the medd and avoid all of this mess?

Then you got 4 trannys and 8 men per turn right into the caucasus and africa is protected. Eventually your baltic fleet is under attack but you cant win them all. The medd is more important anyway.

I have to admit I’ve been leaning that way in the last bit too. That build might be a bit rich though, I’d do maybe 1 TRN 1 AC. If the Russian fighters are out of range, I’d skip the AC and do one or two TRNs.

One nice thing is that you can wait until after combat to decide where to place the naval units. If Egypt went exceptionally well, then maybe you’d consider putting the ships in the Baltic. If Africa will need help ASAP (prolly most of the time), then you can put it in the Med.

Surrender the BALTIC???  :-o :-o :-o

That 16 IPC worth of TRANny in the Baltic is definitely worth it.

• It is a deterrent against UK coming into the Baltic.
• It is a bridge to NOR and KAR, both vital spaces to keeping the UK/US from joining up with the UK
• It is a threat on UK that forces a garrison to prevent SeaLion
• It is the “fodder” part an operational fleet that could be used in an open water conflict

That is why I build 2 TRAN in the BAL on G1 and what I expect of them.

I have not yet seen a game where it was a bad idea.  Even the most agressive USSR and KGF effort still is slowed down by this move.  If anything, I might advocate a 3 TRAN build on G1 to make sure all of those points are intact on G2 if faced with truly agressive USSR and UK players.  Anything less is not as much of a deterrent.

I still agree that a Baltic build can also be good - boy I’m all over the place here - and a Med build can also be good - but can Germany maintain two fleets - hence unification might be a good idea for overall survivability (if opportunity presents itself).

Building 2 TRN Baltic and 1 TRN 1 CV Med? That does mean NO land forces, but the naval presence helps protect the European shores too… If you were to spend all IPCS on navy, that would be the way to go I think. And then many many turns of purely Inf builds…

@Imperious:

If you want (you meaning others who favor it) to link up the fleets why not just buy a damm carrier and 3 trannys in the medd and avoid all of this mess?

Then you got 4 trannys and 8 men per turn right into the caucasus and africa is protected. Eventually your baltic fleet is under attack but you cant win them all. The medd is more important anyway.

If a fleet is bought in the med, then a dd, trans and 2 subs (36 IPC) are wasted in the baltic. They will die to the UK’s air, at perhaps a 20 IPC loss.

Germany has 6 fighters. For a mere 16 IPC, that adds 11 defense to that fleet. UK/USA must spend more than that 16 IPC to destroy it.

Going to the med may be a good or bad idea, but it does nothing to take advantage of the 36 IPC you have in the baltic.

In my game vs Jsp he did a German opening of 2 ACs + 1 Trn and placed 1 AC in Baltic and 1 AC + 1 Trn in Med. Not far into the game but it will probably be interesting. Not far into the game but I will like to see how he intends to use it.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=8784.0

@Imperious:

If a fleet is bought in the med, then a dd, trans and 2 subs (36 IPC) are wasted in the baltic. They will die to the UK’s air, at perhaps a 20 IPC loss.

Germany has 6 fighters. For a mere 16 IPC, that adds 11 defense to that fleet. UK/USA must spend more than that 16 IPC to destroy it.

Going to the med may be a good or bad idea, but it does nothing to take advantage of the 36 IPC you have in the baltic.

Yes they are under direct threat of this, but you have to also accept that the allies will lose 2 fighters as well, which makes it 36 vs 20 ipcs lost and 16 net in germanys favor. Of course on uk 2 or uk 3 they may want to attack the baltic with fleet units.

Thus what about a carrier in baltic (and possible 1 tranny)?

and 2 tranny in medd.  So now you got 3 tranny in medd shucking and 2 tranny in baltic shucking.

that method wont overload the factories in germany and units can flow from both factories.

I dont like the idea of trading my 36 IPc for Uk’s 20. If I got the bomber, its a wash, but this result does not always happen.

If you build AC in Baltic, and 2 trans in the med, what do you do with Egypt. Since the BB will be left behind to protect the new transports. You are left only with your 3-5 bid + lybia + air (and perhaps down a fighter). Not everyone will attack Egypt in this situation, correct?? You still need the UK BB, perhaps the DD, etc.

You attack in Round 1 as normal, then in G2 you smack the SNOT out of Egypt, and then raid Africa for keeps( at least for a few turns).