Not a bad G1 Fleet move…

@Frood:

I hadn’t encountered it before, so I was really stumped. I think it’s a strong opening, that’s for sure.

Didjoo land Russian fighters in Moscow at end of R1?

@Frood:

@newpaintbrush:

Didjoo land Russian fighters in Moscow at end of R1?

Can’t recall - why? I think I usually land them in Caucasus though.

. . . because landing 2 fighters in Moscow allows a different Allied response to G2 Sealion, of course.  ALSO becos I am gonna be in Moscow, and Russian women fighter pilots are hawt.

@Frood:

So maybe it’s because I’ve been out of it for a while, but General D. Fox had me really stumped with his G1 move, which in fact is similar to something I’d been doing. The similarity is in moving the Med German fleet to Gibraltar, including the Atlantic sub, and also keeping the Luftwaffe in range of the Atlantic.

That is, Anglo-Egypt probably cannot be held past UK1.  Luftwaffe land in Western Europe (standard) or Norway (Norway variant).  I see in your game, most fighters landed at E. Europe.  Still, there is a significant invasion of London threat.

However, he combined it with the purchase of an AC in the Baltic. This meant several things:

• I could not attack the baltic fleet on UK1

It also means that Germany has about five less units to push on Moscow early.

• He could use more of his Ftrs in the east, as they could now land on the AC so they could come from farther away and still engage in the Atlantic on G2

With his position, I was essentially blocked from merging my fleet off Algeria because he had enough material in range to sink the entire allied navy, which would not be a good start.

Doesn’t mean anything if you can’t merge off Algeria early.  All you have to do is build and wait.  If Germany stays at Gibraltar, then Germany can’t get any grip on Africa, particularly after UK retakes Anglo-Egypt on UK1.  If Germany runs away from Gibraltar, then you dump units into Algeria with US and/or UK.

I also couldn’t simply build a fleet in the Channel, because both his fleets could hit it. Sure, the Baltic fleet could be kept out of combat with the Russian sub, but that big Med fleet (1 SS 1 TRN 1 BB, plus 6 or 7 air units, would easily kill the UK fleet.

Right, that’s why you don’t build a fleet in the Channel.

I’ve concluded that the best response was to build 1 AC 1 DD. I’ll have to use the Russian sub block, PLUS I’ll have to sac a US TRN off Algeria. That makes it a pretty even fight and reduces Germany to an Air-only attack on the UK fleet, which would be expensive.

To get infantry from Eastern US to Europe, it takes a chain of two transports; one transport to move units from E Canada to UK, one transport to move units from UK to Europe.  To get infantry from Eastern US to Africa, it takes only one transport; one transport to offload from E. Canada to Algeria.  HOWEVER, the African route is quite slow, so the US will probably want 6-8 transports in the Atlantic to have the ability to change to a transport-to-Europe scenario in any event.  In short - transporting US ground units is relatively inefficient.

However, UK only needs one transport per load, due to the proximity of the UK sea zones to Europe and Africa.

THEREFORE - if possible, you want to build the UK transports and ground units up as quickly as you can; that should be UK’s focus.  An AC and DD do not help that.

Anyways, you don’t need to sac a US transport or even the Russian sub.  All you have to do is park northwest of UK, and keep the US fleet remote.  If you’re bound to go to Algeria on the second Allied turn, you can still produce 1-2 AC with US on US1, and unite the UK and US fleets off Algeria (assuming the Germans don’t move out into the Atlantic with the Baltic fleet - but if you build 1 AC 1 DD, that’s not particularly THREATENING to the Baltic fleet, so you can’t control the German Baltic fleet movement unless you buy 3 fighters).

Long ass story short:  I recommend either building transports for northwest of UK and infantry for a stronger but later ground punch, or 3 fighters with UK to mess with the German fleet, but NOT AC/DD.

(So I thought I was doing okay, but then he got killer dice in Egypt - His 1 Inf 1 Arm killed my 3 inf and 1 Ftr, while I only killed one stinking Infantry. So now I’m down a Ftr and Germany has a tank in Egypt on G2…)

You can bring the UK bomber for insurance.  On G2, you defend with bomber and fighter in Africa against German fighter and bomber from Libya.  It doesn’t seem great on the face of it, but it is a moderately risky attack for the Germans.

So anyhow that’s how I’m responding. I’m curious if anyone has any better ideas.

Hawt Russian gymnast fighter pilots, yeah . . .

I might have missed it, but:

If Germany sets up as presented, and UK purchases only naval vessels as was suggested, how do you stop Sea Lion?

Second point, if you are only buying naval vessels, why are you buying a transport???  Make it a submarine, use it as a casualty in the resulting battle.  At least it has offensive damage ability and you are most likely going to lose that ship anyway in the battle, IMHO.

The best thing to do is to keep the UK fleet remote as stated.  Then, with the US you need to buy an AC and probably two transports.  When the german fleet unites off the coast of WE you send all the UK boats 1 BB 3-4 transports and all the US boats 1 AC 2 ftrs 2 DD 4 transports.  With that you keep the german fleet out of the med, take africa and basically keep the fleet from doing much until the US gets enough transports and planes to take it out without much loss.

@Jennifer:

I might have missed it, but:

If Germany sets up as presented, and UK purchases only naval vessels as was suggested, how do you stop Sea Lion?

Second point, if you are only buying naval vessels, why are you buying a transport???  Make it a submarine, use it as a casualty in the resulting battle.  At least it has offensive damage ability and you are most likely going to lose that ship anyway in the battle, IMHO.

Two ways to stop SeaLion:

Russian fighters from Moscow to London on R2.  Combined with UK build of 3 fighters and US moving 2-4 ground units in (the US sacrifices its transports), London has 1 bomber 4 inf 2 art 3 tanks 8 fighters.  You can vary by taste, building more UK ground and less UK air.

Or, just 8 infantry with UK (saving IPCs because Germany will probably have Africa for a while).

It’s not. Let Germany do it. It costs the Allies less if they attack after the merger than if they try to block it because Germany’s air support makes any attempt to block a big loss for the UK. My purchase with the Baltic CV build is always 3 fighters for the UK and stack with the US fleet in sz8. If you are concerned about Germany attacking that fleet with the sz13 fleet+aircraft then you can block it with the Russian sub to save UK/US units for the attack on the German fleet if they combine.

@U-505:

It’s not. Let Germany do it. It costs the Allies less if they attack after the merger than if they try to block it because Germany’s air support makes any attempt to block a big loss for the UK. My purchase with the Baltic CV build is always 3 fighters for the UK and stack with the US fleet in sz8. If you are concerned about Germany attacking that fleet with the sz13 fleet+aircraft then you can block it with the Russian sub to save UK/US units for the attack on the German fleet if they combine.

Mm.  Excellent, that’s what I often do as well.

If Germany unites its fleet, Germany can’t stay off the coast of Western Europe for long, because additional Allied reinforcements will easily kill the German fleet.  The Germans either have to build an IC at Western Europe for immediate reinforcement (which uses a lotta IPCs, especially with added German naval/air builds), or the Germans have to go north or south.  If the Germans go south, they get Africa and prevent the Allies from dumping from E. Canada to Algeria.  But if the Germans go south, the Allies can feed infantry into Archangel, which means a really powerful defense at Russia.  If the Germans go north, the Allies get Africa as described above.