When do you take out the Baltic Sea fleet?

@dictatorcj

Interesting. Yes the ability to put subs in the med probably greatly increases their utility by precluding the uk from placing a destroyer in the english channel to protect a landing in Morocco, which hopefully bus Italy some time to earn some objective money. I know they only have two, but with such a small economy the NOs increase Italy’s capacity to contribute by quite a bit, proportionally speaking.

@squirecam said in Allied Landing In Europe:

@luftwaffles41 said in Allied Landing In Europe:

@squirecam

I’d much rather have transports moving troops directly into Lenningrad then worrying about tanks. Moscow is going to fall once they are deprived of enough IPC. Or, I’ll never get there because I’m defending and letting Japan win.

I absolutely agree with this. This is how the German player should take Leningrad. Obviously with troops bordering leningrad as well like from Finland/Belarussia as well as the Baltic states. And granted it doesn’t take a huge navy to protect 3 transports givertake. Like I said, unless theres a detail I’m missing, Leningrad won’t win you the war, but it’ll substantially put the war effort in your favor as Germany, and frankly taking Leningrad should be Germany’s #1 priority to begin with, regardless of the 1941 or 1942 setup, and I would expect a proper Soviet player to take immediate actions to protecting Leningrad as if it’s more important than Moscow, and if the Soviet player thinks retreating from Leningrad is a good idea then you’ve just basically won the game.

But all in all, this is of me going by the idea that the Soviet Player knows what they’re doing, and knows how to take immediate steps to fighting off the Germans on the Eastern Front.

Like I said, I dont disagree that Germany shouldn’t have a navy say in the Baltic Sea to protect the territories bordering it as well as the transports but no way in hell will they be building a large enough navy to take on the every growing size of the British and American navy. (Yes, I’ve done a 42’ scenario with a buddy of mine and as the allies both America and Britain had possession of atleast 2 aircraft carriers filled with fighters and a battleships).

Hense why the only way Germany will be able to so said “Walk up to Moscow and then take Caucusus” is through tanks and blitzkreig. it’s what they were designed to do, move fast and move efficiently across terrain

@axis_roll said in What's the latest best Japan opening?:

@PizzaPete said in What's the latest best Japan opening?:

Anyone here ever try putting a Japan IC in East Indies Round 1?

YES! That was the first reply in this thread

@axis_roll said in What's the latest best Japan opening?:

@Soviet-Steamroller said in What's the latest best Japan opening?:

1) where to put my IC? (F.I.C. or Burma directly under UK’s nose?).

East Indies. It produces 4 units per turn, you’ll have a navy nearby in SZ35 after J1 (for a J2 build of a tpt and 2 inf, perhaps AAA if the allies get cute with a USA bomber in australia

A decent UK player would probably put an IC in India in response but also could muster 1 inf from Persia and 2 Fighters (Egypt & Australia). On my J2 i would be facing 4 inf, 2 fighters and 1 AA!

Well don’t I look like an idiot, lol. My bad.

Welcome to the forum, Nate 13.

Amphibious assault movement occurs during the Combat Move phase. So you must bring transports already loaded to SZ 14.

When the sea battle occurs, Combat Move phase is already over. There is no way to add another Combat Move then.

Bridging from Italy during Combat Move phase would have been allowed, if SZ 14 had been friendly, then.

@Veqryn:

What turn and what do you use to destroy the Italian fleet?

There are a couple options:

You build 2 bombers as the UK, and use 3 bombers + 1 fighter to destroy them UK turn 2 (landing in Caucasus if Italy is SeaZone 14, landing in Trans-Jordan if Italy is SeaZone 15).  You should have only 1 bomber left after this attack, but you could easily also have nothing left.  If you try this, you will most likely lose that one bomber to a German attack on G3 on trans-jordan.  The other problem with this is, you only have 7 ipcs left over the first turn, meaning you can’t buy anything, meaning your entire europe theater navy consists of the transport and cruiser you leave at SeaZone 1, which you have to leave there because if you come any closer you will get attacked by a German submarine + fighter + bomber on G2.  Turn 2 you can build more navy, but it really looks bleak since you can not move your first set of troops until either Norway turn 2, or Algeria Turn 3 (which means Germany can get Africa for a few turns anyway).

You build 1 carrier, 1 fighter, 1 transport UK1, and 2-3 bombers UK2.  You can destroy the Italian navy on turn UK3 with 2-4 fighters and 3 bombers.  This would seem far superior at first glance, but there is a major problem.  It really is not that difficult for Italy/Germany to take Egypt on their Turn 2, and then take Trans-Jordan on their Turn 3.  Without both of those, you have no place to land the planes, and without any place to land you can not attack in the first place.

The USA can not launch a solo attack on Italy before their Turn 3.  They can mop up after an partially successful UK attack on US2, but if USA tries to attack on their Turn 3 the run in to the same problem as before: they have no landing zones.  If the USA wants to attack with ships, this is not possible before USA4 (assuming Italian navy is in SZ15).

So…… what the heck are you guys doing to BOTH kill the Italian navy, and Retake Africa before the Axis conquer much.  It seems that if you try to kill the navy quickly you will not have enough ground to retake africa successfully before the Axis kill off Egypt and Transjordan, but if you go for a longer approach the Italian navy stays alive until turn 4, which is much too long and the axis get to control africa anyway. 
Please help.  Ideas anyone?

you have a fault
you shoulmd have battleship and such aswell in UK1
attacking those with germany is suicide
they’ll probably attack sz 12 or the US seazone (2 good looking transports)

Wait a moment, IL, I got confused and thought we were talking about 1941, and this is 1942  :lol: In that case, you could be right, because the setup is different. Not sure there, both z2 and Egypt will be better defended, but I agree in that Egypt is too much risky in 1942

@woodstock said in Can the Allies win in 1942?:

“How long can Russia hold out on it’s own against Germany?”

Quite a while. In fact, Russia can hold out for so long they’ll have taken Berlin. Yup, I’m being serious when I say that, a proper USSR player can hold out against Germany, and Italy, push them back all the way to Rome and Berlin and win the war all together. What I’m saying may seem WAY too overstretched and I dont blame u for thinking that. But I sure as hell did it in the 42’ setup. And after doing it, it made me see the obvious.

The Soviets can’t ‘hold out’ until the allies arrive. By turns 7-9 the Soviets will have needed to shift the tides, and be on the offensive towards Berlin, whether the allies have landed or not.

As much as I’d like to think that America and the British have some huge major important factor in this, they really don’t. The entirety of the war effort all rests on the brains and brawns of the player playing the Soviet Union, granted that’s not to say the U.K and the U.S can’t help a brother out, I’m just saying this so called Soviets hold out until “Round 4, 5 or 6” is pretty baloney. Because the that’s pretty much the time when America and the U.K should be SETTING UP to land in mainland Europe, and they still won’t do it for another good 3-4 turns.

Something that one of my favorite Axis and Allies youtubers said, GeneralHandGrenade, spoke of the fact that as the allies (America specifically) There is no short cheap way to win the war for the allies, landing on turn 3-4 is WAY too early for either, frankly a properly played game as the allies could genuinly go on till’ round 11 or 12.

And if any player can’t seem to hold out against the Germans and Italians in the 1942 setup then they’re playing the Soviet Union wrong, and you should probably hand off the role to somebody else, because the player playing the USSR kinda needs to know how to play the game, and play it well.

(i know this is old, I dont even think you’re gonna see this but I was born in the early 2000’s so I wasn’t around for the forums)

Balance issues… Dardanelles should always be closed… NOs favor the Axis, hands down.

Something not in the rules, but a very simple House rule our group uses for both balance and just plain fun…

90% of the time, Japan nukes the Flying Tigers in China on turn 1 before the Allies get to make a single move with them. They are basically placed in a “please kill me” position.

Our group always allows the Allied player the choice to place the Flying Tigers anywhere they want within China on the initial setup… it’s a very minor concession both for play balance and strategic fun.