Topics created by Oddbjoern

I’d better get the new forum up and running.  :wink:

@MarineIguana:

Sea Lion and Germany bombing UK are examples of strategies that can be hard countered by allied response. With Sea Lion, UK buys 6-8 infantry R1. With Germany bombing, russia buys land units and bullies Germany.

Sealion isn’t necessarily a bad move for Germany. The trick is to do it properly and leave yourself a way out (don’t commit 100% to it). If for example Russia doesn’t destroy a German fighter and Germany spends nothing G1, the threat of an all transport purchase G2 forces UK to buy land units for the capital UK1, otherwise with a maximum of 8 units purchased UK2, there won’t be enough to defend on G3. If UK responds properly by placing a few land units on their capital on UK1, Germany can call off Sealion and switch to purchasing nothing but land units and go after Russia strong. The only drawback for Germany is that a few land units will reach the front later, but the total IPC worth of land units at Russia’s doorstep on G4 remains the same. The cost for UK is to lose their capital if they didn’t respond with land purchases, or to have extra idle land units on their capital for many turns if they did. I’m not saying it’s always the best move to do this with Germany, but in the right circumstances, it can work even against a good opponent.

An IC in Egypt can work assuming the opponent is bad. I’m not even sure I would take an IC in Egypt if it were free.
An IC in Egypt doesn’t accomplish much, forces allies to defend it, and costs 15 IPC that could be better spent.

The benefit is marginal. Germany already has a difficult time taking Egypt & Africa without additional naval buys. Often, UK can kill the battleship and transport R1 unless Germany makes a buy. It’s also not fantastic for supporting India since Egypt is only two production and a number of spaces from India. UK can make better use by spending 15 IPC towards 2 fighters.

The risk is great. Germany can threaten Egypt with just 1 carrier buy. Even if Germany never attacks Egypt directly, defending Egypt will divert units from defending India. Japan can easily place naval off FIC. This threat would force UK to defend both India and Egypt. Additionally, the sz off FIC is a great position for Japan to defend even if US commits to the Pacific (KJF).

The board is not setup to do KJF well and to make matters worse USA and Japan income are relatively similar so unless you get some lucky dice early, it is pretty sad.

Yes, #1 is the optimal move in most games. Destroying the sz61 transport is essential for delaying Japan’s take of India. With the sz61 sunk, UK can hold out in India until R6 even with optimized Japan pressure. The carrier and transport can be reliably brought to UK by round 4 to start pressuring Germany.

#2 is very risky. The main problem with #2 is that it uses the entire UK pacific fleet to destroy some of Japan’s naval fleet. Unless the US follows up with a full pacific commitment, japan can use the extra transport and absence of UK naval pressure to aggressively pressure and take India by round 4-5.

A third option to consider is to move the india fleet into the Med if germany failed to deadzone the seazone next to egypt. This allows UK to destroy the med fleet R2 and allows the UK fleet to travel to UK as early as R3. Often, germany will sacrifice air to sink the UK ships in the Med which is also a good outcome for the allies. Overall, this provides the most possible pressure against germany. This is probably the best of the 3 options in my view, but is contingent on a Germany mistake of failing to deadzone sz15.

80+% of my games against good axis players, I do #1.

Persia provides a bit of a conundrum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Campaign

It could be considered anything from a joint UK/Russian colony to a pro-Turkish neutral.

@GoSanchez6:

The only neutral I attack is Switzerland for the Centrals.

That just seems so wrong, I get it, but it still seems weird. Why didn’t Switz get like at least 6-10 units to defend with?

Was wondering if anyone bothers to take Denmark? I did in the fist game I played with standard movement (1 space). It put my Germans way out of position, because of the stagnant movement OOB so it wasn’t worth it IMO. Probably would be ok if using tourney 2 space movement though. Your units could still get to the front on turn 2.

Yes but you know even they have ready a transport or 2 what they can do if you gonna leave on your territories 2/3 pieces of your troops boarding with capital.Navy strategy (with medium opponent) in this game is really difficult one.I tried with German and Austrian navy but no proper results.I think is just worth it when you want to make your opponent scared and reduce his spendings on land units.