Best posts made by weddingsinger

@genken

So if the ipcs work out in Japan’s favor by attacking J1, does this weaken your attack on China? Only if you go hard for Calcutta.

The factory Japan builds on J1 to place on the Chinese coast can build 1-3 mechs and/or tanks a turn. More than enough to keep destroying China unless another power steps in with help.

The factory in FiC on J2 produces for transports to keep the islands or to keep threatening India.

Tokyo builds carriers for the first few turns since you have planes to land on them to defend SZ6 while most of your fleet is south, keeping your transports alive. That neutralizes the U.S. threat.

And if the U.S. is building in the Atlantic instead, skip the carriers and push hard on the mainland.

All I’ve got so far is a few basic opening notes:

I’ll need to playtest my ideas about a mechanized Russia, but obviously Russia moves 6 inf back to Moscow from the Pacific side. I usually retreat the 12 and then on R2 move them back to threaten the Japanese to try and freeze Japanese troops from being able to head south to attack China/UKPac. On German side… not much you can do if Italy is successfully can opening for Germany. If not, you just try to group you inf together and look for a counter attack opening that will delay the German advance an extra turn. If Germany is doing Sea Lion, Russia should try to hit southern Europe. Its much harder for Germany to get rid of them there compared to using their transports to hit you on the coast of the Baltic.

UK needs to assume Sea Lion. Their margin for being able to stop Germany is pathetically small if Germany can bring 10 transports and its air force to London (to stop that requires having 17+ hit soakers and 5 fighters) This means a UK1 activate Ireland using your mech (its a landing spot for U.S. bombers if London falls) and buy of 6inf and 1 fighter (and if Germany looks Sea Lion, UK2 buy of more inf and any U.S. forces you can bring). If no J1, you can NOT spare a fighter from London for Taranto. No scrambles on G1 unless your fighter can/will kill 2 or more German air but killing the German battleship might be worth the fighter in Scotland. UK also ignores Italy in Ethiopia other than walking 1inf/1art to Anglo-Egypt Sudan. It’ll cost you nothing right now. UK cares more about sinking Italian transports and getting Persia. If no J1, I also take Sumatra. Taranto raid and kill Italy’s Malta ships. UK’s goal is to 1) keep London, 2) keep Italy from getting N.O.s, and to build a factory in Persia on UK2 if no Sea Lion, and send 3 fighters to Moscow every turn you can (UK3-5)

US… if a J1 you need to send a bomber and fighter to London. If transport at Canada sank G1, they’ll need 2-4 more bombers purchased US1. If Japan never attacks US and Germany gets London, your 5 bombers can sink the German fleet and land in Ireland (hopefully) on US3 as consolation. I prefer to build for the Pacific theater after that, and leave Germany for Russia/UK (mostly… other than help from the 3-5 U.S. bombers that join in). The goal against Japan is to get enough U.S. ships/planes to threaten and take sz6 if Japan commits to hitting India. Iwo Jima is nice to have, too, to stage bombers from. Caroline Islands are great, but in range of a LOT of Japanese planes, so can be dicey, so be careful. I prefer a couple of US carriers and a few subs, but mostly destroyers to soak hits from Japanese planes. The goal is to either freeze the Japanese advance or occupy sz 6 around US 5/6 and start convoying and bombing.

UKPac, China, ANZAC’s job is to cost Japan planes whenever possible. Slow them down and cost them money if possible. This means sinking transports. Grinding away any Japanese troops being used to take islands. Retaking money Islands if you can keep it for 1 Japanese turn and leave 2 inf there to defend and hopefully cost Japan troops.

@Argothair

I should mention, since I realize its not clear… when I lay out my issues with a strategy like @crockett36 's, I don’t mean I won’t consider it. I am merely offering my issues and allow for follow up. I already decided I’m not anti-Crockett’s UK navy stack while skipping the Taranto raid. Rather, early play testing suggests it is a very interesting and useful strategy.

Arguing for me isn’t about ‘winning’ an argument, but merely discussing every angle to make a strategy as efficient as possible.

@Panzer-V I’m up for a game if you’d like

@trulpen At the minimum U.S. needs a carrier or two and some can-opener transports in the Atlantic. If the UK is ONLY in the Atlantic and not in the Middle East, you lose a lot of flexibility in helping Moscow or India or Cairo.

So here is a scenario (balanced mod) where mechanized Russia helps, though its too early to know how much…

It is after R2 in the image.

G1 buy is all about Russia (6 mechs and 1 tank)
R1 responds with 3 art and 4 tanks

On R2, realizing Germany can NOT take Eastern Poland safely, even with an Italian can opener, Russia buys another 3 art and 6 mechs (66% chance for Russian win, if Italy blocks the 3 mechs in the south its still a 55+% victory for Russia)

Depending on G3, its possible R3 I’ll even buy a tactical or two, if it’ll give me a shot at victory on R4. In either case, the Russian purchases get enough units to the front to slow down Germany a full round and create threats going forward.

@Argothair Yeah, I was thinking about that. Of course, not everyone would sacrifice Italy’s fleet/air force to do that, either.

It does mean that Germany not taking S. France means the UK fleet stack is pretty good move.

And if Italy doesn’t buy a destroyer, France can sink the transports, too, unless Germany drops 3 planes on S. Italy.

Does anyone have much experience with buying fast movers for Russia’s defense?

It certainly works against a slow ineffective Germany player (just did it live), being able to bring 100% of Russia’s forces against a single German group, but I’m assuming against a decently experienced German player who also buys fast movers its a recipe for disaster, right? Fewer units defending an opponent who almost certainly won’t leave an opening to demolish a stack?

@Argothair

Its fun is the best part!

Mechanized Russia makes you feel less helpless. No more sitting back on your heels, awaiting your doom.

@lil-germanz said in Optimal Japanese opening move:

@taamvan though I agree that crippling Germany is challenging you really can slow it down if UK builds up a fleet in Canada and Air Force in London. Than you convoy any where possible and continuous bomb the factories. You will take loses but your spending your income delaying and slowing down Germany’s offensive which buys Russia more time and allows US to get involved. That’s about the only ways that I know that is effective against a powerful German player. You have to keep your fleet off the GB coast line to protect against a air assualt. Need to be able to scramble.

My issue with that is you can’t hit Germany, only W. Germany from London and Germany can leave 4 fighters there to put make repeated bombing runs unlikely.

Also, typical is Moscow being threatened about G6. Its tough to build a fleet that can worry Germany at all with UK when UK1 is building inf and a fighter, then a lot of your air power shifts to the Med to sink Italy’s fleet, can make it back for combat on UK4. So buys on UK2 and 3 are around 60ipcs. Do you really devote that to transports and ships to keep them afloat?

I’m usually a factory in Persia and UK3 and UK4 I spend 60 ipcs on fighters for Moscow. So UK1 is a London buy so no Sea Lion, UK2 you spend 12 ipcs on a factory and then maybe 25 on… it depends. Fighters? Bombers? Troops and a transport for S. Africa? UK planes can land on Russia’s Karaellia if its safe to make it to Moscow in 2 turns…Or shift South if Italy’s a problem.

@Argothair Sure thing. You can even keep this thread if you want.

My Japan is usually ruthlessly efficient (China partisan rule messed me up… so did the balanced mod N.O.'s). Germany I tend to want to do too many things at once and end up doing none of them well.

@taamvan

Good points. I should say my Finland invasion often is just attacking that stack to slow down Germany 1 extra round, maybe.

As with any opening, often its best for Russia to not even kill the entire German group in a territory, but to make a big dent and retreat so that the threat of German counter attack is gone. Stalling is the goal of mechanized Russia I brought up in another thread… you trade units for maneuverability and hope for an opening to hit Germany once in a way that buys you an extra turn (or 2), which let’s you buy more units so you end up where you would have anyway, but its a round or 2 later. Which, for Russia, can make all the difference.

So the real question becomes whether China can keep Yunnan on J2 as well, and how it affects Japan going forward.

Certainly being able to buy artillery seems worthwhile, though less useful when simply trying to stack Yunnan (art over inf means 1 less unit each on C1 and C2) but necessary to counter Japan’s relatively weak ground forces.

It looks like it sort of depends on Japan’s J1. Yyou can keep Yunnan on J2 but if Japan brings an additional transport (or 2) on J1 so they can help attack on J2, China needs some or all of UKPac or Russia’s air force to save the 15-20 inf/art

Of course, if Japan is using transports to feed the mainland, it means less income down South.

So something like this strategy might be hell on Japan if the U.S. is aggressive on the Pacific side. 9ish less ipcs on J3 is one less ship to defend, and tends to ripple through the early choices.

If you are weak on Germany navy, Italy bombing London air field prevents them from being able to scramble into the seazone to challenge the Sea Lion landing which means Germany doesn’t have to spare any planes for the seazone (if, for example, no carrier G1 so you only have a cruiser).

As for defending those transports, you can accomplish that on G3’s buy… Normandy can produce 3 ships to help the transports, and/or add an airfield there to scramble into the seazone if the U.S./UK are in a position to threaten.

German fighter/tactical to S. Italy costs you nothing on UK naval attacks since the planes in Poland and Hungary can’t reach that combat anyway but both could hit Yugoslavia, land in S. Italy on G1 to force UK to play Taranto correctly, which is good enough for us since their planes can’t make it back to London before G3. Those German planes can make it back easily to participate in G3 London, though.

10 unit limit isn’t an issue since your G2 buy is all about transports. You can fill them with the 7 inf from Norway/Finland (move into place G2), 2 from Denmark, and if you ONLY hit Paris on G1, you may have another to spare there, otherwise pull 1 back from Slovakia/Hungary where you move the 11 inf and 5 artillery that aren’t attacking Paris. If you do Sea Lion, the 5 art, 5 tanks from Paris move to Germany.

So you’re still showing Russia a Barbarossa at end of G1 (7 inf in Finland, 14 inf in Slovakia with 5 art). You end with 74+ ipcs for

The goal is that nothing you do actually hinders your ability to attack Russia. Only that all the pieces are in place for Sea Lion instead, if it becomes obvious to do. Looking at the way I’m talking about, it does force your hand to hit Eastern Poland in force on G2 and remove Baltic States as an option.

@M36 said in Germany playbook: overall strategy guide:

@weddingsinger Sound advice, so I’ll put you down as a no for infantry purchases? I find that my infantry screen has been melted away by Bryansk and Smolensk, and the Russians get to trade infantry for mechs and tanks in the final battles. This is especially true if I divert some troops to the Balkans. My vision is to have a stack of 30 infantry attacking Moscow with Air support. This would prevent the heavy ipc damage of losing a stack of tanks and having little left after Moscow.

Germany should make 1.5-2 times as much as Russia, but with a larger air force and 3+ times the tanks, so spending on mechs over inf isn’t an issue.

To help prevent the trading of inf, use Italy to take a Russian territory (non-factory, of course) and then Germany can help occupy it but more importantly with its air force, so Russia can’t counter attack. Its why a mech and tank are a common first buy for Italy… to help can open.

Germany being mobile also has the advantage of 2 movement, so if Russia makes a mistake and leaves a weaker stack of inf somewhere, you are more able to hit it.

Add in factory bombing as soon as possible, and G6/7 is the goal for threatening Moscow.

@Mursilis said in Most efficient Axis Turn 1 for Sea Lion option:

Well if you do carrier 2 transport or 2 bombers and a sub or Destroyer sub carrier is a great opener. The plan to build your fleet and have 7 to 10 transports. You can drop off the first load on scotland and the second hit london with everything. OR if you think your sealion will fail this gives you the option to do two things. Hit gibralter, clear the med for italy and quickly sack egypt OR take that fleet to sz 127 and crush leningrad for those extra 5 ipc’s.

I like to play with options and it definitely gives you the most. 2 bombers and 1 sub gives you the most flexibility however since you can use those bombers anywhere whereas ships can only do one thing.

Well here the bit is to not commit to Sea Lion at all on G1 but to make sure you are able to, if UK doesn’t defend London properly.

For a strong Italy play I’ve done both a carrier on G1 and take S. France to drop ships there, too, since Italy’s remaining ships often end up there on I1, so G2’s buy of ships help support them.

@M36 said in Germany playbook: overall strategy guide:

Im seeing quite a few recommendations of a 1st turn purchase of an aircraft carrier and destroyer even if just to bluff a sea lion. Doesn’t this leave you with a very thin 2nd wave for Barbarossa on G2? Has anybody had a successful Barbarossa with a G1 fleet purchase?

Of course. Russia is so much weaker than Germany that a G1 buy of a carrier isn’t a problem. It simply slows down Germany’s attack on Moscow by a turn (maybe 2), but can be used for other things. If you do it don’t have it sit in the Black Sea doing nothing, though. Usually players will take Gibraltor on G2 (carrier, cruiser, transport). If I want to go for a strong Italy I prefer taking S. France on G1 then buying German ships for the Mediterranean on G2.

But if your focus is 100% Moscow, ships don’t help you.

@genken

Pro/Con is about trade offs. So… if Japan does NOT attack until J3…
Pros: No U.S. in the war. They earn 20-25 ipcs less, are limited to 3 units per factory, can’t move units away from U.S. shores.
Japan can focus on China (and Russia, I guess, if that’s your thing. Germany taking London is easier since no U.S. reinforcements reach London before Sea Lion.

Con: Japan will earn less income. The U.S.’ 20ish ipcs will still be earned, but by UKPac and ANZAC, which is a more immediate issue come turn 3/4 than the U.S. No factory on FiC until J4.

For Japan’s income: No attack, you earn an extra 20ipcs from a national objective, but only 10-12 ipcs from taking Chinese territories (combined ipcs from J1 and J2). J1 40, J2 43, Then on J3 you’ll only earn around 40ipcs. Maybe 45ish.

With a J1, on J1 you earn 40ipcs (even), UKPac is -7ipcs, U.S. +20; J2 you earn 55-60ipcs (now +12-20ipcs over a J3 attack), UKPac is -14ipcs over 2 turns, U.S. is +40. J3 you earn 60+ ipcs (+30-40ipcs over not attacking on J1) while UKPac is -24ipcs and U.S. is +40. ANZAC will also earn 5 extra ipcs if you attack, assuming if you don’t attack they’ll take 1-2 money islands.

So Japan’s income goes up enough to about cover the extra 40ipcs the U.S. gets, but UKPac will earn 20-27 fewer ipcs (plus you can bomb them on J2).

/my math assumes Japan takes J1 Philipines, Borneo, Hong Kong, FiC and 3 Chinese territories, J2 you take other 3 money islands; J3 you take Malaya

@M36 Take a look at my thread about an efficient Sea Lion. Its key to use cede territory on the Baltic to Russia and move any non-Sea Lion troops to Romania, etc. to block the Russians there because you want the Russians to stay in the North. G5 you can use the Sea Lion transports to hit Norway, Finland, karaelia, Novgorod, Baltic States, and Poland.

Russia will be stronger, of course, but they should only get an extra 15-30 ipcs while Germany grabs the 30 ipcs from UK and has a shorter supply line to keep counter attacking… Its important not to telegraph Sea Lion on G1 so Russia is still buying slow infantry and trying to stack safely away from Germany. Then, if UK does Taranto and anything less than max London defense…

G1 buy 2 bombers (more details in the other thread)
G2 buy transports, maybe 1 destroyer if you can afford it (part of why I save 6 from G1)
G3 buy is navy to defend German transports, if needed, and more inf/art in case you don’t take London. These will get used on G5 anyway
G4 transports move to 112 and/or 113, buy fast movers with your 80ipcs
G5 transports used to counter attack Russians on coast of Baltics. Fast movers in Germany, W. Germany can work on Poland, etc.

A mechanized Russia strategy would be the best Allied counter after Sea Lion since it would allow Russia to get large numbers into German Europe quickly.

For me, usually a strong Taranto, UK max defending London with U.S. being prepared to help with a few bombers, UK moving into M.E. to support Russia is enough to shield Africa with existing troops and new planes if needed. If Italy doesn’t really help Germany and goes hard to Africa, then UK doesn’t drop 3 fighters a turn onto Moscow but hopefully that means Italy won’t be can opening for Germany over in Russia (or, not more than once).

In two games in person against modest Axis player(s), mechanized Russia has worked as hoped, delaying Germany 1-2 rounds. It’ll be nice to try it in some TripleA games in the future.

The buy I’m testing is almost all mechs, with tanks getting added on R2 (3 for Novgorod or Ukraine, depending on which way it looks like Germany is going).

It was weird having most of Russia’s money even on R4/R5.

In one game it meant taking Karaelia/Finland because Germany had no more navy and I had just killed his first stack of advancing infantry before his fast movers arrived. I doubt that would work against a German player used to seeing this strategy.