Thank you.
New German move, let me know what you think
-
Oh yeah, one more thing.
A destroyer WOULD be fine, but the thing is - fighters are pretty useful, and I don’t see that the UK spending its turn on 3 x fighters really HELPS Germany a whole lot. Yes, a response of 3 UK fighters does delay UK building its transport chain, but on the other hand, not only do you delay the German ground unit production in turn, but ALSO, you will have to contend with the UK air being used to trade territory on the UK turn.
I think overall, it’s too much for Germany to contend with. That is to say, that if Germany builds a destroyer, and UK counters with mass air build, it isn’t bad for UK, but it is bad for Germany, and there is no way I see that Germany can exploit that advantage, except perhaps to try for Combined Bombardment tech, which is POSSIBLY a decent idea.
-
which is POSSIBLY a decent idea.
POSSIBLY, as in NOT DEFINITELY, as in QUITE POSSIBLY NOT.
-
Oh yeah, one more thing.
A destroyer WOULD be fine, but the thing is - fighters are pretty useful, and I don’t see that the UK spending its turn on 3 x fighters really HELPS Germany a whole lot. Yes, a response of 3 UK fighters does delay UK building its transport chain, but on the other hand, not only do you delay the German ground unit production in turn, but ALSO, you will have to contend with the UK air being used to trade territory on the UK turn.
Im not sold on a UK 3 fighter buy. USA, ok. Not UK. I see 3 fighter buys from UK as Germany, I’m happy.
Squirecam
-
Oh yeah, one more thing.
A destroyer WOULD be fine, but the thing is - fighters are pretty useful, and I don’t see that the UK spending its turn on 3 x fighters really HELPS Germany a whole lot. Yes, a response of 3 UK fighters does delay UK building its transport chain, but on the other hand, not only do you delay the German ground unit production in turn, but ALSO, you will have to contend with the UK air being used to trade territory on the UK turn.
Im not sold on a UK 3 fighter buy. USA, ok. Not UK. I see 3 fighter buys from UK as Germany, I’m happy.
Squirecam
Yeah, um, what squire said.
Squire, it’s entirely possible I will never question your judgment again (unless you advocate buying lots of bombers or something)! I’ve tried out some moves with the G1 naval buys, and I see now how they can be beneficial. Also, after testing out J moves (against a mostly KGF allied plan), I totally agree on your projections of J IPCs; sorry I doubted you!
Hauptmann-Jager, at least give this G1 buy a chance: 3trn, 2inf 2arm. Put the 3trn in the Baltic. From there you have quite a few options.
-
Oh yeah, one more thing.
A destroyer WOULD be fine, but the thing is - fighters are pretty useful, and I don’t see that the UK spending its turn on 3 x fighters really HELPS Germany a whole lot. Yes, a response of 3 UK fighters does delay UK building its transport chain, but on the other hand, not only do you delay the German ground unit production in turn, but ALSO, you will have to contend with the UK air being used to trade territory on the UK turn.
Im not sold on a UK 3 fighter buy. USA, ok. Not UK. I see 3 fighter buys from UK as Germany, I’m happy.
Squirecam
Hold on a second there, squirecam. Remember that what was in question was a proposed build of Germany destroyer and transport in the Baltic. GIVEN that German purchase of destroyer, transport, two fighters, what WOULD you advocate for UK?
And also - I generally do NOT advocate a 3 fighter build for UK. I generally try to build 2 trns 3 inf 1 tank, if Germany does not threaten invasion of London.
–
Also, as long as I have you posting a reply, I’d also like to inquire what you think the optimal build for UK is to a German build of - what was it you use, carrier, 2-3 transports, 1-0 sub?
–
Yeah, um, what squire said.
Squire, it’s entirely possible I will never question your judgment again (unless you advocate buying lots of bombers or something)! I’ve tried out some moves with the G1 naval buys, and I see now how they can be beneficial. Also, after testing out J moves (against a mostly KGF allied plan), I totally agree on your projections of J IPCs; sorry I doubted you!
Hauptmann-Jager, at least give this G1 buy a chance: 3trn, 2inf 2arm. Put the 3trn in the Baltic. From there you have quite a few options.
Heh heh. Got a fan club I see. Well, I will say that I think that knowing how to deal with at least some of squire’s strategies is a good part of a complete A&A Revised education.
-
Oh yeah, one more thing.
A destroyer WOULD be fine, but the thing is - fighters are pretty useful, and I don’t see that the UK spending its turn on 3 x fighters really HELPS Germany a whole lot. Yes, a response of 3 UK fighters does delay UK building its transport chain, but on the other hand, not only do you delay the German ground unit production in turn, but ALSO, you will have to contend with the UK air being used to trade territory on the UK turn.
Im not sold on a UK 3 fighter buy. USA, ok. Not UK. I see 3 fighter buys from UK as Germany, I’m happy.
Squirecam
Hold on a second there, squirecam. Remember that what was in question was a proposed build of Germany destroyer and transport in the Baltic. GIVEN that German purchase of destroyer, transport, two fighters, what WOULD you advocate for UK?
And also - I generally do NOT advocate a 3 fighter build for UK. I generally try to build 2 trns 3 inf 1 tank, if Germany does not threaten invasion of London.
–
Also, as long as I have you posting a reply, I’d also like to inquire what you think the optimal build for UK is to a German build of - what was it you use, carrier, 2-3 transports, 1-0 sub?
–
Yeah, um, what squire said.
Squire, it’s entirely possible I will never question your judgment again (unless you advocate buying lots of bombers or something)! I’ve tried out some moves with the G1 naval buys, and I see now how they can be beneficial. Also, after testing out J moves (against a mostly KGF allied plan), I totally agree on your projections of J IPCs; sorry I doubted you!
Hauptmann-Jager, at least give this G1 buy a chance: 3trn, 2inf 2arm. Put the 3trn in the Baltic. From there you have quite a few options.
Heh heh. Got a fan club I see. Well, I will say that I think that knowing how to deal with at least some of squire’s strategies is a good part of a complete A&A Revised education.
Well, this is a hard(er) question to answer. I say this, because I like to KJF. Typically, this involves an IC in India. Therefore, I would probably buy an IC, Destroyer and infantry. _I’d move UK/USA fleet to SZ8 for merge.
If I did not KJF (and the G buy doesnt dissuade me from doing so), but KGF instead, I would still buy UK transports. Let the USA do the “heavy lifting” as C-subbers would say.
The destroyer/transport buy doesnt scare me. Even less so if the med fleet went East to Egypt.
Squirecam_
-
I was hoping that with a destroyer and a tran I would improve my attack/defense value, but also add fodder while making sea lion a possibility. I realize my navy can’t live forever so I’d like my navy to deal some massive damage with help from my air force. Just my initial thoughts. The only thing with the AC is that yes it adds great defense, but it doesn’t add much for offense, and what I was hoping for was some offenseive punch. subs might be cheaper, but offer no defense against an air attack. These were just my initial thoughts about what I was hoping for. :mrgreen:
-
Well they both defend at 3 and in the beginning of the game the baltic fleet needs more defense against threats so those 2 fighters at 4 are much better to germany than the saving of 4 IPC to get only a DD.
If you know the player is a KJF guy then you may get away with a DD, but if your gonna do that it offers a marginal improvement.
-
I was hoping that with a destroyer and a tran I would improve my attack/defense value, but also add fodder while making sea lion a possibility. I realize my navy can’t live forever so I’d like my navy to deal some massive damage with help from my air force. Just my initial thoughts. The only thing with the AC is that yes it adds great defense, but it doesn’t add much for offense, and what I was hoping for was some offenseive punch. subs might be cheaper, but offer no defense against an air attack. These were just my initial thoughts about what I was hoping for. :mrgreen:
If you build a carrier instead of a destroyer, you have far more defensive flexibility; you spent 4 IPC more but can land two fighters on the carrier for a decent defense.
If you build a destroyer instead of a carrier, you stand to profit IF the Allies do not respond appropriately.
The big question is - how do you STOP the Allies from responding appropriately?
Remember that
1. You are almost certainly not seriously threatening an invasion of London with a build of just 1 transport.
2. UK goes AFTER G1.
3. UK can build 3 fighters, making for 5 fighter 1 bomber minimum. -
I have never seen a German player who keeps the fighters on the CV in the Baltic once the Allied attack is about to go down so essentially 2-3 TP’s, 1 CV, or 1 DD built on G1 all defend about the same in the end.
Benefits of building….
1 CV.
The presence of the fighters usually requires an extra turn of Allied building before the attack is made so you have an extra turn to delay having to build defensively to defend Berlin.2-3 TP.
Allows for heavy counterattacks into Norway or Karelia or reinforcement of Eastern from Germany or even Western if need be.1 DD.
none. Don’t do it. -
What if Hauptmann-Jager is planning on countering the Allied counter to the G1 buy?
OOOOOO mind games.
Jennifer Connelly. Mm. Yummeh. (+1)
-
What if Hauptmann-Jager is planning on countering the Allied counter to the G1 buy?
With what? Jennifer Connelly? That’s one smokin’ hot counter if I ever saw one. You could distract your opponent while you build more navy and snatch Russian pieces off the board. Hereafter known as the German Jennifer Connelly response to the Allied response to the German Baltic buildup. Or the JC softcore porn defense for short.
Oh yeah. (+1)
-
Wikipedia -
“Connelly’s paternal grandfather was Irish American and her paternal grandmother was a Norwegian American; her maternal grandparents were Jewish, their families having come from Russia and Poland.”
–
Therefore, we can conclude that Jennifer Connelly is working behind the scenes in Germany to support the Allies.
pwned (+1)
-
What if Hauptmann-Jager is planning on countering the Allied counter to the G1 buy?
With what? Jennifer Connelly? That’s one smokin’ hot counter if I ever saw one. You could distract your opponent while you build more … snatch … Hereafter known as the German Jennifer Connelly response to the Allied response to the German Baltic buildup. Or the JC softcore porn defense for short.
LMFAO :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
Wikipedia -
“Connelly’s paternal grandfather was Irish American and her paternal grandmother was a Norwegian American; her maternal grandparents were Jewish, their families having come from Russia and Poland.”
–
Therefore, we can conclude that Jennifer Connelly is working behind the scenes in Germany to support the Allies.
pwned (+1)
Her paternal grandmother was captured during the invasion of Norway and is being held hostage. JC is a double agent.
50% bonus (+1.5)
With what? Jennifer Connelly? That’s one smokin’ hot counter if I ever saw one. You could distract your opponent while you build more … snatch … Hereafter known as the German Jennifer Connelly response to the Allied response to the German Baltic buildup. Or the JC softcore porn defense for short.
LMFAO :lol: :lol: :lol:
It takes 18 years to build more…you know. And even then you’re related…ewww siiiiiiick. It saves time when you pick from an already established harvest. :-D
-
This thread went OT fast…
Squirecam
-
Yeah it did.
IMO, building up you GE navy is a good Idea, But build it in the Med. you already have a BB and Try. all you need is another try, destoyer, and you can throw the carrier in later when the fleet finally starts feeling pressure or starts getting adventerous. I’m sure you will have boughten more planes at some point before this, When you finally want to leave the Med for say England or Us, thats when you build your major Navy build. If you are looking at UK or US that means that Afrika is probably yours, IMO you should take brazil if opportunity presents itself, build IC there then you can base your Med fleet off the coast of Brazil, and still be able to fortify Afrika and your fleet and Threaten US mainland at the same time.
-
Another Idea is to BUild An IC in France and Launch U-Boats directlly into the Atlantic.n If you get Lucky enough to get wolf packs, this strategy works really well in stopping Allied convoys, and Fleets of all sizes.
-
I posted several months ago about a German IC in Western on G1, with a fleet unifcation attempt in SZ7 on G2 with a naval build dropped in SZ7.
I posted it as a hairbrained idea.
-
im doing that fairly well Vs U-505 in the league (don´t know where the game is going exactly but anyway)
i like it becuse it enables germany to “controll” All UK SZ from SZ7.
Suggested Topics
