Jennifer and Ncscswitch,
I see your point of view. Consider, however, the fact that I and my friends are still green at A&A.
As I said the apparently good behaving of the German AC maybe due to our inexperience as Allied to counter that move.
I’d like to make some considerations, give me your opinion, please.
I think that having a fleet in Baltic, allows German to build TRN (to carry troops in Norway or Karelia or to menace an invasion of England).
Moreover German can build some U-Boote to be used in counterattaking UK/US Fleet using Aircraft and U-Boote as fodder, so avoiding losses to Luftwaffe. My idea is not to grab Sea supremacy from allies but to sink TRN and disrupt landing of unit in Norway.
Without an existing fleet in Baltic every sub built will be destroyed soon after its launch.
In my opinion the problem is that loosing the Baltic Fleet, leaves Gemran open to invasion, and it is another territory to be defended using also aircraft, so probably the two planes on the Carrier should be used in Germany and can not be used in Western Europe. Moreover its necessary to have a stack of infantry in Germany so its necessary to purchase enough INF every turn to deploy in Germany replacing the units moved to the eastern front and to France. Moreover a strike in Germany, even a failed one, may “insert a bubble in the pipeline” of reinforcement.
Finally, without sea unit every counterattack on th UK/US navy has to be made only with air unit and I dislike to loose aircraft with Germany.
This are my consideration that may be consequences of my inexperience and casued by an erroneous overall Axis strategy.
I have noted, for example, that the more the Japan presses on Russia, the more US and UK try to react making sub optimal moves as employing units in Africa or in Pacific losing focus from the KGF strategy that is normally used in our games.
So the answer to my problem with Germany maybe… Japan coming to help!?!?!?!