Correct.
It’s nice to have, don’t get me wrong, but I’m not investing valuable IPC in maintaining it. (I’ll use it as fodder if I attack the allied navies though, if the allies are silly enough to let it live that long.)
G1 input
-
@Crazy:
:-o
An R1 Karilia stack! I’ve never seen an R1 Karilia stack that I couldn’t smash to smitherines. What utter folly!Yea? Who said a d@mn thing about a Karelia stack with Russia on Russia 1?
I said that Russia can be really well set up to demolish any stack Germany puts in Karelia on Round 1 if Russia just plans for it on their Round 1 attacks.
Very easy to have 9 or 10 infantry, 2 artillery and 4 armor in W. Russia with 8 Infantry, 3 armor, 2 fighters in Russia itself. There’s not a blasted thing Germany can stack in Karelia that will withstand 9 or 10 infantry, 2 artillery, 7 armor and 2 fighters. Not on round 1!
-
Mmm . . . stacked Karelians.
-
Okay, be nice, because what I’m about to say will probably be a really dumb idea. I’m curious to know if anyone has tried an ultra-conservative German strategy. Let’s say Russia only attacked WRussia on R1, and abandoned Karelia (which is not an unfamiliar Russian opening), instead of Germany going on the offensive and trying to break through all those darn Russian infantry, what if Germany makes no attacks (except Karelia) on the mainland (I’m not referring to naval attacks in the Med) and just fortifies it’s line (Karelia, Belo, and Ukraine) for a couple rounds until Japan gets a little stronger on the mainland.
Okay, maybe that’s just the stupidest idea ever, but I’m still interested to know your thoughts. Thanks. -
I could only see that happening if…
Germany went hardcore into Africa and massed troops on the Russian front.
Or Germany devoted more attention to the Atlantic fleet and massed troops on the russian front.
I think Germany needs to make a buffer for itself some where very early on.
But stranger things have happened.
LT
-
@LT04:
I could only see that happening if…
Germany went hardcore into Africa and massed troops on the Russian front.
Or Germany devoted more attention to the Atlantic fleet and massed troops on the russian front.
I think Germany needs to make a buffer for itself some where very early on.
But stranger things have happened.
LT
Yeah, I was thinking more towards Africa. Obviously take Egypt on G1, and a G1 trn purchase for the Med.
-
IF Russia went conservative, I almost always do what you said with Germany which is being conservative myself.
That’s a classic german turtle, mass forces in Eastern Europe, swap the 3 territories.
I also tend to only defend Western Europe and Norway G1-G2 depending on allies possible landings. After that i invite them on the beach by removing all troops and AA guns, poising my troops for a decisive counter that does not make it worthwhile for them to land.
The idea is to offer minimum troops to the ennemy while creating dead zones. For this to be efficient, you mainly build infantry backed by your aviation. Build stack after stack of infantry with the occasional fighter or 2 tanks.
You also need to invest one AC in baltic and possibly one more transport in med, you can even invest a second AC if UK is building up to sink it. Once you reach the conclusion allies will be able to sink it, remove the 4 fighters and be contempt they invested past 80ipc for your 32ipc.
And yea, go heavy in Africa. I never found adding transports in Med was a bad move, for that and the fact you get more and more pression on caucasus doing so.
By the time allies crack a well made German Turtle, a turtle that keeps it’s head in the shell, Japan should be in Moscow.
So Yes CaptainJack, it’s a good strategy if you discipline yourself buying mainly infantry, offering no easy opportunity and holding your ground for Japan. This is in the context of a KGF and if Russia did not take Ukraine ( if they did bleed their troops doing so, i always roll over them )
-
Wow, so it’s not uncommon for you to buy an A/C and 2 transports on G1 - if you are conducting a “German Turtle”
-
8 Bid transport in med
G1 AC + infantry.
G2 extra transport if needed + infantry
etc…It’s a pretty common opening.
From G2, you spend everything in infantry per turn , except about 10 ipc for tanks OR a fighter OR a boat. Exception, maybe G4 OR G5 where you might buy a new AC for Baltic if allies took the bait and are building up to try sink that fleet, as i explained above. -
I wonder how it would work in my situation (none of the guys I play with use a bid).
-
Pulling back when Russia goes W. Russia only can be a good idea. It conserves forces and Germany has more than enough air power to trade three territories (whereas Russia only has barely enough to trade two.)
However, if Russia went ULTRA HARD into W. Russia and you got some lucky punches in, it may be in your best interest to crash through the entire Russian army and destroy it followed by building up some more armies yourself. This generally results in a more frantic and less thought out campaign by England and America to rush to Russia’s aid. (And after all, Germany’s more than able to pump out infantry and tanks again afterwards anyway!)
As for deadzoning W. Europe, ick! If I want England or America landing there, I always make sure it will at least cost them 2 infantry to take it, maybe more. Otherwise they make a profit!
-
@Corbeau:
You also need to invest one AC in baltic and possibly one more transport in med, you can even invest a second AC if UK is building up to sink it. Once you reach the conclusion allies will be able to sink it, remove the 4 fighters and be contempt they invested past 80ipc for your 32ipc.
Or the allies could have out thought you and built destroyers which they can turn into off-shore batteries and thus not have wasted the money.
Just a thought.
-
@Cmdr:
Pulling back when Russia goes W. Russia only can be a good idea. It conserves forces and Germany has more than enough air power to trade three territories (whereas Russia only has barely enough to trade two.)
However, if Russia went ULTRA HARD into W. Russia and you got some lucky punches in, it may be in your best interest to crash through the entire Russian army and destroy it followed by building up some more armies yourself. This generally results in a more frantic and less thought out campaign by England and America to rush to Russia’s aid. (And after all, Germany’s more than able to pump out infantry and tanks again afterwards anyway!)
As for deadzoning W. Europe, ick! If I want England or America landing there, I always make sure it will at least cost them 2 infantry to take it, maybe more. Otherwise they make a profit!
Yeah, the “German Turtle” as Corbeau Blank put it, would only be worthwhile under the “right” set of circumstances. And I like your postion on W.Europe - I like the idea of the Allies having to lose something. However, CB, I also see your point too.
-
Well, Western Europe is only empty after G2, it then get swapped and they will lose something from that point since any swap normally involves at least 2 infantry (6ipc)m back and forth. I just value too much my initial infantry to lose any there the second turn for a +3. I also see a widely open WE as a bait effect to get the allies begin that swap game. Combined arms is about 30 ipc to shore bombard 1-2 infantry there, i don’t see it as a outsmarting move, no offense meant.
Many players can be get to play the way you want them to, even if reading this seems unlikely. Fact is I want them to swap trade WE with me every turn. That’s 2 production slot on 8 for UK i can keep monopolised there every turn vs 2 on 16 slots for Germany. So I guess it’s your choice or not to leave a guy there on G2. Does’nt make a big difference but my experience is it’s easier to lure allies in that game with an initial open St-Tropez beach with a free “pina coladas”.
As long you don’t forget the main goal here is to not have a huge stack of infantry tied in Western Europe and mostly vulnerable to try to prevent a possible landing you can’t stop anyways. Remember that eastern europe tanks, aviation and infantry production in Germany/SE are all in range to counter. Freeing that infantry enable you to push more infantry toward Russia while keeping the deadzone on Western Europe every turn by merely placing your newly built infantry. Just keep in mind how many ennemy troops can land and be sure to have what you need to repel it.
-
@Corbeau:
Well, Western Europe is only empty after G2, it then get swapped and they will lose something from that point since any swap normally involves at least 2 infantry (6ipc)m back and forth. I just value too much my initial infantry to lose any there the second turn for a +3. I also see a widely open WE as a bait effect to get the allies begin that swap game. Combined arms is about 30 ipc to shore bombard 1-2 infantry there, i don’t see it as a outsmarting move, no offense meant.
Many players can be get to play the way you want them to, even if reading this seems unlikely. Fact is I want them to swap trade WE with me every turn. That’s 2 production slot on 8 for UK i can keep monopolised there every turn vs 2 on 16 slots for Germany. So I guess it’s your choice or not to leave a guy there on G2. Does’nt make a big difference but my experience is it’s easier to lure allies in that game with an initial open St-Tropez beach with a free “pina coladas”.
As long you don’t forget the main goal here is to not have a huge stack of infantry tied in Western Europe and mostly vulnerable to try to prevent a possible landing you can’t stop anyways. Remember that eastern europe tanks, aviation and infantry production in Germany/SE are all in range to counter. Freeing that infantry enable you to push more infantry toward Russia while keeping the deadzone on Western Europe every turn by merely placing your newly built infantry. Just keep in mind how many ennemy troops can land and be sure to have what you need to repel it.
Well said.
-
@Bunnies:
Mmm . . . stacked Karelians.
LMAO
+1
-
Makes sense, CB, but I’d still leave at least two infantry in W. Europe on G1 or G2. That way England MIGHT get one with their battleship, but would still need to risk 7 IPCs to get the other one (or more.) I’d probably leave the AA Gun there too, just to encourage England to avoid bringing Fighters, but I might not depending on how well I’m doing.
Also, do note that my comment above about British destroyers to out-think the German fleets that later pull their fighters back can be out thought by Germany just by producing a submarine in SZ 5 each round.
I’d say the submarine is a good investment when, and if, England gets 5 destroyers and their starting Battleship. Anything less than that and you may not recover your investment on the submarine. (5 Destroyers = 15 Punch, 1 Battleship = 4 Punch, that’s 19 punch or roughly 3 hits. 3 hits = 9 IPC in infantry, a submarine costs 8. Therefore, the submarine is cheaper than the lost infantry.)
Suggested Topics
