Thank you guys. I thought it was legal the only thing that was tripping me up was the whole we don’t own the sea zone before the turn but you can’t own a sea zone so it is fine to land on a carrier that has taken a sea zone. Or that is my understanding. Thanks again for the info. It was one thing I was not sure on.
Lots of questions on Germany and UK
-
Had my first global game in a very long time this past week. Played as Germany (lost) at around turn 5 when Europe stagnated/Tokyo was on the eve of invasion and axis conceded. I never liked blaming a loss on bad luck but this time I really felt like the dice Gods had it out for me.
After a fairly average battle for Paris which resulted in me keeping my stack of tanks, I forgot to implement taking the french treasury (we normally forget this step anyways and i was supposed to implement it this game) which was my first big hiccup. My first dice problem (and by far the worst in the game) was my assault on the Royal Navy. I followed my typical strategy of sending the Bismark, one sub, fighter and tac to sink the British BB, cruiser, and destroyer off of Scotland. two subs to sink the destroyer and TT off of ireland, and 2 (or 3, I forget) subs, fighter and tac to assault the main stack in the English channel. I also decided to press up the attack, as my unbeatable friend was playing UK, and send two bombers accompanied by all remaining fighters to hit London’s IC.
Attack off Scotland succeeded, but every other attack failed with no British losses. surprisingly enough we had never strategically bombed an IC and have the defender scramble intercept fighters, so it was much to my surprise when I found out all aircraft roll at a 1 but still saw my opponent rolling snake eyes every time and i kept getting five’s.
This brings about my first question, given my units that i appropriated to sink Royal navy (in case of English channel I just send as much to draw scrambling fighters as much as actually trying to sink ships) did i not send enough? or did i just get screwed by the dice and the situation was nothing i could have prevented? and in the case of the SBR, is that a smart thing to do G1? and if i were to modify the values aircraft were given in the air battle prior to SBR what would you recommend changing it to because personally i hate rolling for 1’s.
I did not allocate forces to take Normandy and instead sent them all to Paris, this coupled with my Naval/Air fiasco allowed Normandy to stay in the hands of the allies the entire game with Britain (U.S. went all in Japan and was absent from Europe) constantly shipping forces over to counter my constant raids from France (my tank stack that survived battle of Paris killed all but one fighter in Normandy G2 which is why the constant skirmishes developed). This was just the Western Front. In the south and East the Axis attempt was disappointing.
G1 I took Finland, Yugo, and Bulgaria putting a minor IC in Romania moving all forces not allocated to west or Yugo onto the Russian border. My plan was against a medium skilled Russian player and involved a southern root to the Caucasus with 6 inf covering flank in Poland and Finland while keeping distance from Leningrad. However due to a surprise takeover of Tobruk and a weak Italian response I made a ill decision to build a factory in Yugo and start shipping inf to Libya. North Africa’s fate was sealed before i could send my Afrikacorps and cost me 29 IPC’s for the minor, transport, 2inf and art. this major setback in south and west meant my Eastern campaign could only do so much and my stack only made it to Western Ukraine through E.P. and Besserabia when the major Russian stack from Ukraine attacked and Soviets pulled it out with 1 tank remaining.
The next round the Axis capitulated with Euro-Axis doomed on all fronts and Japan looking out at the U.S. fleet sitting triumphantly in the sea of japan. other than the questions i already asked as to what caused my downfall, how was my decision of Barbarossa strategy? Romanian/Yugo factory? I would love to know and would love just one win for global that didn’t involve my nemesis on my team
Is there a way where you can break this down into easier to read chunks?
-
Usually on G1 for the attack on the Royal Navy, I will send the following:
SZ 106 = 2 subs
SZ 91 = 2 subs
SZ 111 = 1 sub, 1 BB, 1 fighter, 1 Tac and 1 bomber
SZ 110 = 3 fighters, 3 Tacs and 1 bomber
This is usually successful in wiping out the Royal Navy. As for surviving units, that depends on if UK scrambles or not. If they decide to save the RAF, I will usually wipe out the Royal Navy while keeping most of my planes. However, if UK scrambles into SZ 110, I might take a lot of plane losses, but I also get the chance to cream the RAF in the bargain. Generally, it will be easier for Germany to replace at least some of those planes than it will for the UK.
Also, if the RAF is wiped out trying to defend the Channel, that could make a possible Sealion easier and more than likely means the Italian Navy will be mostly intact, which will mean a lot of trouble for UK in the Med. -
Sounds very dangerous, knp!
Let’s play advocate of the devil again :evil:.
I would personally be very tempted to scramble SZ110. On average, that would mean sacrificing 2 British FTR and a French one, to kill 6 German aircraft. That just sounds bad for Germany :|. -
Sounds very dangerous, knp!
Let’s play advocate of the devil again :evil:.
I would personally be very tempted to scramble SZ110. On average, that would mean sacrificing 2 British FTR and a French one, to kill 6 German aircraft. That just sounds bad for Germany :|.Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you. I hate to see when UK scrambles into SZ 110. On the other hand, while the Luftwaffe definitely takes a hard hit, you also wipe out the Royal Navy and the RAF home squadrons.
Some may disagree with me, but generally if I manage to kill all UK/French ships and planes yet still manage to keep both strategic bombers and at least 1 ftr and 1 tac, then I think it is an overall success. Remember, Germany will still have another fighter and tac from the eastern border. Usually I use the tac to help with the assault on Paris and it lands in W Germany and the fighter will help attack Yugoslavia and either land in S Italy to help protect against a Taranto raid or, if I think a Taranto raid is less likely, the fighter will also land in W Germany.So, the final result is Germany still has 2 fighters, 2 tacs and 2 bombers in W Germany and SZ 112 (if Germany bought a carrier). Meanwhile, All the Royal Navy except for 1 DD and 1 Transport in SZ 109 is now on the bottom and all the RAF home squadrons including that pesky French fighter is trashed with all the UK’s remaining air force down in the Med. The only plane able to reach London is the Gibraltar fighter and maybe the Malta fighter in 2 moves if they don’t lose it in action against the Italians or do something else with it.
This still makes Sealion a very good possibility if Germany can send 10-11 transports of troops/tanks/artillery. By round 3, UK will only have 2 fighters (Gibraltar, Malta) in London plus any they might purchase.
There lies the trick for the UK. If they buy too much fighter protection, they have less troops to protect London and Germany will overwhelm them with sheer numbers. If they buy all infantry to defend London, then they will have little air cover and most of their defense will be a bunch of "2"s. So Sealion could still be successful if Germany attacks with 20-22 land units, 2 fighters, 2 tacs and 2 bombers.
Also, if the RN and RAF is wasted in SZ 110 and 111, it is very unlikely that UK will come out to try and hit the German navy in SZ 112. I have seen games where the RAF did NOT scramble and after the sea battles, UK flew all their planes plus any remaining navy and sank my German fleet in 112.
Again, with these developments, it is more likely UK will not try Taranto and the Italian fleet will be mostly intact and cause lots of trouble for UK in the Med. This will go a lot toward giving Italy a real “leg up” on expanding into Africa and the Middle East.
So yeah, I hate losing half the Luftwaffe plus several subs and probably their 1 battleship, but if I’m trading it for but bulk of the RN and nearly half the RAF, I still think it is a good trade.
Oh yeah, even if you decide against Sealion and decide to go right after Russia, UK will be stuck with few planes, no boats and a stack of men stuck on their island so it will be a few rounds before they even become a real threat to Germany. If Italy does well in the Med and Germany keeps a decent supply of U-Boats flowing into the Atlantic, you can keep the Brits in check for a while.
Now, what the Americans do when they come into the war is anybody’s guess. -
Herr kaLeun says he 's not very experienced but I think he is shamelessly modest and I agree with everything he posted ;-).
Herr KaLeun I agree with clerc in that you are most definitely underselling yourself :p
Thanks for the compliments guys! But the grand total of A&A Global 1940 games I played in my life, is precisely 2. I owe the strategical an tactical insights that I summarized, to other people on this forum who generously shared their knowledge.
In the mean time……
I tried my best to keep Luftwaffe intact but the dice said nay :p I will definitely use less air on next G1 though.
No, what you need to do, is to use more air. Use those bombers and fighters that you sent to London to do your naval battles instead, in order to win those battles by a good margin and keep as many planes as possible alive. Preserving the Luftwaffe by not using it would be a bad idea.
for the destroyer and TT off Ireland wouldn’t attacking it be smart as it will draw scrambling fighters away from the two larger sea battles
The problem is that how to use those fighters is Britain’s choice. If you set up the main battles in such a way that the UK has a good chance of winning them by scrambling, they will forget about SZ 109 and kill your main attacks, which is pretty much a disaster for Germany, as LeClerc pointed out. But if you make your main attacks so strong that the UK can’t expect to succeed even with the scramblers, then he won’t scramble at all because that would be a waste of his planes. And in that case, if you attack SZ 109, the UK will be more than happy to gainfully employ the fighters after all, by scrambling into that sea zone.
and/or wouldn’t leaving the destroyer there be inviting it to kill the rest of your subs or is keeping subs around not even a big deal in your opinion because I have never been in a situation to really use subs to their full advantage as Germany
If you used your subs for the main battles, there typically won’t be any remaining subs to kill anyway. If you send one or two subs away to fight elsewhere and win that battle, then the destroyer may indeed come after them, but that’s not necessarily favorable to the British. It’s one reason why I like the 2 sub attack in SZ 106: if the destroyer sails in from 109 on UK1, then there’s a certain risk of that attack failing. So, depending on the number of German subs surviving, the UK will need to send at least one and maybe two fighters to finish the job. And because those fighters need to land, they’ll see Toronto before they ever get to see Taranto, and Italy’s admirals will rejoice.
From the starting position, Germany’s subs are basically dead. So use them to do as much damage as possible. -
Usually on G1 for the attack on the Royal Navy, I will send the following:
SZ 106 = 2 subs
SZ 91 = 2 subs
SZ 111 = 1 sub, 1 BB, 1 fighter, 1 Tac and 1 bomber
SZ 110 = 3 fighters, 3 Tacs and 1 bomber
This is usually successful in wiping out the Royal Navy. As for surviving units, that depends on if UK scrambles or not. If they decide to save the RAF, I will usually wipe out the Royal Navy while keeping most of my planes. However, if UK scrambles into SZ 110, I might take a lot of plane losses, but I also get the chance to cream the RAF in the bargain. Generally, it will be easier for Germany to replace at least some of those planes than it will for the UK.
Also, if the RAF is wiped out trying to defend the Channel, that could make a possible Sealion easier and more than likely means the Italian Navy will be mostly intact, which will mean a lot of trouble for UK in the Med.Depends on how much UK killed in the channel, of course.
-
I feel weary using bombers though :(
I always want the best possible outcome not being a sea lion but bombing and/or convoying the Brits into submission. Whether or not this is realistic I would rather lose all my normal planes and keep my bombers because it is just too expensive to be buying bombers as Germany
speaking of expensive what about those NO’s i proposed?
P.S. the toronto/taranto thing made me laugh xD
-
(…) Some may disagree with me, but generally if I manage to kill all UK/French ships and planes yet still manage to keep both strategic bombers and at least 1 ftr and 1 tac, then I think it is an overall success (…)
That’s okay knp, I don’t get you wrong :-). I’m afraid we just have to disagree on that. You are right in that all of the RN is down, but… The RN is non-existent anyway if 110, 111 and either one of 106 or 91 are knocked out and that can be achieved without loosing a single German plane.
If Germany and the UK loose aircraft G1 on a 1:1 basis I can still be with you but Germany loosing double the amount that the UK looses?So I have been giving it some more thoughts and what I think loosing 6 German aircraft G1 against 2Brits and 1 French does:
-
It worsens Germany’s chances for Sea Lion, compared to a Sea Lion where neither side lost a single plane. In my experience the UK can hold that off, so then why wouldn’t it if Germany lost double airplanes already?
-
It kills German chances to capture Moscow, given some US pressure in Europe. Not that Germany won’t be able to push back the Reds, but taking Moscow is another thing entirely. Russia moves into a comfort zone which is very bad news for the axis plans.
-
If Germany persist in the Atlantic, Italy and/or Germany will feast on Africa but can this win the Axis the game? As this also means Germany cannot expand anywhere else because Russia moves from its comfort zone into being outright dangerous!
-
If Germany does not persist in the Atlantic and turns on Russia (without being able to seriously threaten Moscow itself), the UK is still capable enough to hold much of Africa and take back what is lost from turn 4/5 and onwards.
And then, indeed, the US enters the war and we can start guessing.
I 've seen it in our group a couple of times already: Germany resigning after loosing much of its luftwaffe to the UK only loosing half that amount of RAF/Armée de l’Air combined. We never put much debate into it as to why exactly we resigned as every1 on the table agreed, but now I am happy we can share thoughts about whether this is premature or not.
Personally I think fighting on with Germany in this situation is only an option if you know Stalin is very weak at defending Moscow. In that respect it can pay Germany well, ofc ;-). -
-
Oh yeah, I’m not saying it is a good thing for Germany to lose half the Luftwaffe even at the expense of the RAF and RN. I just think that it leaves Germany with still a step up over the UK.
You are right in that losing that much air power will make it much harder for Germany. It is my experience that Germany can still pull off a win, although it will take a little longer than it would if they still had the majority of the Luftwaffe left.
I guess my thing is if the UK manages to keep all it’s RAF, even after losing the navy, they are much more able to cause trouble for me while I’m trying to take down the Reds. Whereas if the RAF gets wiped out along with their navy, even at the cost of up to half of my planes, then UK is kind of stuck on it’s island and really unable to bother me for at least a couple of rounds or so.
Now, losing up to half of my planes is very extreme and I would not want to lose any more if at all possible. Losing any more would be one of those phyrric victories and you are right, it will cost Germany in the long run.
One other thing, this my be my thinking because of the people I play with. Maybe it’s just their tactics that make me think it’s not such a bad thing. Perhaps if my UK player employed better strategies, I might think differently. -
Hehheh yeah who knows.
Personally I definately feel the difference if playing Germany versus 1 (group of) player or the other. -
I feel weary using bombers though :(
If you want to fight the two major naval battles G1 (SZ 110 and 111) and you want to win those battles, use the bombers.
I always want the best possible outcome not being a sea lion but bombing and/or convoying the Brits into submission. Whether or not this is realistic I would rather lose all my normal planes and keep my bombers because it is just too expensive to be buying bombers as Germany
I’m not sure what your plan is there. You can’t knock the British out of the war that way. All that will happen is that you’ll need to invest a lot of money for bombers to do the raids and for subs to do the convoying (yes, you’ll need new bombers because they’ll get shot down eventually, and no, they’re not terribly expensive if you ask me, just 1-2 IPC’s more than the smaller planes).
An SBR campaign against the UK early in the game basically amounts to spending German money to make the British spend their money. If you don’t plan to do Sea Lion as a counterpart to that bombing campaign, you won’t make any real progress as Germany. Russia will be smiling, and as soon as the US arrives, your bombers and subs will need to stop bothering the Brits or they’ll be destroyed.As LeClerc explained, Germany can’t afford to fight a two front war against the UK and Russia. You have to pick one of them. If your general plan is to go after Russia, you’ll probably still want to attack the Royal Navy G1 with everything you’ve got, simply because it’s the best moment to do so. But after doing that and taking out France, send your forces east to kill Russia. Conversely, if your general plan is to go after Britain, you’ll need to prepare for Sea Lion.
speaking of expensive what about those NO’s i proposed?
I agree with you that the British NO that exists in the game is a bit lame. But I’m not sure about alternatives…. control of the Atlantic seems to be too easy to achieve for the Allies. I like the Sicily idea, though, and it also has a nice historical background to it.
-
Of course, this game gives you the opportunity to do it your way, alternate history and perform something new if possible.
BUT!
If you are not considering to take out the RN on G1 ,you will need a solid plan to keep the Western Allies at bay.The RN will shut down most likely the channel and Gibraltar.
With Gibraltar shut down, the Italian ships can’t sail into the Atlantic anymore to support any German activities there. The RN will start to built up a solid bridgehead for the U.S. wich will join them sooner or later.
Any subs you will built to try to blockade any landings will simply vanish against the huge amount of shipments the Allies now have.That means your plan must involve a quick built up of massive forces to crack Moscow Round 5,6 or 7 as the latest and starting a build up in France meanwhile arround Round 4,5 or so.
If you consider to destroy the RN on G1 then you will have a pressure relief for at least three turns with little German and Italian Navy build up to secure the Channel and Gibraltar.
You are making it harder for the Allies to invade quicker and forcing the U.S. to budget the money/IPC’s for spending into the Atlantic or the Pacific. You’ll see it triggers a small slowing down effect on U.S. side.
The U.K. can’t do much on it’s own, it needs the U.S. .As for German spendings:
Everything you loose on G1 and G2 is not a big deal in relation to your achivements but G3 you should start calculate everything you may loose and be able to replace if neccessary.
If you loose one or two bombers on G1,G2 ok ; you will be able to replace them with your income ,but G3 and so fort you need to calculate your risks your taking and be more ecconomicly.
Very good posts Herr KaLeun, enjoyed reading them.
-
I agree that you shouldn’t attempt an SBR run on London G1. You need to concentrate your air power on the Royal Navy in sz110 & 111. Bombers are like flying battleships in sea battles attacking at 4, and you can send in plenty to protect them (much better use then SBR at this time). Send subs after the Canadian mini fleet, and the cruiser off Gib (1-2 each battle), and forget the sz 109 dd/transport. I think it is better to overpower the Royal navy, then to entice them to scramble (until you get more acquainted to the game anyway). I have seen both success, and failure for the Germans when the UK scrambles, it gets too dicey for my liking in the first round. It could loose the game for either side, and the dice have a bigger impact in larger more even battles with expensive units (very little fodder).
With that said, I get what KNP is saying about trying to draw out the RAF into the sz110 battle (might be able to also kill of the RAF). Watch what you wish for though, because this risky strat could be devastating for the Germans as pointed out above, and I wouldn’t suggest it for a newbie. In this attack you are sacrificing air even if he doesn’t scramble, and the Germans need to keep the Luftwaffe in tact IMO to continue to threaten the the allies (or defend). BluGerman your attacks also intentionally invited some scrambles. The difference being that once the UK scrambled they had the advantage in sz110, where KNP still kept an edge for the Germans.
For Pete’s sake you have to take the French loot G1 to build up for Barbarossa (or Sea Lion). You need that 19 IPCs to buy ground units for the Russian assault end of story.
I would also try to take S France G1 for the IC (although the French ships will convoy you LOL). This will allow you the option to build German ships in the Med if you want to G2 w/o the expense of buying an IC. I have found it better to supply a German carrier (if you can do it safely) to beef up the Italian navy protecting Italian transports when they leave the safety of their harbor (instead of buying German transports that will need protection). Early German subs builds in the Med can be cool, but you have to be sure that the UK can’t kill them before you get the chance to use them (do they still have a dd in range). This could push the UK out of the Med, or keep them from re-entering when combined w/Luftwaffe.
I have bought a German IC for Yugo in the past, and it can be helpful to the Italians, and allows you to drop both Italian and German ships in sz97 (but spending too much German income in the Med will stall your Barbarossa).
As for the Romanian IC build G1, there are 2 trains of thought here. I’m not convinced it hurts you as far as what you can bring in, but it defiantly tips your hand to the allies G1 (Barbarossa). The thing is that once you make that choice, and let them know it G1 you have to follow through, and not get too distracted from your goal (like spending too much in the Med).
-
If you build a Romanian IC G1 you can produce slow units G2 (maybe G3), and faster units in the later rounds. Then push into Ukraine (Russian IC) for builds there as well, and the 2 ICs can compliment each other. You can still build fast units in Germany as well to catch up.
-
Building all inf/art in Germany G1 will get more slow units to the Russian border G2 w/o the expense of the IC, and doesn’t tip your hand to the allies. Faster units will take one more turn to get to Moscow from Germany IC, but you can produce more to make up for it (w/o the cost of the IC).
-
What can also work is waiting to build an IC on Russian soil at either W Ukraine or Rostov to get more units at the front, and it doesn’t tip your hand to the Allies G1. A competent allied team can usually stall your Barbarossa at some point (like RAF headquartered in Moscow) so having another IC on Russian soil 2 spaces from Moscow can help finish the push. We have seen IC’s built in Romania G1, and W Ukraine once Germany gets there along with the captured Russian factories. The thing is that the Germans can have a hard time keeping production up in all these IC on Russian soil (and defend W Europe), so the Romanian IC is generally not used as the Germans close in (so was it necessary?)
The heavy loses your Luftwaffe took in the naval battles around England (too risky because of the SBR attempt), not getting the French loot, and buying a second minor IC is what doomed you (and the others have spelled out the same story). Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t think that based on this experience (mostly bad decisions) you should be tinkering with the rules, or NO’s yet.
-
-
G1 Purchase: 1 SS, 1 DD, 1 CV
G1 Combat:
2 SS, 1 Ftr (Norway), 1 Tac (Germany), 2 Bombers to SZ111
2 SS, 1 BB, 3 Ftr, 3 Tac to SZ110
1 SS to SZ106
2 Inf, 2 Art (Via Holland) to Normandy
All remaining ground units able to invade France do so, including the 3 Arm from S.Germany and 1 Tac from Hungary
All ground units capable of hitting Yugo do so, leaving 1 Inf behind in Romania to NCM to BulgariaG1 Combat decisions:
1. My aim is to sink the UK fleet, not destroy their Ftr. I’ll not trade a Ftr for a Ftr with UK, so if all that is left are Ftr and I’m going to trade a BB and/or Ftr to finish them off, I’ll retreat. If I get them all in one fell swoop, I’ll take it. Note in some cases the BB can retreat with a single hit on it to SZ112, which bolsters the fleet you’re about to place there.
2. I generally prefer to strafe Yugo. I’ll roll combat for one round and then retreat back to Romania. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn’t and I take Yugo. Both are acceptable results. I prefer the strafe because Italy can use the IPC on mainland Europe in the early rounds.
3. I know many people say to leave Normandy alone. I see the merits, but I’d rather collect 2 IPC for 4-6 rounds than have to leave units behind to keep the French from liberating Paris or taking Holland / S.France. To me, its a staging point for the UK/US to both land Ftr on. I’d rather see-saw ownership of it for multiple turns than see 4-8 Ftr land on top of 20 ground units combined between the UK and US in the middle rounds.G1 NCM:
Fly the Ftr from Poland down to Rome. An extra Ftr scrambling may save some of or all of the Italian fleet.
Step 1 Inf from Norway to Finland, place the 4 units
Step 1 Inf from Romania to Bulgaria, place the 4 units
Leave the Inf/Art Stack in Berlin
Leave 1 Ftr (from Norway) and 1 Tac (from Germany) in SZ112 to land on the CV.
Land all remaining Ftr/Tac/Bombers in WGr
NCM the CR + TT to SZ112G1 Place units:
Place your SS, DD and CV in SZ112. You could have as much as 1 SS, 1 DD, 1 CR, 1 BB (tipped), 1 CV + 1 Ftr/Tac and 1 TT in SZ112 with 3 aircraft capable of scrambling over it.
Note: This creates a formidable defensive wall for a few turns, which keeps the UK squarely on London or building in Canada. Eventually this fleet will be sunk, but you may be able to suicide it with a component of bombers to sink everything the Allies put off of Gibraltar if they don’t pay attention. Keep that in mind, as you could set the Allies back 2+ turns if they get loose in defending a navy out there.
Note 2: You’re also in a good position with this fleet for a G3 Sea Lion as you may not have to send any aircraft to protect TT on the Amphib part of the invasion. I generally don’t Sea Lion, but its good to keep the options open if UK plays silly.Lastly, there’s a million ways to play Germany. Mine isn’t 100% correct, or the best. There are better players on this forum than me that can tell you that. The dicey battles include SZ111 (retreat once ships are sunk), Normandy and you can risk losing the Tac in Paris to AA. SZ110 can also get dicey if there are 3 Ftr scrambling. I’ve seen it played both ways and from experience the odds are you’ll retreat after sinking the navy or face trading aircraft with the Allies. When I’ve played as the UK I generally let the fleet get sunk (its inevitable) and save the aircraft to land on CV once Germany is fully committed in Russia. This also allows the UK to build an Armor/Mech in S.Africa early which seems to be a constant thorn in the side of the Italians while also building 6 Inf in London in case Sea Lion materializes.
Some comments on your OP:
1. Don’t build factories as Germany. Build units that can take the Russian factories. I’d rather spend 12 IPC on 2 Arm that can take and hold Ukraine’s minor than building one in Romania. Use the units from S.Germany + Bulgaria to make it highly expensive for the Russians to try to hit your soft underbelly. The only thing I’d consider building regarding infrastructure is an AB in E.Poland if you have an opportunity to sack Moscow early and can use the additional air power to minimize losses. Note that Bombers can reach Moscow from E.Poland, so realistically E.Poland is your launching pad for just about everything and keeps the Russians worried about which way you are actually going to go (Arm/Mech move there from Berlin each round you purchase them).
2. My brother and friend both call it the “water balloon” effect. In short, never get caught thinking throwing a water balloon on the board that explodes everywhere is good. In the short term you may gain a few extra IPC, but you lose momentum as you have to dry off the board and regroup - which inevitably means you’ll sustain losses in both units and territory you just gained. Is it really worth taking Baltic States for 1 IPC when you’re going to lose 10 IPC worth of units to do it? In short, always think ahead 2-3 turns when considering fighting over a small potatoes territory. How soon can the enemy counter attack there, what kind of losses will I sustain to both take and hold it, is there a total economic benefit for doing it? If not, is there a strategic benefit worth the cost (answer is usually, “No.”). So be wary of water ballooning, it almost always comes back to haunt you. And if you really want to understand it, play as Japan. Their opportunities are boundless to water balloon, but when you start losing all your TT and stranding units on islands, you’ll realize its better to be a slow moving ball of destruction versus an exploding water balloon.Good luck!
Germa
-
Spendo02,
Very interesting observation on the “water balloon” effect. I have to admit, Japan has a tendency to do that in our games. While it sometimes works for them, often times it becomes a real problem, especially in losing the transports like you pointed out. -
I’ve had the most success with Japan in a “slow” play that is methodical, overpowering and highly calculated. The times I struggle with Japan are when I try to take all the DEI by J3 and end up losing TT and stranding units. There’s no way I’m sending a TT to go get those units off the island, the cost is very prohibitive in time and resources to protect one to simply pick up 3-7 IPC worth of units and they don’t defend overly well or at any bonus for being stranded either. In short, losing an undefended TT at a DEI costs you 10-14 IPC, and stops further expansion of those units for potentially the entire game. As the Allies, I’d be excited to wipe 10-14 starting IPC off the board for free from an undefended TT. Even if its lightly defended and I can sink more ships, it’s still a win for the Allies.
So, I’d rather take 1-2 DEI per round, solidifying each holding and challenging ANZAC and the UK to suicide against heavily defended landings. It may take an extra round or two, but you’ll spend 3 rounds and too much IPC to simply recover from a lost TT by water ballooning.
My friend swears by it, and things get dicey for the Allies in the Pacific when he plays Japan, but each time I sink a TT, I’m winning the battle because its stops further expansion - which is the key for Japan. Eventually the tides turn and expansion comes to a halt. Problem always is, did he make the US spend enough in the Pacific that they are delayed in arriving in Europe? I’m a better player as the US in the Pacific than I am in the Atlantic - mostly because my playgroup does not play Germany well against Russia so I tend to stalemate there.
-
We played 2 games this weekend but only finished one. The first one went like this for Germany. We played with Tech tokens so it was a fun game.
Turn 1: Germany - economy (30)
Purchase: 1 IC(Romania) and 2 Tanks, 1 Tech dice. (Misssed Tech on round 1)
Attack:
• SZ :110 2 Subs, 3 Fighters, 3 Tact, Bomber
• SZ: 111 2 subs, Battleship, Fighter, Tact, Bomber
• SZ:106 1 Sub
• France: Everything from Holland, West Germany and 3 tanks from Southern Germany.
• Yugo: Everything left from Southern and the 3 tanks on the east front plus fighter and tact. Land them in S. Italy.
Activate – Norway and Bulgaria.
Non Combat – 1 inf and art to Norway. Stay in SZ 112.Italy – economy(10)
Purchase: 1 Fighter
Attack:
• Southern France : 2 inf + 2 art + Tank
• SZ:93 – Sub + 2 fighter + Bomber
• Tunsia: inf + art + mech + tank
• Greece: 8 inf + 1 tank + BB + CR + CR barrage.Turn 2: Germany – economy (68)
Declare war: Neutrals
Purchase: 10 mech 3 tanks, Tact
Attack:
• Sweden – 9 inf + 1 art + 1 armor + 2 bombers with CR barrage
• Spain: 3 mech + 6 tanks +2 fighter +2 tact
• Normany: 2 fighters + 2 tact + 2 art + 1 mech
Italy managed to take Turkey on round 2 with the units in Greece and using their 3 fighters, bomber and BB, 2CR barrages. Italy also sends tank to Gibraltar. The next turn Germany blitzes through Turkey into Caucasus and gets Jet Power. Germany builds an Air Base in Spain with 6 tanks, 3 fighters, and 2 art from Italy. Wish I would have got a photo of that round. I switched my fighters from 109’s to 262’s, hehe.https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=744531928900816&set=oa.303817613101077&type=1&theater
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=744531958900813&set=oa.303817613101077&type=1&theater
That complex in Romania really helps send units to Turkey quick which lead to a huge boost in economy for Italy and Germany. Probably would have been a good game if USA would not have left their SZ:101 with only transports and no fighters to scramble which my German CR was at Gib with a transport and 2 inf. I ended up taking his transports out and landed in central. Germany had an economy of 80 that round. The allies surrendered after that.
-
Really like the ‘waterballoon’ comparison :D.
I love to go it slow for Japan as well but I must admit I sometimes go waterballooning on purpose -only I never called it that way ;-).
last time I played Japan and my German partner wanted to go Sea Lion versus a capable allied team so I decided to put a lot of pressure on the USA and I took J3:
Aleutians, Hawai, Midway, Wake,Johnston, Gilbert, Solomons, New Guinea, Guam, Borneo, Celebes, Java, Malaya and the Philipines. I also attacked the complete and combined USA and ANZAC fleets in SZ 54 AND I still managed to continue the usual offensives in Mainland Asia this turn (last turn of serious offensives for Japan here).Perfect example of a waterballoon because after this turn Japan had only 7TRS left, plus the leftovers of its fleet. The upside: J4 the allies had no warships anymore (SZ54 was an allied mistake) and the USA had a very hard time deciding where to spend its IPCs, either in Europe liberating London or in the Pacific stopping me. Downside: China, India and Russia were on the offensive in no time, seriously threatening Japanese VC’s on Mainland Asia.
Edited: My mistake, I took those territories as part of the J4 offensives. Controlling all Pacific islands still looks awesome!
-
@Herr:
An SBR campaign against the UK early in the game basically amounts to spending German money to make the British spend their money. If you don’t plan to do Sea Lion as a counterpart to that bombing campaign, you won’t make any real progress as Germany. Russia will be smiling, and as soon as the US arrives, your bombers and subs will need to stop bothering the Brits or they’ll be destroyed.
Yep. And if you’re not going to Sealion, why would the Brits even bother fixing their factories? No reason to unless you need to use them.
-
Great example ItIsILeClerc. I wonder what your economy was after that round. How many transports did you max with? I always make the mistake of not keeping enough DD to block with Japan.
Suggested Topics
