A couple of issues:
1. The British navy is susceptible to being hit by 2 subs as well as about 3-4 fighters + 1bomber if they take Norway and have the Russian sub “block” the Baltic navy. Subs can sail through all naval units unless there’s a destroyer present. Therefore, the attack in SZ3 favors the Germans at no cost to their airforce unless you buy a navy.
2. You miss the second part of the equation which is the med fleet is going to Gibraltar on G1 so the fleets are linking on G2. The British can’t afford to try to take out the linked fleets on G2. 5 fighters + 1 bomber + 2 tran + 1 battleship loses 73% of the time against 2 fighter, 1 carrier, 3 subs, 1 battleship, 1 destroyer, and 2 transports.
That being said, there are still very easy counters to a German navy which is attempting to link, but none of the answers I like have to do with the UK spending so much money on carriers/fighters early on when you can have the US do it for you.
A couple of issues:
1. The British navy is susceptible to being hit by 2 subs as well as about 3-4 fighters + 1bomber if they take Norway and have the Russian sub “block” the Baltic navy. Subs can sail through all naval units unless there’s a destroyer present. Therefore, the attack in SZ3 favors the Germans at no cost to their airforce unless you buy a navy.
2. You miss the second part of the equation which is the med fleet is going to Gibraltar on G1 so the fleets are linking on G2. The British can’t afford to try to take out the linked fleets on G2. 5 fighters + 1 bomber + 2 tran + 1 battleship loses 73% of the time against 2 fighter, 1 carrier, 3 subs, 1 battleship, 1 destroyer, and 2 transports.
That being said, there are still very easy counters to a German navy which is attempting to link, but none of the answers I like have to do with the UK spending so much money on carriers/fighters early on when you can have the US do it for you.
Let’s go back to my original post… I said Egypt was attacked… This means the German BB and tranny in the Med went east in G1. It is impossible for them to link with the Baltic fleet in G2. Also, go ahead and split that fleet… My combat sim tells me that the chances of losing both subs is about 70%. I’ll just attack the capital ships with the planes instead(97% chance of vicotry). The subs(if they don’t die in the attack in SZ3 on G2-chances are they will) in GB3 are next. Even if one of the subs survives, you splash the russian sub with a plane from SEU, and re-merge your fleet in SZ3, the subsequent counter(5 figs and a bomber against 1sub, AC, 2planes, DD, and tranny) attack is a 2-1 fight in favor of the allies. If the Axis get lucky, the Americans finish off what’s left in US2. Any way you look at it, I have have accomplished what I wanted to… The Baltic fleet is gone by GB3. Believe me, We have run into this scenario many times playing… The Baltic fleet has never been able to survive past the 3rd round. The reason we invest in the carrier is it prevents early invasion attempts by Britain and the US.
Wilk
But 3 rounds with no Allies troops in Europe… VERY nice for Germany.
All the Germany fleets are is to stall/slow the Allies a couple of rounds. 16 IPC’s is all it costs, and UK has to wait until UK4 to start landing troops…
4 rounds of RUssia alone with Germany… NOT pretty…
I can’t deny that you can get rid of the Baltic fleet by UK3, but lots of people really like to miss the main point of the Baltic navy - what does it take out? If it takes out 2 transports and a battleship, and perhaps a fighter, as well as force the UK to build a carrier or 2 and lots of fighters when they could instead be landing earlier with transports, then I think the Baltic navy has done a great job.
There are easy ways to dance around the Baltic navy that don’t require you doing silly things like exposing your bb/2 trans to an attack by 2 subs + airforce.
An SZ12 US/UK fleet consolidation being one of those :-)
@ncscswitch:
An SZ12 US/UK fleet consolidation being one of those :-)
Hmmm… 4 trannies, 1BB, 1sub, and 1DD off the coast of algeria by G2… The most the Germans can bring to it if the fig dies in the Ukraine in R1, and a fig is left in SEU after the attack in Egypt(SZ15) on G1, and the sub lives killing the BB in the Med in G1… Germans can at most bring… 4 figs, a bomber, and a sub… Since the Russian sub would have first strike on German sub(DD negates German first strike)… That battle is less than 50/50 for Germans… With the UK building trannies on GB1, and the US building an AC and trannies in US1… You could merge the fleets west of GB-- (if attack in G2 doesn’t happen) would be around 8 trannies(4uk, 4us), 2DD(us), BB(uk), AC(us), 2 planes(us), and a sub(rus) in a position to strike either Norway or WEU in force in round 3… interesting… I like it, Switch…
Overall, I believe it is worth while for Germany to make an attempt to take Africa. The German Med fleet is in trouble to begin with so make the British use their units to attack the fleet after dumping off an infantry and artillery into Anglo-Egypt. Force the UK to use their forces to keep Africa from falling into the German’s hands.
If Germany holds some of Africa, then there are less IPCs going into an invasion of Germany. If the US or UK move to bail out Africa, then there are less units going to invade Germany.
Overall, the German effort is minimal and the Allied effort is significant. This fits into my book as a “worthy” cause, but don’t get your hope up too high on taking over the entire continent.
Agreed
Germany can grap up and extra 5-7 IPCs for about 3-4 rounds in Africa. Most Brit players will give up the 3IPCs in India to keep Germany from picking up 10 in Africa. I have played 3 mock games using switch’s strategy of merging the fleets off of Algeria in round 1 after Germany took Egypt. I had GB building trannies in round one, and pulling troops off of India and shoring up southern africa. With the combined builds of GB and the US, Germany was never in a position to threaten that navy beyond round 2, or the navy built by the US stationed west of GB by round 3. Yes, Japan had a cake walk in the south for a while, but I managed an organized retreat from tha Japanese on all fronts. By the time Japan had enough forces massed to make it’s first attempt in round 7, Russia always had 25+ russian troops, 6 allied inf, 2 planes, and at least 4 other allied planes defending her. Even though the Allies had to way till round 3 to make their push into Europe, Germany was in no position to help Japan by round 6, and was ripe to fall by no later than round 8. Because the allies shored up Russia’s western front, Russia was collecting 7 inf worth on money every round. With the fighters(and other cheap ground units) being thithed off by the US and GB, Russia could hold indefinitely after round 8.
This being said…. Germany would fall sooner(round 6 or 7) if they don’t pick up the extra coin for a while. For the IPC expenditure, Africa is well worth the effort. I have only seen the Axis win once without getting into Africa… Russian player(me, first time playing Russia) didn’t stack properly on Japanese front… Had the Japs knocking on Moscow’s door by end of round 4… eeek.
Wilk
Wilk
Overall, I believe it is worth while for Germany to make an attempt to take Africa. The German Med fleet is in trouble to begin with so make the British use their units to attack the fleet after dumping off an infantry and artillery into Anglo-Egypt. Force the UK to use their forces to keep Africa from falling into the German’s hands.
If Germany holds some of Africa, then there are less IPCs going into an invasion of Germany. If the US or UK move to bail out Africa, then there are less units going to invade Germany.
Overall, the German effort is minimal and the Allied effort is significant. This fits into my book as a “worthy” cause, but don’t get your hope up too high on taking over the entire continent.
See Wilk’s got the idea. The Axis is set up for more losses than wins because it’s too slow to take Russia.
Chuckle…
Give the Germans an 8 bid… drop a tranny in the Baltic, burn all your IPCs getting long range aircraft… Sea Lion out of the gate… Use the Atlantic sub to block US from counter… Game over 1st round :-D
Wilk
See Wilk’s got the idea. The Axis is set up for more losses than wins because it’s too slow to take Russia.
well lol if you’re using LHTR techs apply at the end of your turn so you can’t research LRA and then immediatley use their increased range to attack London.
Nod… with the 8 bid… Does Germany have enough to take GB outright anyway?.. 4 ground with 2 planes and a bomber… would be close… besides… You could build 5 trannies and strafe GB in round one and sea lion outright in round 2… instead of going after Egypt in round one… You could bring the Med fleet east… take out the BB and attack GB with 8 trannies in units… plus 5 planes and a bomber… risky… A gimmick attack, but would be fun to try once for kicks.
Wilk
well lol if you’re using LHTR techs apply at the end of your turn so you can’t research LRA and then immediatley use their increased range to attack London.
You’re about 65% total chance to not invade GB with a transport bid and a round 1 attack, so 35% success. One Russian fighter in GB puts you down to about 11% success. A second Russian fighter puts you at about 2.5%.
Interesting topic.
I played a game yesterday, as Germany. On T1 I built a baltic AC and 8 inf. I attacked Anglo-Egypt w 1 tank and 1 inf from SEUR. Destroyed the DD with BB in a single hit. Took planes from the balkans to attack anglo egypt and landed them in Lybia. I attacked Gibraltar BB with atlantic sub, 2 fightrs 1 bomb. Egypt fell on round 1. Africa was wide open cause the brits were also busy defending their “commonwealth” factory in India :-D.
On the next few turns, I was able to assault Caucus with a transport and a shore bombardment without interference from the Indian Navy. Moreover, i could bring reinforcements on the eastern front much faster than on foot with my transport. I landed a single tank in Africa and it gave me an extra 10 ipc’s per turn…
Of course the americans landed in Morocco, but at the expense of their expeditionnary force and a part of their fleet.
With Africa not only you gain IPC’s, but also time, by distracting the Allies at the expense of very few combat forces. A single tank and two infantry aren’t going to make a huge difference on the eastern front if you play wisely.
I agree, like most people here, that a sting in Africa by G can be a real pain in the eye for the allies. For a little effort, G gains a lot in return: extra IPC’s if the allies are not doing something about it AND if the allies do something in order to get it back, they lose a lot of equipment in order to do so…
I played a game yesterday, as Germany. On T1 I built a baltic AC and 8 inf. I attacked Anglo-Egypt w 1 tank and 1 inf from SEUR. Destroyed the DD with BB in a single hit. Took planes from the balkans to attack anglo egypt and landed them in Lybia. I attacked Gibraltar BB with atlantic sub, 2 fightrs 1 bomb. Egypt fell on round 1. Africa was wide open cause the brits were also busy defending their “commonwealth” factory in India
I wonder how you can take Gibraltar in G1 without a bid of an extra transport in the Med while you attack Anglo-Egypt with units from SEUR… While you need your only transport to take those units to Anglo-Egypt, you have no transport left to capture Gibraltar. I hope you know that with planes only, you can’t take an empty enemy territory… you need an amphibious assault (with ground units, thus) to make Gibraltar belong to G. So the fastest way to take Gibraltar if you transport troops to Anglo-Egypt, is on G2, right?..
On the next few turns, I was able to assault Caucus with a transport and a shore bombardment without interference from the Indian Navy. Moreover, i could bring reinforcements on the eastern front much faster than on foot with my transport. I landed a single tank in Africa and it gave me an extra 10 ipc’s per turn…
Very strange… Your opponent didn’t do anything about it? lol… well, when i play with my friend, he normally has a stack of GB-planes in Russian territories so he would attack every fleet in the Med who gets near Russian territory…
I wonder how you can take Gibraltar in G1 without a bid of an extra transport in the Med while you attack Anglo-Egypt with units from SEUR… While you need your only transport to take those units to Anglo-Egypt, you have no transport left to capture Gibraltar. I hope you know that with planes only, you can’t take an empty enemy territory… you need an amphibious assault (with ground units, thus) to make Gibraltar belong to G. So the fastest way to take Gibraltar if you transport troops to Anglo-Egypt, is on G2, right?..
In fact, I just sank the BB, didnt invade on foot because my transport was busy invading anglo-Egypt…
Very strange… Your opponent didn’t do anything about it? lol… well, when i play with my friend, he normally has a stack of GB-planes in Russian territories so he would attack every fleet in the Med who gets near Russian territory…
Yeah, well…The guys I played against are not what you can call veterans. Example: they thought, in order to conduct an amphibious landing, that you had to load your transports on your non combat movement phase and then offload your transports on the next turn… After an hour-long dispute and rulebook reading, I could proceed and go ahead with my invasion…
You CAN load and offload your transports during the combat movement phase RIGHT? I’d like to see the quote from the rulebook.
[You CAN load and offload your transports during the combat movement phase RIGHT? I’d like to see the quote from the rulebook.
[/quote]yes, you can!
i’m not sure where you can find this in the rulebook…
but i have played a&a - the computer game (this is not the revised version, though) and there you can!
:-)
Yes, you can. See the Transport section and Amphib Assaults throughout the rulebook and LHTR.
To me, it’s cristal clear that you CAN do that. I’ve found the passage in the rulebook. But it was just a pain in the :-o to argue about it for an hour during the game. After all, on D-Day, the expeditionnary force took only a couple of hours to cross the channel. They didn’t step in the transports and waited for 6 months in the middle of the water :wink: Anyways, the positive aspect is that they don’t play like this anymore.
Oh good! I am glad you got that worked out. “Bridging” is a critical aspect of Allied play.
