All the German openings: For Beginners

[Argothair]

Nice work so far! I’m excited about this guide. I hope that as you finish it, you have room for a discussion on timing – what is the smallest number of turns in which a strong German player can realistically hope to take Moscow, what is the largest number of turns in which a strong German player can realistically hope to resist a combined US-UK-USSR attack, what are some strategies for changing those numbers, etc.

[Frederick II]

Good job so far. The one thing that really helped was the eastern front because I didn’t have a good idea for Germany.

[Black_Elk]

Thanks Frederick! Glad to hear it.
Agreed Oddbjoern, so many possibilities! :-D
To Argothair, it’s an important point that we should definitely explore. If the Allies roll terribly or make an obscene strategic goof, then its certainly possible in rare cases to take Moscow before the 6th round, but usually this entails some kind of catastrophic dicing. More likely, if the Axis player plans well and executes according to plan, the earliest it will come is in the 7th. On the long side, it could go for a very very long time. It’s fairly normal for games to last a dozen or more rounds, and not uncommon for some games to stretch well beyond 20 rounds. What tends to happen in the long game is that two opponents (both willing to play to concession) will fight each other to a standstill, ie. the balance of forces will reset after some battle that ended up rather less decisive than one might have wished, and both sides rebuild. It’s possible, if you enter the deep endgame (e.g. Moscow has fallen, but Allies have recovered their position on income/production) for the game to continue almost indefinitely. I’ve seen infantry chips stack up like mini skyscrapers on Berlin.

I’m still kicking around numbers over here and reviewing past games for more thoughts. Been most of the day on the road, but just had some quick thoughts on reading your opponent(s).

In a face to face game the enemy may reveal things in body language or tone that might project a certain confidence of ability, or perhaps they’ll bluff a lack of it, but it’s hard to know who you’re dealing with until they open in the first round. This is especially true in a digital game, where the opponent is not sitting across the table from you. One indication of overall ability might be whether the opponent requests a bid for Allies. If they feel that the game is skewed towards Axis, and suggest that you bid to choose sides, this might demonstrate a higher aptitude for A&A or at least tell you that they know the ropes. On the other hand, the Allied player might be supremely confident, maybe they’re not too terribly worried about your Axis skills (they don’t know you’ve been cruising the A&A.org boards reading up on strategies all weekend! hehe). Or maybe they’re just out for a casual game, and forego the bid. In that case great, you’re ready to crush! But if the enemy does look for a bid, then the shot call is on you, how low can you go and still have confidence that the Axis will prevail?

I’d suggest that the game is fairly balanced for Germany, among opponents of equal skill anywhere from half a dozen to a dozen ipcs bid for pre-placement units. With a reasonable amount of luck and a strong attack plan, you can still overcome the Allies. Sure it’s not as straightforward as winning OOB, but you can still prevail, it just takes a bit more tact in the opening round.

Another consideration might be whether the Allies are playing as a team. Facing down two players instead of just one, can be an advantage in and of itself, and often a round of haphazard coordination or mistakes between Allied teammates, can easily overcome any perceived imbalances of the starting unit set up or overall distribution of power by sides.

Just remember, all this sizing up of the opponent beforehand will have to be confirmed, or maybe totally upended, when you see how they actually open as the Russians! The R1 purchase should play into your build decision on G1.

If you notice that Russia has purchased less than 6 hitpoints in units, or if they made crazy attacks or unwise defenses, this could be a green light for Germany to push hard on G1 to exploit the Russian weak-points on attack, and just go for the jugular. Or you could take the opposite approach, pull back trusting in your defensive/TUV advantage and make crazy builds and moves of your own. Sometimes playing against a less experienced opponent or a terrible Russian opener, can be an enjoyable opportunity, to pursue builds and strategies you don’t usually get a chance to try, or you can just slam into them and try to kill them in as few rounds as possible haha.

Lets say the Allied player hasn’t read the Russian opener thread yet, and they don’t fully appreciate the significance of Karelia to Germany, or yet see how having a large Soviet stack in W. Russia is key to holding the Germans off this factory. Perhaps they launched too many attacks on R1 and got rocked, or went too light into W. Russia and were turned back, or maybe they tried to stack Karelia for defense not realizing how hopeless the Allied situation in Leningrad is on G1. Or who know maybe they did some sort of wild KJF movement sending their air/armor against Japan? In all these cases, your German opener will likely look a lot different than the ones we’ll be outlining. This is because, when the dice gods throw you an oppertunity, you gotta take try and take advantage. It’s almost always worth it as Germany to destroy Russian armor or Aircraft, or deplete their total units if given the chance to do so early on. And its always worth it to move forward on the Eastern front, if you can trade units at favorable odds, or lock down a space without the threat of an immediate Soviet counter attack. But assuming normal results, on G1 you’ll be down W. Russia (with a large force of Russians and aagun cover) and perhaps 1 or maybe even 2 other territories, with all your units there destroyed. A lot of Russian players will take Ukraine, at least occasionally, so its hard to plan on the Ukraine fighter surviving. If it does though, that’s a nice bonus for your Axis starting position.

Some quick thoughts on purchasing…

One way to approach playing Germany is to say that you will always max place the production value of Berlin, just to be conservative. This means usually 8 inf or artillery units (ie. 8 fodder hitpoints per round), and then a couple other units left over to fill things out and bring your total production up to about 10 units total (e.g. the max for Berlin). If you start with 24 ipcs or 8 infantry as the baseline, that allows 17 ipcs for air/naval expansions or ground upgrades. It also gives you that 17 ipcs as cushion in case you start getting mercilessly bombed, which can sometimes happen sooner than you’d think. Planning your purchases like this keeps you in the “safe zone” of total hitpoints, where you’ll always be buying at least a couple more units per round than the Russians can, so you don’t run the risk of getting backed off the eastern front, while still giving you room to beef up your attack power and mobility with heavy hitters.

If you want to go lower than 8 fodder hitpoints, then just recognize that this is a very concentrated build strategy you’re trying to adopt, one that usually only works if it has a lazer-like focus on the round immediately ahead. In such cases, players will often alternate between going “Big” on attack power/mobility buys in one round, and then “Big” on hitpoints buys in the next. Basically alternating between Infantry/Artillery spams and then magnified “heavy hitter” builds, to keep an overall balance in their force.

Doing a full fodder spam means maxing your production with infantry up to the highest level possible for your income/production. With 41 ipcs that’s 13 infantry with 2 ipcs remaining, or 11 infantry and 2 artillery (10 units in Berlin, 3 in Rome.) Once Karelia is taken, the total spam can climb up to 15 ground, or 45 ipcs in dedicated infantry builds. This is an infantry spam on par with the Allied production out of Moscow and London combined! So it can be pretty tough to manage for the Allies if G builds this way consistently. A German player who wants to just kick back and errect infantry walls, will still have a lot of starting tanks and aircraft at their disposal. Building this way tries to exploit that starting attack power/mobility advantage by just loading it up with a lot more fodder hitpoints each round. It’s a sound principle. Perhaps even more effective than mass infantry is the mass artillery spam.

The central idea is the same (to amass hitpoints) except here its maxing artillery pieces each round up to whatever you can afford, and then using the remainder on infantry or saved for next round. An example for 41 ipcs would be something like…

8 artillery and 3 infantry, or
10 artillery and save 1 ipc etc.

The goal here is to ensure the maximum attack power for all your starting infantry units (of which there are more than a dozen) so you basically spend a round focus on mainly artillery. Once you’ve hit parity 1:1 artillery for infantry, then you start moving your stacks forward, and continue with a more middle-of-the-road mixed build for 41 ipcs like…

5 artillery and 7 infantry.

These are the sort of games, where Germany goes fodder crazy, that can last a very long time. Especially if the Allies haven’t quite figured out how to get their Air transits and transports working across the Atlantic.

The opposite of this kind of mass hitpoints approach would be a G1 build that goes balls out on pure attack power projection and mobility on G2.

I think if you purchase under 8 hitpoints of units with G, this will definitely invite a Russian advance in the second round. But, if you really want to go all gangbusters and dramatically increase your Air or Naval, there is a case to be made for doing it on G1. This is because Germany itself is not immediately threatened by the western allies, and it is possible to manage a Russian advance (albeit not for very long) if your aim is to gain some overwhelming edge on the water vs UK/USA. This can be achieved either directly with a large fleet expansion, or indirectly with a large air build. Just sticking with that last for now, a pure air expansion build for 41 ipcs (not bothering with ships for the moment) might look something like…

Conservative air builds, with an eye on preserving a decent number of total hitpoints:

1 fighter, 1 artillery, 9 infantry.
1 bomber, 2 art, 7 inf.
2 fighters, 7 inf.
1 bomber, 1 fighter, 1 artillery, 5 inf.

Extremely aggressive air builds, e.g very few hitpoints, but very high attack power projection:

2 bombers, 2 art, 3 inf.
1 bomber, 2 fighters, 3 inf.
3 fighters, 2 art, 1 inf.
3 Bombers, 1 art, save 1 ipc

Just as a refresher, before this all starts to sound too technical… :-D
“Hitpoints” are the total number of hits a force can absorb before being annihilated.
Attack or Defense “Power”, is the “hits at” combat value of individual units in a force added together. So if we really wanted to parse out those builds listed above, to see what sort of advantages and trade offs we get them, it might read something like this…

1 fighter, 1 artillery, 9 infantry. = 11 hitpoints, 15 attack power - mobility projects 3 attack/4 defense, across 4 spaces.
1 bomber, 2 art, 7 inf. = 10 hp, 17 ap - mobility 4 attack/1 defense, across 6 spaces: x1 Strategic Bombing Raid.
2 fighters, 7 inf. = 9 hp, 13 ap - mobility 6 attack/8 defense, across 4 spaces.
1 bomber, 1 fighter, 1 artillery, 5 inf. = 8 hp, 15 ap - mobility 7 attack/5 defense, across 4 spaces, plus 4 att/1 def across 6 spaces: x1 SBR.

2 bombers, 2 art, 3 inf. = 7 hitpoints, 17 attack points - mobility 8 attack/2 defense, across 6 spaces: x2 SBR.
1 bomber, 2 fighters, 3 inf. = 6 hp, 13 ap - mobility 10 attack/9 defense, across 4 space, plus 4 att/1 def across 6: x1 SBR.
3 fighters, 2 art, 1 inf. = 6 hp, 15 ap - mobility 9 attack/12 defense, across 4 spaces.
3 Bombers, 1 art, save 1 ipc. = 4 hp, 14 ap - mobility 12 attack/3 defense, across 6 spaces: x3 SBR.

In the examples above, the more conservative Air approach is like when the doctor just orders “1 fighter a day, to keep the British away!” or maybe a bomber every round, until you have a solid air wing developed. Here you’re never losing sight of the fodder exchange, and you’re buying infantry every round regardless. Basically a piecemeal build up, slow and steady. The aggressive air builds are more like a Dark Skies DS scenario (named for the popular strat in G40, but the same basic rules apply here in 42.2) where you really magnify the air advantage right out the gate, and then use the attack power and mobility to give you more flexibility in later rounds after the core of your Luftwaffe is established.

Now just to the question raised by Argothair, if Germany is going this route with air builds, then a conservative build pattern would likely increase the overall game-length. An aggressive air build pattern would shorten the gamelength. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Axis will fair any better or worse than they would over a long game, just that the likelihood of a speedy resolution is increased when you focus on attack power/mobility over hitpoints, especially in the first round.

Note, with a purchase that includes a decent number of infantry fodder units (which is a good idea) you can always increase the total attack power of the force by substituting out 1 infantry hitpoint, in exchange for 3 fodder upgrades from infantry to artillery. Keep in mind that you only really need artillery for the total number of infantry units you can boost. Again it’s helpful to keep the total attack power vs hitpoints in mind. For example consider the following 3 builds:

A. 1 fighter 1 artillery, and 9 infantry = a total of 11 hitpoints, with a total attack power of 15.
B. 1 fighter, 4 artillery and 5 infantry = a total of 10 hitpoints, with a total attack power of 20.
C. 1 fighter, 7 artillery, and 1 infantry =a total of 9 hitpoints, with a total attack power of 19.

Build A gets you another hitpoint overall, but build B will give your ground force 5 more attack points when it arrives at its destination, the Eastern front! Build C is overkill considered in isolation, netting you less total attack power and less hitpoints than build B. Build C only really makes sense if you are already fielding a bunch of infantry units, and the mass artillery purchase is designed to “activate them.” Otherwise, as an independent build 1 inf + 1 artillery unit purchased/used together, are as good as 2 artillery units and cost a buck less, plus they can be transported as a single group. So you always want to be aware of your total infantry to artillery ratio in the area. That way you don’t overspend in subsequent rounds. This goes for all players, but is especially significant for Germany.

[Frederick II]

Great job on the purchase, the infantry and artillery stacks were more important than I thought. I usually bought 3-4 inf then buy more tanks and aircraft or a ship.

The 3 bombers and 1 artillery purchase look as if Germany is going to do a lot of SBR on London for a sealion plan. :-D

[Black_Elk]

I’d never rule out a dicey Strategic Bombing Raid against London on G1. Few experiences in Axis and Allies are as satisfying on G1 as rolling a 6 on that UK factory, and then doing a fist pump “taste it Churchill!” type move.
:-D

Sure there are probably more advantageous ways to use the bomber, but you still have to admire the audacity of a raid. Germany is in a unique position, it has a chance to screw the other guy first (Russia doesn’t have a bomber OOB). Sometimes it can set off a very amusing chain reaction, as UK has to sweat a whole new set of problems. On the other hand, they might roll an ace with the AA gun, and then you’re kicking yourself. This all assuming normal rules, if interceptors are on there’s really no point to such a raid, as the trade off becomes way uglier.

Continuing with thoughts from the post above, I suggest that 8 ground/fodder hitpoints per round is a pretty safe place to start with Germany. This is like your basic reserve force, your “core” units, that will be needed for trading/stacking along the eastern front.

Depending on the ground mix you go with for the core (infantry:artillery), this usually leaves Germany with a dozen or more ipcs left over to buy strategic units. That’s the cash you use to buy heavy hitters, mobile units, or units that can influence the naval game. Thinking about the situation over several rounds, this consistent investment (a dozen ipcs or more) every turn to dedicated tanks or air or naval units, can really push an advantage as the units power begins to magnify over time. Provided the units are not put at risk and survive to play on (rather than being traded in combats) they will start to stack up. And its the stacks that win the war

So just for example, if you say to yourself “OK I got 8 ground units inf/artillery, and then I’m going to buy 1 tank a round each round for several rounds!” Or “1 fighter every round!” Or “1 bomber!” or “1 destroyer” or “1 sub!” etc. And stick to it…
By the the time your 3rd turn placement phase concludes, that’s some serious attack power/mobility or strategic potential you will have developed, sneaky style, just by purchasing one heavy hitter at a time, but doing it consistently.

3 tanks project 9 attack power over 2 spaces.
3 fighters project 9 attack power over 4 spaces.
3 bombers project 12 attack power over 6 spaces.
3 subs project 6 attack power over 2 sea zones (surprise strike), and provide three more naval hitpoints in a naval/air exchange.
3 destroyers project 6 attack power over 2 sea zones, three blocking sacrifices to disrupt naval movement. Destroyers are like magnets for enemy air, they can be used to distract enemy fighters out of position or from other potential attacks, by drawing their focus onto the water.

None of those builds is necessarily showing your hand to the enemy. They’re little by little. On G1 any given purchase might seem casual, but by G3 it starts to coalesce into a more meaningful strategic build up. You’ll still have the infantry/artillery fodder you need to advance in the East. Those last two builds especially (subs or destroyers) can trip up an opponent, who balks at your purchase of ships and thinks you’re a fool, not anticipating that the expenditure is mainly for purposes of misdirection.

I think destroyers can be a fun psych warfare investment, at a relatively cheap cost. Another destroyer to block, or providing another defensive shot against British aircraft, can really change the whole purchasing calculus for the Allies in the first round. But that said, for overall coverage against Allied navies, its hard to find a “naval” unit that’s going to do you any better than a bomber. Except maybe a bomber with fighter fodder covering it ;)

Germany doesn’t need a defensive navy to be effective on the water, they just need overwhelming attack power projection in the air, with maybe a few subs or destroyers back up, to give the Western Allies all sorts of headaches. The reach of the Bomber at 6 allows you to shut down many points of convergence for the Allied transports, making it harder for their fleets to coordinate at advantage. Rather than just fanning out on amphibious to snatch more territory at a go, they have to stay together with all their warships/transports in a big stack. In that respect, building at least 8 total hitpoints, and 1 air unit a round minimum, (alternating your strength between new bombers or new fighters etc.), is a pretty reliable approach, regardless of what else is happening on the gameboard. Germany rises like an Eagle on the wings of strong Luftwaffe, and it will probably sink like a lead zeppelin once the Luftwaffe is destroyed, so just keep that in mind when you are considering Air trades vs ships. Often it is batter to be Fabian in your approach, and preserve the airforce to fight on, rather than trade it out piecemeal for temporary victories.

Another way to approach these sort of multi-round builds,  it is to drop your reserve force from 8 fodder hipoints down to 7, 6, 5, or even 4 inf/artillery. For a baseline expenditure of 21 ipcs, 18 ipcs, 15 ipcs, or 12 ipcs, every round, dedicated for your core fodder force. The lower you are willing to go on total hitpoints, the more heavy hitters you can buy, and the more magnified your build strategy can be become. But just be aware that if you go on the low side, its going to take longer to put yourself in position on Russia.

If you go lower than 8, it means your attitude towards Russia is more one of containment, just holding and light trading, while Japan sets up shop. In this case Germany is not necessarily gunning for the early “hammer/anvil” double hit on Moscow, but instead trying to one-up the UK. A heavier build, especially in the air or on the water, can really screw the British, since their position in the opening round is the most tenuous. They already have a million things to do, so one more thing piled on can be very disruptive, potentially allowing Japan to get the edge, especially on India or Africa.

I think that is probably the best way to look at a German naval build of any sort, whether its just a lone wolf sub or a single destroyer blocker patrolling, or even up to the big-ticket carrier/transport builds, basically anything G does on the water should have the aim of giving Japan the edge vs India early on. Otherwise it’s not paying for itself. If UK has to keep their London fighters at home, or send them on less advantageous transit routes to deal with unexpected German naval builds then that’s less fighters on Moscow/India that Japan has to worry about. Similarly, transports at the ready, or the threat of a rapid transport buy, can scare the UK into an infantry spam on London, which frees up advantages for Axis elsewhere, since that’s money they’re not spending on mobility towards India.

Given how critical Suez and India can be to the overall chances of success for Axis, it can sometimes be advisable to pursue an early focus on UK and just back off Russia to do so, if only for a round.

Otherwise, the consensus view is that, for Axis to win, the Russians must die! So how to achieve this aim is where we’ll start.
Next time
:-D

[CrayzKirk]

I really haven’t played this game much however my only opinion for Germany is to buy infantry and artillery at least equal to what Russia buys.  Russia can have a very nasty first move however as stated before, the attack power on many locations is really devastating.

I played Allies vs TripleA because I thought I would be able to beat it easily, like 1942 Spring 1st.  This game plays totally different.  When I play Axis, Russia STOMPS Germany with very limited losses.  When I play Russia against the German Computer, the dice work out as expected.  Maybe a little less than expected, because I, like all dice players, get much worse than average rolls.  Backgammon convinced me of this; I had players to the 1/36 rolls to beat me and yes, it does happen more than 1/36.  Or, maybe we just think that.

I understand that the TripleA Japan is totally lost; I watched the save games and after that, I saw no reason to abuse the AI.  Straight up against Germany, Russia is in trouble vs the AI.

Still trying to convince a friend that this game is even worth playing;  Of course, Russia hits the less than 10% roll each time I play him.  Very Frustrating for that to happen EVERY time.

[Frederick II]

I like a lot of fighters better than subs and destroyers but they are still very useful. Germany can’t really buy a lot of tanks unless they choose so. I think going down to 7-6 hit points is fine for a few rounds, any lower you’re a bit risking it.

[Black_Elk]

I agree, its hard for Germany to spam tanks, or at least, it’s a lot harder for them to do so in 1942.2 than it was in Revised or AA50.

The 1 ipc jump from 5 ipcs to 6 ipcs per tank, really adds up when compared to artillery purchases. But there are still a lot of cases where a tank purchase can turn the tide vs the Russians in the east. In 1942.2 the mass tank purchase is rather less common in the early game, but still fairly important during the endgame. In Revised you’d see people build infantry for the push for just a few rounds, and then start dropping tanks relentlessly. This worked for both Germany and Japan, and came to define the earlier game with Axis tank drives.

Armor is less potent in 1942.2, but the movement advantage across the ground is still pretty huge from a strategic point of view. Tanks should always be purchased primarily with the movement advantage in mind (more so than the attack/defense advantage at 3 for example). Knowing when to buy them to exploit the movement advantage is the trick.

I said I’d bring it back here, to start looking at G1 purchases for 41 ipcs… purchases to deal with the Russians. I’ve been swamped at work lately, but this might be a good random Tuesday to start delving into things. Lets think about some situations where G1 tank buys might be advisable.

Again its a little hard here to account for every possible Russian opener, but you can look at things in terms of “best case vs. worst case scenarios” or “better cases vs worse cases.”

Let’s just pick a place to start, and say Russia lands a near perfect strafe on Ukraine! ie. a worst case scenario for Germany.  :-D

Ok what does that look like? Well usually this is when Russia destroys all the German units in Ukraine down to just the lone fighter, and takes only a couple hits in the process. All 3 Russian tanks survive the Ukraine engagement to retreat safely to Caucasus, along with the artillery piece and maybe even some infantry. The West Russia battle goes as normal with around 3 hits taken, before the Soviets prevail and stack it with all units in range. The Russian Yaks can land safely in Caucasus, with 4 newly purchased hitpoints, making it impossible for Germany to take this territory on G1. Moreover, because the strafe went well and Caucasus is secure, the Soviets can afford to send their second AA gun to cover the stack in W. Russia. This makes a German attack on W. Russia rather risky, the AA guns providing at least some additional fodder and threat vs the full airstrike, to make the exchange a poor trade. Or so it would seem. You can imagine it looks something like this (image below) on G1 at purchase… What the hell is the German player to do now? :-D

With your Ukraine ground forces smashed, you will be down on total hit points at the front.
One approach is to take your “free fighter” and head for the hills. Turtle up and spam infantry to make up the hitpoint loss. Another approach is to rush hitpoints back into the region and threaten counter attacks on the way. This is when tanks might serve.

A more average result for the Russian Ukraine strafe, (a slightly better case for Germany), can still be rather ugly. This is like when Russia still achieves the primary objective of strafing the Germans down to just the fighter, but perhaps takes more hits in the process. Maybe bringing 3 tanks but losing 1 during combat. Here Russia can still stack Caucasus with 4 new hitpoints (and the dude from Kazakh if need be) and still land the Yaks on the front line with confidence, but the Soviet forward hitpoints in the south are not as great.

Well in an opener like this Belo is probably the going to be the most important swing territory on the Eastern Front for the first few rounds. If Germany gets a chance to stack Karelia or Ukraine on G1 that is of course optimal, but usually a strong Russian player will make these territories too dangerous to occupy. Here the Russians purchased artillery, but an armor buy can make it even riskier to for Germany to move forward.

The Soviets will likely stack W. Russia to back down your options on Karelia and Ukraine/Caucasus G1, so this leaves you with just Belo, Baltic, or Poland as your front line German stack location. Of these Belo is optimal, since it can threaten “the whole line” from Karelia down to Ukraine from the same central location. Belo mirrors W. Russia, and from this position you can either push North or South, while still holding the opponents stack in your gravitation orbit. Whether you can afford to stack Belo on G1 will depend entirely on how many units survive the Soviet opening battle into W. Russia, how many Russian tanks survived, or whether the Russians purchased new armor. If Belo is threatened on Russian counter attack, it is still possible to defend it with enough fighters to make that a terrible trade for the Soviets.

In general the Luftwaffe has the responsibility of either defending against western Navies/Naval builds out of UK, or advancing on the Eastern front. They will probably have to choose which of these is the top priority in any given game round. Its sometimes possible to split the difference in Europe (with a few air in the West and some in the East to cover both areas) but it is harder to gain an overwhelming advantage in either region when you land your air that way. Additional purchased fighters, and especially additional bombers, can really help to cover both areas and rapidly transition between West/East, but for the most part, at the beginning of play, German air tends to concentrate in one region or the other during any particular round.

Fortunately in this case, the Soviets elected to let the 6th German BF109 escape! But even if it died, Germany still has several fighters and the bomber that can be used for stack defense on the Eastern front on G1. It all depends how many hits you are willing to risk in your battles with the Royal Navy, but often times holding Belo into G2/G3 is reason enough to send some fighters east.

This means 1 round out of commission vs the Atlantic for any fighters you land in Belo, but if you are willing to buy a few tanks, what you can do is transfer out fighters for tanks from Germany, maintaining you defensive advantage, but allowing your fighters to “attack out” of Belo the following round, and land in France or Northwestern on G2 to cover the UK.

How much risk you are willing to take in sz 7 and sz 14 on G1? Lets set the tanks aside for a moment and make a quick detour back into the air. If the Russian’s put their sub in sz 7 (as they should) Germany still has very strong odds on this fight, provided they bring the cruiser.

Germany vs. the British battleship and Russian sub in sz 7.

2 subs and 1 cruiser = over 50% odds to the attacker, with 1 unit remaining.
2 subs and 1 cruiser + 1 fighter = over 90% to the attacker with 2 units remaining.
2 subs and 1 cruiser + 1 bomber = over 95% to the attacker with 2 units remaining.
2 subs and 1 cruiser + 2 fighters = 99% with 3 units remaining.
2 subs and 1 cruiser + 1 fighter and 1 bomber = 100% again with about 3 units surviving on average.
2 subs and 1 cruiser + 1 fighter and 1 bomber = 100% with 4 (just shy of 5) units surviving on average.

If you choose not to bring the cruiser, then the amount of air you bring can be more significant, but there is still a diminishing return in sz 7 after a certain point.

2 subs + 1 fighter = over 65% with 1 unit remaining
2 subs + 1 bomber = over 80% with 1 unit remaining
2 subs + 2 fighters = over 95% with 2 units remaining
2 subs + 1 fighter and 1 bomber = 98% with 2 units remaining
2 subs + 2 fighter and 1 bomber = 100% with 3 (just shy of 4) units remaining.

This is just to point out that if you already plan on bringing the cruiser, then bringing a ton of air into this fight could easily be overkill. Even if you decide not to bring the cruiser, you really don’t need all that much air to get the job done, and the difference in surviving units is usually just one more surviving sub on average. The survival of Atlantic uboats might not be super critical to your Warplan, in which case you could pull air off this attack to go east instead.

The situation in sz 14 is very similar. If you’re willing to bring the Battleship its virtually a shoe-in.

1 Battleship vs 1 cruiser = over 85% odds to the attacker with 1 unit remaining on average.
Any fighters you bring with the Battleship is just hedging your bets on the first round combat, or shoring up that 15% chance that the battleship goes down. For example, 1 battleship and 1 fighter vs 1 cruiser = above 90% odds. Even if you don’t bring the battleship, 2 fighters or 1 fighter and 1 bomber = above 90% odds. So again, Germany has more starting aircraft than you really need to clear the UK ships on G1, which means the rest could be used in support of a tank drive on the Eastern Front.

Tanks from Germany can reach Ukraine, Karelia, or Belo in one move.
Even a single extra hitpoint on attack or defense (when combined with the Luftwaffe) can be all the difference between the Soviets advancing or staying at home. With an infantry stack in Belo, you can hold the line and still put fodder on the critical territories of Karelia/Ukraine/W.Russia. If you have to pull back from Belo at some point (in order to hold Karelia or Ukraine say), you can still deadzone Belo with fodder from Poland or Baltic and just trade it with light forces, as long as you have tanks coming up from the rear. If you hold to the hard and fast rule of at least 8 or more total hitpoints, there is still a lot of build variety you can achieve, in the balance between total hitpoints (hp), total attack power (ap), and total mobility (i.e. attack power to the front).

Some Tank builds that can be fun in these situations might be…

5 tanks, 2 artillery, 1 infantry. (8 hitpoints, 21 attack power: +15 attack power vs front line)
4 tanks, 2 artillery, 3 infantry. (9 hp, 21 ap: +12 attack vs front line)
3 tanks, 2 artillery, 5 infantry. (10 hp, 20 ap: +9 attack vs front line)
2 tanks, 2 artillery, 7 infantry. (11 hp, 19 ap: +6 attack vs front line)
1 tank, 2 artillery, 9 infantry. (12 hp, 18 ap: +3 attack vs front line)

For an Tank build with a Destroyer block purchase I dig…
1 tank, 9 infantry, 1 destroyer (10 hp, 12 ap: 3 attack vs front line)
2 tanks, 7 infantry, 1 destroyer (9 hp, 14 ap: 6 attack vs front line)
3 tanks, 5 infantry, 1 destroyer (8 hp, 14 ap: 9 attack vs front line)

Going lower than this on infantry doesn’t really give you enough total hitpoints to advance in the East, since the destroyer doesn’t count towards your ground hitpoints or projected attack power against the Soviets.

Tank builds (which focus on a German mobility edge) can also work fairly well when supported by an overall air expansion. Again the trade off here will be total hitpoints and total attack power vs attack power mobility immediately to the front line during the following round.

Some Tank + Air builds I like are…
3 tanks, 1 fighter, 1 artillery, 3 infantry. (8 hp, 18 ap: + 12 attack vs front line)
2 tanks, 1 bomber, 2 artillery, 3 infantry. (8 hp, 19 ap: + 10 attack vs front line)
2 tanks, 1 fighter, 1 artillery, 5 infantry. (8 hp, 18 ap: + 6 attack vs front line)
1 tank, 1 bomber, 2 artillery, 5 infantry. (9 hp, 18 ap: + 7 attack vs front line)
1 tank, 1 fighter, 1 artillery, 7 infantry. (10 hp, 16 ap: + 6 attack vs front line.)

The key to any of these tank builds is in the ability to “rush defense” to your main forward ground stack, then conserve the tanks for counter attack positioning in order to deadzone Karelia or Ukraine until you are able take and hold those territories.

Usually a tank rush to the East involves cycling your tanks into your forward stack location, basically trading out G1 defensive fighters for G2 defensive tanks.  Later on, you can cycle these same tanks back out again (to defend the West), in exchange for Japanese defense power… But basically the idea is to move forward early, and then hold the line with armor, while you bounce your luftwaffe back towards the west to defend against amphibious build ups by the Western Allies. Depending on the size of your airforce and the size of your tank wall, you can do this cycling move for several rounds without really giving up too much flexibility in either theater East/West.

The moment of truth with your tanks, comes in about round 6, 7 or 8, when Germany often has to decide whether it’s more advantageous to push forward and break Russia early, or just hold the line and defend the West until Japan arrives at the center.

If you want to push forward early, this usually requires a multi-round set up, where you buy more total hitpoints than Russia can purchase/receive in a given stretch, and then rush the armor forward with the entire Luftwaffe and all ground in the region, to break the main Russian stack or force it to retreat to Moscow.

Typically the German tank drive will focus on Baltic States or Belo on G1, then move to a focus on Karelia. Once Karelia is locked down, the Germans can push infantry stacks with a couple tanks a round until they can stack either Ukraine, or optimally W. Russia itself, in order to force a full Soviet withdrawal from Caucasus. This usually when that moment of truth arrives, and the German’s must choose whether they want to lead the assault on Moscow, or simply beat the Russians into submission and provide coverage for Japan they look instead to the long term defense of Europe. To get something like this up and running, its nice to have armor column stacked tall with a dozen or more tanks, to ensure you have enough flexibility to go “either way” when this fork in the road invariably arrives.

In the Russian opener below, you can see how under Ukraine strafe conditions, a few German tanks puchased on G1 can really help prevent the Russians from moving forward in the second round.

German air attack options on the Eastern Front:
Before we conclude here for the day just take one more look at the Soviet numbers in W. Russia. I chose that number of Ruskie defenders in these sample games for a reason…
6 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 tank, and either 1 or 2 aaguns.
The first image attached below shows 2 aaguns and is still a pretty close call (at 11 total hitpoints).
The second image is meant to show the clear danger of putting only 1 aagun in W. Russia (10 total hitpoints), even when the Ukraine strafe works more or less as intended!

With this number of total hitpoints for the Soviet defender, there is the potential for a dicey G1 Airblitz!!!

This is where you use the entire Luftwaffe and all available tanks, for an audacious attack opener - to put the whole game up for grabs in the opening round! In these examples, if Germany has 3 infantry, 3 tanks, just 5 fighters, and 1 bomber in range of W. Russia, they can basically wipe out the entire Soviet stack at above 80% odds and only lose a fighter or two, and perhaps not losing any fighters at all. If the Russians bring only 1 aa gun instead of 2, the odds for G jump to above 90%, and they still come out of it most of the Luftwaffe still intact!

A 6th fighter surviving in Ukraine can ice this Airblitz play and really make things unpleasant for the enemy. Taking it to above 90% with an average of 5 (just shy of 6) attacking units remaining. If a tank survived in Ukraine, the ability to airblitz W. Russia is even more potent! This can be a huge set-back for the Allies, and very difficult to recover from, as its much harder for Russia to replace lost hitpoints than it is for Germany. This is one of the reasons why many Russian players will not take any unnecessary risks in the initial W. Russia battle, (and also why they often want an extra bid unit somewhere near W. Russia hehe). Without a bid unit somewhere on the eastern front, the Ukraine strafe can easily backfire on the Allies!

Now imagine how much uglier the situation might be for Allies, if the Russians did even worse in their initial battles and took even more hits? Less than 10 hitpoints and they are pretty much smoked. Just something to keep in mind, since the airblitz on W. Russia can be used to train your opponent to really fear the G1 Luftwaffe (even if only used like this on occasion). It’s worth considering especially if the Russian player purchases no armor in the first round. If you do go for the W. Russia airblitz, you should stack Belo with the remaining tanks from Germany to cover it as a landing spot, and push hard on Karelia too, so Russia cannot recover it in the second round. In the same way that I would always suggest always smashing Karelia on G1, if the Soviet player is foolish enough to stack it in the opening round, I’d also suggest smashing W. Russia on G1 if the Soviet player can’t see the wisdom of stacking it with enough units to deter the Airblitz. You gotta teach 'em to fear your Messerschmitts! :-D

More often though, and more conservatively, if Allies go for a Ukraine strafe, then G has the option just stack Belo on defense and go from there. In either case, if time and early pressure is a factor, armor could work to your advantage as G. Of course, an even safer approach might be to just buy a ton of artillery at the outset, and give yourself some more time (and more income), before you start making tank purchases. But if you don’t have the time or the patience to wait it out, early tank buys can still be a lot of fun as an alternative to the infantry slog. It usually just means that your critical combats will come sooner rather than later in the game, so better hope they go well! ;)

Next time we can look at possible German responses to Allied openings that are more predictable (and, in my view, potentially stronger for that reason) than the Ukraine strafe opening. We’ll also consider how Allied bids will jack up all these opening calculations, and how to manage some of the more common Allied bids on G1. Take care all, catch you next round.

Elk

[Frederick II]

If Russia moves  into Ukr. with a bait force which is like some inf maybe an artillery or tank on R2. But on G1 you moved Romania/Bulgaria forces into Poland to go stack in Bello and on G2 do you hit and run the bait, or pull forces to Romania/Bulgaria so they don’t out flank you or something else? What do you use to take out the DD in the Med and the BB attacking the CV isn’t the RAF destroy the BB even though you should do that attack. But still your advise on Germany is great. :-D

[Black_Elk]

Not entirely sure I follow the second Q, but I think I know what you mean with the first. Are you talking about the movement exploit that retreating allows, when attacking from 2 or more territories into a single territory? For example, hit Ukraine from Belo and Bulgaria in the same turn, and then retreat to jump the Bulgarian infantry a space farther than would otherwise be allowed?

It’s a gamey play, but legal according to the rules. I’ve seen it used before. In general though I think G is better off taking the territory and holding it with blockers rather than jumping forward. Sucks to leave Russian units alive that could attack forward.

As for the British DD in sz 17, it is debatable whether this is worth attacking or if it might be simpler to just let it escape. If you want to hit it, your only real option (that doesn’t put the battleship at risk, and doesn’t require a carrier buy) is to send the bomber against it. I have done this on occassion with success, and sometimes with distaste rousing consequences, so I’d have trouble recommending it as standard. I tend to prefer a dd block if you want to keep the med active, or else just run the risk and let UK try to hit you. After all they can still dud, and then they’re the one out of position rather than G ;)

[Frederick II]

Okay, let me sum it up. You said in your post that it is good to stack in Bello, so I was trying to say if Russia moves a puny bait force into Ukr. on R2 so they could try to destroy your force that was trying to take Ukr. back and forget about the silly Romania/Bulgaria out flanking move. I was wondering if you would take the bait or let them keep it?

I also was not talking about attacking 1 territory from 2.

[Black_Elk]

Ah well in that case, I think it’d be hard to say categorically. I’m honest enough with myself to know that I’m one of those players who tends to play it by ear. Usually I’d say that Russian cannot afford to bait, so its probably a good idea to just destroy them, but it depends how much counter attack power the soviets can bring into it. Would probably have to see snap or a savegame to know for sure.

[Black_Elk]

North or South?

This might help a bit to answer the question that Frederick posed on the previous page. The short answer is, I think its very hard to stack Belo on G1, against a seasoned Russian vet. This is because 1942.2 is rather different than the Revised map or Spring 1942, where the importance of Ukraine on R1 was undeniable very hard to ignore.

In 1942.2 I wanted to start us off with that discussion of how to manage the Ukraine opener by Russia, first because its very familiar to players of the previous boards, so it’s one you are likely to see, especially when people first dive in to the new map, but that doesn’t mean I think its the strongest play the Russians can make.

In previous games, Moscow stood between Germany and Japan at the top of the board, which meant the only area of convergence for Axis was in the South, but in 1942.2 there is an option to converge in the North. I believe this is the stronger direction for Germany to go at the outset and probably long term, due to the way Archangel and China have been redesigned, and also due to the new production spread across the center. The starting factory in Karelia makes the North an attractive convergence area, whereas the the starting Factory in India can make the south a rather less attractive one.

German naval strength, and their Air and Armor advantage, makes stacking the North a bit simpler than stacking the South. The threat from an early UK landing up north is diminished, while the threat of UK involvement in the south is increased (on account of India.) This means that, once you’re clearly established in Karelia, its easier to lock down the middle and the south, than it is to lock the middle/south before you have control of Karelia. If you cede control of the North to win the South, (by allowing UK to build a fleet for example, and then letting them back you off Leningrad via Scandinavia or sz 5 drops, this can really start to undermine your strength at the center, and can jack up your pressure on Moscow. Karelia is easy to reinforce, but also flexible to pull out of and then deadzone from an adjacent space if needed, while still keeping your forces near the critical territory of Berlin. Caucasus on the other hand, is farther afield. It’s 2 moves from Berlin with your Armor, rather than just 1, and this can make your logistics tough in the long run.

Ukraine is generally seen as the gateway to Caucasus, meaning if you’re stacking this space, it should usually be with an aim to break the center, but the cost of tanks, the distance, the design of the med, the India factory, and other things all conspire to make Ukraine somewhat less powerful at the outset, at least from the perspective of the overall German game.

So this brings us back to the question of where the Russians attacked initially, and how to deal with that as Germany under normal circumstances? ie, how should you play it if Russia just goes all in on W. Russia, or if they attack Belo or Baltic states rather than Ukraine? Also, if the Russians are awarded a bid, and they use extra units to make their opening battles more potent, how do you deal with those extra Ruskies on the gamemap?

Here again its worth remembering that Germany is not alone. While they remain the lead player on the Axis team, this doesn’t mean they need to do 100% of the heavy lifting right at the outset. They have a little time to set things up and more often, its better to bide your time and wait for G2 or G3, when Japan will be in a better position to support your stacks, before you really start your advance against the Russians.

Even a couple Japanese aircraft, or a single successful SBR against Moscow, can be enough to secure your forward movement, whereas if you go it alone before Japan can assist, the Russians will often have a counter.

Not to turn this German opening guide into a Japanese opening guide, but just to point out that Japanese bombers can reach from Tokyo to Karelia in one move. A Japanese bomber based in Kwangtung can SBR Moscow and then land in Karelia. Fighters in Kwangtung can reach Ukraine in one move, but fighters based in Szechwan can reach all the way to Karelia or Belo!

This means that your options for a G2 push with Japanese air support are better than a G1 push solo, and your options for a G3 push with Japanese support are even better still.

So it’s worth considering, how many units do you really want to put at risk on the eastern front at the beginning? And is it worth launching forward on G1 to trade units and play the income game, if you can’t actually hold the territories against an all out Soviet counter attack? Those are rhetorical questions, the ready answer should be, only if you can destroy enough Russian TUV to really put a dent in the Soviet’s power projection (ie. to pick off heavy hitting units) otherwise you’re better off waiting until your German stack is unassailable!

It’s much easier to reinforce the North via Baltic States, and then move south from their on a slower but steadier push through Belo from there, once you have the extra production captured. It’s also a lot easier to cover Scandinavia and the sea zones around UK, without putting your aircraft out of position, if you choose a northern focus. If the German player recognizes this, it stands to reason the Allied player might recognize the same and adapt their opening to compensate.

Often that means a stronger Allied focus on Archangel (as an air landing spot) and as a way to threaten Karelia. Sometimes the Russians can even bounce out of W. Russia for one round, provided they have enough units in Archangel, Caucasus, and Moscow, to deadzone it. Frequently this will happen around G3, where the Russians pull out for 1 round to cover Arch, and let UK reclaim the territory for them, with US air to cover. So what does all that have to do with the German opening?

Well basically it means, that you can’t really count on controlling Belo at the outset as a fighter landing zone, and if you can’t land fighters there, this means it could be dangerous to stack. On the other hand, you might have some luck holding onto your 6th fighter, and Baltic States (even if it is captured on R1) can easily be reinforced. I’d suggest that this is your ideal route to push. Even if you lose Ukraine on R2, and even if for some reason you cannot manage to reclaim it on G2, this can still work to Germany’s advantage, provided your are pushing north consistently. The Luftwaffe is potent, especially when massed together, and even a single round’s purchase of a couple tanks in Berlin or Karelia, can give G the option to smash south rapidly, without giving up their position in the North.

I don’t have a whole lot of time today, but just wanted to dive in here for a minute to talk up the Northern route, because its a much stronger proposition in 1942.2 than it was in other games. Not only does Germany have an easier time setting up in this region, but Japan also has some cool options in 1942.2 that it didn’t have in previous games. Evenki can be especially significant (at the connection point to Singkiang) not just as a way to bleed the Russian purse, but as a staging ground that forces the Allies to sweat Archangel can openers. Often it makes sense for the Axis to press this northern advantage early as a way of drawing Allied forces off the south, only to rapidly redirect south at the last minute for a final push on the center.

This works for the British as well as the Russians. If for example, you are forcing the Allies to send British Air and ground forces northwards to protect the Russians, it becomes easier to swing south and take India or Suez on Amphibious.
This North/South tension, is novel and a new thing compared to earlier boards, so just wanted to mention it here again, and to say I think its easier to start North and then shift South, rather than doing things the other way round. ;)

So instead of thinking about a “worst case” Ukraine strafe. It might be more fruitful to examine a Russian opening more like this one. This sort of Triple Hit opening, is rather hard for Russia to pull off OOB, but it is possible, and even more likely, if they were awarded an extra infantry unit or two. Its possible to reconfigure this sort of opening to have even more power in W. Russia, or to make a purchase that projects even more power on R2. Even a small bid in this area can change a lot of things.

You can see that under these conditions, stacking Belo or Karelia on G1 is not very feasible. The Russian fighters in Archangel, mean that any naval expansion for Sea Lion is totally out of the question (since those fighters shut it down, 4 moves from London.) Caucasus is open for the income, but essentially impossible to hold through G2.

In this sort of situation, it would be advisable to hold your forces in reserve, trade light in the South, and keep your eye on the prize. Setting up to stack North in the following rounds. Note it may be possible, given a decent bid (with artillery say) for Russia to actually do a triple hit with Baltic States + Ukraine, instead of Belo, in which case the southern attack route becomes even more dangerous for G. And of course, there are ways to set up similar Russian openings that just stack huge in W. Russia, making it even harder to go forward on G1. Just something to keep in mind before you charge ahead with reckless abandon, whether you can actually gain enough in strategic position for the risk, to make the move worth it, or if the move might just result in a R2 reset of the whole front haha.

triple hit.jpg_thumb

[SEP]

How about a G1 build such as:

1 Destroyer (to help protect the BB as you outlined).
1 Fighter (to compensate for any loss from R1 and to maintain/build a strong air force).
1 Tank (to compensate (or help compensate) for any loss from R1.
1 Artillery (for future infantry assists)
4 Infantry
1 IPC left over.

This is a balance build that allows some flexibility in preserving your navy, building for a massive air force, adding tanks which are needed and still giving 5 fodder units for defense.

If you feel that you need more infantry/artillery then forego the destroyer perhaps.

Continue to build (at least) one fighter or bomber per turn.  Possibly alternate between them so G2 you build a bomber (or if funds permit, one of each).  Continually add your fodder units as much as possible of course and try to squeeze out at least one tank up until your in a position to start cranking them out.

As an alternative, if we forego the destroyer option in the Med (take our chances), we could perhaps begin popping out one AA every turn and getting them into position for that ‘Fortress Europe’ intimidation factor.  Give the Allies pause when they see a LOT of planes and AA guns.

[Black_Elk]

I like it  :-D

One of the nice things about playing Germany, is that you can always revert to the mass infantry spam, if you catch an unlucky break somewhere, and are forced to scale back your initial ambitions. Often times A&A can turn into a waiting game, where you just have to stick it out, and play through an ugly round or two. If you can claw your way through the dark times, often the dice will turn on the enemy before too long and you’ll have a chance to strike again. ;)

Some people think that Germany has enough Air and Armor to play the Inf/Artillery spam from the outset, and I wouldn’t balk at it since the spam can be potent, but there’s also a lot to be said about buying a nice mixed force at the outset. The Mixed build suggested above meets the sort of basic minimum I like to hold to, of buying at least as many hitpoints as Russia can on G1, while still providing that extra power projection. Basically you can’t go wrong with another BF109 or another Tank on the blitz!
:-D

The DD might seem like a toss up, since 8 ipcs is rather pricey when compared to 2 artillery on the land, but if you can stall the Allies for another round, or force them to make some riskier air trades to secure the med, you can make that money back without too much effort. Seems like a well rounded build, that would probably keep most Allied players on their toes. On G2 a bomber expansion can be a lot of fun, since it does double duty vs UK and Russia. A bomber only costs 12, which usually leaves you with a lot left over to make a sizable investment on the ground. Saving an IPC can be a fun way to give you some interesting G2 builds, with that little extra flexibility provided by saving something in the bank.

I think it’d be a fun opener to play out.

[SEP]

If we’ve taken care of the bulk of the American and British navy in the Atlantic it becomes as lot easier to start with the balanced buy.  We don’t have to worry about G.B. getting too adventuresome and what we have on the western side of Europe should be sufficient for the first round or so.  Time to get the air force and navy to where we need it while still providing for the needed push while still allowing for a bit of fortification.  I think in the long run, particularly into the later rounds you’ll be glad you adopted a strong air build.  Nothing quite as satisfying (to me) than to have a massive air force.  It’s intimidating and offers the most flexibility.

Of course if the dice go against you then it’s all a moot point  :wink:

Might not be a bad idea to pop out the occasional sub as well if the funds permit.  If America/G.B. want to start a ferry service to Africa they’ll have to build more than just a transport network.  Which means less funds for other pursuits.  One sub on Germany’s part may force them to build at least a destroyer or two for escort duties.  So the price of the destroyer(s) plus transports compared to just your sub(s) can get pricey on their part.  Along with your BB and destroyer (if you still have them) it may serve to really help ward off a strong African defense/liberation attempt.  May force G.B. to go ahead and commit to a S. Africa IC and/or help from India (which helps Japan which in turn will help Germany down the line).

Just some further thoughts.

[Frederick II]

SEP, good idea on the purchase for G1 even it’s a bit low on hit points. Buying a bomber can really help by trying to take out a BB built by the british or americans or a aircraft carrier with a fighter on it with the help of fighters.

Black_Elk, if you go North and stack in Karelia wouldn’t the russians attack with their own stack in WRussia?

[Private-Panic]

I picked up from wittman a G1 carrier + 2 fighters build off Italy. Seems perfect to me for supporting an early Africa focus if your aim is to merely pressure R and keep the UK out of W. Europe until you have all those lovely African ipcs to deploy.

I like the Africa focus because it’s so hard for the allies to resist if G does not allow its forces to be distracted elsewhere.

[Black_Elk]

I think if you’re going to go carrier then the med is definitely best. I like the flexibility it gives you to hit sz17 with a fighter on G1. A single carrier for 14 ipcs isn’t too much of an investment. 34 ipcs for a fully loaded carrier can be a bit pricey, as this leaves only enough for a single infantry and single artillery unit, but it can work. Under such conditions UK would be hard pressed to deal with you in the Med, but this also allows Russia to play much more aggressively on the Eastern Front, which would be a trade off to consider. The challenge with a carrier build is always in reinforcing that naval purchase in subsequent rounds, once the transport leaves sz 15. Sometimes a sub or two can help to prevent getting squeezed out too soon by Allied Africa drops, but subs don’t do you much good against aircraft. Destroyers are hard to buy in later rounds, once you move off the coastal production center, since they are easier to pick off from the Air. Usually its really up to Japan to keep any German naval expansion going over the long haul, so I’d make canal control from the Indian Ocean side a top priority. Other alternatives on a G1 build might be 24 ipcs for the Carrier with 1 fighter (leaving a landing spot open for the sz17 fighter should it survive) or 32 ipcs for the Carrier with 1 fighter + 1 destroyer (leaving you with 9 left for 3 infantry units, to at least have some kind of push against the East for G2.) Just some ideas. Germany can afford to do a lot of different things on G1, provided your follow up build on G2 doesn’t neglect the ground game against Russia overmuch.
;)

To Frederick’s Q, stacking Karelia on G1 is rarely possible, unless the soviets just got rocked in the W. Russia battle. More likely the northward stacking occurs on G2 and G3, with Karelia just being traded back and forth until the Germans are ready to move in for good.  But it matters early on, especially in your decision about how many units to send from Germany into Batlic States vs Poland.

On G1 if you don’t put enough resources into Poland this can leave the South vulnerable to Russian attacks in the second round, on the flip side if you don’t put enough resources into Baltic States, this limits how early/effectively you can stack the North. The transport in sz 5 can play into this decision as well, whether you choose to bring units over to Baltic States from Scandinavia or N.W. Europe or both. My personal preference is to pull 1 inf from NorthWestern and 1 from Norway, and leave the other Norway dude to consolidate in Finland for added G2 stackability into Karelia.

Sometimes you can get away with stacking Karelia in the first round, in which case it may be advisable to bring the Tank over from NorthWestern to get you the extra defense power. But again I’d only do this if the Russians fought terribly in their opening attacks, and failed to buy any armor.

The early Air expansion concept with Mixed Air buys can be a lot of fun, since it can also translate into a Naval expansion if those newly purchased fighters suddenly land on a pair of newly dropped carrier decks! And of course Bombers in combination with subs, to give you that extra perimeter coverage, around all those sea zones where you don’t really want to move your core fleet with the carrier decks “just yet.” This is the “Sub Screen” where you try to keep your subs 1 space out from the main fleet, guard against destroyer blocks or bait the enemy. The carrier based fighters and bombers can work with the subs to deadzone key sz to prevent the enemy from getting too close with a strike fleet of your own. This can be really helpful against US convergence zones, as they can be hit before UKs turn, provided you have subs at the ready.

Another concept we haven’t discussed all that much yet, but which can occassionally be relevant on G1, is the concept of the saving IPCs over multiple rounds for a more expanded purchase on G2. The idea is basically not to commit yourself to an expansion on G1, but leave the option open on G2.

This sort of play can sometimes be helpful during the endgame as well, or at any point in the game really, if Germany manages to secure a naval option for themselves. Here you save to purchase a larger single-group of transports at one time, as opposed to splitting them over several rounds. The principle is that, because transports are defenseless, you don’t really want them sitting around and presenting targets to the enemy, until the point when they are actually going to be used for some kind of large scale amphibious invasion.

A principles can apply with carriers. It might sometimes be better to drop 2 or 3 carriers in a single round, for your core fleet, instead of building it up piecemeal, one carrier at a time. This kind of move can often catch the enemy off guard, as they might have enough air at the ready to face down 1 fully loaded carrier, but not 2 or 3 loaded carriers at a single time! This is when mass Air and early fighter expansions really come in handy, since you don’t need to pay for the fighters to fill the decks, you only need money (and production slots at the coastal factory) for the carrier decks themselves.
:-D

In general, and especially for Germany, its better to field units as quickly as possible, and translate your ipcs into attack power rather than saving them, but sometimes it can be useful strategically to save for 1 round. If you want to psych out the opponent say, you can save a large portion of ipcs in a single round, to facilitate a deadlier potential drop. This tactic I call “the Transport Scare” where sometimes all you really want to is to threaten “the possibility” of a mass Naval expansion. If the transport or naval drop doesn’t pan out, the Western Allies call your bluff and move to counter, you can always just use the money you saved to buy a huge tank Wall instead! Or marauding gang of bombers!
:evil:

[V_is_for_Veal]

Generally, I like to keep it dead simple with Germany on this board. Basically, buy a huge stack of infantry and artillery the first round, buy another huge stack the second round, then tanks, then fighters, then bombers. This build order means everything can catch up to slam together, and round 5-7 you have Russia crushed, provided Japan has been doing their job and rapidly bankrupting them in the East, and has lit a fire underneath by capturing India ASAP. Keep the air power in NW Europe and you’ll keep Allied shipping off Britain long enough to get your army out East.

I also have been messing with building all the bombers the first round. Flatten Russia’s economy continuously, keep them in Baltic states and you won’t have to worry about the Western Allies even longer, otherwise it’s the same deal.

Once you’ve built everything you need for the Eastern campaign, it’s just mass infantry and a few guns to hold Berlin and trade for Europe.

You do your best to be obnoxious early on with your fleets, but Africa, the Middle East, even Norway… it doesn’t matter, all that seems to matter is crushing Russia fast enough that you can spend your booty on a defensive wall in Germany. You’re trying to get the British to waste resources defending themselves on the peripheral fronts, not dump more cash in yourself.

As far as openings proper, I just figure out how to annihilate the Royal Navy with optimum efficiency, and I really like the 5-5-5 opening where you stack infantry all along the Eastern front so that Russia can’t trade without losing most of their army, shouldn’t matter to you, Herr Hitler, you’re building a whole new one yourself–faster than they can.

If you keep the pressure on like this you basically dictate the whole flow of the game, and the allies have hardly any room for any funny stuff–they’re gonna need a flock of fighters and flawless logistics to have a prayer.