@theskeindhu For the Pacific, what I like to do it bait out elements of the IJN by sending loaded transports at Borneo/DEI/Philippines on suicide missions. The TTs are going to die in all likelihood, but if the opponent overextends you can punish them for it, and if they lack TTs they won’t get the islands back right away, which gives you some healthy income/slows Japan down for a few turns. Even if they have TTs, you can usually sink them with your Carrier FTRs + 1-2 SUBs. This forces them to buy a few more TTs/spend effort cleaning up your SUBs, which distracts them from India/Moscow. Every small distraction helps. 1-2 INF can swing a battle’s odds dramatically in the favor of one side over the other.
All the German openings: For Beginners
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
:-DThe 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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
:-DIn 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: -
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.
-
Top tier advice coming at you there!
Veal’s attack plan shows a good grasp of how to go for the jugular on Russia. :-DIn hurry up mode, where your buys seek first to max HP defense power, then max attack power, then max mobility, in that order.
The inf/art push at the outset allows for an earlier potential hit on Russia. With more fodder cushion for your stacks, you’ll have a chance to break through the Moscow wall and be the Hammer (rather the Anvil, to Japan’s Hammer). Or if you get backed down, at least you’ll have more total ground in Eurasia to manage whatever defense the Western Allies force you to take up.
:wink:Good call V!
-
I only buy the Carrier. The German fleet stays put (drops Tk/Inf in Africa)The 2 Fts landed on in after combat. The other 27 is always 3 Art and 5 Inf (2 for Italy).
-
The German navy builds is best in the Med because the RAF can kill it easier in the Baltic than in the Med where their fighters are mostly out of range. One thing that annoys me is that if I build a carrier and expecting the fighter to destroy the DD in sz17 and land on the carrier but both the DD and fighter are destroyed. Then the RAF will try to take it out with what they got. When I could get the same defense value of the carrier from a DD for 6 ipcs cheaper.
Good idea Veal on buying one thing at a time. :wink:
Hey Black_Elk when you said about bringing troops from NWE, and Norway, what I do is bring my tanks from NWE and France and replace with fighters to keep the allies away and some inf to get some hit points. Do you usually empty Norway? Is there any worth defending it?
-
Yeah, I usually play allies on this board because I enjoy the logistical challenge, and I will say that the Mediterranean carrier really screws my whole game up. I spend my bid on infantry in Egypt and Trans-Jordan, then I like to stack West Russia, and put a Red fighter on each side of the canal, and leave like 4 infantry in Caucasus as a trap where both of my fighters can swing back for a counter-attack that leaves me consolidated. All of this is so I can get my Indian fleet into the Mediterranean, and be a major pain for Germany, taking back Africa pronto and forcing stackage or trading in the “soft underbelly”–or better yet he attacks the fleet and my fighters on defense work the Luftwaffe and let me drop fleet off the UK earlier.
The carrier in the Mediterranean totally ruins all of that, but it doesn’t usually bother me because I know that I’m looking at that much less pressure on Russia, I like to think of it as a toss-up because I’ve still forced that much investment in there while stymieing any territorial progress it might lead to.
I feel like carriers are for protecting transports, and the single transport in the Mediterranean just never seems worth it, and a second one plus the carrier is just too much money. I feel like with the guys you drop in Africa the first round, keeping it for the second is worth it, but it’s just not the way I like to play Germany. If I see someone trying to pull the same crap I do around the Suez, I’m just gonna build a pair of subs–if I react at all. I’ve beat better men than myself simply heaping the pressure on Russia like I described above.
Now in revised… man I loved that golden handshake. I used to play Axis more on that board, I’m starting to think spending a bid in the Middle East is just too game changing, it totally determines who I like to play, hah!
-
Veal how are you going to protect you transports from the RAF without a carrier with fighters since a DD is not enough it’s just unit to take the hit for the BB saying “Kill me not the battle ship.” a cruiser could work but it’s a destroyer with better defense value. If someone has a better idea then a carrier with fighters please share.
-
I just do the most annoying move I can with my navy and expect it to die I suppose, in my mind anything spent naval or Africa is usually a waste, there’s just too many ways for the allies to counter. I don’t wanna let the damn Italians suck me for any more resources than are already sunk.
Taking Gibraltar and pulling the BB out into the open ocean as a surface raider is usually a decent headache for the Allies. If the British go for it than they can’t send fighter support to West Russia, I might even be able to force the Russian stack back, and I get my Baltic transport for another turn without dropping a dime in the water. Plus a BB can really do some dicing.
Sure, the allies could get creative in the Mediterranean in theory, but their money is gonna have to go to Russia if I’m really pushing that hard, y’know? Plus, if I go all bombers or get some subs I can still crush their fleets even if mine is toast, and still wheel hard on Russia.
But all of this depends on how the Russians open her up, sometimes there’s some major naval opportunity–I just haven’t seen it in a while facing my usual nemesis.
-
I really prefer the Russian bomber bid for Allies over the Med bid for UK, for a whole host of reasons on balance, but I can definitely feel you, with that sense that the game is rather narrow in that area around the canal.
A lot of the time whether I can put up any decent hits in the W. Russia defense initially will determine how I open. If I do well and peel off some Ruskies, then sometimes I will go for the early artillery punch, and just count on the extra hitpoints I’m amassing to crack Russia without a need to do much else. But if things get dicey, I often go with the 1 bomber per round type model, spending the rest on ground consistently. Here G just amasses a huge airforce to pummel the Russians relentlessly from the sky. I’ve become really partial to having that second bomber and the flexibility it provides on G2, and then once you have 2 bombers, it’s pretty much like crack rocks, and you get addicted to bomber builds hehe.
If it’s like a 6 round set up on Moscow regardless, then 9 ground + a bomber at Berlin every round, for six rounds, nets you 6 bombers with 60 total hitpoints added to the arsenal. The Russians will have a devil of a time dealing with you after the 6th round, and it really doesn’t matter much what else you’ve been doing in the meantime. Sign of the beast style, with your Iron bomber wing, criss crossing the sky, raining down the hellfire all over the place!
:evil:You know the sort of game where it basically becomes pointless for Russia to continue trading territory with you, since their infantry units just get completely reamed in the first round of combat so easily by the bombers. And then, even if Japan is not quite ready and you need to buy time, you can always just take a crack at em with a ruthless SBR run, one good pass and Moscow is pretty much broken. The advantage in having the air already in place after you take Moscow is that they can quickly be returned to the west, unlike the massive artillery wall, and then you just spam ground to lock down Eurasia. I’ve found myself doing things like that more than a few times in 1942.2.
:-D -
For Veal, I do see your points but wouldn’t the transports you build will be immediately destroyed by RAF because usually a fighter in the region then once the transport is built the fighter destroys it and wasn’t able to land troops in africa.
For Black_Elk, bombers are great but when you purchase them that’s barley any tanks to purchase. Also I didn’t fully understand your bomber plan I get the 6 rounds purchase but what do you do after that?
-
Well if you purchase enough aircraft, tanks aren’t really necessary, since your mobility will be in the Air, you can get the job done with just the infantry/artillery combo.
What do you do? The short answer is, after 6 rounds, you try to level Moscow! :-D The whole objective under such a scheme is to wheel your ground forces towards the east and then position yourself for a solid hit on Moscow. Unlike tanks, bombers can conveniently reach all the way from Germany, Italy, Northwestern, or France etc and still hit Moscow in one move, provided they have a landing spot. So often, what players will do, is to exploit the mobility advantage by transitioning their aircraft between West and East as needed, until the final battle for Moscow arrives.
The point I was trying to make on the previous page is that, unlike a massive ground wall purchase, the bombers can take the Russian capital and then rapidly fly back to the West the following round, allowing you to use the Russian purse for a ground spam in the endgame, instead of the other way around, where you use the captured Russian purse to rapidly purchase aircraft for the endgame. Without a proper Air armada during the deep endgame (post Moscow collapse) it can be very hard to hold the Western Allies in check, as their fleets can then bounce around with impunity, and their amphibious invasions can really start to put a dent in your defenses. By concentrating on Air power earlier and consistently over time, you force their fleets to consolidate, and its much easier for Germany to eject them from the continent if they do start to make landings.
I would not say that this kind of mass Air strategy is 100% by any means (I don’t think such a thing exists in 1942.2, as the German game is just too idiosyncratic for one full proof strategy.) Its more a matter of taste, and playstyle preference, which is why I am always reluctant to tell someone just do “X Y and Z and that’s that.” Instead I like to lay out the options and offer potential alternatives, because alternatives can be useful to have in the arsenal. The 1 bomber per round idea was suggested mainly as a counterpoint to the mass infantry/artillery “hurry up” from round 1 model.
In the “Hurry up” game, you buy your Bombers on the back end. First its the infantry push mechanic exclusively, and you only expand the Luftwaffe once you have enough ground in place for the final drive on Moscow. In that sort of game the bombers come after everything else, and they catch up at the last minute to deliver the extra hitpoints and attack power you need to crack the Russian capital. The challenge with that model, is that it is often a lot harder to trade territories and TUV with the Russians profitably during the interim.
The “Dark Skies” approach by contrast, is where you build the Bombers first, as part of a mass purchase at the outset, to gain overwhelming air superiority and an insurmountable coastal defense advantage (ie. making it basically impossible for the Western Allies to build a fleet that can challenge you in Europe.) In Dark Skies the whole idea is to place your bombers early, so you can always trade territories and TUV at advantage, right from the outset. Versions of this playstyle have been around ever since AA50 came out, when the cost of the bomber unit was first reduced from 15 to 12 ipcs and transports were first made defenseless. Things which greatly increased the combat effectiveness and overall purchase value of the bomber unit.
The “1 Bomber Per” approach, is somewhere in between these. It will never deliver the kind of early advantage that a mass bomber purchase on G1/G2 might, but you also don’t have to wait to start wheeling east with your ground forces.
This is a style of German gameplay that can be hard to explain in the abstract, and you almost have to see it in operation to appreciate how much it screws with the Allies haha. The observant A&A player would likely say “Hey wait a minute! I remember what you said back on page 1 of your General 1942.2 strategy thread, about how 4 infantry are always better on attack than a single bomber, and how hitpoints are the most important thing you can buy with IPCs!… So why would I buy 6 bombers/60 hitpoints over the course of 6 rounds, when I could have like a 100 hitpoints and equivalent attack power if I just buy all infantry?”
The answer has everything to do with mobility. If you buy all ground all day, it becomes harder and harder to wage a two front war with G (East and West at the same time), because you cannot transition your attack/defense power around quickly enough to be effective in both regions. It becomes easier for your enemy to read what you’re doing and plan counters in advance, and harder for you to get all crazy and surprise them with a sudden and dramatic re-positioning of your forces. The bombers allow you to pull tricks out of your hat, even on defense, where extra hitpoints added to a large stack can be all the difference you need. It’s just something to bear in mind. I gave a fairly ringing endorsement of Veal’s first idea to just punch it home with Artillery walls in the first few rounds, until all your forces can converge on Moscow at the same time (e.g. buy bombers last). I play it that way too, and quite often, but there are other approaches that can work as well, and strategies that call for buying bombers earlier and consistently can be highly effective as well. Knowing this can come in handy, especially if you wind up playing the same opponent often, since you don’t want your approach to be too predictable or you gameplay to get too stale.
There is probably a counter to every great German opening in A&A, provided the opponent knows how to read you like a book and predict what you’re going to do in advance, so it’s always nice to keep some hidden aces up your sleeve, and mix things up from time to time. Germany has a lot more flexibility to play this way than the Allies do ;)
-
Hello,
I’m new to this forum, lots of great stuff in here. I used to play a ton of Classic back in the day and from absorbing Don Rae’s essays, able to win pretty consistently with either Axis or Allies. Recently an old college buddy of mine bought Spring 1942 2nd edition so we’re both trying to learn this different board. I’ve been reading a lot of these posts and strategies as well as downloading and reviewing some of the forum AAA games. At this point I routinely crush the Hard AI when I play as the Allies with or without a bid, (I normally go with a KGF strategy where I transit UK/US fighters into WRussia, hold the line at India, lock down Africa, and SBR Germany while I wait for the fleets to converge off the coast of France). I’ve just tried playing a new game where I play against myself to see how to overcome that KGF Allied strategy with Germany and I’m having trouble.
I like Elk’s idea of going North to go South and working to stack Karelia as quickly as possible and then work south from there. I also like the idea of maximizing Germany’s output of at least 10 units a turn out of Germany. So assuming that Germany is buying an optimal infantry/artillery split the first two rounds, stacking tanks in Baltic states G1, and then gradually purchasing a fighter/bomber/tank mixed in w/ inf/art in around round 4 or 5, here’s my question:
If Germany is able to stack Karelia on G2/G3, while light trading Ukraine and Belo, WHAT THEN? Specifically if the Allies are playing a strong KGF it’s right around round 4ish that they are able to land in France with around 6 units from UK, 6 more from US with the US pulling out its fighters from WRussia to reinforce France. At this point the German tank stack is sitting in Karelia so they can’t hit France and the units bought in Germany the last round aren’t enough to dislodge that stack. The German air can hit France, but it’s usually either not enough to kill the Allies in France without tank support. It creates a tough decision for the Germans, do they withdraw their tanks back to Germany to then clear out France the next turn which would probably force the allies to retreat up to Norway at the expense of being able to threaten Russia with their tanks? The other option I see is to keep the panzers in Karelia and either try to take W Russia that or next turn, (since it’s weakened by not having US Air support), try to move everything into Archangel to force the Russian stack out of W Russia, or some other move I’m not thinking of? I guess Germany can build up the coast of France before round 4 to make it hard for the allies to land there, but that is at the expense of quickly stacking Karelia and using its fighters for Karelia defense.
In that scenario is best for the Germans to back out the tanks to Germany to threaten France, keep their air up in Karelia to defend against a Russian WRussia counter, while hoping that Japan can either take India by this point or try to pressure Russia by stacking Kazakhstan by going through China and just ignoring India?
Sorry if this sounds like a convoluted question, I can post the save file of the game that i’m playing against myself to better show what I’m talking about.
-
Hello,
I’m new to this forum, lots of great stuff in here. I used to play a ton of Classic back in the day and from absorbing Don Rae’s essays, able to win pretty consistently with either Axis or Allies. Recently an old college buddy of mine bought Spring 1942 2nd edition so we’re both trying to learn this different board. I’ve been reading a lot of these posts and strategies as well as downloading and reviewing some of the forum AAA games. At this point I routinely crush the Hard AI when I play as the Allies with or without a bid, (I normally go with a KGF strategy where I transit UK/US fighters into WRussia, hold the line at India, lock down Africa, and SBR Germany while I wait for the fleets to converge off the coast of France). I’ve just tried playing a new game where I play against myself to see how to overcome that KGF Allied strategy with Germany and I’m having trouble.
I like Elk’s idea of going North to go South and working to stack Karelia as quickly as possible and then work south from there. I also like the idea of maximizing Germany’s output of at least 10 units a turn out of Germany. So assuming that Germany is buying an optimal infantry/artillery split the first two rounds, stacking tanks in Baltic states G1, and then gradually purchasing a fighter/bomber/tank mixed in w/ inf/art in around round 4 or 5, here’s my question:
If Germany is able to stack Karelia on G2/G3, while light trading Ukraine and Belo, WHAT THEN? Specifically if the Allies are playing a strong KGF it’s right around round 4ish that they are able to land in France with around 6 units from UK, 6 more from US with the US pulling out its fighters from WRussia to reinforce France. At this point the German tank stack is sitting in Karelia so they can’t hit France and the units bought in Germany the last round aren’t enough to dislodge that stack. The German air can hit France, but it’s usually either not enough to kill the Allies in France without tank support. It creates a tough decision for the Germans, do they withdraw their tanks back to Germany to then clear out France the next turn which would probably force the allies to retreat up to Norway at the expense of being able to threaten Russia with their tanks? The other option I see is to keep the panzers in Karelia and either try to take W Russia that or next turn, (since it’s weakened by not having US Air support), try to move everything into Archangel to force the Russian stack out of W Russia, or some other move I’m not thinking of? I guess Germany can build up the coast of France before round 4 to make it hard for the allies to land there, but that is at the expense of quickly stacking Karelia and using its fighters for Karelia defense.
In that scenario is best for the Germans to back out the tanks to Germany to threaten France, keep their air up in Karelia to defend against a Russian WRussia counter, while hoping that Japan can either take India by this point or try to pressure Russia by stacking Kazakhstan by going through China and just ignoring India?
Sorry if this sounds like a convoluted question, I can post the save file of the game that i’m playing against myself to better show what I’m talking about.
If you are doing optimal German buys, then you should have something like 4 inf, 4 art, and 2 tanks in Germany plus maybe an inf and art in Italy. Plus, you should have 4 fighters and 1 bomber in range. You should be able to beat the Allied army most of the time with that.
I’m not by any means an expert, so take my advice with a grain of salt. -
you should have something like 4 inf, 4 art, and 2 tanks in Germany plus maybe an inf and art in Italy. Plus, you should have 4 fighters and 1 bomber in range. You should be able to beat the Allied army most of the time with that.
You are basically correct as to what would be in Germany for a counter to attack France, but that isn’t enough to clear around 8-12 ground units (combined US/UK) and another 6 or so US fighters plus at least one US bomber.
When I get home from work, I’ll post a save file of my game, or take a screenshot.
Suggested Topics
