@cyanight:
He produced 10 Artillery on G2 not G1. On G1 he went with 6 artillery and 2 inf.
Well, Narvik did indeed seem to make that error in his post, if I understood Narvik correctly (the same way Fred did). Fred was saying that Narvik was implying that Germany should buy 10 Artillery G1, which it indeed cannot do.
I think it’s also worth mentioning I don’t know what the hell Narvik was talking about in general as a strategy for Germany. Buying that many slow units, and at that ratio, for Germany with the intention of sending them east is detrimental. Buy slow artillery only once (or never, see my last post), as you only get an extremely tiny window of opportunity to do it, and then your mechs you build afterward to utilize them more fully catch up without issue. Also, Germany starts off with a lot of infantry and comparably few artillery. G1/G2 is the only chance to balance that out (or not, see my last post).
Either Narvik is way ahead on me with his 3:1 inf:art ratio on attacking wisdom, or he’s wrong. I put it more like somewhere between 4:3 and 7:6 as a general rule, and assume I have more infantry or mechs coming after me as reinforcements after a fight.
On offense:
3:1 = 6 pips / 4 hp for 13 IPCs
7:6 = 7.22 pips / 3.75 hp for 13 IPCs (fractions are fun!)
1.22 pips for .25 hp is a preferable deal for most compartively-sized skirmishes. Yeah, you’re going to have more HP with 3:1, but there’s going to be more things alive to kill you after the first round as well. If you’re going to be one-shotting a lot of battles, 3:1 is great, but your enemy is not very bright. He should be pulling back to avoid handing you little gift packages. It’s also better to front load yourself with plenty of artillery because new ones will never catch up to the fight. Mechanized infantry will.
The proposed 4:1 ratio is close to being insane, unless he means he was going to bring in planes, but he didn’t say that.
On defense:
3:1 = 8 pips / 4 hp for 13 IPCs
7:6 = 7.5 pips / 3.75 hp for 13 IPCs
Yeah, sure, defense is better. Won’t argue there. But, umm, maybe run by me again why Germany is planning on being so defensive?
As far as defending Moscow after you take it: there are a ton of what-ifs to consider, but assuming play of equal skill level up to this point in the game, I can’t see how this is going to be an issue in most circumstances. Some possibilities? Yes, fine. Most logical possibilities? Absolutely not. You either take it by smashing it all or with much less walking in after a Russian retreat, or you dig in and play the long game.
@cyanight:
I personally like to buy 2 bombers on G1. They can be put to use right away and the threat of sealion is still there. Without buying the extra bombers you cant bomb UK to 20 on G2 prior to the sealion invasion.
This is not the worst thing to do, strategic bombers are incredibly flexible for Germany, but I might have to disagree with you that you can’t SBR London effectively without them. To 20? No, you’re right. But you still have two strat bombers to hit the major factory on G2, and then hopefully some tac bombers and fighters left to hit the air base and escort, unless your G1 attacks went really pair-shaped on you. Also, two more strat bombers is two more chances to lose strat bombers. I don’t know if doing 5.5 IPCs of damage to UK (and then only maybe!) feels like the right thing to do.
As UK I would not see a 2x Strat Bomber purchase on G1 as a strong sea lion threat. For 24 IPCs you can do better than roll two more dice for 4’s in London, especially since both of those dice have a 1/6th chance of not even being able to participate because of AA cover.
You’re taking two 1/6th chances per each bomber by SBR’ing and then attacking with them. That’s a 30% chance to end the ordeal without a bomber, per bomber. I can’t run the numbers in my head to see if that kind of risk (but high potential future versatility) is worth the investment, but I can confidently say that it’s not the optimal play for Sea Lion, nor is it the optimal play for Barbarosa.