German Strategy…beef up the navy or straight to Moscow?


  • some of the discussion seems to be suggesting that Allied control of the northern atlantic is optional for britain’s strategy.  doesn’t UK pretty much HAVE to have a fleet?  regardless of how much G can threaten with fighters, bombers, AC, etc., UK will eventually need to be able to transport units to the mainland, which means being able to defend transports, which can only be done with a navy.  otherwise landing fighters in russia will be britain’s sole contribution to taking on germany.  which now that i think about it might not be a terrible strategy.  (probably makes for a boring game for the UK player.)


  • You don’t need to control the Atlantic with UK to the extent of destroying any German Baltic navy.  Just make enough to handle what Germany can throw at you (with a safety margin of course).  If you overbuild too heavily on UK navy, you delay landing in Europe.

    Usually Germany will do whatever it can to force UK to confront the Baltic navy, while minimizing the cost to Germany in air power.  Good placement and movement by UK usually cuts down the German options a lot, especially if Germany didn’t drop IPCs into Baltic fleet.

    Building early fighters with UK to fly to Russia doesn’t work well.  A fighter is 10 IPCs and defends at 4; you pay 2.5 IPC per dice pip.  Infantry is 3 IPC and defends at 2; you pay 1.5 IPC per dice pip.  Considering you pay 166% per dice pip for fighters -  best go inf/tank even at the cost of building a fleet.


  • i guess i was just thinking if you went fighters, they would be there and contributing 1 to 2 rounds sooner and you’re spared the cost of transports and a protective fleet.  plus they can adjust their role easily, if the german front is going OK they can help against japan or even africa.  but like i said, i don’t know if that would be a fun game for UK, not doing much but moving planes around and defending.


  • UK1 defensive fleet, UK2 transport and ground build, UK3 drops 6 units to Karelia/Archangel.  (Could be 4 units if Germany chanced sub vs E Can transport and fighter/bomber vs UK battleship).  Contrast with UK1 fighters, UK2 fighters, UK3 fighters.

    UK Air:  UK2 3 fighters in Europe, UK3 5 fighters in Europe, UK4 8 fighters in Europe, UK5 11 fighters in Europe.
    UK Navy:  UK2 nothing, UK3 6 ground units in Europe, UK4 12-14 ground units in Europe, UK5 20 ground in Europe.

    If the game lasts 5+ turns, you’ll want to have built UK navy as soon as possible.

    20 IPC of fighters attacks 18 IPC of infantry.  Expected result of 1 round of combat:  2 dead fighters and 1 dead infantry.  That’s 20 IPCs the attacker loses and 3 IPCs the defender loses.  Admittedly, it isn’t quite so simple in the actual game, but going pure air is not a sustainable long-term strategy.


  • i’ll agree that UK fighters would be weaker than unopposed UK transports to the mainland, but the planes would enable russia to take and hold more territory, improving russia’s position and denying germany income, which could significantly marginalize the difference between what the transport can bring and what the planes add up to.

    i’m envisioning the planes as a support role rather than attacking anything of germany’s.  with stacks of russian infantry backing them up i think they will make it very very hard for germany to gain ground against russia.

    also if germany did build the navy, then he can destroy britain’s defensive fleet with halfway decent odds.  in that situation, seems like going air makes a lot of sense for UK.

    all of this is theory on a beginner’s part, poised against much more experience so i do honestly believe you are most likely correct, but this is a thing i will have to learn through experience  🙂


  • @ragnarok628:

    i’ll agree that UK fighters would be weaker than unopposed UK transports to the mainland, but the planes would enable russia to take and hold more territory, improving russia’s position and denying germany income, which could significantly marginalize the difference between what the transport can bring and what the planes add up to.

    i’m envisioning the planes as a support role rather than attacking anything of germany’s.  with stacks of russian infantry backing them up i think they will make it very very hard for germany to gain ground against russia.

    Works better the other way around, with russian infantry supporting UK landings. Since G plays right after R it can counterattack any Russian advances with everything at its disposal while the UK fighters won’t move to defend the Russian position until after G plays.
    Worse, if the UK fighters are based on West Russia, for instance, and Russia is forced to withdrawal from that position then the UK fighters will be lost to a german attack.


  • my thinking was germany can’t take back everything, they have to focus on one or two territories.  then UK can make whatever doesn’t get taken back impregnable.  i’m really just gonna have to try this and watch it fall apart to understand why it’s not as effective i think.


  • If you do 100% UK air, until UK4-5 you’ll do better than if you had started with a UK1 fleet build.

    What I anticipate should happen after that?  History of game as I anticipate it - Germany controls Africa, you kill the German Med fleet, Germany builds subs at Med to protect Africa from US landing, maintaining control of Norway (which is usually lost very early on).  Japan presses forward with transports/ICs.  UK/Russia hold up at West Russia pretty well, but once Japan hits Novosibirsk/Kazakh around J4-5, Russia’s forced to bleed off strength east to keep the Japs at bay, which means Allies have to retreat from West Russia; losing control of Africa and Norway is not good, but not fatal - being forced to huddle at Moscow with only UK fighters to reinforce, though, should be the beginning of the end for Russia.  Germany or Japan grabs Caucasus; Russia may be able to reclaim at heavy cost, but with nothing to stop the steady flow of Axis reinforcements, Caucasus falls, then Russia.

    US can divert to Brazil before hitting Africa, but that means diverting transport escorts and transports for additional turns, which Russia may not have with all the Axis pressure.

    You could definitely do UK fighters/Russian infantry to stave off Germany for a long time, but Japan, Africa, and Norway are what make the real difference.  If US goes against Japan, Japan is slowed in Asia, but Germany producing cost effective ground units powered with additional Norway and Africa income, combined with just a BIT of pressure from Japan is enough to make things very difficult for Russia.  If US goes in the Atlantic and helps Africa, Japan runs free in Pacific and pressures Moscow directly.


  • I would be surprised if Germany had Africa and then wasted those IPC’s on subs. Seems counterproductive.

Suggested Topics

  • 7
  • 16
  • 18
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 31
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

83
Online

15.1k
Users

35.9k
Topics

1.5m
Posts