UK Builds

@simon33:

Why don’t you just build a third fighter in Calcutta to defend against sbr? It is well spent.

Because I am worrying about a quick J3 Indian Crunch.  I am preparing for the following Japanese movement:
J1 move 1(2) inf from Kiangsi to Borneo, move 3 inf, 1 art from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to Philippines; J1 build 3 transports
J2 move 3 inf, 2 art, 1 tank from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to sz36; J2 build naval base in FIC; concentrate all carrier groups in sz36 (each with 1 tact, 1 fighter), bombers in Siam, block sz38 with some fleet
J3 attack India with 6-8 inf, 3 art, 1 tank, 3 tact, 3 fighters, 2 bombers (can have offshore bombardments)

According to the build & movement below (no Russian fighter to India), I will have
16 inf, 1 art, 3 AA, 1 fighter in India for defense.
This should just be enough to defend India.  If I build a UK fighter in India, then I don’t have enough infantry to defend India.

Middle East-Indian Wall strategy
[[to counter J1 attack, no matter Germany goes for sealion or barbarossa]]
Turn 1
C1: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 4 inf in Szechwan

UK1:
India 1 tack+fighter to Middle East (Middle Earth strategy)
Sz39 transport 1 inf to Persia
India 5 inf, 1 art=> Burma
Burma fighter=> India
Malaya 3 inf => Shan state
India build 5 inf

ANZAC1: Malaya inf => Shan state

Turn 2
C2: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 5 inf in Szechwan

UK2: (consider the case J1 take Borneo, build 3 transports; J2 build MIC and NB in FIC; move 3 transports to sz36)
Burma 7 inf, 1 art => India
Shan state 3 inf => Burma
India build 4 inf
(if no Sealion, build Persia factory)

ANZAC2: Shan state inf => Burma

Turn 3:
China: aim at taking Yunnan

@simon33:

I haven’t had much success with strategies like the one proposed except when Germany spends some of its money on fleet. That gives ussr a bit ight breathing room to do something.

But I agree with you, in case Germany goes for barbarossa, Russia should focus on wars in Eastern Front.  Again Yunnan and India worries me.  The above implies that China should defend J3 take and hold Yunnan by itself…

Awesome, thanks guys, this is really going to help in my game!

The Allies have to control Turkey at the beginning of the Russian turn for Russia to move ships through the Straits.

Also, according to the rule book: “If a canal or narrow strait is controlled by a power not on your side, but with which you are not yet at war, you must ask permission to use it, which may be denied.”
So in a very theoretical situation, Germany could capture Turkey before being at war with Russia, and allow Russian ships to pass through the Straights. But I don’t think that ever happens.

@wittmann:

If you are playing Global, yes.
Is not easy. You will probably only get the bonus on UK1.

Well, if germany/italy work hard enough, then yes.  The only places they u might have trouble retaking would be malta, cyprus, and alex if germany lands planes with italian garrison.  British somaliand is annoying but reclaimable.  everywhere else, the allies should eb able to reclaim without too much trouble.

@DutchmanD:

Oh, this is no more ahistoric than Italy being able to take Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and the rest of the Mediteranean when they could even beat the Greek army with their entire military. Not to mention one of the most significant ahistorical flaws of G40, which is that the French troops in Aremain loyal to the Allies for some reason, not Axis Vichy…  and, if they are not at war, why are they killing Brits mercilessly on Italy 1? Don’t get me started on the whole “orginally owned” territory nonesense either, the Germans can buld a major IC in Norway and the UK can build one in Malaya, but the Japanses cannot build one in Shanghai; the Japanese were the first to build factories in Shanghai around 1900 after the First Sino-Japanese War, and by 1937, when they fully officially occupied the city, it had more manufacturing power than the rest of Southeast Asia combined!  Dice Gods forbid the Japs actually being able to make a major IC in an actual manufacturing center that they originally created        :wink:

Ahistoric… hmpf!  Nothing like an instant 10 tnps build by the Germans and the dissappearance of essentially the entire Royal Navy in the Spring of 1940 to make you give up on all the historical aspects of the game we love…
 
All good points, but directed more at game mechanics than historical accuracy.  I agree that the production cycle is not accurate to real life, it should take 3-4 turns for a BB to be built, but the game is not made for that scale.  All units you can build are placed almost immediately.  Both the US and UK fleets are severely nerfed, most likely in order to give the axis a chance that they didn’t have in RL.

As for the other issues, I understand why Vichy is not in the game, you have to draw the line somewhere and Larry choose to add France but have them be inert, while China is also hamstrung.  Otherwise you get a community of people clamoring on the BBS from Bulgaria wanting special Bulgarian rules or some other nonsense.

I have played a game where Japan could build a major in China and it did seem overpowered.  It was maxed on production and China was quickly swallowed up.  It took massive US naval builds and tenuous fighting from India to stall the Japs.  Japan was also able to not build many trns in that game and still concentrate on the Pacific islands.

Thanks for going over the Abandon London moves again James.  One would assume they became even more potent in A3, have you had the opportunity to try it yet?  It’s playing the allies like the Axis, creating the initiative and then keeping it long enough to sack Italy…hopefully.

@cminke:

leave a inf on ever 2nd row of teratoies.  if they destroythe first move the secon in. counters blitzing and doesent waste too many inf

An enemy ank might even stop in the first territory, even when the 2nd territory is open (if behind that you have enough forces, the tank will be dead ehh…. metal)

So it all depends on location and situation.

Filling évery territory is of course an insane idea

thanks for the responses.  I really appreciate it!

If this is correct, then how would a newly built carrier in SZ110 not matter?

-  The UK can now launch an air attack on SZ113 with 1 or 2 fighters (depending on if a destroyer was also built in SZ113) and kill the entire transport fleet along with any hopes of a G2 operation Sealion.
-  Depending on any surviving UK naval unit it can also launch an additional attack on either the damaged (?) battleship or the lonely cruiser with the remaining fighter in the UK and 1 or more destroyers.
-  Finally the main attack on the Italian fleet can still go ahead as planned … and depending on G2 builds, the air units used can fly back to the UK the following round to assist against a possible G3 Sealion.

… all that for the cost of one carrier? Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

It is correct except UK can still attack 1 BB, 1 CV and my 2 Fighters with 4 planes. The CV build stops that. It is necessary. MY APs are placed with the CV and protected.

odds are like less than 10% for him to win.

3/3/3/4 vs. 4/2-2/4/4/0/0