• I saw a recent post suggesting SZ 5 is the best place for UK landings in Europe.  However, even if the UK battleship survives Round 1 and even if UK buys an AC and 2 destroyers, it seems like a very long time before UK has a large enough navy to do this.  Can anyone comment on what your navy typically looks like to make this work?  If Germany is buying a fighter or bomber every other round or so, this UK navy will need a lot more naval support and leaves Germany the option of leaving its air force just about anywhere it wants.  Conversely, if UK focuses landings through Norway, Germany is forced to divert its air force to Western Europe, which also helps keep the air force away from Russia.


  • Given UK1 Ukraine/West Russia, followed by G1 attack on UK battleship and Anglo-Egypt, without any air or naval buys by Germany, I’d probably do 2 destroyers 1 AC on UK1 northwest or southwest of London to stay out of range of most of the German fighters and/or subs as possible.  That’s followed by a UK2/US2 landing at Algeria, or UK2 landing at Karelia/Archangel.

    I don’t know where SZ 5 is offhand.  Best describe where it is.

  • '12

    Never let a lack of knowledge prevent oneself from posting I always say!


  • I think that it is best to focus on landing troops in Norway/Finland. It would divert the German air force from at least a few Russian territorries and if you could bring in some fighters and bombers, you could take out some of the German air force pemanently and maybe even distract the German armies from Russia 😄

  • '12

    I think one of the biggest tasks of the allied navy is threat.  Yes you obviously need to land forces and those forces need to earn income for the allies, losses for the Axis and attrit the axis forces.  However, you also must tie up German forces that now are trying to prevent you from hitting other spots with economic advantage.  By this I mean a favourable exchange of forces when combined with economic benefits and lost opportunity costs of axis forces diverted to clean up the allied foray.  Staying in or being able to stay in Sz5 allows you to threaten Germany itself and reinforcements flowing through East Europe.  By forcing Germany to defend WEu and the fortress europe ‘air base’ there, as well as Germany proper less German forces are available to threaten stacks along the russian border.  While it is tempting to have navy in Sz4 and does offer some tactical advantages in particular that first allied move forward after landing perhaps in Norway, the loss of the threat that navy poses to WEu, Ger, EEu means that Germany can lean forward much further.


  • All good responses, I appreciate the input.  However, in just about every game I’ve played, the allied navy is usually destroyed by Germany alone or with the assistance of the Japanese airforce, and long before the allied navy made any meaningful landings in Europe.  In the last game I played, I spent several rounds just building a large UK navy, which was intially effective in SZ 5, but by the time a large enough US navy was within range of helping in SZ 5, Germany/Japan easily killed the whole fleet.  G’s 1 bomber and 6 fighters (assuming Norway fighter alive), along with an additional a fighter or bomber every other round, seems like it will always be too much for allies to effectively land ANYWHERE in Europe.  The more allies build, the more air units Japan sends over to help.  I’m still at a loss as to how to stage/time effective landing ANYWHERE in Europe without losing it all to German and/or Japan airforce, particularly how to get US armor/inf. to Europe consistenty without leaving at least one set of transports vulnerable to attack.

  • '16 '15 '10

    SZ5 is great if you can swing it but there are some dangerous limitations–it can’t be reinforced directly unless you have an adjacent factory.  So if the enemy is building up air force its hard to stay there.  It gets more complicated when you have both UK and USA units in SZ5 and a large Japanese air force is threatening.  You can’t retreat the UK units without leaving the USA units as sitting ducks!  At that point, you’d better have an IC in Nor or Western, or a fleet big enough to withstand the Japs!

    SZ6 and SZ7 are much safer.  Even SZ4 and SZ12 are safer, since you can reinforce those zones with naval units built in SZ2.

    LMD, aircraft carriers and fighters are my preferred defense against enemy air power.  While pure destroyers give me more anti-air bang for my buck,  I prefer figs/acs over other naval units because the fighters will give me excellent value over time via trading territories.


  • @LMD:

    All good responses, I appreciate the input.  However, in just about every game I’ve played, the allied navy is usually destroyed by Germany alone or with the assistance of the Japanese airforce, …

    This is because either the Allies are screwing up or because Germany is getting lucky.

    Since it happens in every game, I’d say the Allies are screwing up.  Badly.  Allies are probably doing something silly like buying battleships and/or cruisers instead of destroyers and/or carriers, and parking fleet where they can be blown up easily.

    Even in the event of a German buy that makes a UK1 naval buy vulnerable, the Allies should NOT BE LOSING THEIR FLEET.  It’s like you have a dog that has a problem getting run over by trains.  You know the dog can see the train coming, but the dog just stands on the tracks.  You’re like run dog run, but it stands there with a glazed look in its eyes.  Again and again and again.  Bark, stand, choo choo, eyes glaze, whap, hospital, bark, stand, choo choo, eyes glaze, whap.  Don’t be a dog that stands on the tracks.  If you see a train could hit you, step out of the way.  It’s not like the train is going to suddenly jump off the tracks and whoop your butt.

    If you do live in an area in which trains regularly jump off the tracks and whoop butt, though, may I recommend moving?  Same principle.

    1.  You probably will not be able to make any transport drops on UK1.  If you get greedy, the Germans can probably punish you.  I certainly would if I could.

    2.  Unless Germany bought a carrier, German fighters on Western Europe can’t hit you northwest of London.  German fighters on Norway can’t hit you southwest of London.  Something like that anyways.  Basically German fighters have limited range, keep that in mind to build fleet in a safe zone.  If it’s not safe - don’t build it.

    3.  Zhukov’s comments were dangerously incomplete.  You cannot build just aircraft carriers for defense.  If you do, Germany can easily build a couple subs.  Fighters do not defend against enemy subs when a friendly destroyer is not present.  FURTHERMORE, and VERY IMPORTANTLY, if you do NOT build destroyers EARLY, Germany can keep its subs in the Atlantic.

    If you DO build destroyers, Germany has to either use its subs in the Atlantic or run them away.  In either event, you will not have to worry about the subs after the next German turn in all likelihood - because after the next German turn, on your turn, you will use your destroyers to kill any subs in range of your fleet, and build whatever new navy you need to replace it.

    If you do NOT build destroyers, Germany just hangs out with subs in the Atlantic, waiting for you to bring a nice fat fleet into range.  Then suddenly, German air and subs kill everything.  Germany loses some cheap subs that it doesn’t care about (6 IPC subs are FAR cheaper than 10 IPC fighters).  You lose transports, carriers, big expensive stuff.

    So remember.  Destroyers and carriers and fighters.  Destroyers because the destroyers chase or kill enemy destroyers plus let fighters on carriers defend against enemy subs plus are cheap fodder.  Carriers because they carry fighters.  Fighters because they can defend well, and attack both naval and ground targets.

    What about cruisers, battleships, bla bla bla?  Forget them.  Too expensive.  You want to race to Europe as fast as safely possible, and if you screw around with expensive cruisers and battleships, your defense will not be nearly as strong for the IPCs spent, so it will take you much longer to get enough fleet to get a credible ground attack force into play.


  • @LMD:

    I saw a recent post suggesting SZ 5 is the best place for UK landings in Europe.  However, even if the UK battleship survives Round 1 and even if UK buys an AC and 2 destroyers, it seems like a very long time before UK has a large enough navy to do this.  Can anyone comment on what your navy typically looks like to make this work?  If Germany is buying a fighter or bomber every other round or so, this UK navy will need a lot more naval support and leaves Germany the option of leaving its air force just about anywhere it wants.  Conversely, if UK focuses landings through Norway, Germany is forced to divert its air force to Western Europe, which also helps keep the air force away from Russia.

    The recent post was mine I guess. In most of my games when I play KGF I have the Allied fleet in SZ5 in R4 or R5. The trick is that I play Norwegian gambit which preserves the UK BB SZ2. I never move SZ5 without the US covering and without 4 Uk + 4 US trannies in the fleet. A possible round by round development can be as follows:

    1. UK Buy AC, 2dd,  US buy AC 3trn,

    2. UK buys 2-3 trn or moves SZ12 and buys land units, US buys 2trn, to meet SZ 10 with the bb and the trn off Pacific. US merges the 5 trn, AC, dd, cru with the UK fleet at SZ12 or SZ 8 or moves it SZ 1 or moves there just the AC and dd in case the cru operates with UK fleet since R1 already.

    3. UK completes the 4 trn and positions the fleet in SZ 3, 6, or 7 and should have gets units on Norway or/and WEU if the opportunity opens. In any case there should be 8 land units UK/Nor. US comes to merge with the uk fleet with AC, dd, cru nad 4 trn and lands 8 units on Norway too. The US BB and other 4 trn should be SZ 1 and 2.

    4. At the beginning of UK4 you have to do the evaluation of the Aixs air power. Germany should be out of water by now. Typically they would have 2bmb and 5 figs. Say you lost one dd sinking the Gerry subs. So your fleet consists of BB, 2AC, cru, 2dd, 4 fig (and 8 trn). That would give germans exactly 0 % chance to sink it if it moves SZ5. So there is no chance sinking this fleet even with some Japan air covering.

    Provided G has nothing on the sea, Germany would need 6figs and 4bmb to increase the chance of sinking your fleet to 39 % And 7 figs and 4bmb gives them 64 % finally. This would of course require 68 IPCs on air provided only 1 fig was lost R1 which is rather rare. This means Germany is 23-26 inf weaker then it would be otherwise or 19-23 less  (provided the 1 bmb buy is pretty standard). This on the other hand means Russians most likely have stacked UKR or KAR.

    And there is no rush for the allies who can easily wait for the US BB and/or build an extra AC. In case there are 2 bbs in the fleet G would need 5bmb and 8 figs to prvent it from moving SZ5 R5 and if there is the extra loaded AC which everybody would build seeing such a obsesion with air in Berlin Germany would need 10 fig and 5 bmb to give itself nice 43 %.

    In other words there is no way of stopping a good allied player going SZ5 R4 or R5 if this is his priority and keeps the UK bb alive on R1 which is what i discussed in the article on Norwegian gambit.

    If you have 16 allied land units on norway/UK with 8trn in the fleet, G should not consider WEU a safe place for its bmbs so you have no trouble operating the second supporting US fleet of four trannies SZ 1-2 WITHOUT ANY COVER at all. From R5 on Allies can be pumping 16 units a turn to Europe.  :mrgreen:

  • '12

    Germany can defend WEu without too much trouble in the face of 8 allied transports.  4-6 Jap fighters and 4 german fighters and about a dozen infantry roughly without looking at a battle calc should do it.

  • '16 '15 '10

    Good point that if you possess the UK BB then it will make your fleet alot safer from a potential Japanese attack.

    Bunnies makes good points about bombard surface navy…just too expensive imho.


  • @MrMalachiCrunch:

    Germany can defend WEu without too much trouble in the face of 8 allied transports.  4-6 Jap fighters and 4 german fighters and about a dozen infantry roughly without looking at a battle calc should do it.

    I was about to say this to Grenada’s post. Since the US fleet moves to SZ8 on US2, G will have 3 turns to build up W. Eur and just 12 inf + 4 fighters + 2 bombers, without counting the Japanese fighters, is enough to stop any Allied landings for good because the 8 Allied transports can’t attack all on the same round. G will be weak on the Eastern front until it gets those 12 inf but it won’t need to worry about W. Eur for the rest of the game.

    Meanwhile the entire Allied transport scheme just got more complicated. They have a fleet capable of surviving an attack but they will have to buy more carriers to defend the US shuck to SZ8/2/12 before they can move to SZ5.


  • @MrMalachiCrunch:

    Germany can defend WEu without too much trouble in the face of 8 allied transports.  4-6 Jap fighters and 4 german fighters and about a dozen infantry roughly without looking at a battle calc should do it.

    You are absolutely correct.  I do it myslef this way if I can. This is the famous Hobbes’ Fortress Europe after all. But can you make it there with 4-6 jap fighters by R3? The thing is that WEU might be in danager of a heavy attack as soon as R3, sometimes even R2. If you are able to allocate sufficient inf on WEU and Berlin at the same time it should mean you are not that strong with air and also it must be a huge relief in Moscow to see a dozen inf on the Atlantic coast. And it should not be any risk to leave your trannies SZ 2 with the cover of the US BB anyway, possibly with a cover of 1-2 dds. The thing is it is never a problem to give the ships SZ 2 extra cover with UK if needed since it plays after Germany.

    Moreover Allies usually should not offload heavy at WEU anyway, the aim is to trade WEU not to take it because you are likely to be anihilated without a chance to retake by a good Axis player. It is much better to offload NOR-KAR-EE thus incresing pressure because you combine the units from previous rounds with the newly offloaded. And by creating a stronghold in KAR you also position yourself to help russians if needed.

    If you are that strong in WEU with inf R3-4, surely it must be safe for Allies to offload safely NOR or even KAR. Once they reinforce there with just one more offload, there is nothing pushing them out.
    :mrgreen:

    So it is always a matter of choices. While I do agree it is possible for Axis to keep WEU long into the game and I agree it is a way to go in most cases, I cannot see this stopping Allies getting SZ5 R4-5.


  • Granada comments that he uses what he refers to as the Norwegian Gambit (which is really just saying a 2 Russian fighter attack vs Norway) to preserve the UK battleship.  I personally think it is not necessary to go to such great lengths to preserve UK’s fleet.

    @MrMalachiCrunch:

    Germany can defend WEu without too much trouble in the face of 8 allied transports.  4-6 Jap fighters and 4 german fighters and about a dozen infantry roughly without looking at a battle calc should do it.

    That IS a lot of trouble for Germany.

    If you have a fat stack of German and Japanese fighters on Western Europe, yes, that will hold it.  But the German infantry used on Western Europe are inevitably taken from the Russian front, and the Japanese fighters can’t lend their attacking power in Asia.  Losing the Japanese fighters in Asia is not a real problem for Japan, as it keeps a steady stream of units pouring in.  But the German units are not so easy to write off.

    Assuming a KGF plan (Kill Germany First), the Allies should control Africa, and the Axis keeping so much power back on Western Europe allows UK and US to set up a transport chain from Eastern Canada to London to Karelia/Archangel.

    With Africa out of German hands and UK/US ground dropping almost directly into Moscow, the game is definitely still in question.

    There are different variations on the game that take some getting used to - for example, the German Mediterranean carrier/transport build, the German Mediterranean sub build, German Baltic carrier, German 2+ bomber build, German fighter build, German G1 Caucasus heavy attack for G2 start with Caucasus (after Japanese fighter reinforcement on J1) with super tank dashing, German West Russia attack for greater IPC control, regular German tank dashing, German tank stack posted on Eastern Europe, and German stack on Western Europe with infantry and German and Japanese fighters, and the German Karelia stack to additionally trade Archangel and lock UK/US out of drops to Europe.  Those are just the ones I can think of offhand.

    Axis stacking Western Europe is one of these - if the Axis stack a lot in Western Europe, Allies hit other targets.  If Axis don’t stack enough in Western Europe, Allies can take it.  If the Axis don’t stack in Western Europe at all, that gives the Allies freedom in the Atlantic.

    More specifics on hitting other targets?  Something like this - UK drops 8 ground units to Europe, US drops 8 ground units to Europe, Russia reinforces with 1-2 ground units.  That’s 18 Allied ground units piling up each turn, potentially reinforced by US and Russian fighters.  That stack is going to go someplace, and Germany will have to deal with it.  Germany will have more units in Europe to begin with, but it will only be producing 8-10 units a turn (Germany, Southern Europe, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Balkans for 28 IPC plus possible trading territories Karelia, Belorussia, and Ukraine for 34 IPC a turn).  Germany can’t afford to race for long.

    Better in my opinion (edit - better IF the Axis think they can break down Russia pretty fast) is  stacking EASTERN Europe, not Western Europe.  From Eastern Europe, the Axis can hit the sea zone drop to Karelia/Archangel, and defend Eastern Europe.  Tanks on Eastern Europe can hit Western Europe along with infantry from Berlin.  Tanks on Eastern Europe can also dash and hit Caucasus or West Russia.

    Now, if the Axis don’t think they can break Russia pretty fast, then Western Europe if you like.


  • I did a little count of the most favourable standard situation for Axis. This would be 2bmb 5figs Germany and 1bmb 5 figs jap in WEU R4. Still against the fleet of bb, 2dd, cru, 2AC, 4fig it gives just 4 % to the combined attack if UK is able to send an extra fig to reinforce between the G and J moves which is likely and 20 % chance if you cannot reinforce the fleet at all.

    The thing is Germany with all its planes has just 1 % chance to win with 6 allied units remaining, this of course would be 2AC,3fig and bb. Now tell me, would be a reasonable Germany player willing to risk all luftwaffe for creating 4 % chance of sinking the fleet? Surely not, a reasonable Axis would not attack.

    Od course things may change significantly with a 2bmb German buy R5 which might look like turning the SZ5 into a trap for the allies. But still all the UK needs to do is to keep itself 4 extra figs then. If Germans would be bullish enough to send 4bmb and 5fig against your aforementioned fleet they would help themselves to manic 18 % chance of winning with 2.91 units of defenders remaining. If the defender just takes care of the fact that the 2 last units alive are his ACs and lands 4 UK figs there Japs would have just 39 % chance of winning with 5fig and bmb then.

    In the absolutely worst case scenario there are various opportunities for a reasonable retreat sacrificing some of the UK ships in the process. I will not go into much details but trust me it can be done safely without losing more then the 2 UK dds most of the times.

    Still worse for Axis: if Norway goes to US which I will try to do from now on, US can build an IC on Nor R5 in case Gerrys do a 2bmb build so that US could put a ship if necassary to SZ5 directly. The 3fig buy with UK and IC buy with US should make SZ5 safe for the rest of even the most competitive game. But honestly here it gets a bit speculative since in a typical KGF R5 German player has ussually not a remotest chance to dream of buying something so sumptous as 2bmbs.

    As Zhuk mentioned the UK BB really makes all the difference which is of course the logic behind the Norwegian gambit: to get Allies into SZ5 as soon as possible.

    :mrgreen:


  • I have always seen it like this:if the axis keeps his combined airforce in WEu,the combined allies should be landing through SZ4.If axis has the airforce in EEu,the allies should go in from SZ3-Nor.In both cases the allies can keep both a steady flow to Europe and slowly reinforce the fleet,away from danger,till it can move towards SZ5.

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 31
  • 4
  • 14
  • 44
  • 6
  • 3
  • 17
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

69
Online

15.3k
Users

36.4k
Topics

1.5m
Posts