German Strategy



  • A - 1 air unit, 1 tank, 1 art, rest of IPC to INF
    B - 1 art or tank, rest of IPC to INF

    These are the 2 builds i have been sticking with as Germany.

    If allies go all out against Germany i generally build as many INF as possible and 1 art or tank per turn for fortress Europe.
    If allies don’t go all out against Germany then i keep adding one air unit per turn, and there have been many times where UK got a little too overconfident with its fleet/transports and lost everything to the Luftwaffe.

    Once i take or get close to taking and holding Caucasus i start making more tanks to get there quick to help hold it.

    Is this a good German strategy? Or should i build more artillery and/or tanks?



  • Also i dont usually attack anglo-egypt G1 unless i lose the fighter in norway.
    If i lose that fighter then i bring the bomber and take anglo, if not i attack SZ2(UK battleship and transport and russian sub) with sub. fighter. bomber.
    Sz13(UK cruiser) with battleship and fighter
    SZ15(UK destroyer) with 2 fighters
    and i use the transport to move tank and inf from Libya to W europe



  • @Uncrustable:

    Also i dont usually attack anglo-egypt G1 unless i lose the fighter in norway.

    To me, Germany should attack Egypt G1, specially if if the fighter in Norway was destroyed. More on that below.

    If i lose that fighter then i bring the bomber and take anglo, if not i attack SZ2(UK battleship and transport and russian sub) with sub. fighter. bomber.
    Sz13(UK cruiser) with battleship and fighter
    SZ15(UK destroyer) with 2 fighters
    and i use the transport to move tank and inf from Libya to W europe

    On UK1 your German Med fleet will be sunk (2 ftrs from UK landing on Gibraltar + bomber) and Germany is out of Africa.
    With Germany I usually attack the SZ13 with 2-3 fighters, SZ2 with sub, ftr and bomber, SZ15 with the battleship, and Anglo Egypt with 2 inf, 1 art, 1 arm and 1 ftr. You have 80-90% odds on all those attacks, You’ll get unlucky from time to time though.
    Sometimes I chose not to attack Egypt, if for instance Germany is counterattacking on West Russia on G1 and the Luftwaffe is sent there. But in that case I’d rather land 1 inf on Gibraltar to prevent those fighters from sinking the fleet.



  • @Hobbes:

    @Uncrustable:

    Also i dont usually attack anglo-egypt G1 unless i lose the fighter in norway.

    To me, Germany should attack Egypt G1, specially if if the fighter in Norway was destroyed. More on that below.

    If i lose that fighter then i bring the bomber and take anglo, if not i attack SZ2(UK battleship and transport and russian sub) with sub. fighter. bomber.
    Sz13(UK cruiser) with battleship and fighter
    SZ15(UK destroyer) with 2 fighters
    and i use the transport to move tank and inf from Libya to W europe

    On UK1 your German Med fleet will be sunk (2 ftrs from UK landing on Gibraltar + bomber) and Germany is out of Africa.
    With Germany I usually attack the SZ13 with 2-3 fighters, SZ2 with sub, ftr and bomber, SZ15 with the battleship, and Anglo Egypt with 2 inf, 1 art, 1 arm and 1 ftr. You have 80-90% odds on all those attacks, You’ll get unlucky from time to time though.
    Sometimes I chose not to attack Egypt, if for instance Germany is counterattacking on West Russia on G1 and the Luftwaffe is sent there. But in that case I’d rather land 1 inf on Gibraltar to prevent those fighters from sinking the fleet.

    I almost always lose my med fleet by G2 no matter where it is.
    Yes i give up africa, but its hard to keep anyhow and worth very little. Id rather save a tank and an INF then fight for africa.
    Alot of game ive played where Germany took angloegypt, UK took it right back on UK1.
    So i dont see the value of attacking anglo and losing all those units just to get a couple of IPCs.



  • @Uncrustable:

    @Hobbes:

    @Uncrustable:

    Also i dont usually attack anglo-egypt G1 unless i lose the fighter in norway.

    To me, Germany should attack Egypt G1, specially if if the fighter in Norway was destroyed. More on that below.

    If i lose that fighter then i bring the bomber and take anglo, if not i attack SZ2(UK battleship and transport and russian sub) with sub. fighter. bomber.
    Sz13(UK cruiser) with battleship and fighter
    SZ15(UK destroyer) with 2 fighters
    and i use the transport to move tank and inf from Libya to W europe

    On UK1 your German Med fleet will be sunk (2 ftrs from UK landing on Gibraltar + bomber) and Germany is out of Africa.
    With Germany I usually attack the SZ13 with 2-3 fighters, SZ2 with sub, ftr and bomber, SZ15 with the battleship, and Anglo Egypt with 2 inf, 1 art, 1 arm and 1 ftr. You have 80-90% odds on all those attacks, You’ll get unlucky from time to time though.
    Sometimes I chose not to attack Egypt, if for instance Germany is counterattacking on West Russia on G1 and the Luftwaffe is sent there. But in that case I’d rather land 1 inf on Gibraltar to prevent those fighters from sinking the fleet.

    I almost always lose my med fleet by G2 no matter where it is.

    If the Soviets bought 1 ftr or 1 sub on R1 then it usually opens an opportunity for Germany to a stack on Karelia/Ukraine on G2 or G3 - but for that you have to go for a 5 inf, 5 arm buy on G1.
    Otherwise, if you have 2-3 units left in Egypt then the UK can either try to sink the Med fleet or retake Egypt but not both. Battleship has a chance of 20% surviving, transport 40%.

    Yes i give up africa, but its hard to keep anyhow and worth very little.

    Completely agree - a lot of players give too much importance to Africa - the trick is to get the other side to spend more on Africa than you do.

    Id rather save a tank and an INF then fight for africa.
    Alot of game ive played where Germany took angloegypt, UK took it right back on UK1.
    So i dont see the value of attacking anglo and losing all those units just to get a couple of IPCs.

    Usually Germany can do a 2nd landing on Africa, which is key because it destroys nearly all UK units on the area and the remaining German units can only be destroyed with additional UK/US landings.
    The trick is to get the UK/US to commit as many units as possible to retaking Africa  since afterwards they’ll be unable to move past Persia, if Japan sets an IC on India. For instance, G2 retakes Egypt with 2 German units left, then Japan lands 3 fighters on Egypt - now the Allies will have to send more units to Africa, otherwise they risk losing it completely.
    From the other side, when I play as Allies I usually consider a welcome bonus if Germany decides not to take Egypt - the UK can switch and hit Indochina and clear /prepare defenses against a G2 attack on Egypt.
    Even if the Allies will sink the Med fleet on UK1, you should still destroy those UK units on Egypt and still retake it on G2 with the inf + art that start on Algeria.
    That is, unless I am playing with Germany and using a Case Blue strategy, instead of Fortress Europe, which in that case I assume that the Med fleet will be sunk on UK1 🙂



  • Just another thing I remembered… it is nice to save the inf and armor on Libya but if you just join those units with the ones in Algeria and land 2 ftrs on non-combat then they should survive any UK1 attack. Sometimes it’s a nice move because keeps those units alive to harass the Allies on Africa without any additional Axis investment into Africa.



  • So how about Germany’s build ?

    1 air + 1 art + 1 arm + mass INF

    Or should Germany make more artillery and/or armor ?

    Also when is enough air anough ? I usually stop at 6 fighters and 3 bombers, that may already be too high, but paired with a sub or 2 that can clobber a good size fleet in the atlantic.

    What about trading W Europe with allies ? Is is best to stack INF on W Europe, weakening Germany’s Eastern force, or make him lose artillery and armor by trading, and thus putting more pressure on Russia at the same time ?



  • @Uncrustable:

    So how about Germany’s build ?

    1 air + 1 art + 1 arm + mass INF

    Or should Germany make more artillery and/or armor ?

    Also when is enough air anough ? I usually stop at 6 fighters and 3 bombers, that may already be too high, but paired with a sub or 2 that can clobber a good size fleet in the atlantic.

    What about trading W Europe with allies ? Is is best to stack INF on W Europe, weakening Germany’s Eastern force, or make him lose artillery and armor by trading, and thus putting more pressure on Russia at the same time ?

    It really depends on what you’re looking for with Germany. I’m a big fan of infantry buys during the initial rounds because you’ll need them, either for offense against the Soviets or defense against the Allies. Regarding air, I haven’t bought any for the Germans lately because in a Fortress Europe the main threat should be from the Japanese airforce.
    If I’m hitting West Russia on G1 or decide to push a stack to Ukraine or Karelia, then 5 inf, 5 arm. But it really depends on what the Russians are up to. If I’m pushing the Soviets, then let the Allies land on W. Europe once or twice but be ready to retake it and hold it - which may be harder to achieve than said.



  • Re: the OP - that isn’t a strategy.

    Re: Africa - I am astonished you would abandon Africa early and build German air.

    Re:  Answering back:

    I almost always lose my med fleet by G2 no matter where it is.
    Yes i give up africa, but its hard to keep anyhow and worth very little. Id rather save a tank and an INF then fight for africa.
    Alot of game ive played where Germany took angloegypt, UK took it right back on UK1.
    So i dont see the value of attacking anglo and losing all those units just to get a couple of IPCs.

    If you’re not going to consider advice, you shouldn’t ask for it.  I can sum up your quote like this “Your advice is sucky, so no thanks.”  Nobody’s going to take the time to write a serious reply if that’s how you’re going to treat them.  Except maaaybe Hobbes because Hobbes is very polite.

    @Uncrustable:

    So how about Germany’s build ?

    1 air + 1 art + 1 arm + mass INF

    Or should Germany make more artillery and/or armor ?

    Also when is enough air anough ? I usually stop at 6 fighters and 3 bombers, that may already be too high, but paired with a sub or 2 that can clobber a good size fleet in the atlantic.

    What about trading W Europe with allies ? Is is best to stack INF on W Europe, weakening Germany’s Eastern force, or make him lose artillery and armor by trading, and thus putting more pressure on Russia at the same time ?

    Let’s play a game.

    I have a mug with a capacity of exactly one liter.  You cannot see or hear or smell or touch or taste anything in, around, or near the mug.  Now, I’m going to pour some beer into the mug.  I’m not telling you how much beer that is; in fact, I am doing my best to keep the amount secret.

    Now I want you to tell me EXACTLY HOW MUCH BEER I need to top off the mug, expressed in an EXACT NUMBER OF MILLILITERS.

    Are you understanding this game we are playing?

    Oh, and if you ask any questions about the mug or the beer, I can call you stupid for even asking those questions.

    This is a good game . . . I wonder if they will let me use it at Guantanamo.



  • Bunnies P Wrath:
    Dude stop trolling, you are no help and never will be, go away you pathetic piece of garbage. Thankyou.

    Hobbes:
    I will try the no air build for Germany i kinda like it, only noobs will lose a fleet to leftwaffe anyhow, ive never built 5inf 5arm either i will try that the next game the allies go KJF.
    Is it best to stage jap air in w germany (requiring a german stack) for long reach ? or in germany where it cant reach as far but can be protected by what germany buys at the IC ?



  • @Uncrustable:

    Hobbes:
    I will try the no air build for Germany i kinda like it, only noobs will lose a fleet to leftwaffe anyhow, ive never built 5inf 5arm either i will try that the next game the allies go KJF.

    If you bring the Japanese airforce to Western Europe than any Allied player will have a hard time coordinating the fleets and sometimes it will have to sacrifice some ships.
    With a KJF you need 5 inf, 5 arm on G1 to put pressure on the Soviets as quickly as possible, IMO.

    Is it best to stage jap air in w germany (requiring a german stack) for long reach ? or in germany where it cant reach as far but can be protected by what germany buys at the IC ?

    W. Europe is usually the best place because of range, as you mentioned, but also to deny its income to the Allies, specially the UK and save you the hassle of having to retake it every round. The problem is that you’ll need 12-18 infantry plus fighters to defend it from a combined UK/US assault. This requires a substantial investment but once you get those numbers you can don’t have to worry much more and those inf can be pulled back to Germany if necessary to defend it.


  • '12

    Uncrustable, Bunnies may have a unique way of answering that you don’t like, but he is answering you.  He is also more polite than most of the professors I deal with would be if a student was asking questions of them without doing any research before hand.  In this case, he is the professor and you are the student so don’t think you are on the same level yet.  Earn some respect then you will receive it.  When I was a newbie on this site with <100 posts I didn’t much like the way he answered me either, but then again I am overly sensitive, moreover, rereading how I formulated my early posts causes me to somewhat shudder.  Accusing somebody of being a troll then resorting to name calling is rather ironic and extremely rare in this forum.  If you have never built 5 Inf + 5 tanks on G1 then you should include yourself in the category of ‘noobs’.  You should also do more research before positing questions.  Have you read Hobbes fortress Europe strategy article?  Have you reviewed any of the games played on here to see how other players play?



  • @MrMalachiCrunch:

    Uncrustable, Bunnies may have a unique way of answering that you don’t like, but he is answering you.  He is also more polite than most of the professors I deal with would be if a student was asking questions of them without doing any research before hand.  In this case, he is the professor and you are the student so don’t think you are on the same level yet.  Earn some respect then you will receive it.  When I was a newbie on this site with <100 posts I didn’t much like the way he answered me either, but then again I am overly sensitive, moreover, rereading how I formulated my early posts causes me to somewhat shudder.  Accusing somebody of being a troll then resorting to name calling is rather ironic and extremely rare in this forum.  If you have never built 5 Inf + 5 tanks on G1 then you should include yourself in the category of ‘noobs’.  You should also do more research before positing questions.   Have you read Hobbes fortress Europe strategy article?  Have you reviewed any of the games played on here to see how other players play?

    This is not college, im not paying anybody to teach me. It is a simple game forum. People answering and talking like bunnies does nothing but run off new players and discourage them. We are all here because we like the game of axis and allies. There is no place on this forum for stuck up Aholes like bunny. I am a bit noobish i will admit to that. But that is why i post on here what i have been doing hoping to get some friendly advice from fellow A&A players.
    To treat a game forum like a lecture room is absurd.

    Hobbes: Thankyou for your friendly advice. I cant wait to play my next game.

    My only question remaining for now is this: Majority of games i play allies are KGF. And i dont think a 5INF 5ARM build works in this case (Could be wrong). So why would Germany build 5INF and 5ARM on G1 ? The allied player may have been thinking KJF but after Germany does that wouldnt the allied player decide instead to KGF ? Should Germany wait til round 2 to build arm heavy, and only if allies are not all out KGF ?

    thanks 😉


  • '12

    This is not college, im not paying anybody to teach me.

    The fact people give detailed answers without being paid is amazing I think.  That being said, you should still do a fair bit of research yourself before becoming too active on the forums.  It shows you have respect for the time people spend to answer your questions.

    My experience with a G1 5 and 5 build is that it allows Germany to apply pressure right away and gets bodies to the front line right away for defense as well.  You will need lots of infantry later, but the immediate results you can get with 5 tanks pays off…   Same goes for Russia, an 8 infantry build on R1 is a mistake in my opinion.  2-5 tanks on G1 90% of the time is my feeling, you can find situations where more than 5 tanks should be build but I can’t see any situation where you build < 2 tanks on G1.



  • @Uncrustable:

    I almost always lose my med fleet by G2 no matter where it is.
    Yes i give up africa, but its hard to keep anyhow and worth very little. Id rather save a tank and an INF then fight for africa.
    Alot of game ive played where Germany took angloegypt, UK took it right back on UK1.
    So i dont see the value of attacking anglo and losing all those units just to get a couple of IPCs.

    Egypt is a must attack battle IMO.
    Exceptions could be if you are buying additional German fleet in the med, trying to merge with atlantic fleet, or going for the kill instantly (if R1 went bad for allies).

    Yes UK usually will take it right back and leave both Africa and the middle east with very few defending forces, so that Japan easily takes it all unless Allies invests heavily in Africa.

    Letting the UK fighter survive leaves many possibilities for the UK to either really harrass Japan or just reinforce the atlantic fleet, so that it balances the threat from your air buy.

    I think the buy is OK, additional air units can pay off by postponing allied landing while exchanging territories with USSR cost effectively, but this also depends on how well USSR did R1. Too few armor for Germany can be a problem it allows USSR to move forward stacking Ukraine or Karelia.

    My opening German moves are exactly as Hobbes stated earlier, but what to buy G2 depends on how the war is progressing - not only if it is KGF/KJF but especially the outcome of battles (and buys) of USSR.



  • I don’t mind new players.  Nobody dropped out of their momma knowing how to play Axis and Allies.  As far as slinging insults,well, be a bit silly for me to get angry over something like that, considering the brash way I often put my point across.

    Willful ignorance, though, is a bit different.  You come in saying you have a strategy, but you don’t.  You ask for advice, then spit on it.  I’m not making stuff up here.  This is the history in the thread.

    I save politeness for when I think it’s useful.  Someone new comes in, and asks questions, sure, I might be brash, but I try to be moderately polite.  Someone comes in, doesn’t seem to have much idea of what’s going on, and starts rejecting good advice - well, that’s when I feel some shock value is appropriate.  Shake things up, mess with the status quo, and get some different results fast.  How else are you going to get any kind of results when the “student” thinks he/she already knows everything?  That’s a real question.

    You don’t seem to be paying much real attention to what others have written, except for what I’ve written, because it’s gotten your dander up.  Since you actually seem to be paying some sort of attention to me, I might get some sort of point across.

    That said -

    For those seeking to emulate Bunnies in real life, I do not advocate, in real life, being outspoken or brash or even faintly rude.  On the internet under an anonymous alias, you can screw around (remembering that if you really piss someone off they can ID you eventually).

    But in real life, even if you get the immediate result you want from the situation, people - not just the people you insult either - will remember you unfavorably.  They will remember that you “made a fuss”, when what most people want to do, really, is sweep problems under the rug and pretend they don’t exist.

    If you perchance think you are different, imagine that you and the people in your neighborhood all work the night shift.  After working all Monday night, you get home, take the kids to school, and settle in for some sleep.  But there’s a team of construction workers working on the road outside your house, and the pneumatic drills won’t let you sleep.  Now, you might think of it that they’re fixing a problem that the community has, so everyone should thank them.  You should thank them too.  But those j***** monkey*ing seating dogs need to die, for obvious reasons.  (Anyone that doesn’t understand this has never had street construction going on right outside their house just when they’re wanting to settle in for a good kip.)

    So really, in real life, even if you think there’s a really horrible obvious and nasty problem, just ignore it like all the other people that are ignoring it.  If a kitten or a puppy or even a small child falls into the sewers through a crack in the road and dies of starvation three days later, then you can wring you hands and scream and have protest meetings all you like, while everyone conveniently ignores the fact that everyone knew about the problem and the risks and that reasonable steps could have been taken to prevent the whole mess.

    Human history is full of examples in which a kingdom was lost for want of a horseshoe nail.  Or more accurately because some bean counters petitioned the king that having spare horseshoe nails on hand would be an unfair burden to the taxpayers of the kingdom, and despite the well reasoned arguments of the horse-riders society, pushed their argument through on the budget.  That’s the way it works in real life, so better get used to it!

    You could make a compelling argument about modern socioeconomic problems being caused by bean counters with swelled heads that have argued in such manner as “I know how to count beans, therefore I am an expert on beans, since horses can eat beans, I am therefore also an expert on horses, since I am an expert on horses, I am in a position in which I can reject, and even make fun of, any argument supporting extra horseshoe nails, since it goes to reason that any idiot that wants extra horseshoe nails is a lunatic and dangerous to society, those idiots should be removed from positions from which they could influence society, and to fill their positions, I conveniently have more right-thinking bean counters that happen to be my friends.”

    But, well, I digress.  Key point - in real life, be polite, for heavens’ sake!

    THAT said -

    On the topic of inf/tanks - I feel the general issue has been properly addressed, but I take issue on Hobbes’ quote

    With a KJF you need 5 inf, 5 arm on G1 to put pressure on the Soviets as quickly as possible, IMO.

    So it is the purchase phase of G1 (Germany’s first turn), yes?  How do we know the Allies are going KJF (Kill Japan First)?

    As I’ve written in other threads, I say the defining characteristic of KJF is a US1 Pacific fleet drop.  I also say that there is almost no way for the Germans to know on the G1 purchase phase that a KJF is in the offing, barring major Russian movement east.

    Suppose the Russians DID move east, and/or did stuff like sub buy, Buryatia 6-stack combined with movement towards China, or Russian fighter to India, or any of a bunch of other moves.  Is there anything to prevent them from moving west later, and the Allies going KGF?  No, there is not.  In those cases, a possible KJF is in the offing, but really, a 5+ G1 tank purchase has nothing to do with a projected KJF, and everything to do with the fact that Russia has moved its reserves to positions in which they will be unable to help in Europe for some time.   Or, at least, that Germany has a high odds situation of being able to successfully apply early pressure in Europe.

    G1 purchase of 5 inf 5 tanks shouldn’t be thought of as a KJF response or whatever.  It is simply something you do in certain circumstances in which Germany can press early in Europe.

    So why would Germany build 5INF and 5ARM on G1 ? . . . Should Germany wait til round 2 to build arm heavy, and only if allies are not all out KGF ?

    You are advised, but you fight against the advice.  That’s how it is.  Instead of doing what is suggested, you start asking if you should do something else instead.  Just look through the thread.  It’s like if you’re in a baking class, and the teacher says preheat the oven for thirty minutes at 375 degrees Fahrenheit, then you start saying things about Celsius and how ovens should only need to be preheated for ten minutes.

    Look, the ovens are marked for Fahrenheit, and they’re older models so they need longer preheating times.  That’s how it is.  Stop fighting.

    As Hobbes and MrMalachiCrunch alluded, in some conditions 5+ tanks G1 purchase allow heavy G2 pressure against Russia.  You lock in more income for Germany, deny more income to Russia.  KGF or KJF doesn’t matter, the theory is the same.

    A G2 tank build only allows G3 pressure, which is not at all the same thing.  Asking whether you should go G2 tanks (and asking about the KGF situation) shows you do not understand the key concept behind a 5+ G1 tank build.

    But before you get pissed off, I’m not saying you don’t understand to piss you off.  What I am saying is if you don’t understand the key concepts, you won’t do what is proper and necessary to a 5+ G1 tank purchase, like a certain something you should do with Japan if at all possible.  Which I am not going to describe at this time, because it will be more fun to see what others will say that move should be, besides which you will also have fun calling me something nasty.

    Hobbes gives friendly advice.  I give fiendly advice.   :evil:

    Oh, and another thing - for those that have REALLY been paying close attention, the extra credit question is what are supporting preconditions supporting a G1 5+ tank purchase?  Keeping in mind there is a huge laundry list of possibilities for R1, of course, so a proper answer would be horrifically long.  For those that want the extra credit, I expect your five page paper, or a pound of carrot cupcakes, on Monday morning.   :roll:



  • I never ‘spit’ on anyones advice. I merely said that i dont see the reasoning behind it, and hobbes proceeded to give that reasoning

    @Hobbes:

    Completely agree - a lot of players give too much importance to Africa - the trick is to get the other side to spend more on Africa than you do.

    Usually Germany can do a 2nd landing on Africa, which is key because it destroys nearly all UK units on the area and the remaining German units can only be destroyed with additional UK/US landings.
    The trick is to get the UK/US to commit as many units as possible to retaking Africa  since afterwards they’ll be unable to move past Persia, if Japan sets an IC on India. For instance, G2 retakes Egypt with 2 German units left, then Japan lands 3 fighters on Egypt - now the Allies will have to send more units to Africa, otherwise they risk losing it completely.
    From the other side, when I play as Allies I usually consider a welcome bonus if Germany decides not to take Egypt - the UK can switch and hit Indochina and clear /prepare defenses against a G2 attack on Egypt.
    Even if the Allies will sink the Med fleet on UK1, you should still destroy those UK units on Egypt and still retake it on G2 with the inf + art that start on Algeria.
    That is, unless I am playing with Germany and using a Case Blue strategy, instead of Fortress Europe, which in that case I assume that the Med fleet will be sunk on UK1 🙂

    Moving on, my Japan round 1 build is usually 3 transports and one destroyer if UK used a boat to kill the lone jap transport, and if UK used a fighter to kill that transport i might go 3 transports/armor/artillery. I use 2 fighters and a bomber to attack US in 52 (hoping to atleast trade a fighter for the carrier) i send 4 fighters and atleast 6 inf to china (depending on what UK left in india, and also depending on where the UK carrier and cruiser is). If i move the battleship and carrier from east indes to FIC then i also move my transport there with 2 INF from philipines or 1 inf from there and the armor from japan.
    I move the cruiser to FIC also unless i need extra defense for my transports on japan, and the other carrier i move to japan where the fighter that attacked 52 will land, the battleship from japan stays on japan unless UK used a carrier or cruiser to kill the jap TT in 59. Land the 4 fighters from china in FIC along with the 2 troops the transport brought. The sub will move to japan unless it has a chance to kill the UK transport and/or sub from australia.

    This is my general strategy for J1.
    The one thing i generally dont know when to do is build ICs in India and/or FIC .?
    And what is the best way to move air from japan to germany? Carriers in the indian ocean ? Or FIC -> Egypt -> Europe. Most of my games Germany is not yet prepared to hold Ukraine on G3 so japan cant land its fighters there.



  • @Uncrustable:

    The one thing i generally dont know when to do is build ICs in India and/or FIC .?
    And what is the best way to move air from japan to germany? Carriers in the indian ocean ? Or FIC -> Egypt -> Europe. Most of my games Germany is not yet prepared to hold Ukraine on G3 so japan cant land its fighters there.

    IC on FIC is less efficient than getting 4 transports for J to maximize usage of Japan’s starting IC and using 2 of those transports to bring units from Japan to FIC. 2 transports cost 14 IPC, carry 4 units, 1 IC costs 15 builds only 3.
    India on the other hand should have a Japanese IC as quickly as possible, but without risking it to fall to an early Allied (Soviet) attack from Caucasus.
    Air, depends on the situation. If you keep a carrier on SZ60 and another off Egypt you can move newly build fighters to Europe in 2 rounds. Bombers can be sent through Egypt or India (and if you build an IC on India then any J bombers built there can hit SZ5 on the next round), fighters India can reach Balkans or E. Europe  - really depends on the situation.



  • @Hobbes:

    @Uncrustable:

    The one thing i generally dont know when to do is build ICs in India and/or FIC .?
    And what is the best way to move air from japan to germany? Carriers in the indian ocean ? Or FIC -> Egypt -> Europe. Most of my games Germany is not yet prepared to hold Ukraine on G3 so japan cant land its fighters there.

    IC on FIC is less efficient than getting 4 transports for J to maximize usage of Japan’s starting IC and using 2 of those transports to bring units from Japan to FIC. 2 transports cost 14 IPC, carry 4 units, 1 IC costs 15 builds only 3.
    India on the other hand should have a Japanese IC as quickly as possible, but without risking it to fall to an early Allied (Soviet) attack from Caucasus.
    Air, depends on the situation. If you keep a carrier on SZ60 and another off Egypt you can move newly build fighters to Europe in 2 rounds. Bombers can be sent through Egypt or India (and if you build an IC on India then any J bombers built there can hit SZ5 on the next round), fighters India can reach Balkans or E. Europe  - really depends on the situation.

    Yeah i agree. Thanks for all your help Hobbes 😉



  • @Uncrustable:

    @Hobbes:

    @Uncrustable:

    The one thing i generally dont know when to do is build ICs in India and/or FIC .?
    And what is the best way to move air from japan to germany? Carriers in the indian ocean ? Or FIC -> Egypt -> Europe. Most of my games Germany is not yet prepared to hold Ukraine on G3 so japan cant land its fighters there.

    IC on FIC is less efficient than getting 4 transports for J to maximize usage of Japan’s starting IC and using 2 of those transports to bring units from Japan to FIC. 2 transports cost 14 IPC, carry 4 units, 1 IC costs 15 builds only 3.
    India on the other hand should have a Japanese IC as quickly as possible, but without risking it to fall to an early Allied (Soviet) attack from Caucasus.
    Air, depends on the situation. If you keep a carrier on SZ60 and another off Egypt you can move newly build fighters to Europe in 2 rounds. Bombers can be sent through Egypt or India (and if you build an IC on India then any J bombers built there can hit SZ5 on the next round), fighters India can reach Balkans or E. Europe  - really depends on the situation.

    Yeah i agree. Thanks for all your help Hobbes 😉

    Something else I remembered. Sometimes an IC on FIC is a good option if the Allies go KJF.
    If the UK has built 1 IC on India on UK1 then Japan needs to focus everything on conquering it and it is a quicker way to place units on FIC than shipping them from Japan. However, there’s a risk that the Allies may conquer FIC instead and then its former IC will be used against Japan.
    If the US go with a Pacific strat an IC on FIC may also be a good option since it allows to add additional ships/ground units for Japan away from the main battle.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 7
  • 4
  • 11
  • 5
  • 9
  • 6
  • 2
  • 30
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

84
Online

14.5k
Users

34.9k
Topics

1.4m
Posts