The German navy builds is best in the Med because the RAF can kill it easier in the Baltic than in the Med where their fighters are mostly out of range. One thing that annoys me is that if I build a carrier and expecting the fighter to destroy the DD in sz17 and land on the carrier but both the DD and fighter are destroyed. Then the RAF will try to take it out with what they got. When I could get the same defense value of the carrier from a DD for 6 ipcs cheaper.
Good idea Veal on buying one thing at a time. 
Hey Black_Elk when you said about bringing troops from NWE, and Norway, what I do is bring my tanks from NWE and France and replace with fighters to keep the allies away and some inf to get some hit points. Do you usually empty Norway? Is there any worth defending it?
Yeah, I usually play allies on this board because I enjoy the logistical challenge, and I will say that the Mediterranean carrier really screws my whole game up. I spend my bid on infantry in Egypt and Trans-Jordan, then I like to stack West Russia, and put a Red fighter on each side of the canal, and leave like 4 infantry in Caucasus as a trap where both of my fighters can swing back for a counter-attack that leaves me consolidated. All of this is so I can get my Indian fleet into the Mediterranean, and be a major pain for Germany, taking back Africa pronto and forcing stackage or trading in the āsoft underbellyāāor better yet he attacks the fleet and my fighters on defense work the Luftwaffe and let me drop fleet off the UK earlier.
The carrier in the Mediterranean totally ruins all of that, but it doesnāt usually bother me because I know that Iām looking at that much less pressure on Russia, I like to think of it as a toss-up because Iāve still forced that much investment in there while stymieing any territorial progress it might lead to.
I feel like carriers are for protecting transports, and the single transport in the Mediterranean just never seems worth it, and a second one plus the carrier is just too much money. I feel like with the guys you drop in Africa the first round, keeping it for the second is worth it, but itās just not the way I like to play Germany. If I see someone trying to pull the same crap I do around the Suez, Iām just gonna build a pair of subsāif I react at all. Iāve beat better men than myself simply heaping the pressure on Russia like I described above.
Now in revisedā¦ man I loved that golden handshake. I used to play Axis more on that board, Iām starting to think spending a bid in the Middle East is just too game changing, it totally determines who I like to play, hah!
Veal how are you going to protect you transports from the RAF without a carrier with fighters since a DD is not enough itās just unit to take the hit for the BB saying āKill me not the battle ship.ā a cruiser could work but itās a destroyer with better defense value. If someone has a better idea then a carrier with fighters please share.
I just do the most annoying move I can with my navy and expect it to die I suppose, in my mind anything spent naval or Africa is usually a waste, thereās just too many ways for the allies to counter. I donāt wanna let the damn Italians suck me for any more resources than are already sunk.
Taking Gibraltar and pulling the BB out into the open ocean as a surface raider is usually a decent headache for the Allies. If the British go for it than they canāt send fighter support to West Russia, I might even be able to force the Russian stack back, and I get my Baltic transport for another turn without dropping a dime in the water. Plus a BB can really do some dicing.
Sure, the allies could get creative in the Mediterranean in theory, but their money is gonna have to go to Russia if Iām really pushing that hard, yāknow? Plus, if I go all bombers or get some subs I can still crush their fleets even if mine is toast, and still wheel hard on Russia.
But all of this depends on how the Russians open her up, sometimes thereās some major naval opportunityāI just havenāt seen it in a while facing my usual nemesis.
I really prefer the Russian bomber bid for Allies over the Med bid for UK, for a whole host of reasons on balance, but I can definitely feel you, with that sense that the game is rather narrow in that area around the canal.
A lot of the time whether I can put up any decent hits in the W. Russia defense initially will determine how I open. If I do well and peel off some Ruskies, then sometimes I will go for the early artillery punch, and just count on the extra hitpoints Iām amassing to crack Russia without a need to do much else. But if things get dicey, I often go with the 1 bomber per round type model, spending the rest on ground consistently. Here G just amasses a huge airforce to pummel the Russians relentlessly from the sky. Iāve become really partial to having that second bomber and the flexibility it provides on G2, and then once you have 2 bombers, itās pretty much like crack rocks, and you get addicted to bomber builds hehe.
If itās like a 6 round set up on Moscow regardless, then 9 ground + a bomber at Berlin every round, for six rounds, nets you 6 bombers with 60 total hitpoints added to the arsenal. The Russians will have a devil of a time dealing with you after the 6th round, and it really doesnāt matter much what else youāve been doing in the meantime. Sign of the beast style, with your Iron bomber wing, criss crossing the sky, raining down the hellfire all over the place!
:evil:
You know the sort of game where it basically becomes pointless for Russia to continue trading territory with you, since their infantry units just get completely reamed in the first round of combat so easily by the bombers. And then, even if Japan is not quite ready and you need to buy time, you can always just take a crack at em with a ruthless SBR run, Ā one good pass and Moscow is pretty much broken. The advantage in having the air already in place after you take Moscow is that they can quickly be returned to the west, unlike the massive artillery wall, and then you just spam ground to lock down Eurasia. Iāve found myself doing things like that more than a few times in 1942.2.
For Veal, I do see your points but wouldnāt the transports you build will be immediately destroyed by RAF because usually a fighter in the region then once the transport is built the fighter destroys it and wasnāt able to land troops in africa.
For Black_Elk, bombers are great but when you purchase them thatās barley any tanks to purchase. Also I didnāt fully understand your bomber plan I get the 6 rounds purchase but what do you do after that?
Well if you purchase enough aircraft, tanks arenāt really necessary, since your mobility will be in the Air, you can get the job done with just the infantry/artillery combo.
What do you do? The short answer is, after 6 rounds, you try to level Moscow! Ā The whole objective under such a scheme is to wheel your ground forces towards the east and then position yourself for a solid hit on Moscow. Unlike tanks, bombers can conveniently reach all the way from Germany, Italy, Northwestern, or France etc and still hit Moscow in one move, provided they have a landing spot. So often, what players will do, is to exploit the mobility advantage by transitioning their aircraft between West and East as needed, until the final battle for Moscow arrives.
The point I was trying to make on the previous page is that, unlike a massive ground wall purchase, the bombers can take the Russian capital and then rapidly fly back to the West the following round, allowing you to use the Russian purse for a ground spam in the endgame, instead of the other way around, where you use the captured Russian purse to rapidly purchase aircraft for the endgame. Without a proper Air armada during the deep endgame (post Moscow collapse) it can be very hard to hold the Western Allies in check, as their fleets can then bounce around with impunity, and their amphibious invasions can really start to put a dent in your defenses. By concentrating on Air power earlier and consistently over time, you force their fleets to consolidate, and its much easier for Germany to eject them from the continent if they do start to make landings.
I would not say that this kind of mass Air strategy is 100% by any means (I donāt think such a thing exists in 1942.2, as the German game is just too idiosyncratic for one full proof strategy.) Its more a matter of taste, and playstyle preference, which is why I am always reluctant to tell someone just do āX Y and Z and thatās that.ā Ā Instead I like to lay out the options and offer potential alternatives, because alternatives can be useful to have in the arsenal. The 1 bomber per round idea was suggested mainly as a counterpoint to the mass infantry/artillery āhurry upā from round 1 model.
In the āHurry upā game, you buy your Bombers on the back end. First its the infantry push mechanic exclusively, and you only expand the Luftwaffe once you have enough ground in place for the final drive on Moscow. In that sort of game the bombers come after everything else, and they catch up at the last minute to deliver the extra hitpoints and attack power you need to crack the Russian capital. The challenge with that model, is that it is often a lot harder to trade territories and TUV with the Russians profitably during the interim.
The āDark Skiesā approach by contrast, is where you build the Bombers first, as part of a mass purchase at the outset, to gain overwhelming air superiority and an insurmountable coastal defense advantage (ie. making it basically impossible for the Western Allies to build a fleet that can challenge you in Europe.) In Dark Skies the whole idea is to place your bombers early, so you can always trade territories and TUV at advantage, right from the outset. Versions of this playstyle have been around ever since AA50 came out, when the cost of the bomber unit was first reduced from 15 to 12 ipcs and transports were first made defenseless. Things which greatly increased the combat effectiveness and overall purchase value of the bomber unit.
The ā1 Bomber Perā approach, is somewhere in between these. It will never deliver the kind of early advantage that a mass bomber purchase on G1/G2 might, but you also donāt have to wait to start wheeling east with your ground forces.
This is a style of German gameplay that can be hard to explain in the abstract, and you almost have to see it in operation to appreciate how much it screws with the Allies haha. The observant A&A player would likely say āHey wait a minute! I remember what you said back on page 1 of your General 1942.2 strategy thread, about how 4 infantry are always better on attack than a single bomber, and how hitpoints are the most important thing you can buy with IPCs!ā¦ So why would I buy 6 bombers/60 hitpoints over the course of 6 rounds, when I could have like a 100 hitpoints and equivalent attack power if I just buy all infantry?ā
The answer has everything to do with mobility. If you buy all ground all day, it becomes harder and harder to wage a two front war with G (East and West at the same time), because you cannot transition your attack/defense power around quickly enough to be effective in both regions. It becomes easier for your enemy to read what youāre doing and plan counters in advance, and harder for you to get all crazy and surprise them with a sudden and dramatic re-positioning of your forces. The bombers allow you to pull tricks out of your hat, even on defense, where extra hitpoints added to a large stack can be all the difference you need. Itās just something to bear in mind. I gave a fairly ringing endorsement of Vealās first idea to just punch it home with Artillery walls in the first few rounds, until all your forces can converge on Moscow at the same time (e.g. buy bombers last). I play it that way too, and quite often, but there are other approaches that can work as well, and strategies that call for buying bombers earlier and consistently can be highly effective as well. Knowing this can come in handy, especially if you wind up playing the same opponent often, since you donāt want your approach to be too predictable or you gameplay to get too stale.
There is probably a counter to every great German opening in A&A, provided the opponent knows how to read you like a book and predict what youāre going to do in advance, so itās always nice to keep some hidden aces up your sleeve, and mix things up from time to time. Germany has a lot more flexibility to play this way than the Allies do
Hello,
Iām new to this forum, lots of great stuff in here. Ā I used to play a ton of Classic back in the day and from absorbing Don Raeās essays, able to win pretty consistently with either Axis or Allies. Ā Recently an old college buddy of mine bought Spring 1942 2nd edition so weāre both trying to learn this different board. Ā Iāve been reading a lot of these posts and strategies as well as downloading and reviewing some of the forum AAA games. Ā At this point I routinely crush the Hard AI when I play as the Allies with or without a bid, (I normally go with a KGF strategy where I transit UK/US fighters into WRussia, hold the line at India, lock down Africa, and SBR Germany while I wait for the fleets to converge off the coast of France). Ā Iāve just tried playing a new game where I play against myself to see how to overcome that KGF Allied strategy with Germany and Iām having trouble.
I like Elkās idea of going North to go South and working to stack Karelia as quickly as possible and then work south from there. Ā I also like the idea of maximizing Germanyās output of at least 10 units a turn out of Germany. Ā So assuming that Germany is buying an optimal infantry/artillery split the first two rounds, stacking tanks in Baltic states G1, and then gradually purchasing a fighter/bomber/tank mixed in w/ inf/art in around round 4 or 5, hereās my question:
If Germany is able to stack Karelia on G2/G3, while light trading Ukraine and Belo, WHAT THEN? Ā Specifically if the Allies are playing a strong KGF itās right around round 4ish that they are able to land in France with around 6 units from UK, 6 more from US with the US pulling out its fighters from WRussia to reinforce France. Ā At this point the German tank stack is sitting in Karelia so they canāt hit France and the units bought in Germany the last round arenāt enough to dislodge that stack. Ā The German air can hit France, but itās usually either not enough to kill the Allies in France without tank support. Ā It creates a tough decision for the Germans, do they withdraw their tanks back to Germany to then clear out France the next turn which would probably force the allies to retreat up to Norway at the expense of being able to threaten Russia with their tanks? Ā The other option I see is to keep the panzers in Karelia and either try to take W Russia that or next turn, (since itās weakened by not having US Air support), try to move everything into Archangel to force the Russian stack out of W Russia, or some other move Iām not thinking of? Ā I guess Germany can build up the coast of France before round 4 to make it hard for the allies to land there, but that is at the expense of quickly stacking Karelia and using its fighters for Karelia defense.
In that scenario is best for the Germans to back out the tanks to Germany to threaten France, keep their air up in Karelia to defend against a Russian WRussia counter, while hoping that Japan can either take India by this point or try to pressure Russia by stacking Kazakhstan by going through China and just ignoring India?
Sorry if this sounds like a convoluted question, I can post the save file of the game that iām playing against myself to better show what Iām talking about.
Hello,
Iām new to this forum, lots of great stuff in here. Ā I used to play a ton of Classic back in the day and from absorbing Don Raeās essays, able to win pretty consistently with either Axis or Allies. Ā Recently an old college buddy of mine bought Spring 1942 2nd edition so weāre both trying to learn this different board. Ā Iāve been reading a lot of these posts and strategies as well as downloading and reviewing some of the forum AAA games. Ā At this point I routinely crush the Hard AI when I play as the Allies with or without a bid, (I normally go with a KGF strategy where I transit UK/US fighters into WRussia, hold the line at India, lock down Africa, and SBR Germany while I wait for the fleets to converge off the coast of France). Ā Iāve just tried playing a new game where I play against myself to see how to overcome that KGF Allied strategy with Germany and Iām having trouble.
I like Elkās idea of going North to go South and working to stack Karelia as quickly as possible and then work south from there. Ā I also like the idea of maximizing Germanyās output of at least 10 units a turn out of Germany. Ā So assuming that Germany is buying an optimal infantry/artillery split the first two rounds, stacking tanks in Baltic states G1, and then gradually purchasing a fighter/bomber/tank mixed in w/ inf/art in around round 4 or 5, hereās my question:
If Germany is able to stack Karelia on G2/G3, while light trading Ukraine and Belo, WHAT THEN? Ā Specifically if the Allies are playing a strong KGF itās right around round 4ish that they are able to land in France with around 6 units from UK, 6 more from US with the US pulling out its fighters from WRussia to reinforce France. Ā At this point the German tank stack is sitting in Karelia so they canāt hit France and the units bought in Germany the last round arenāt enough to dislodge that stack. Ā The German air can hit France, but itās usually either not enough to kill the Allies in France without tank support. Ā It creates a tough decision for the Germans, do they withdraw their tanks back to Germany to then clear out France the next turn which would probably force the allies to retreat up to Norway at the expense of being able to threaten Russia with their tanks? Ā The other option I see is to keep the panzers in Karelia and either try to take W Russia that or next turn, (since itās weakened by not having US Air support), try to move everything into Archangel to force the Russian stack out of W Russia, or some other move Iām not thinking of? Ā I guess Germany can build up the coast of France before round 4 to make it hard for the allies to land there, but that is at the expense of quickly stacking Karelia and using its fighters for Karelia defense.
In that scenario is best for the Germans to back out the tanks to Germany to threaten France, keep their air up in Karelia to defend against a Russian WRussia counter, while hoping that Japan can either take India by this point or try to pressure Russia by stacking Kazakhstan by going through China and just ignoring India?
Sorry if this sounds like a convoluted question, I can post the save file of the game that iām playing against myself to better show what Iām talking about.
If you are doing optimal German buys, then you should have something like 4 inf, 4 art, and 2 tanks in Germany plus maybe an inf and art in Italy. Plus, you should have 4 fighters and 1 bomber in range. You should be able to beat the Allied army most of the time with that.
Iām not by any means an expert, so take my advice with a grain of salt.
you should have something like 4 inf, 4 art, and 2 tanks in Germany plus maybe an inf and art in Italy. Plus, you should have 4 fighters and 1 bomber in range. You should be able to beat the Allied army most of the time with that.
You are basically correct as to what would be in Germany for a counter to attack France, but that isnāt enough to clear around 8-12 ground units (combined US/UK) and another 6 or so US fighters plus at least one US bomber.
When I get home from work, Iāll post a save file of my game, or take a screenshot.
Is there a good reason to leave your tanks in Karelia? If you hit Karelia hard on G2, you can bring them back to Baltic States on G3 (refilling Karelia with extra infantry), so that the tanks can return to France on G4 if thatās profitable, and continue on to West Russia or Archangel otherwise.
If you find yourself in a situation where you cannot hold Karelia on G3 without leaving your tanks sitting in it, I would say pull everything back to Baltic for a turn (lightly trading Karelia) and restack Karelia on G4. In a strong, early KGF opening; itās not realistic to insist on crushing Soviet resistance early ā you can try it, but if youāre not pulling ahead, thereās no shame in hilding the Axis lines at France, Baltic, Finland, Belorussia, and Egypt. Japan will be along to crush India soon enough, and you can pick up German momentum as you go, especially if youāre building lots of early infantry.
One more thought is that if Anglos are dumping 12 units into France on turn 4, they probably have little/no capacity to follow that ip on turn 5. Sink some transports, and take advantage of the lull on turns 5/6 to penetrate deeper into Russia.
Thanks for the response and advice Argo, youāre totally right.Ā I had the mindset of trying to threaten Russia, (the territory), as quickly as possible which isnāt really feasible with an Allied strategy like that.Ā I played a couple more games and focused on holding the line while still defending Western Europe and it worked well as Japan acted as the hammer to Germanyās anvil.Ā Now I just need to read through that how to play a forum game post so I can start playing against humans!
If the allies go full tilt KGF its not really possible for the Germans to keep up pressure on Russia for ever. However the dont have to as Japan will do that instead.
One thing I find helpfull as Germany is to switch from light to medium trading against Russia. Seems to me that Russia have to sacrifice much more IPC each trade as they have much less air.
