G1 Carrier Build

Cv and tt build g1 is for sea lion,  which most players feel is not optimal in most situations.

And an art build g1 is far better than an inf one.

I don’t like buying a ton of ground units on G1 unless I’m doing a G1 Barb. If UK sees an all ground units buy, then they can take the gloves off against Italy. Others have enumerated why a carrier can be an effective G1 build, but I’d be hesitant to buy those transports. Maybe save the money or get something else.

My favorite G1 buys are either saving that money up or spending a partial buy getting 1-2 bombers. The bombers give you a little bit more options G2 and can still be used in a SL.

I’m not a large fan of Heavy German Naval buys although a G1 buy of 8 Inf 1 Sub works well followed by a 10 Tank 1 Destroyer buy on G2.

@Amalec:

On projecting power out to Gibraltar:
I think this is, in effect, a pipe dream. When the US does move to Gibraltar it will do so with a navy that is simply too large for Germany to hit. Even if it doesn’t, the Allies can easily place blockers in SZ110 or SZ104. Even if THAT doesn’t prove true, losing German ships and aircraft against Allied ships and aircraft - even significantly in German’s favour - is hugely costly for Germany and plays into the Allied goal - to siphon resources from the Russian theatre. Worse, you’re almost certainly going to have to retreat behind the straits after US4 or US5 because the US Navy will be large enough to take you out and the Allies would love to get a chance to trade American fighters for German ones.

It has some merit G2 if there is to be no J2 DOW. That way you can bring your fleet into the med where they can actually be useful and gain an NO for occupying Egypt.

Re: inf vs art G1. You do realise that Germany starts with a mass of inf anyway. Very, very unlikely for the USSR to kill any art in the early rounds.

I agree with Simon (and the others) that if you are going to buy ground units for the push to Moscow on G1 you should buy mostly art to pair up with the large amount of inf you already have (not more inf attacking at 1). You need to bump your existing inf to a 2 attack value, then as your inf die off in battle the art pairs with mech.

I agree that you need to buy inf to use as fodder w/air to counter attack any allied landings, but you would do that a later once the allies start to set up.

I would only recommend 1 ac 2 tt as an opening buy if Germany is seriously thinking about Sea Lion.  Now, if UK is smart and reacts defensively, then at least you’ve prevented a UK1 SZ 97 attack as well as UK buying factories or bombers or airbases on UK1.  If Japan doesn’t declare on J1, then Germany will have the option of sailing the fleet down to 112 (hopefully taking Gib, at least temporarily) to link up with the Italian fleet on G3.

Amalec,

I’ve seen Carrier, Destroyer, Submarine - havnt seen Carrier 2 transports thought.

The destroyer makes a hit on the carrier super suicide and gives Germany a potential unit for blocking later.

@Amalec:

Thanks for the responses! I’m still not quite convinced…

On spending the 30IPC on ground forces against Russia:
While I agree that ART/MEC/ARM are better ground forces against Russia - I think INF are a better first turn build. ART can be built on G2, arriving in time for Moscow but kept safe from the small attack/counter attack battles that take place in pushing Russia out of Leningrad and Ukraine. ARM and MEC are best built on G2-5, since they can catch up. I digress though: the important aspect here is spending on land forces against Russia vs spending on naval units.

Any inf/art placed down in Berlin will take an additional 5 turns to get to Moscow. That means any G2+ inf/art buys in Berlin will arrive after the Soviet Far East forces could potentially return home. Unless economic parity is attained and maintained, the axis chances of victory will decrease each round they fail to win. IMO, the axis must be in position to win by Rd 8 or very shortly thereafter. While they are cheap, I don’t really think Germany can afford to be buying slow movers to push into Moscow past G1 unless you’re building them in captured factories.

Germany does start with a bunch of infantry, so I’m not sure more infantry are needed. If nothing else, get arty to boost your existing infantry plus all the planned mech builds that will be rolling off the factories G2+.

You are trying to say that units bought after G1 can’t reach Moscow before the eastern units potentially arrive so therefore not buying art is a missed opportunity?

With all the IPCs Germany gets G1, if the G2 buy has 10 art placed in Berlin they will make a much bigger contribution to an attack than 6 inf from the East. If supplemented by a 9 inf buy it seems to break even on paper wrt first round power.

Art built on G1 can reach Eastern Poland on G3 and Belarus on G4.  The 10 extra attack power of 6 art+2 inf compared with 10 inf might tip the scales to force the Russians to step back away from contact.  If you can get him to turtle down to Moscow, that opens up the Caucasus and Middle East oilfields, a major game changer.  It is rare, but not impossible, that the 4 extra defense power of 10 inf will prevent a Russian counter-strike as you approach his stack.

Art built on G2 reach Belarus on G5.  By that time the Russians have an extra full turn to reinforce the front and you might not be able to push back the defenses if they had been sufficient to hold the previous turn.  G4 vs G5 is a huge difference in benefit.  Depending on the Russian’s decision on the Siberian forces, they might be back in Moscow by G7 and G8.  A single round of delay will allow 6-20 additional defenders in the Capitol.  Add in a further 3 or 4 allied fighters landing in Moscow and the slight delay will turn a good chance of dominating victory into an unreasonable risk. Each game is different but this scenario happens quite frequently.

A lot of interesting thoughts!

I personally don’t really get the carrier purchase. The main argument for carrier + 2 TT’s is to be serious about sealion. But people keep writing, that if London falls, USA will almost always take it back. I have not enough experience to know anything about that.

I can see some meaning with the TT’s though.
It shows your intent to land in london, which may scare the UK player to keep his planes in defence instead of crushing italian fleet. But why not use the TT’s to offload in Sovjet, preferably Leningrad? In that way, you can move a lot of infantry waaay faster. If the Sovjet player is smart, he can hold this maneuver back the first round, but then you can do it in the second round after DOW on Sovjet

A&A is a moneygame. To have a strong fleet is wishful, no doubt. But controlling the atlantic is not changing the income balance. It’s a fact the allies start out with about 67% of total IPC income, this can be changed to a 60/40 within the 1 round, when Ger takes out french economy, Japan decimates China and maybe USSR depending on tactics, and USA is not being brought in to the game.

2. round: If you want to change the IPC balance, going for Sovjet will help. I’ve played only one game of G40, and represented Sovjet, so maybe I have missed something.
But from a Sovjet perspective, Germany has so much coming. You kind of have to prioritize what to defend. Since you want to prevent as many German bonusses as possible, it makes more sense to give up Leningrad instead of opening up in the south, where axis players gets bonuses for Stalingrad, Caucasus, has factories in Ukraine as well, and gets access to the middle east, where axis also gets bonusses. damn

Back to german perspective. TT’s makes it look like a threat against london, but could be used for landing troops in northern russian territories, backed by the finnish reinforcements, and changes IPC Balance.

But the carrier? It doesn’t do much by laying around in the baltic sea. sure it can keep planes on it for defensive reasons - but you don’t win a game where you so economically behind, by playing defensively…

My experience with Barbarossa, limited as it is (I am a full time grad school student and full time employee, so I don’t have a lot of time to play anymore) is that it is better to have Italy grab territories and use the Germans to reinforce.

I believe the loophole still exists that Germany doesn’t have to be at war to reinforce Italian held Russian territories too.  So there’s at least one round of that if you organize right.

@Cmdr:

I believe the loophole still exists that Germany doesn’t have to be at war to reinforce Italian held Russian territories too.  So there’s at least one round of that if you organize right.

It still exists in 2nd Ed but not in BM2.0.

@simon33:

@Cmdr:

I believe the loophole still exists that Germany doesn’t have to be at war to reinforce Italian held Russian territories too.  So there’s at least one round of that if you organize right.

It still exists in 2nd Ed but not in BM2.0.

Gotcha.  BM came out after I started my graduate degree, so I am far from well versed in it.

Anyway, it wasn’t a “huge” loophole, at best you got an extra round of IPC for the objective because a smart Russia would just declare on Germany on their next turn.

Retaining control of Norway (and Denmark) and Finland means 10 IPC per round for G.

I believe it’s harder to maintain control of them with no CV-purchase G1? UK can just sink your puny fleet UK1.

Against a determined Allied effort, Germany cannot retain control of Norway without turning back some forces from Russia. It’s more profitable to let the Allies have Norway once they mount sufficient force and use the forces that you would use for recapturing Norway to capture Moscow instead. Once Moscow falls, the Allies cannot hold Norway against a half-determined German effort.

I would build the carrier only for specific purposes, such as sending it to the Med or using it to support Sea Lion (or other nefarious plans for attack). I would not spend German IPCs to build a carrier for defense – those IPCs are better spent killing Moscow.

Marsh

The idea would be to maintain control of those territories for as long as possible. Again it’s 10 IPC’s a round for G.

It should be relatively easy to retain control of Scandinavia for the first four rounds.  One transport + 10 planes is enough to obliterate a small landing force.  The big trouble is when the Americans land 4-8 ground units and UK reinforces with a bunch of planes.  I don’t know how a carrier build will stop this anyway since you don’t want to get into an Atlantic naval race with the USA.  That is assured defeat for the Axis.