Germany Navy, Again

I have done something very similar to this.  My buddy knew I always go for Moscow first.  This game I planned to.  I bought 3 transports on G1.  Made the med attack with the sub and med fleet.

G2 masses Germany navy in SZ7 took London.  My buddy does the Ho-Chi-Men trail through the US to deter Japan from steping foot on the US mainland.  In addition to this he built a navy once they got to E Canada (2 rounds later) he took and held London.  I never got it back.

Had I not done some fast thinking with Japan on the US W coast Germany would have been toast.

I had a topic started about conducting Sealion every ones 8 ball said no b/c Germany needs help from Japan.  So I think you would have more luck with a Canadian Sheild then you would with a Sealion.

LT

@mateooo:

and most importantly, the italians are better spaghetti makers than allies.  If you have a choice, pick anyone else.

Only we Italians are able to do spaghetti. Spaghetti made outside of Italy are good for gluing poster on the walls.

@OLver:

Thanks for the input guys. My oponent should really have landed in Africa with UK on the first turn.

I also thought that sending a Russian fighter in Anglo Egypt was a big mistake made by my oponent, so was it to not leave Leningrad completly empty.

My bad I said 1 inf and one art from Africa but of course it was 1 tank and 1 inf. I also forgot to say that my two subs in the baltic were moved in  seazone 7. I knew my navy was going to be destroyed, but it forced my oponent to split his airforce, and I saved a sub and killed one fighter with my transport/dest fleet.

There are two approaches to a non-Baltic fleet buy that I’ve seen and use.

1.  Stay put.  If the UK attacks with its air, the Germans kill UK air.  The Germans lose a lot of navy which they weren’t using a lot (they would have used the Baltic transport), and the UK loses its valuable and hard-to-replace air.

2.  Split into four groups.  If the UK splits its air up, German subs can surrender and German destroyer and/or transport have a better chance of bringing down some UK air.  If the UK doesn’t split its air up, then at least three German units survive.  Note that the US bomber will probably knock out another German naval unit.

I guess my oponent did not play really well  with Russia because even thought I had few land units on the Russian front, my fighters always allowed me to trade territories and to keep UK and US navy at bay for a while.

Yes, trading territories is - after a fashion - a strength of the German fighter buy, but REALLY, you should have been bled dry, especially with having to transport units to Africa.

Now I have to explain what were, in my opinion the advantages of such a move. UK and USA had to buy much more navy to protect their transports, so even thought my russian front was some kind of weak, Germany was almost never threatened, and the Allies coult not build any fleet in the Pacific. On UK1, my oponent send his Indian SZ Fighter to destroy my tank in Anglo-Egypt along with the Transjordan inf. He succeded, but my lonely Japan transport stayed alive, so I only had to buy one on J1 and could already build a factory in Mandchuria. On J1 I took China and Buryatia. Two turn later a factory was build in French Indochina, and another one in India a turn later.

German fighters have nothing to do with a fleet in the Pacific.  Nothing you have yet described prevents the Allies from building a fleet in Atlantic OR Pacific.  (Of course, if they build in the Atlantic, they’ll have to overcome that German air force, but I digress)

The UK can still send their carrier and destroyer against the Japanese transport at Kwangtung - and they should, too, in view of the fact they used the Indian fighter against Anglo-Egypt.  More weak play.  :wink:

I think you spent way too many IPCs on industrial complexes.  If you purchase 16 IPC of transports, you can move up to four units from Japan to the mainland, and vary between anywhere from Soviet Far East to French Indochina; furthermore, those transports can be used as naval fodder and to pick up Japanese infantry from isolated islands where they are doing no good.  Compare with a 15 IPC industrial complex that produces three units, cannot switch where units are placed, cannot be used as naval fodder, and do not solve the problem of wasted Japanese infantry resources sitting on isolated islands.  I know Caspian Sub states 2 transports 1 industrial complex is good, but I think I would prefer 3 transports 1 tank on J1 regardless of bid - if I can claim India and put an IC there with Japan, the positional advantage is huge.

–

In practice, those German fighters have limited range, exactly as I previously mentioned; you will probably end up having to split the German fighters between eastern territories and Western Europe.  This isn’t too bad in practice.  What you will probably see is the Allies building up a fleet off Eastern Canada; when the Allies feel like it, they will unite newly built naval units from Eastern US with the existing fleet off Eastern Canada and land at Algeria, where with no surviving Baltic fleet elements and your German Mediterranean fleet probably not in a position to counter, and insufficient German fighters at Western Europe (considering that you have to split between Western Europe and eastern territories), you can do nothing THAT TURN.

On the next turn, though, you can land 10 fighter 1 bomber (possibly 9 fighter 1 bomber) at Western Europe.  If the Allied navy stay off Algeria, you beat them up, if the Allied navy retreats from Algeria, you may have a problem.  Why a problem?  Because even a pretty tame Allied fleet will land 6 US and 4 UK ground units (2 starting UK transports and 2 starting US transports plus 1 US transport bought on US1); you may easily have to deal with a lot more.  And although you have air at Western Europe that can hit Algeria, you need cheap German ground units to act as fodder; you can get 2 German infantry in with the Mediterranean transport, but otherwise - well, you can see that you might have a problem to deal with.

So let us say that is what happens.  On the German turn, you fly all your fighters to Western Europe, and the Allies respond by pulling their navy back to Eastern Canada and buying another US carrier at Eastern US (I assume they bought one already on US1 after seeing the German fighter build).  Germany does nothing about the Allied forces in Algeria.

Germany’s next turn, you can only trade off Karelia and one other territory easily (that other territory being the one your German bomber can hit).  BUT now what?  If you fly away from Western Europe, the Allies will land MORE units at Algeria.  And if you do NOT fly away from Western Europe, the Allies STILL land at Algeria, with probable 6 transports (up to 7 or 8 easily), 2 destroyers, 2 carriers, 4 fighters, 1 battleship.  EVEN with that mighty air force, there is nothing you can do.  So let us say you GIVE UP Algeria and start harassing Russia with your mighty air force.  The Allies have sunk 32 IPC in carriers, and are just making their landing at Africa; they are out of position to help Russia.

So as you can see, what have you gained at best?  Nothing but TIME.  Time for Japan to push on Russia.  Time for the Germans to keep the IPCs they gained in Africa.  And that is EXACTLY why I recommend using African bid units instead of Ukraine.  You need to control Africa early while you still can; you WILL lose Africa eventually.

–

And remember these things too:

1.  The Allies can still go KJF (if they do, Germany has to try to control and keep control of Africa.)

2.  By buying so many fighters early, you lock yourself into a certain line of German play.  You may do better to stagger your fighter buys out (say 1 German fighter a turn or even 2 German fighters on G1) so you can have some early infantry to trade with Russia sooner.

In short - yes, if the Allies go KGF, German fighters are useful - however, I do not think that 4 fighters RIGHT AWAY is necessary or proper; I think 2 fighters is the most that the Germans can afford on G1.

@cyan:

if you have excess money to buy navy with russia i’d rather spend it on fighters and then use the one sub as sort of a fodder pieace. that way once your navy objective has been covered you can switch to land easily and i think fighters are great.

Actually, if you needed fodder pieces for Russia, I’d go with Transports.  Then you can shoot down planes. :P

@Bean:

It’s ok Jen, and it turned out to help you in your game ^^

Yea, well he was a royal prick in the game and got the mod to force that the worst outcome of the two results be applied, even though the first outcome was obviously first.

I had to go back to a previous roll to check and make sure my artillery was applied right, they were not.  So he lost 1 hit, but because my worst of two was like -12 hits, he still came out like a bandit.

Anyway, thanks, because Germany now has +42 IPC for next round and I AM sticking him with it.  18 rounds of illegal rocket fire. (I just took every rocket on S. Europe, figured it was the most fair.  Germany’s a higher value target then S. Europe, so it would probably be the target shot at anyway.  Besides, Germany was the first rocket rolled in every round, S. Europe was the second, Caucasus the third.)

Germany lost 400 IPC in armies (killing only 215 because of that dice fiasco) but she also has 120 to spend and Japan’s going to finish off the enemy anyway!

Sea Zone 12, Sea Zone 5?  Did you not include them because you don’t want to factor in naval territories, or because they slipped your attention?

Egypt I would definately put in.

Let’s for go listing the Capitals of any nations, they’re a given.

1.  Ukraine
2.  Caucasus
3.  E. Europe
4.  Karelia
5.  SZ 5
6.  W. Europe
7.  SZ 12/13 (You’d be surprised how important it is to prevent America from going in here!)
8.  Egypt
9.  Balkans
10. S. Europe

I listed the last two last because if you are fighting to get either of those back, the game’s pretty much lost.

@CrazyStraw:

Howdy.

I hadn’t weighed in on this thread, but I just got a story to tell.

Yesterday I played a game against a good player.  It was time-limited.

No joke, in a 5 round game I built 9tra 1car with Germany.

And it WON the game for me!

It was ridiculous!

It was absurd!

It was outrageous!

It was sublime…

So German boats can be good.  That would have been excessive in 99% of the games I’ve played, but yesterday it was exactly enough to get the job done.  Simple lesson: the Baltic is important.

I begin to see the value in LL / No Luck games and in non-time limited games.

My entire strategies in my tournament game had to change because of a time limit.  It caused a waste of two turns because I forgot to take into account that there was a time limit in each round.  (not a round limit, that would have been easy to work with, but a time limit.)

needless to say, I’m never making that mistake again!

(sorry, send it too early, one more time)

I like the idea for G1 to tran to support baltic fleet.

But, what if UK1 chose to sacrifice its planes and attac. You will be left with  1 DD and 1, maybee to tran.

Schould G2 then reinforce navy again, and with what?

If not, the next round new UK plans (and maybee navy, if G planes are not too thtathening) and US airforses can take this easy out?

I think the conlusion is to go for africa for G, but at as low cost as possible.

Many talk about supporting aftica with indian troops for UK, but isnt this to leave India open, and make J walk through Asia? My problem playing Russia is always to keep the J out, when they come for full om R door in round 5-7, with plenty thanks and planes, then R falls… I guess with leaving India this happens even quicker? And, do the 2 UK troops from india make a big differens in Afr, easy replacements from G will take them out as long as med fleet is alive, or?

And, maybee this is for another line, but, how for R to slow down J in east?