• @Argothair

    Likely for the best. We could go on and on about this but frankly I think to start a new thread would be the way to go. I think this debate has been incredibly intriguing for me to watch and react, it’s genuinely fascinating to look at a strategy made by someone else, so you can see just how differently you two think. Yeah, honestly the J1 attack when you think about it has less effect towards Middle Earth anyway.


  • @Luftwaffles41
    I’m sure your correct.
    I’m just musing at this point with not a lot to back it up.

    The primary issue is does it benefit the Allies or hurt them to engage in a scrap with Japan early around Hawaii. I honestly don’t know. My guess is that it benefits the Axis. But it’s just a guess.

    As I said, I haven’t tried a KJF test yet. First one starts today (no German Sea Lion). I’m not optimistic for the result for the Allies. But I’m going to give it a shot, and with no Sea Lion threat that would seem to be the best of possible scenarios for the Allies. If they can’t change the game by busting on Japan without the threat of Sea Lion, it’s doubtful they can do it with Sea Lion.

    But your secondary point is also probably correct, Japan pushing west is way pushing their logistical limits (although its only a 3 turn move to get to Stalingrad with fast movers from China’s coast. Just sayin’).

    The reason I push on West with Japan after India is because the Hawaii/ANZAC options look so grim and long term.

    Meanwhile, if the Army that was in India is falling back, if I just turn my back on them, they can be a formidable aid to Russia. Those ME transports come in handy for a speedy evacuation.

    (Sorry, a bit of background info- the end games to my previous tests usually end up with Russia falling back to Stalingrad/Caucusus and the British in ME trying to lend support to prevent the final Russian collapse; while the US tries to make a difference in Western Europe. Potentially, with enough UK support from ME, the Russians can lose Moscow , but keep Stalingrad.

    With the Indian Army free to play the ‘saving’ cavalry, things could get dicey indeed for the Germans. Theoretically, the UK/Soviet Armies could retake Russia. Hence the need for my Japanese Army in India continuing to apply pressure. In fact, in my last game, the UK ME force got so fat that they, pushed the Japanese back, retook India, all the while trying to save Russia at the same time [a poor choice as they should have just helped Russia]. It was a wild game).

    In that same game, I had a good handful of Japanese in Western China, trying to set up an ambush for the retreating Russians from Siberia.(I mean if Chia is going to protest the Burma road, why not exploit their absence in North-Western China?) I failed in that, but it allowed me enough guys to harass the crap out of Russia with the Japanese and eventually take Stalingrad- temporarily - like 2 turns. THAT was enough to bring about the final crumble of the Soviets. After that it was just about chasing a squirming prey.

    And squirm they did. The US went all in in the Pacific , which halted all Japanese production towards anything but an ever increasing Japanese Navy to counter the US. And also allowed the UK successes in India and Russia previously mentioned. wild game indeed.


  • @Luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    The destroyer in 110 doesn’t really work because of German Air Supremacy which will destroy it and then have their navy move down to gibraltar in the non combat movement phase

    Whoa?1? Can you play through like that? Sink a fleet and then move through the sea zone you just battled in to a SZ further on with other units during non combat?


  • @Argothair said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    Sydney is not as easy as it looks, partly because of all the vicious, vicious emus that defend the plains

    Easily the best line of this discussion. So good.

    Another reason to push forward with the Rising Sun to the ME/Russia. Retreat your navy for a few turns, if you have to, and buy fast movers for Russia/Slow Movers for ME.
    Then , when the pressure from the US gets too big, drop the carriers with the fighters fleshing them out and let the arms race begin.


  • @Stough yes you can in NCM.


  • @Stough

    Why not? Just you can’t land in gribraltar that turn. You carry the units with you on the 3 transports to gibraltar, next turn you take it and in the non combat movement phase you move your ships through the straight of G and into the Med before the Americans can catch you on the way in.


  • @Stough

    You’ve got a point there, but you’ve gotta think that after that Taranto Raid the U.K would’ve had surface warships to protect those transports for a swift evacuation to Egypt (that is, it’s not taken yet). In other words that Japanese have to devote their own warships to go size up and support a campaign into the ME which would allow the Americans to come in without any real threat towards their main fleet. If it works for you, then I guess it’s not a bad idea to try it, I’m just going off of what’s logistical here in terms of what’s going to win you the game.


  • @Luftwaffles41 no in the rulebook it states you need to control the strait or narrow at the beginning of your turn:

    "If your side (but not necessarily your power) controlled a canal or narrow strait at the start of your turn, you may move
    sea units through it (you can’t use it in the same turn that you capture it)
    "


  • @Cornwallis

    Ahhhh okay I get it sorry totally forgot about that thanks.


  • I mean, if that was the case Italy could still take Gibraltar so you could cross the Straight without the pentalty


  • @Luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    I mean, if that was the case Italy could still take Gibraltar so you could cross the Straight without the pentalty

    yep that’s a good combo of both nations. If Ger and Italy focus on the Med it’s very hard for the UK without US help to hold out.

    What is your experience with US buying for exemple 3 or 4 bombers US1 to a) use in Pacific or b) fly to england to destroy a small fleet or strat bomb?

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @Stough said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    Sink a fleet and then move through the sea zone you just battled in to a SZ further on with other units during non combat?

    Yes, in general, although as Luftwaffles points out, you can’t cross a new strait.


  • @Cornwallis

    I’ve found that the U.S tends to lose the majority of those bombers, especially when the Germans and italians are capable of scrambling. Very inefficient in my opinion.


  • @Cornwallis

    and frankly id welcome the U.S bombers, if they aren’t building surface warships every turn in the Atlantic then they’re only delaying themselves for every turn to get to the Med and into Europe.


  • @Luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    @Cornwallis

    I’ve found that the U.S tends to lose the majority of those bombers, especially when the Germans and italians are capable of scrambling. Very inefficient in my opinion.

    they can for exemple kill the German fleet after a Sealion (as GHG states in his london calling). Or eventually attack a new italian fleet (after a taranto). if they buy 4 then US has 5 bombers, that can pack a well chosen punch. And if you lose them but wreck some damage then it’s is worth it i think. But they are indeed vulnerable to bad dice.


  • @Cornwallis

    No, 60+ at the bottom of the Med is not something the Americans can afford to lose. If they lose it then its something they won’t be able to rebuild in time to stop the Axis powers


  • @Luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    @Cornwallis

    No, 60+ at the bottom of the Med is not something the Americans can afford to lose. If they lose it then its something they won’t be able to rebuild in time to stop the Axis powers

    Throwing it away is not a good thing but if they can take a full loaded carrier or the italian navy with it, then why not. It’s like you said, Allies have the lead in IPC so losing more than you kill is not that bad.

    Plus, the threat bombers pose is volatile:
    in europe they can attack a fleet, or strat bomb. They can move very quickly to pacific to attack a portion of the japanse fleet or strat bomb the factories.
    It also hides the intentions of going for germany or japan.
    I must say i have never tried it, but my friends and i have been debating the pro’s and con’s of it.


  • @Cornwallis

    You’re not wrong, with the U.S always for the most part gaining 70+ IPC’s it wouldn’t be a bad thing to lose it, however there’s always a catch to these sorts of things. If the U.S had unlimited time then hell build all the bombers you want and send em to Europe or the Med, but the Americans dont have a lot of time, and it especially doesn’t make it any better if they lollygag about when setting up the Floating Bridge. 6 turns it takes to get guys into France and set it all up, if they aren’t there by the latest of turn 8 then the Axis have won the game.


  • @Luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

    @Cornwallis

    You’re not wrong, with the U.S always for the most part gaining 70+ IPC’s it wouldn’t be a bad thing to lose it, however there’s always a catch to these sorts of things. If the U.S had unlimited time then hell build all the bombers you want and send em to Europe or the Med, but the Americans dont have a lot of time, and it especially doesn’t make it any better if they lollygag about when setting up the Floating Bridge. 6 turns it takes to get guys into France and set it all up, if they aren’t they by the latest of turn 8 then the Axis have won the game.

    That’s true, it is a race against time. We thought sending the bombers asap will allow you to damage very early in the game, hopefully slowing the axis down.
    You prefer KGF or KJF?


  • @Cornwallis

    KGF. I’m not too concerned about Japan considering the idea that they are pretty much in the boxing ring beating the living s*** outta ANZAC and India and China. But the thing is they can’t leave that ring. Germany however is a wolf in a flock of sheep. Germany has the ability to win the game without fighting the Americans. 8 victory cities. Berlin, Rome, Warsaw, Paris, Cairo, Stalingrad, Leningrad, and Moscow. And they will do it at the cost of not even worrying about attacking London or Washington D.C.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

25

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts