Territory Re-Capture (UK - Italy - UK - Germany or Italy?)

That is indeed the strategy, and it relies on the allies having pretty bad luck to smash up those stacks without losing 50% of your starting planes.

Germany can replace the planes, but not at the same time as it builds mechs, armor stax
Japan has even more planes, but it needs even more than Germany does because without them, its a paper tiger.

The problem with doing these stub attacks is if you lose more than 50% of your starting air power before turn 5, you will not be able to force your victory cities and strategic objectives.  The consequences are felt several turns later (7,8), when you cant smash stax because you lost your mobile strikeforce.

It really depends on which method you prefer.
A G1 attack can catch the Russians a little off guard and take advantage of their defenses still being relatively thin. The downfall is that Germany’s offense will also be a little thin and be more prone to Russian counter-attacks.
A G3 or G4 attack allows Germany the maximum build up time before Russia can declare war and can make for a much stronger punch into Russia’s borders all along the line. I often wait until G4 because you can hit Russia on 4 fronts (Romania > Bessarabia, Hungary > E Poland, Poland > Baltic States, Finland > Karelia) and have a very strong front line after the battles - harder for Russia to counter attack. The downfall of this is that Russia also gets 3 turns of build-up so they will have more stuff for you to fight. Generally, Germany will still have more than Russia, but if the dice don’t favor you, your front lines could get really ate up by the time you reach Moscow.
A lot depends on what USA does when they get into the war. If they go 80%-100% Europe, your Russian offensive could peter out fast because you have to fend off an American invasion or try to bail out Italy. On the other hand, Japan should be doing very well in the Pacific and you may get an overall Axis win that way.
If USA goes mostly Pacific, then you should be very successful in Russia. The UK will be busy trying to fight Italy and your U-Boats while you pour tanks into Russia and steadily grind them back. However, If Japan plays poorly, it’s possible the USA could wrap things up in the Pacific early enough to still come over and cause trouble for you in Europe before you can take Moscow. Then it’s the dreaded TWO FRONT WAR for Germany.

Thank you for analyzing that statement for me. Odds favor a scramble, but my experience with it is okay. My decision depends on my mood and what I feel like doing. :)

When I am germany I throw that battleship. I don’t want to lose fighters, I will lose a battleship.  In which case the uk scramble odds are on average less than 1 fighter for 1 fighter… the battleship UK gets to kill anyway. So yeah I like that better.

the idea is not to defend every landarea, only the vital ones (italy, germany), then have meches + tanks + planes in range so that you can counterattack anything else.

it is not trivial for US to land in north italy if you defend it with 3-5 units, and are able to counterattack with 15-20 german planes + 20+ german landunits.

german mechs in w germany are able to counterattack most terretories in europe, if the german planes try to stay in range, then it is difficult to land.

the only two terrs that are not “covered” by this strat is norway and s italy. in s italy you need how much you need anyways, and for norway, if your fleet is alive, you can have 5-8 inf in finland, keep your planes within range and then be able to attack with about 25-30 units (depending on how many planes you have).

It is expensive to defend against an enemy that can land everywhere, so rather, counterattack than defend, if you are able to kill one load of americans, then the transports need 3 turns before they are back and able to threathen again.

@Admiral:

@Rhey:

I always attack Japan in China on UK Pac 2. This reopens the burma route (as the Japanese have way too limited ground forces) and keeps china in play. China is really more important then most of the players think. I find them very strong, especially against those scattered Japanese forces. The only problem is their airforce but every japanese unit you can take out on the mainland, is a huge win.

Crazy thing about the Japanese air force and Chinese units is this, the latter just needs to keep those precious stacks out of their range. Pull back, retreat. Advance when the time is right. A smart Chinese players does this, and makes the Japanese player really invest their time in the Chinese hinterland, splitting their options.

Best strategy for the Chinese is to play exactly like the Russians:  Turtle up and keep one step away from the units trying to take them out.  Each round you’ll be able to add 2-3 Inf to your big starting stack.  Once Japan attacks the UK or Anzac, you’re free to start marching towards either A:  Burma Road to reclaim it or B: The valuable territories the Japanese start with in the north.

Both cases make Japan invest more deeply into taking China than it wants to, while buying time until India can help you retake the Burma Road.  Don’t play foolish with your big starting stack, protect it until the Japanese are too thin or they’ve invested too much in China (which is an IPC sink if Japan doesn’t get it early).

Does this site allow explicit images such as swastikas?

Look at rule book page 20. If you made a combat move into the tt(territory) and won, it is yours. If it was French to start with, then there was no combat move into the tt, and is still French. Liberate France if you want to collect income from it. The dutch are not a power, and are a different deal.

Most of the NOs in Anniversary were simply dependent on a territory (or territories) being held by one side, so UK often gets a NO for the US controlling the Carolines in the Pacific, or the US getting a NO for the UK controlling France, or Russia getting a NO for the UK controlling Norway, Finland, and Poland.  It’s basically the same thing; ANZAC was closely connected to the UK still, having been colonies/territories in the British Commonwealth/Empire up until just before WW2, so a good deal of British economics was affected by the status of Australia and New Zealand, just as it was with Canada (which is recognized in the game as an independent nation with their own roundel, but controlled overall by the UK player).

You don’t have to have the same person control ANZAC and UK for the NO to make sense, just like you don’t have to have the same player control the US and UK in Anniversary.