My rationale for my votes:
1. Russian FIG. With 3 FIGs, Russia has plenty of offensive punch for territory trading in Europe to keep her income up, without leaving expensive ARM behind to be killed on a German counter attack. Those FIGs also provide some serious defensive punch, and when combined with stacked INF, create a very nice Russian Meat Grinder for German forces that attack core territories.
2. Baltic AC. Cheapest way to get serious defense out of the Baltic Fleet. Also creates long-range risk to Allies fleets by German FIGs since, unless contianed, the AC can sail out to recover FIGs that attack as far away as SZ2. It also maintains a minimal Sea Lion threat that keeps UK “honest”.
3. UK AC. In my opinion, this is the key to establishing control in the Atlantic, and in protecting TRNs that will be used to destroy Germany. Without solid fleet defense from the start, the German AF and Navy are too great of a threat and will thwart Allied landing attempts until either fleet defense IS built by the Allies, or attrition finally takes out the Luftwaffe and Kreigsmarine, which may well occur too late for the Allies to save Russia.
4. Japan IC (either Manch or FIC). While TRNs are nice, that early IC will have huge production value against Russia. Also, Japan hits their build limit VERY quickly without a second IC. A J1 IC purchase prevents the build limit from being an immediate issue and allows Japan to maximize their drive on Moscow.
5. US Atlantic TRNs. The key to victory in KGF. Get the US into the European war as fast and as hard as possible.
This seems like the tabia and I play some of these but it’s always good to question the tabia to see if there is a better way.
Russian Fighter- Useful but do you need it turn 1? A turn 1 land buy turn 2 ftr is definitely an alternative. You won’t really make full use of 3 ftrs until turn 3. With a land buy Russia has an early inf edge on the front which limits Germany’s aggressiveness unless he wants to lose arm/art.
Baltic AC - I’ve always played it but now I question whether a destroyer would be sufficient. If the full UK fleet is stationed northeast of UK you don’t really want to send 4 ftrs and a bomber after it anyway. Against any merger block the destroyer is actually better. A dedicated attack will kill either fleet, though of course the carrier will extract a higher price.
Japan IC-Yes but round 1? Without 4 transports your not maxing Japan’s capacity and will likely not have time to go infantry picking in the Pacific. Also you initial push into Asia is stalled a bit. 2 inf might be important against an Allied attack whether it be KJF or just a strike against weakness.
UK car/US tran- Why not the other way around? US has more money to spent on luxury’s and UK can more efficiently pump troops into Europe.