What if these happen? - Extrem G1 Strategy

Makes sense, CB, but I’d still leave at least two infantry in W. Europe on G1 or G2.  That way England MIGHT get one with their battleship, but would still need to risk 7 IPCs to get the other one (or more.)  I’d probably leave the AA Gun there too, just to encourage England to avoid bringing Fighters, but I might not depending on how well I’m doing.

Also, do note that my comment above about British destroyers to out-think the German fleets that later pull their fighters back can be out thought by Germany just by producing a submarine in SZ 5 each round.

I’d say the submarine is a good investment when, and if, England gets 5 destroyers and their starting Battleship.  Anything less than that and you may not recover your investment on the submarine. (5 Destroyers = 15 Punch, 1 Battleship = 4 Punch, that’s 19 punch or roughly 3 hits.  3 hits = 9 IPC in infantry, a submarine costs 8.  Therefore, the submarine is cheaper than the lost infantry.)

triplea.sourceforge.net

With software? Are you sofware? Wait a moment, you are Smith agent from Matrix  :mrgreen:

Put it this way: as the Allies, are you more concerned about

a) 2 Inf 2 Arm that can land in Persia or Egypt next turn
or
b) 2 Inf 2 Arm that can be in FIC or Bury next turn
or
c) 3 Arm that can be in Caucasus next turn?

Maybe c), but a) is at least a close second. Ideally, I’d like FIC, India and EI ICs - I don’t care if I’m not utilizing Jap’s IC to the max, all that does is strand units in a backwater (unless it’s KJF of course). But once the Allies are well into KGF, it’s not so bad to tempt them into switching strats with a provocative little IC in EI. Right now I face NO allied units in the Pacific or the Indian ocean, so I just want to be able to bring units to Russia/Africa with maximum speed and responsiveness.

Responsiveness often gets overlooked as a value - if you have to build your units three turns before they arrive for combat, you have to guess what you might need then. If instead you can deliver in one round, you have much more flexibility. So I like to build ICs - people think it detracts IPCs from building actual combat units, but it can actually bring more units to the front more quickly if that IC is 1.5 turns closer to the front than the units you would have built back at your starting IC.

Yes….  And im hunted by the sad fact that i have lost 5 games in a row…  Somehow i see my credability disipate when discussing strategy  :(    :cry:

The reason for the mass of troops is FIC.

Japan can dump forces into Asia while the US floats across the South Pacific.  Japan either comes out and attacks the fleet, pulling their trannies of bridge duty to serve as fodder, or Japan stays put and ferries troops.

If they do the former, then you have taken a LOT of pressure of Russia.

If they do the latter, then the US lands HEAVY in FIC:  10+ divisions of mixed INF/ART/ARM
… behind the Japan front in Asia
And with a piece of property that can be reinforced immediately by UK AF before Japan can counter (maybe even FIGS from Russia itself).  Drop an IC…

Allied HARD point in south Asia, with massed fleet heavy on transports, which is a lot of defensive fodder, and a rapid threat to India, Africa, and even Japan itself in a few rounds.

Japan has to take the bait and move out on that fleet, otherwise they get pierced in their underbelly, with no way to remove the spearhead.

Eitherway, it stops the flow against Russia from Japan.

Now if you want to fine tune the specific naval builds… do an AC and FIG with 1 TRN one round, a BB and TRN the next, that is up to you.  But the more TRN you have in the mix, the greater the land and IPC threat to Japan.

I as Russia only send the units east of russia and caucasus on the first turn to asia the rest to concentrate on germany

Hi Hannibal (ante portas),

In fact, I agree with pretty much you said. Surely I couldn’t keep up with your tactical understanding when A&A was new to me. So congratulations at first.
Nevertheless there’s some more input. Just my humble opinion:

Except of the Baltic AC in your first round, ships usually don’t buy for Germany. If you really want to build 1-2 Subs/Trans in the Baltic each turn you’ll have to stay there with your own navy or they’ll be sunk immediately with british airforce. UK and US can together close you up in the Baltic and wait for your attack, of course it will be costly for them, but usually more expensive for you.

You are quite right about going through the north is a superior strategy. Karelia is a very strong position for both sides. As the axis you should take and hold it in the first round. UK has different options to support Russia. His support in NWY can be strafed to death by your forces in Karelia. Better to cut of your supply lines in EEU after your Baltic fleet is removed. Or, most likely, he can support Archangel, so you’ll meet the main UK/Rus forces in ARC.
If you wanna go south through UKR, Russia will concentrate it’s forces in CAU and the UK can take a lot of your income away from you. You won’t be able to trade more than one territory with Russia (WRU), but it’s harder for Russia to trade a lot of countries (due to the max. of 3 Ftrs)
In fact, I most likely wait in KAR until the japanese player puts preassure on Russia which forces the allies to retreat on my front, then I take a step into WRU.

Don’t underestimate a US counterattack on Pearl Harbour. Especially if the go KJF it’s very hard to replace your lost navy again. An aggressive british opening in the Pacific and a Pearl counter, 2 ICs in IND and SIN and Japan is in big trouble.

You are quite lucky that your Russian player is rather predictable. Maybe he should be more aggressive, attack UKR, build some tanks or even a Ftr, etc.

These are just my opinions and can, of course, vary in different games and against different ways to play. I hope this gives you some input.