3 is a completely different UK1 counter… It involves an AC buy by UK, and is a source of ongoing disagreement between me and the head of Caspian Sub…
So maybe you think the UK should buy an AC and maybe the head of Caspian Sub thinks you shouldn’t buy an AC. So maybe the UK1 counter doesn’t involve an AC after all. Dun dun dun.
Well, Bunnies, I don’t agree that Egypt is a necessary attack for Germany. In fact, I am leaning towards NOT attacking it lately. This allows England to shoot himself in the foot by invading the Med with his fleet which allows Germany to quickly close the trap by taking Egypt on G2 and hitting it with the German navy on G3. (course it means getting fighters and navy in range on G2 by building or moving it there. So what?)
And yes, America’s coming in with two fully loaded carriers. However, that’s less troops and transports that Germany has to deal with. The idea isn’t to master the Pacific forever, just to recover from using a full round of purchases to sink the British navy if it gets in the way and/or deny England any capitol ships at all at the start of the game.
If Germany doesn’t attack Anglo-Egypt at all on G1, UK CAN (doesn’t have to depending on German fleet and air position) put up to 1 transport 2 destroyer 1 carrier 2 fighter in the sea zone, and UK can have up to 5 inf 1 tank in Transjordan plus 1 fighter in Russia and 1 bomber in range to support. Japan gets a significant boost in Asia with the survival of the Kwangtung transport, but Germany has to contend with a strong UK3 navy and no progress in Africa, and UK has the flexibility to retreat from Transjordan towards India, strongly attacking Japan in spite of that early Japanese transport advantage.
Specifically, German fighters will probably not be in range to hit the waters north of Anglo-Egypt/west of Transjordan at the end of G1, so Germany can at best attack that UK fleet of 1 transport 2 destroyer 1 carrier 2 fighter on G2 with 1 transport 1 battleship 1 bomber (ugly). I suppose you’re saying Germany can capture Anglo-Egypt on G2 to cut off the UK fleet and move German air east, without attacking the UK fleet, but if Germany doesn’t hit that UK fleet on G2, UK2 sees 1 transport 2 destroyer 1 carrier 4 fighter 1 bomber attacking the German fleet of 1 transport 1 battleship which probably means dead German navy and the possibility of the UK STILL controlling a sizable fleet that can survive a German air attack. (Note that I assume the Allies did NOT unite the fleet off Algeria, because that scenario is just too horrible for the Germans and it can reasonably be prevented with 1 trans 1 battleship 5 fighter 1 bomber threatening an Allied fleet of 4 transport 1 sub 1 destroyer 1 battleship max though the Allied fleet may be decreased by a G1 Atlantic sub bid as described in a previous post for Allied fleet of 3 transport 1 destroyer at Algeria, which is clearly no good at all.)
Still, regardless of the Atlantic scenario, the only way for the Germans to survive the UK2 attack (given no attacks on Anglo-Egypt) is a very expensive Mediterranean fleet buy of minimum 2 carrier which even then isn’t necessarily favorable unless the Germans preserved some additional fleet like the Atlantic sub, and even that may only achieve parity, not superiority (Allied attack of 01333 3334 vs German defense of 01334 444 is still not favorable and requires TWO CARRIERS at S. Europe, so makes for a very possibly horribly ghastly and decisive UK2 attack and in any event horribly slows Germany in Europe.
The two fully loaded US carrier scenario is not in response to a German ignore of Anglo-Egypt, it’s in response to an aggressive German naval strategy that preserves German fleet elements and a good degree of German air.