UK opening strategy

The Pacific route may like an attractive path, but in practice, it take much more naval investment to protect the transports.

Typical air and naval:
Germany - 5 fighters, 1 bomber. 1 fighter is usually lost in ukraine and baltic fleet is sunk by uk
Japan - 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 5-6 fighters, 1 bomber, 1 destroyer, maybe 1 sub, + any transports japan bought.

Japan starts with a much larger naval threat, and US would need to invest 50-150 IPC for a US pacific fleet to survive.

Also, the Atlantic route is shorter than you’re describing.
The typical starting route is for land units purchased in East US to move to east Canada. From there, a transport can move it to Algeria each turn. From there, transports can threaten South Europe or West Europe. US also has the option of placing a fleet in the Mediterranean Sea. That fleet can transport from Libya to Ukraine, Caucasus, trans jordan, Southern Europe, and Western Europe. A US1 buy of 1 carrier, 1 transport, and land units is a great start to accomplish this.

Those modifications completely change the game. Specifically, bombers with a 2 cost are so good that every country should make an all bomber buy and Russia, UK, and USA  will produce no IPC from round 2 forward. The game will be determined by whether Japan or us gets hit by SBR. Very likely Japan through bury.

While we are going with game modifications, why not make all units free with unlimited movement and 6 attack and defense? That would make things most simple.

No Strategies out there hey?

A large part of the game depends on who the Allies decide to attack. They can decide between KGF (kill Germany first) or KJF (kill Japan first).

For people who are new to the game, I think a KGF would be easier to pull off. All the Allied capitals are near(er) to Berlin, so the logistics are easier. Also, Germany can threaten Moscow quicker than Japan if not threatened.

However, a KJF can work against players who are used to playing against KGF. It is usually best to go this route if Japan has a bad first turn, although I have won games where I had a KJF in mind before the game started. In this strat, your goal is to reduce Japan down to Tokyo and maybe a couple other territories, and to wipe out their navy. In this way, only a minimal Allied force is needed to contain them, and all attention can shift to Germany.

Note that I don’t mean to ignore the other axis power that you aren’t focused on. This is usually only a problem in KGF, and Japan can reach Moscow quickly if left unchecked. Usually the U.S. will deal with Japan a bit in KGF, and Russia will hold off Germany with a little U.K. support in a KJF.

As the Axis, you must identify if your oppenent is playing a KGF or KJF. The nation that is the focus of the Allied attacks must play defensively while the other nation kills Russia.

I agree with the shield and sword statement. It is my experience that Germany on its first turn should buy a transport for Italy and all men. Regroup your tanks and all your infantry into Eastern Europe and plan to take Karelia on turn 3 if possible. Turn 2 can work but can be costly. Germany should buy mostly all men on turn two and three as well and move them into Eastern Europr so as to overwhelm Russia and get ahead of their infantry total. Once Germany has more infantry than Russia attack Karelia with men and tanks only, save your planes. From Italy send two full transports every turn into Egypt and Trans Jordan until you secure the Suez and subsiquently Africa.  Meanwhile Japan hits China, and India and then all out Russia, while still maintaining suppremacy in the Pacific by staying one step ahead of the US and as someone else mentioned take out as many US and UK ships as possible while not over commiting your fleet and only losing the cheap expendable replaceable pieces. An IC is a good idea if you are sure you can hold it: Manchuria is good to go after Russia, but can be reinforced by Japan transports anyway, FIC is safer but India is the best of both if you can capture and hold it, because it is two squares “a tank blitz” away from Caucauscus and Trans-Jordan and you can move fleet through the Suez if needed and assist Germany in conquering Africa as required. Not to mention taking precious money away from the UK. Japan would then purchase three tanks every round for India (or FIC) and keep that up until Russia falls. From India or FIC you can also launch a strike on Australia and New Zealand to further hurt UK. If UK buys an IC on India, Japan MUST capture it at all costs or UK will get the upper hand and its game over. If Germany and Japan hit fast and hard as a unit first at UK to bankrupt and “stall” them and get the valuable money they need and at US to “stall” them, then maintain that stall on both of them and go all out Russia so as to hit Moscow on the 5th or 6th turn from both sides, the Axis will have an IPC victory easily or if using victory cities (AA50 and new) or complete victory rules they will be on their way to world domination. :-)

@Aretaku:

India Destroyer to Jap Transport
Aussie Sub to Jap Sub
2 Inf from Australia to New Guinea (which can be reached)
2 Inf, 1 Fig from India to Borneo (Carrier must accompany to allow fighter to land)

If all four attacks succeed, Japan is down two ships and five IPCs, and has to think long and hard about what to kill and what to potentially let slip away. It also helps in that it keeps mainland Asia relatively calm for a round or two while Japan deals with the situation.

There are many options for Britain in the Pacific in turn one, but when this one succeeds, it can really ruin Japans day.

In may playgroup there is often a SJF (Slow Japan first approach) similar to this moves. We are also used to  stack Buryatia with 6 infantries and sending Russian infantry in Sinkiang. This togheter with the UK opening move described by Aretaku can really ruin Japanes days!

I am trying to answer to this opening in the following way:

Buy: 1 AC, 1 TRN, 1 Tank, save 1 IPC; Ignore Pearl Harbour to wipe out all the UK fleets instead; Attack UK fleet in Borneo with 1 BB, 2 Fig, 1 BMB; Attack UK DD with 1 BB 1 fig (from Japan); attack UK Sub with DD and 1 fig (from AC at Caroline) if JAp sub is gone and UK sub is alive, this should give a good chance at killing it; Attack China with 5 inf (3 from Kwantung and 2 from FIC) and the remaining two fighters;

NCM:

transport 1 inf and 1 tank in FIC; leave 2 inf in Manchuria; leave 1 AC at Caroline and the other in East Indies Sea Zone, the British Transport still alive in New Guinea can not reach East Indies or Philipphine; the surviving fighters should be landed in FIC, in sz 60, in Caroline and in East Indies if possible;
Deploy the AC and TRN in sz 60.

Apart the BB in sz59, all the other surviving ships are able to strike in solomon islands seazone with the surviving fighters. The objective of such attack should be to kill the USA TRNs slowing down the island hopping. Meanwhile, Japan should attack India and starting to unload at least 2-3 trns of troops (emptying the islands) on the mainland, buying more fighter is the priority however.
If USA do not come to Solomon the fleet in south East may be used to attack Borneo, Australia and New Zealand.

What result am I having?
The counter move is composed of 4 distinct attacks and it is difficult that all of them went always good.
Sometimes happened and I wiped all the UK Fleet with minimal losses.
Sometimes losses has been more grievous leaving the Japan weak. But if the USA player do not strike immediately in USA1, Japan may still recover consuming his revenge on UK: India, Australia, New Zealand or Madagascar are objectives for turn 2, 3 and 4 together with recapture of Borneo.
Some other times the counterattack went very bad leaving the Japan open to USA attack but… it is better to die in a blaze of glory than dying slowly each turn…

@Bunnies:

@Cmdr:

Protecting the S. African complex is a synch, really.

The problem is defending South Africa AND Moscow.

Easier to do then not having units producing in S. Africa.

1)  Instead of driving units to Algeria to reclaim Africa, you can start off the bat dumping units into Arkhangelsk on UK 1.  That means at least 3 rounds more unit drops in Russia then otherwise.

2)  With America going through Africa, America has already saved 40 IPC on Transports AND saved on warships. (2 Destroyers, Battleship, 5 Transports is a pretty good deterant in and of itself, against the Luftwaffe.  The Kriegsmarine should be made short order of with the US Air Corps (3 Fighters, Bomber + I like to have two more bombers out of the saved 40 IPC, netting me 10 IPC.))

3)  2 Transports, Carrier, Destroyer, Submarine in SZ 28 (British) + 2 Infantry/Artillery/Armor in S. Africa per round is plenty to stop Germany from even getting the land in the first place, saving cash for England.  And once you get 24-30 IPC in equipment in place down in Africa (I like Egypt, close enough to run south if Japan comes close, far enough to run to Caucasus in a hurry if needed) for England and Africa’s yours forever.  (Don’t forget, America’s landing 10 Ground Units a round into North Africa as well, it’s not JUST the 24-30 IPC worth of British units there.)

Strat 1:  2-3 transports in Baltic and move Mediterranean fleet west.  Usually only feasible if Germany received bid units in Africa, and/or USSR did not take Ukraine (the extra German fighter’s needed on the attack).  Threatens invasion of London.  Should not be used if Russian fighters landed in Moscow (Allied response:  UK 3 fighters and transport E.Can tank, US transport 2 inf 1 art 1 tank (sacrificing US transports) Russia fighters to London resulting in strong UK defense and immediate threat to Baltic fleet.)

Baltic transports can be used to transport German infantry to Karelia as well as threaten London and reclaim Norway.  If a united Allied fleet gets close, the Germans can counter with German air plus fodder German transports.  However, this strat is not effective against quick Allied air.

Strat 2:  Carrier in Baltic.  To prevent UK 2 fighter 1 bomber destroying German fleet straightaway.  Carrier gives German fighters added range, allowing German threat to London, as well as allowing German fighters stationed at West Europe and on the carrier to rotate duty when attacking Karelia, West Russia, or other points east.

Carrier protects Baltic fleet until the Baltic fleet suicides against the Allied Atlantic fleet.  Carrier is much less inherently useful as attacker or defender; its use to effective extend fighter range is of limited use.  A carrier is stronger against Allied air, but continued Allied buildup force the Germans to use more IPCs on navy, or lose their existing navy.

Strat 3:  Carrier and transport in Baltic.  Threatens London and extendes fighter range.  As above, but with so many IPCs in the water, Germany’s attack on Russia is stalled.

Strat 4:  Nothing in Baltic.  The UK has a lot of targets on UK1:  retake of Anglo-Egypt, the Baltic fleet, etc.  If Germany builds NOTHING in the Baltic, the UK may either attack Anglo-Egypt with less (good for Germany), or the UK may lose lots of air on a risky attack against the Baltic fleet.  Either way, the strategy here is to build infantry and tanks, to press on Russia early; if the UK lets its fighters die, that’s just less force the UK can hit the German ground with later.