German Navy pieces

It’s a good strategy.  The main benefit is it prevents the Allies from landing Algeria on Turn 1-2.  Another thing to like about it is you’re credibly harassing the Allies without losing any IPCs on naval units.

I’d probably attack the fleet with the RAF and probably also with the BS and trannies (which I’ll retreat to 8).  If Germany submerges, I take a shot with the American bomber.  So odds are there’s only 1-3 subs left over to go to the Med.  Meanwhile the combined fleet is in 8 (UK buys an AC and a fighter), and I put my Russian sub in 12.

At that point, if Germany moves to the Med I can go to Norway with the combined fleet, while the United States builds up air power to knock out the Med fleet.  If the Med fleet moves to Egypt or the Black sea I can land Algeria, which signals the beginning of the end for the Med fleet unless Germany invests in an AC.

Possibly the better move for Germany if 2-3 subs survive in SZ7 is to attack the combined fleet in sz 8 with 5 figs, 2 bombs, and 2-3 subs.  However, this is a good battle for the Allies unless Germany has 3 subs.  Nonetheless if Germany has 2 subs it might still be Germany’s best option to attack and hope for good dice.

I think this opening has enormous chances of success against non-experts.  Against experts I’d prefer to go to Egypt strong and get 5 infantry instead of a bomber.

@AxisOfEvil:

@Cmdr:

Actually, I am quite proud that I, and game play, have convinced about 25% of the voters

….

40 votes Russian Fighter
10 votes British Bomber

I really, really look for things to agree with you about jen. I like your enthusiasm in your analysis. But im confused. How can you incorrectly quote vote results that are posted at the top of this thread. How can anyone agree with you when your misrepresent obviously verifiable facts. Note the time and date of my post here. I am going to reproduce the numbers I see at the top:

ONE Russian Fighter  34 (79.1%)
ONE British Bomber  7 (16.3%)
ONE Japanese Fighter  1 (2.3%)
ONE American Bomber  0 (0%)
ONE German Fighter  1 (2.3%)
Remove Vote

Total Voters: 43

Look, they even include a handy % next to the number for us!! sweet. So 43 total votes. 7 for UK bomber. And logically, if 79.1% of the votes are for the russian fighter, it does not mean Jen can claim the other 20.8%. There are other options, created be Jen herself. Think of those as the Nadar vote, it doesnt count for your side Jen.

Again, why should we debate easily verifiable facts, especially ones posted at the top of the page!!!

Hence my observation of the Florida vote count (no political agenda was implied!)

@Woodstock:

In this thread, the G1 AC + 3 TRN buy seems to put quite a load on both UK and USA, right to RND2 at least.

If you know what you are doing, then AC+3T can be a very good buy.

If you dont, you can be defeated much easier.

I have found that in my first few rounds playing germany, I was much to aggressive.  Usually I get so burned out pounding Russia, that by the time that I am in striking distance or moscow i am unable to fend off US/UK assaults into WE, SE etc.  I agree with the previous posts that suggest a solid INF and FIG anchor.  Since you always have the advantage on the defensive, let Russia burn its self out on a what it think is a conservative germany, meanwhile you destroy/delay the US/UK shucks with a combine german fleet on SZ 12, with a FIG stack in WE.  Russia will be so tickled pink to get those extra 3-5 IPCs that it my become overly aggressive.  Whenever an ally sticks a vulnerable army out, you will be in position to lop it off.  All the while Japan weakens Russia, and moves in for the kill.  Of course this only works in a KGF came.  If Japan gets tied down Germany is living on borrowed time.

That’s my portion of the test.  Can I keep England and America out and leave it just me vs Russia?

Also, I put the bid to Japan, instead of Germany to balance not taking out Egypt, which I think is what he said was a death knell for the Axis.

i have done the same in my game vs Mojo. (ie wiped out all russias offense, including Figs…) But im down on takns, and now concentrate oon holding the key german areas with Inf, Art and Figs.

Actually, this was teh thread that started teh whole thing that led to LHTR 1.3.  It was about using friendly ships that were already in an enemy occupied sea zone as fodder for your attack on those enemy ships.

Under the new LHTR that came out of this, the Allies can NOT use those US ships that are already in SZ59 as fodder for a UK attack on the Japan ships in SZ59.

This became the “Multinational Forces on Attack” thread.

The main reason you could do that is because you took London on G2, so he couldn’t possibly increase his naval force (not to mention he lost a fighter off his carrier). Plus, the US didn’t really put any effort into co-guarding the UK fleet because he is trying to go after Japan first.

You made an excellent choice in this circumstance and it is a good example of what I think the German navy was designed for, but in normal circumstances the costs would have been greater and the benefits less if the US/UK had united in SZ8 and built some navy together (and not lose the capital  :lol:)