Germany should build 10 units a turn

The most effective allied strategy is to KGF.  For this main reason, Germany should fatten up and not lose the war by ensuring many infantry as part of their buys.  Japan will be unstoppable by round 5 (at the latest) since There is no good way to slow Japan enough that really makes a difference.  Japan can even fly a ftr or two to Europe to help keep the allies off Fortress Europe.

@axis_roll:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@axis_roll:

…, try a G1 IC buy in Bulgaria.

You mean Romania?

It is labelled as both Bulgaria/Romania
Similiar to Czech/Hungary

Sorry, I thought this was the Global 1940 thread

I just tried the build 2 factories UK in south africa and india.What a failure that was .It leaves russia wide open for a can opener italy so Germany wins right off the bat.Back to square one all you can do as the allies is KGF with tranny’s.I’m really kinda pissed off now.I think the the china’s representaion in this game is horrible.China had 3.8 million troops and if you think that the 5 divions represented is close your really wrong.Since your letting germany in this game just walk in to moscow the game shuld be balanced with a true representation of china and the 2 million in india.china should have like 12 troops right off the bat .now way would japan just walk on through china like a big joke.And then they should get a infantry for every territory.damn

@Octopus:

Interesting topic (for it goes beyond the obvious).

I just finished a long game as the Axis and the potential to sink the Allied fleet was always on my mind. At one point I did pull it off and sink the British fleet after entering SZ 8. The kicker was the cost benefit of attacking the fleet that made it a no brainer. Fighters are worth 10 while cruisers are worth 12. Going 1 for 1 is a cost benefit. The Allied fleet’s cheapest unit defends the strongest (a fighter at a 4) meaning they will lose their cheapest units last and sacrafice their most expensive units early.

Keep in mind that bombers cost the same as a cruiser while having a higher attack value. The advantage goes to the airforce.

Having a fleet with 2 Cruisers, a battleship, and a carrier (with 2 fighters) is looking to get popped by an airforce that consists of fighters and bombers (assume comparable combat values). Economics demands it (especially if there are 4 juicy transports in tow).

To this end, I think the destroyer (cost of 8) is fantastic as a fighter/bomber eater as it will clearly take the fall for the more expensive ships that need to stay in the fight.

Good Luck!

Right.  Regardless of Capital ships the UK (or US) needs some DDs to shift the cost differential.  With 1 BB and maybe 2 DDs, you are only losing 16 ipcs for 3 hits while Germany would be losing 10 for each ftr.  I typically like to have just enough DDs + intial BB hits for the first wave of a potential G attack.  So 6 ftrs require 3 Allied DDs.  The good thing is you can split the cost of DDs between UK and US, meaning each could supply 1-2.  If you buy 1 AC, 1 CA, 1 DD on UK 1 and US follows with 1 AC, 1 DD on US 1, you probably won’t need another DD unless Germany makes a significant investment in more air.  In Rd 3 you can have a stacked Sz 6 fleet (additional UK3 buy if needed) and also enough to protect Sz 12 with the US ships.

It is beneficial to have a few US ships with firepower in Sz 6 (prior to moving to sz 5) if the Ita ftr is lingering around Fra.  A loaded US AC also gives the US some fighting power up north, even if you only get 1-2 trns up there it still helps and gives you some punch, but it is not enough of an investment to cripple you if you need to start spending in tha Pac or Afr.

@Lynxes:

I think DM is on the right track here, you need to have a core of your fleet in place early and then add DDs as fodder during the game. Getting caught having to buy expensive ships in mid-game when you should be pumping out land units that land in Europe is a bad idea. Also, you need a mix of high and low strength units. 1 CV+2 fig, 2 CA, 2-3 DDs is a nice fleet to have as UK and not too hard to reach. A CV is, as many have said, mandatory, having your fighters parked in UK is useless. And if you send fighters to Karelia, you should STILL buy a CV and put US or UK fighters on it.

Yes, it is a lot easier to find an extra 8 ipcs to buy a dd mid game then to worry about an AC buy.  Plus, if you have enough Capital ships early Germany usually won’t even bother contesting the Atlantic.

I’d probably go for a surge into china while holding the line against Germany.  Never seen this before though so I don’t know for sure, usually Russia just gets beat on while US/UK try to get something going.  My usual Russian strat is kill as many German and Japanese units as possible.

@wodan46:

@Unknown:

So you’re hitting Philippines with 1 TP only??

You would use the Infantry/Artillery, and you’d support with either a Fighter or Cruiser (Battleship can handle Destroyer)

If you send the 2 fighters against the Indian Ocean fleet, then you don’t have the ability to send a different fighter against the Philippines.  In an amphibious assault, the cruiser must either join in wth the naval battle, or move in during the noncombat phase.  The rules don’t allow you to split your fleet and say that 1 part is conducting the naval battle, and the other part will shore bombard.  :-(  I wish that it did.

That means, that if you only send 1 loaded transport against the Philippines, that there is a very good chance (the battle becomes about a 33% chance that you capture, 67% chance that you don’t) that you won’t take it.  This means that you don’t elliminate the US’s NO for the Philippines, and unless you either take New Guinea or the Solomons (both of which leave you open to be attacked), then you don’t get your second NO (the 4 of 6 one)

So, you probably had better send 2 transports to capture the Philippines, because IMHO, sending the 2 fighters against the Indian Ocean fleet is pretty key.

@Woodstock:

In Revised, the Indian IC pretty much always was a bad idea, as Japan could simply react on it on J1.

Unless playing minor victory (which is better balanced than major victory), wherein an Indian factory is essential.

@Woodstock:

And to get back on topic: I think the key difference here opposed to Revised is that in AA50, UK moves after Japan.
If Japan moves away from India, going for the China or Russian route, it might be very liable to buy an Indian IC at UK1.

In some ways, Japan going first hinders the Indian factory.  If UK went first, they might actually get to build in the IC before Japan can capture it.

Purchases: 2 tanks, 7 Infantry

I honestly haven’t found an effective G1 set of attacks for the 41 scenario, even if I do take Ukraine and the Baltic States, it still feels like a paper thin front, idk maybe someone will come up with a new set of plans for ze Germans.