Topics created by bcclark7

Yea, I’ve been doing enhanced for a while, the destroyers are more expensive in revised.

So America buys 2 Carriers, Fighter then next round 3 destroyers, etc, etc, etc

Anyway, Canadian shield’s no real response.  Russia’s going to be all over Germany like flies on a hobo if they even attempt that maneuver while America’s massing ships, hell, even if Germany tries to go land and makes an attempt to roll over Moscow leaving Africa to the English.

The real question is, does Japan ignore America and lose all their islands and their entire fleet or does Japan build in response.  Since most players are going to build submarines in response (since they are cheaper than destroyers you can mass more of them faster) then America pulls out after just a few rounds (still more than enough time to rescue England if needed) leaving Japan with a bunch of useless submarines.

Meanwhile, America was building destroyers which, if you get the technology, and why shouldn’t you since you don’t need to build more destroyers at the moment, can bombard the Germans into the stone age with all but no expense to America. (Hell, given that arrangement, I’d recommend Bomber builds to just sink the Germans deeper in debt.  You only need 1 infantry a round to do your bombardments.)

Furthermore, now Japan’s building ground units like crazy, but Russia can divert 100% of it’s military power to defending against Japan and England can devote 100% of it’s air and ground power to attacking Japan.  Only England’s navy is tasked with ensuring that SZ 5 is cleared of enemy ships so that America is free to bombard each round.

@ncscswitch:

The North African Dominance (NAD) strat is FAR superior to the Brazil IC strat for keeping Africa in Allied hands.

It requires fewer transports, achieves the same purpose in allowing for Allied landings south of Sahara, and does so with far fewer IPC’s committed by the Allies.  It also maintains an Allied shift-threat to northern Europe, AND an Allied threat to Southern Europe that the Brazil IC does not accomplish.

But hey, if you want to waste the cash, feel free.

Yea, but you taught me very well how to bottle up the North African Dominance strategy with very little effort and resources with Germany.

Sorry to say it, but NAD is not superior, it’s inferior against a veteran player.  Too easy for Germany/Japan to dump in Egypt and now Germany is +9 IPC and England/America is +2 IPC (Algeria, Libya) for a net +7 to the Axis.

However, if moving from Brazil/S. Africa, the reverse is true.  Germany/Japan may have Egypt, Libya and Algeria but that’s only 4 IPC while England has the rest +7 IPC.

Just the way I see it, though.

If you are playing a KJF (or playing 50/50 correctly), losing India should not be a concern.

I would agree an IC in an all out KGF is a bad idea.

But the russians can support India sufficiently in most cases.

I was victorious. The UK’s navy was destroyed very early in the game, and my Japanese counterpart did very well. Moscow was taken!!!

@mateooo:

and most importantly, the italians are better spaghetti makers than allies.  If you have a choice, pick anyone else.

Only we Italians are able to do spaghetti. Spaghetti made outside of Italy are good for gluing poster on the walls.

“How may I do thy bidding my Master?”

@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.)

BTW, I missed it before in your last uber post, Bunnies, thanks for the props on the excitement on KJF, and recognizing I have some experience to draw on when I talk.

If Germany forsakes taking Africa because of the complex in S. Africa,then the complex has paid for itself.  If Germany bleeds out trying to keep a foothold on Africa then the complex pays for itself in reduced German presence.

However, the interesting thing really isn’t Germany, it’s what that complex can do to Japan. wink