You’re getting closer. Defining it in terms that you have will work for the purposes of this rule.

The UK ships, and all of their other units for that matter, are controlled by one unified UK. The terms Europe economy and Pacific economy are only relevant when it comes to purchasing and placing units and making repairs to facilities. After the purchase and repair phase of the UK’s turn, all of the units move and fight as one power. On the place units phase and collect income phase, then the “economies” are separated again.

The prime response would be a couple of existing US fighters, but since you can’t stage them onto Canada or Iceland or SZ 102 until your 2nd turn, and then only at war (except for SZ 102, so J1) the only way for the UK to receive them would be for them to put a CV in SZ 109, which is dangerous.

The worst thing about a SeaLion threat is that UK needs all its fighters on 1 space, because it cannot defend Scotland and London and a fleet until it has several turns of buys.    This means only 3 scramblers, not the 6 scramblers.    And it means you can’t start an early fleet (say 1 CV and 1 DD in SZ 109) because the fighters will have to jump off once London is threatened, which leaves the fleet bare.

So that’s why CV in 102 is so nice, because its the only direct, safe intervention.  But since you don’t have a CV to start, you’d build US 1, head to SZ 102 US 2, and hope for a J3.  In every other case (J1, J2) you could just land on London as soon as you stage up, but that’d be Iceland US2, London US3.  And if they killed London, your only LZ is back on the carriers…

Thank you for the clarification

I read this about Stuka:

The dive-bomber was a purpose-built aircraft, designed to drop bombs with pinpoint accuracy on frontline battlefield targets. To support their panzer offensives, the Germans developed close air support into an art form and the Stuka was central to this effort. The secret of German successes in this field was the close integration between air and ground units. Stuka squadrons worked hand-in-hand with ground units so they could intervene rapidly at the decisive point of the battlefield. These highly specialist squadrons were in the thick of the action and developed an impressive reputation. The need to fly deep into the heart of battle meant Stuka pilots suffered some of the highest casualty rates in the Luftwaffe, and as a consequence became some of the most highly decorated German servicemen. Hans-Ulrich Rudel was the most famous Stuka pilot and squadron commander of the war. He was also the most highly decorated German soldier of the war, being the only serviceman to receive the Knight’s Cross with Golden Oak Leaves with Swords and Diamonds.

This give the general tactics. Does Variable depiction a special case of the above Stuka tactics?

I’ve seen it happen multiple times in SZ6 around Japan, where a massive US-fleet first sends precisely those units ( sub+air+tt ) in an amphibious assault because they can’t be targetted by kamikaze. After the amphibious assault, the rest of the fleet moves in during noncombat.

I do mean the US should not build anything Atlantic side unless the Axis are contesting the waters. Yes of course don’t let Germany or Italy sit on Gibraltar and threaten stuff they shouldn’t Otherwise, when where Japan is knocked out with a 100% US effort I often lose. When it’s like 80/20 spending by the US or going full blown Europe side, I’m more likely to win them. It’s way easier for Germany to spam a bunch of infantry/ mech infantry and bombers and cover everything while still building for like a round 10 Moscow.

Whereas a hard effort against Japan from the north by Russia and everything else is really hard. Their planes can’t be everywhere and they don’t have enough ground if the allies just keep shoving everything. Come play me on triplea sometime.

Russia and the UK can hold Moscow and the Middle East long enough for the US to get Japan in check and then switch their builds at that critical moment.

Playing the allies is really hard and the timing has to be practically perfect.

lol

Very good point

Yes, without retaliation. The UK Fts land in non com.

@larrymarx:

What about building an airbase in Soviet Far East and having the Americans send stacks of fighters through Asia, first threatening Japan and then moving onward to reinforce your troops in or near your capital?

Not sure if that is a good idea, I think it would be best off just having US sent air power anyways and then have the eastern Red Army capture boarder Chinese territories for US to attack from.

@Ichabod:

@PainState:

A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.

Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.

There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.

Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.

Hi PainState,

From my perspective, if I was planning on doing a G3 Barbarossa AND I wanted to drive towards the south, then yes, it makes sense to not DOW. My stack will be together except for the minimum required mobile units and maybe 1 AAA in Poland so Russia doesn’t attack Poland to get their NO for occupying an Axis territory. But E. Poland will be real strong because the German air will be there and maybe bombers will also be in range of a raid on the Moscow factory. Also, 5 IPCs is more income than I’d probably get as Germany on the 1st turn.

There are a few disadvantages of course. 1, Russian blockers can’t be attacked. 2, the Scandinavian units are behind. But for me that’s ok, I just use them to lay siege anyways. I never expect to get Moscow on turn 6 anymore. I assume that the UK/Anzac and that lone French fighter are going to get to Moscow.Â

I see both sides. Depends upon who you are playing with. While it wasn’t france….the best victory I ever had was one in which I got diced trying to sink the American fleet at Gilbraltor. Had 98 percent odds of winning. Lost my whole airforce and  the American transports were still alive. Desperate measures followed. I relentlessly attacked Moscow the next 2 turns even though I couldn’t take it…then bought all bombers for the final push with my stragglers getting into range. The bombers were my hail Mary prayer because pressure was building on the western front. Moscow fell…allies conceded due to my income and the fact it was a one front war. Had I not been desperate who knows if I would have slow played Russia to long. I had just enough defense in Europe to turtle and hold. Had the bombers failed it was game over for me…but the fact I had a chance to pull a rabbit out of the hat is what  are the game fun.

Also, you mentioned that you have a game group with which you want to play A&A.  If money is tight, one option would be to ask the members of your group to chip in…perhaps even to the point of splitting the cost evenly between all the members, and treating the game as the collective property of the group.  Alternately, one person could buy and own the Europe 1940 game and one person could buy and own the Pacific 1940 game.

@Cow:

You get the middle east by buying air and attacking ground with it.

Air force > Navy in this game

IN SOME SITUATIONS.

Better to prepare for a counter attack where you won’t have to deal with fighters in the battle and coastal bombardments. So no defending the atlantic wall in this version of the game.

I think this take is mostly accurate but sometimes Allies have so many transports and (UK) fighters that they might be able to hold Normandy (especially in cases when the bulk of the Luftwaffe is far away).  In cases like that, it might behoove Germany/Italy (let’s say they are defending Germany, West Germany, and France from a big Allied fleet) to move the France stack to Normandy.  If the USA force is relatively small and the UK force is not enough to take Normandy, a 1-2 attack would be costly and risky.  Landing in Holland instead is not always an option, since it’s adjacent to Normandy and W Germany and within tank/mech range of Germany).

In circumstances like that I’ve had success stacking Normandy with a combined German/Italian stack.