nd waits for the AC, DD, 2 TRN, SS to come from Atlantic/Indian oceans thus saving lots of money on naval units for a short delay,
Does that statement tickle anyone else’s brain? Short delay meaning 3+ turns? How does the united UK fleet off of Aus make it to European seazones in less than 3+ turns?
She is talking about a dump of UK and US forces into North Africa for 3 turns, with a fleet that is immune to the Germans, then when the extra units arrive she can shift anywhere she wants with complete immunity.
The SZ35 fleet can be moved into UK waters on UK4, allowing for a landing in Western that turn, or anywhere else the following turn, with plenty of naval force protection for the TRNs, allowing the UK and US combined fleet to split apart, with UK heading north, and US moving into the Med if they choose.
The net effect is that Russia stands alone against Germany for 3 turns while Germany loses Africa. With solid Russian trading, 4 turns is not a major problem. Then starting in Turn 4 Germany has a few issues… Allied fleets they cannot hope to touch, the Brits hammering them in Norway, Karelia, Eastern, or moving to Archangel to reinforce the Russians, and the US able to hammer Western, Southern, or move through the med to reinforce Caucuses.
It is actually a VERY deadly strat if it is not effectively countered as it allows the UK and USA to make a landing of more than 20 divisions in Turn 4, basked up by AF and BB shots, and enough extra TRN that survivors in addition to build units can strike again elsewhere with no interruption of any shucks.
Not to say it is unstoppable, mind you. You can ask Switch how to stop it, he did it, has done it before and probably will again. So there are ways to stop it, but it’s difficult and it doesn’t leave you a lot of room for error. (Your errors have to be less then your opponent’s errors, IMHO.)
True Jen.
I got my but handed to me by AJAX in a DAAK game a while back with the North African Dominance strat. I have put a lot of thought into countering that one in the 18 months since…
I really must be missing something. How does a unified fleet off of the north west side of Australia get into the W. Europe seazone by UK4? Are we simply assuming that you can sail through the Suez with impunity on UK2? I just don’t see it because you have to be in control of both sides of a canal at the beginning of the turn in order to pass through, which seems to me impossible because Germany can/should have either Egypt and/or Trans-J :? Or did I read some rule wrong or miss something else?
@ncscswitch:
She is talking about a dump of UK and US forces into North Africa for 3 turns, with a fleet that is immune to the Germans, then when the extra units arrive she can shift anywhere she wants with complete immunity.
The SZ35 fleet can be moved into UK waters on UK4, allowing for a landing in Western that turn, or anywhere else the following turn, with plenty of naval force protection for the TRNs, allowing the UK and US combined fleet to split apart, with UK heading north, and US moving into the Med if they choose.
The net effect is that Russia stands alone against Germany for 3 turns while Germany loses Africa. With solid Russian trading, 4 turns is not a major problem. Then starting in Turn 4 Germany has a few issues… Allied fleets they cannot hope to touch, the Brits hammering them in Norway, Karelia, Eastern, or moving to Archangel to reinforce the Russians, and the US able to hammer Western, Southern, or move through the med to reinforce Caucuses.
It is actually a VERY deadly strat if it is not effectively countered as it allows the UK and USA to make a landing of more than 20 divisions in Turn 4, basked up by AF and BB shots, and enough extra TRN that survivors in addition to build units can strike again elsewhere with no interruption of any shucks.
OUCH
KGF sucks (as the axis)
I really must be missing something. How does a unified fleet off of the north west side of Australia get into the W. Europe seazone by UK4?
SZ30 (rd1)
SZ28(rd2)
SZ23(rd3)
SZ12(rd4)
Hello France! (rd5)
SZ 35 to SZ 33
SZ 33 to SZ 27
SZ 27 to SZ 17
SZ 17 to SZ 7
(Aircraft Carrier, Destroyer, Transport off India)
SZ 40 to SZ 42
SZ 42 to SZ 22
SZ 22 to SZ 12
SZ 12 to SZ 7
(Transport, Submarine off SE Australia)
I would like to ask: is it not better to use Indian Fleet against Japan and slowly rebuild UK Home fleet?
Waiting Indian Fleet are 4 turns in which Allies should keep the US and UK fleets togheter.
If UK build slowly up a fleet turn 3 or 4 Allies may separate US and UK fleet landing in two differents territories (UK in Norway and US in Africa). Meanwhile UK Indian fleet may be used to create problems to Japanese.
SZ 35 to SZ 33
SZ 33 to SZ 27
SZ 27 to SZ 17
SZ 17 to SZ 7(Aircraft Carrier, Destroyer, Transport off India)
SZ 40 to SZ 42
SZ 42 to SZ 22
SZ 22 to SZ 12
SZ 12 to SZ 7(Transport, Submarine off SE Australia)
Oh I see, I’m really bad with seazones. I assumed you first unified off of Australia, not immediately run separate ways!
I would like to ask: is it not better to use Indian Fleet against Japan and slowly rebuild UK Home fleet?
I like to kill the Kwang transport myself :D
I usually send the Indian DD to attack Japanese TRN in sz59.
Then unify the British Fleet in sz 30.
From there in UK2 I evaluate the situation.
If possible I try to get a shoot at the Japanese Island in the south Pacific (East Indies or New Guinea).
If USA is rebuilding a fleet on West Coast, I go south of Australia to join with USA Pacific Fleet (Maybe the Fifth Fleet :) ) in the Solomon.
For the UK Home fleet I prefer to buy 1 AC and several TRN for increasing carry capacities and self defence.
To be assured of killing the Kwangtung transport you must throw away an Aircraft Carrier and a Destroyer. Cost: 28 IPC. Gain? 8 IPC. This does not strike me as an overly strong gambit. Especially considering Japan’s going to be spending money on transports either way.
Likewise the submarine in SZ 45 isn’t that big of a deal. Why am I sending perfectly good fodder at worthless targets? Killing the Submarine in SZ 45 has never saved my American Aircraft Carrier. Even if it did, what, American can’t just buy two carriers and a fighter on US 1 if it wanted too?
However, I split my fleet and run for home. I now have a 128 IPC fleet not including any fleet I purchase. That’s plenty to kill off some pesky carriers that Germany actually had to blow money on, money it did not blow on ground units to pressure Russia.
As for Japan, they’re neither further along nor farther behind because of their extra Transport. Not in the grand scheme of things.
If Russia have 6 inf in Bury, then the surviving trans may be a problem, but if you don’t attack the trans, then
Russia naturally will retreat to Yakut, before the UK turn. This may be an issue in multiplayer…
There are very few players who don’t do the DD attack, it’s generally reckon to be one of the most important
opening moves.
Ah, see, to me that’s a major problem. Why am I leaving 18 IPC worth of units where they can be shelled at will by the Japanese to defend a 1 IPC plot of perma-frost?
I’ll usually have 1 infantry in Buryatia (to force you to keep a battleship behind, or devote some honest forces to take Bury) and have 3 infantry in Yakut and 2 infantry in Novosibirsk. That’s what happens to my 6 Siberian Infantry units, normally.
To be assured of killing the Kwangtung transport you must throw away an Aircraft Carrier and a Destroyer. Cost: 28 IPC. Gain? 8 IPC. This does not strike me as an overly strong gambit. Especially considering Japan’s going to be spending money on transports either way.
You think of this incorrectly. It is 28 IPCs of units that basically has no value to you since it is so far away, and the 8 IPCs you are destroying definitely slows down Japanese land invasion. If you don’t take it out, India falls on J1 for sure if you counterattacked Anglo, and also stacking 6 inf in Bury or even 1 doesn’t remotely bother the Japanese anymore. It is also 28 IPCs of units you don’t have to replace in any way. Looking purely at IPC costs of units isn’t very useful; I mean really do you go “wow, the UK lost 55 IPCs of units - Anglo Egypt, SZ13, SZ15, at the cost of 2 German inf! They lose!”
As for Japan, they’re neither further along nor farther behind because of their extra Transport.
I don’t understand how you could say this. An extra transport will allow the Japanese to move in faster. Waiting for UK 5 to invade Norway because you’re waiting for the Indian fleet does slow down the Allied advance.
Because the added increase of Japanese movement is not significant if looked at in a 10 round game perspective. Sure, for rounds 1 and 2 they’ll be moving faster, but that rate of benefit decreases in value over time, eventually reaching a peak performance and never exceeding that curve.
Meanwhile the 6 infantry you claim are too far away from Germany to help, are actually not all that far. Again, we’re talking 3 rounds before they are fully redeployed against Germany. In the over all grand scheme of a 10 round game, this is not much time at all. And considering that 18 IPC out of 24 IPC in come is rather significant (not to mention it’s 12 Punch on defense, roughly 2 hits a round more) that can be sorely needed agaisnt the German war machine.
Remember, I also advocate that British fleet redeployment to Europe. Coincidentally, that’s also a 3 round journey. That means you have just limited the Germans to 3 rounds before all hell breaks lose.
I think that Japanese TRN in sz59 is enough important also looking forward to a 10 round game.
IMHO it is more important than the Indian DD, so the best thing that the indian DD may do in its short operative life is to attack and sink the TRN. After that it will be utterly killed by a Japanese BB… Royal Navy is famous for winning the Wars not the battle.
The AC is not needed, 1 more die point is useless. We are speaking of a battle between a DD (50% of hit) against a TRN (about 16,7%). I and my friends play Revised by almost two years, and I have still to see the UK DD sunk by the Japanese TRN.
So AC and TRN may be saved. Having the Japanese fleet the need to kill the destroyer, Indian Ocean Fleet is almost free of doing whatever UK player wants. Usually I join them in sz30 with the SUB and TRN from sz40.
Moreover, if UK leaves sz35 Japan has an easy shot to India in first turn, and maybe UK fleet cruising to Europe will receive a lot of bad news from what happening in Russia.
In a face2face game of us, Japanese player conquered India and placed there an IC in J1. Good move in my opinion.
Regarding Buratyia usually we pull back all the infantry to Yakut. I think that leaving one there to be shot by a JApanese BB is not useful. I do not think that Russia should spend inf to defend Allied ships in Pacific that USA may replace if needed and UK do not care because almost useless.
This is also, as Trihero said, a move relly needed in multiplayer games (we usually are 4 or 5 players).
Because if Russia retreat then UK may attack or not the TRN in sz59. If Russia leave units in Buratyia UK must attac kthe TRN in sz59.
The DD attack on the Jap trans is 70%-72%.
That means it fails statistically about 1 of 4 or 1 of 5 times ?
Lucifer, statistically you are rigth.
But as I said I have never seen those DD sunk without killing the Japanese TRN.
Statistically speaking we will see it one day. Maybe UK players in our playgroup has always been lucky.
The day the TRN will sink the UK DD, we will learn to send other shi pwith the DD.
Maybe the entire Indian Fleet!!!
I’ve seen the DD and the AC sunk with the Transport alive. Not often, but I’ve seen it (like twice this year.)
Anyway, if you attack with a DD you have an 85% chance to sink the transport and a 30% chance to be sunk by the transport. However, you have a 100% chance to be sunk before England moves again, I guarantee that!
I’m all about conserving what you have and not wasting it on futile attacks if at all possible. The Transport in SZ 59 is nice to kill if you are backing it up with an attack on Borneo and New Guinea. (2 Inf, Fig to Borneo, 2 Inf to New Guinea, both statistically in your favor.) Followed by an attack on the SZ 45 submarine, for good measure and a strong American build in SZ 55 to drive the point home that Japan’s going on defensive maneuvers this game.
But unless you are willing to commit to that level of aggressiveness to Japan, I think the better choice is to leave the transport (one that would be rebuilt anyway costing only 8 to Japan and 12 to England minimum) in favor of building fighters for a few rounds and then having a full fleet with a very strong air force from then on.
It’s opportunity cost, I guess.
