Carrierland

[Jennifer]

Bean,

I have to admit, my response to carriers is to build fighters.  Why?

Yes, submarines are cheaper, slightly.  However, their specialty is destroyed with a single destroyer so their cost effectiveness is somewhat limited.

Yes, planes are more expensive, slightly.  However, after I sink your navy, I can use the planes to attack your land holdings and defend my infantry stacks.  Submarines cannot do that.  Thus, when your fleet is destroyed, what do my submarines get to do???

However, if Germany builds a carrier or two, I will most likely have to build a carrier with America (assuming the one at pearl was sunk, a good assumption I think.)  That means I’ll have two, 1 UK, 1 US should be enough firepower with the 2 battleships, 3 destroyers, submarine and 8 transports to withstand a German attack. (Think unification of LA Fleet and Pacific/Indian Ocean Fleets around turn 3.)

Meanwhile, as I’ve been lambasted for stating before, during that time I have negated the German fleet by retaking Africa.  I can get it faster then Japan can come to help Germany, meaning England’s not too far in the hole, especially if they end up with Norway to make up for India.

[trihero]

Bean,

I have to admit, my response to carriers is to build fighters.  Why?

Well, fighters are my most logical counter as well. Didn’t I say earlier I thought it might be best for the UK to overbuild fighters?

That means I’ll have two, 1 UK, 1 US should be enough firepower with the 2 battleships, 3 destroyers, submarine and 8 transports to withstand a German attack. (Think unification of LA Fleet and Pacific/Indian Ocean Fleets around turn 3.)

Well, that would ruin my day if I thought that buying carriers would give me a shot at killing navy. But I don’t buy the carriers in order to threaten Allied shipping, I don’t think about it even a bit. So it’s very strawman to say that I can’t attack the Allied fleet. The whole point is, how are they going to deal with it? They are not going to be very happy without their favorite shipping zones disabled. And if you simply do your North Africa dominance remember that Germany will not have to make a second carrier until round 5 when the Allies are actually able to attack SZ5 with enough force to scare them, meaning plenty of troops to push Russia around and defend W. Europe with.

Meanwhile, as I’ve been lambasted for stating before, during that time I have negated the German fleet by retaking Africa.  I can get it faster then Japan can come to help Germany, meaning England’s not too far in the hole, especially if they end up with Norway to make up for India.

Well, it’s impossible to count on getting far in Africa with solely Germany early on, so I’m not exactly frightened that you’re overlanding large quantities of men that are going to take 2 IPCs away from me and threaten Japan 5 turns later.

And the German fleet is anything but negated. It’s still there waiting to block entry into Berlin, E. Europe, and Karelia. If anything it’s more stable since Germany has the time to build land troops before having to build that second carrier.

How are you actually thinking about containing Germany with all those troops in Africa, and the best landing zones locked out since you don’t have SZ5? All I see is that you’re saying that I can’t kill your Allied navy and Germany doesn’t have Africa - both of which are the most minimal requirements that the Allies have to meet within the first few rounds. Where’s the pressure? S. Europe will disrupt the shuck, and you aren’t going into Norway until round 4 or 5, and you are forced to walk bottleneck from Norway instead of being able to combine forces quickly through SZ5.

[Jennifer]

Think of it this way, Bean.  With a large Allied contingent in Egypt they are 2 turns from Caucasus/India which means you HAVE to send forces down there to stop them.

[trihero]

If you land inf in Algeria on Round 2, it will be Round 7 before they can attack India or reinforce Caucasus. It will be round 8 before your second wave of inf can arrive. That seems to me a lot of rounds for little gain, just the 2 IPCs taken from Germany. Once you arrive to threaten India, Japan should be able to field enough troops for minimal defense; remember they have 6 fighters with not much else to do.

And also back to the main topic, maybe Germany doesn’t even have to build a carrier to start with. It seems popular not to even strafe the Baltic fleet when nothing is added to it; people seem to wait for extra UK/US fighters. Build the carrier on G2 or later and you’ll have less troop worries in the short run.

[Enskive]

the best respons to a german ac built in the baltic is uk fighters.

uk purcase round1 and 2 3 fighters

then round 3 u can atack whith 9 fighters and 1 bomber, against 2 sub 1 tranny 1 dest and 1 ac 2 fighters. The calc says 99% chance whith 6 unit left.

and if germany purcase 1 ac in round 3, it has 4 fighters 2 subs 1 tranny 1 dest and 2 ac. Against 9 fighters and 1 bomber it gives uk a chance of 55% chance whih 1.78 units left. That is ok for the UK, uk fighters for germans, il trade any day. So in the 3 first rounds u need to invest 32 icp on navy, more if u want to be sure in cant be sunk.

In the mean time US is going trough the med treaten we, se, balkans, ukarine. The only area u dont trade is norway. The other problem is that germany can hold kardelia.
No presure from germany against russia eraly on will mean that japan will have a hard time.

u spent at least 32 icp the 3 first rounds and u only take a treat against norway away(usal u cant take EE anyway the 3 first rounds, what u can do if you stack kar.

[trihero]

That’s what I was thinking too, Enskive. Force the Germans to either abandon their navy or invest more into it early!

and if germany purcase 1 ac in round 3, it has 4 fighters 2 subs 1 tranny 1 dest and 2 ac. Against 9 fighters and 1 bomber it gives uk a chance of 55% chance whih 1.78 units left. That is ok for the UK, uk fighters for germans, il trade any day. So in the 3 first rounds u need to invest 32 icp on navy, more if u want to be sure in cant be sunk.

I’m not sure I would attack with the UK in that situation. That’s 8-9 fighters for 4 German fighters? With those kinds of chances the battle can go horribly wrong quite often, but the point was you made the Germans invest more into navy early.

[Enskive]

It is not 8-9 fighers for 4 fighters.

Germany have put 72 icp in the fleet. U have purcase 6 fighters to take it out. So it is a god trade for UK. u are using and ekstre 30 ICP from fighters u have on the bord, but germany also have units for 36 ICP. That is 108 ICP for germany 90 for the UK. 105 if u count whith the bomber. That trade i will make any day.

But ofcourse if u have the time waith 1 more round and have some ekstre fighters whith u. you can alwayes decide when u see the bord.

let me say althings are easyer in theroy. There are alwayes counters, that can counters, that can counters.

But i have never lost to a german ac purcase round 1. So to me it dosent work. But what do i now :)

[Jennifer]

Just a thought, but if you’ve cost the Germans 72 IPC out of how many rounds and bought 60 IPC in fighters and other equipment to sink it, what are you buying to help Russia???  Did you leave Germany uncontested in Africa resulting in them earning 50+ a round while you are earning less then 20 a round?

Straight cost analysis is great, but what’s the ratio to income?  If Germany loses 2 infantry to Russia and only kills 1 Russian, while cost analysis says the Russians are ahead, I think the Germans are really ahead in that exchange.  A) Germany makes more then Russia.  B) Russia has two enemies to contend with.

If England purchased 6 additional fighters to sink 2 carriers, 2 submarines, transport, destroyer and 4 fighters but lost Africa who is really ahead?

[Enskive]

afrika is alwayes contested.

Uk sends 2 tanks and 2 inf there first round, and Us goes there all game. Anglo is retaken.
if germany purcase 2 ac in the first 3 rounds, russia will have it easy so UK dosen need to send help the first couple of rounds. US is going trough the med taking we, se and balkans, so there is alot of help.
The best help russia can get is germany purcase and ac. the problem is also that germany using alot of icp to controld on sea zone, that gives the control of 1 area norway, it helps germany in EE but there is normal a good stack so u cant take that anyway.

As i said thing dont alwayes go on the borad as it dose on the forum. But i have never seen this strat work agains a top player.

have any of u beaten a top player whith this strat?.

We can debate this alot but it is the games that speach the truth.

[Jennifer]

Okay, then you believe in the Northern Africa Domination Strategy, which is a good strategy.  But if England is landing in Algeria with 2 infantry, 2 armor in round 1, then they are not landing in Norway.  They have nothing to land there WITH.

[Enskive]

no ofc, if germany wants invest so much icp to hold norway free for 3 ore 4 turns then let them. Because u only hold norway free.
But u have still 1 art free, and u can alwayes sail them back round 2 if there is a reason. But the only navy u have is a bb and 2 trannys, u dont want them in range of the german navy.

The AC may works better against an US going trough norway, i dont no, never uset it. But against US in the med it fails.

I woud like to here about some games were it have workt.

[Jennifer]

Yes, but you see, I am saying Germany can hold Norway without defenders for free.  I’m not buying anything, I just threaten you with 2 submarines, 4 fighters, 1 bomber, transport and destroyer at least.

[Enskive]

whith out the ac u dont have to purcase 3fighters for uk. And u can go to norway but only whith 1 inf. Uk round 1 2 inf 1 ac and 1 tranny. Then u have 1 bb 1 ac 2 fighters and 3 trannys in sea zone 3, u use the russian sub to block for the tranny and dest. U will only have 1 inf in norway, but that is not so importen the importen thing is what u can do round 2 whith uk. That gives germany about 10% chance to sink the navy. Then u just let usa go to afrika.

A smart person will watih for round 2 to purcase a german ac. because i have now comitted uk 1 to a navy purcase. I still dont think it is a good ide, but u will have distrupted the Uk counter to the ac purcase.

The best way to defent norway is to stack kar, and trade it whith UK.

The way i do it is to stack kar, and move the dest and the 2 subs to sea zone 7. The chance of during some dmg whit the fleet is not that high. But u can now defent we whith 2 inf and 4 fighter, and there is a good chance that the tranny will be alive round 2. And that means 2 more inf in kar.

Kar is the most importent area for germany, if u hold that the allies cant land europe, they can only trade. Germany needs to presuer russia, that will make the japans game so much easyer. And that means u gonner trade WE in round 2.

[trihero]

Okay, then you believe in the Northern Africa Domination Strategy, which is a good strategy.

I just tried this strategy against myself, and it didn’t go well. I didn’t do anything special with the Axis to specifically counter it, I just went about my usual business. Germany was uncontained for many turns, and infantry units landed in Algeria on Round 2 were able to go to Persia on Round 6, but didn’t want to do because Japanese forces were built up. UK landed in Norway on Round 5, and the US burnt up its bb/2 dest 8 fighters and a bomber in order to kill 3 car 5 fig 2 sub 1 tran.

I think I must be doing something wrong overall, though I’m not sure what it is.

[Jennifer]

Were you landing England in Norway/Karelia/Archangelsk and only America in North Africa after round 1?

America should be hitting Persia on round 5 and putting immediate pressure on Japan’s industrial might at that point onward.

[trihero]

Were you landing England in Norway/Karelia/Archangelsk and only America in North Africa after round 1?

America should be hitting Persia on round 5 and putting immediate pressure on Japan’s industrial might at that point onward.

I really must not understand the strategy. I thought you had to wait for the Indian carrier/dest to link with the main fleets in order to go to SZ6 safely, and that happens on UK4-5. Otherwise I’d feel like I would have to buy more UK navy to defend off of Norway. I also didn’t think the Allies could land in Algeria on round 1 because of the bb/tran/sub + 5 fighters 1 bomber ready to strike boats there.

So I counted Round 2 infantry in Algeria, being in Persia on Round 6, and not even bothering the Japanese because they took India on round 1, built a complex on round 2, then 3 infantry on each round afterwards. When the Allies got to TJ, they had to wait a round before wandering into Persia because of the sheer Japanese force easily waiting to roll them backwards.

[Lucifer]

Personally I don’t think the G AC buy is a good strat, and more than one is only worse.
But sometimes allies can’t even land in Afr. rnd. 1 becuase Germany may do sealion.
And in other games there’s even sub, trans + BB in sz 13, 4 G ftrs in WE + bmr in Berlin makes
allie landing in Afr. too dangerous, better to wait until rnd. 2.

To let Germany have Afr. uncontested means allies is letting axis win. E.o.d.

[Jennifer]

Bean:

The “classic” (as in what most people describe as) North Africa Domination is England solely on North Russia from UK 2 on and America in North Africa every turn.

MY version is a few rounds in North Africa with England and then solely into Asia.  But in my version, England’s only buying 4 infantry for a few rounds as well, the rest goes to fighters which land in Russia to defend.  That usually works out to about 6 or 7 British fighters by the time I have 4 transports for England.

[trihero]

The “classic” (as in what most people describe as) North Africa Domination is England solely on North Russia from UK 2 on and America in North Africa every turn.

I wonder how the UK can afford to operate by itself early on if there’s a carrier in the Baltic, maybe they have to build something silly like car/dest?

MY version is a few rounds in North Africa with England and then solely into Asia.  But in my version, England’s only buying 4 infantry for a few rounds as well, the rest goes to fighters which land in Russia to defend.  That usually works out to about 6 or 7 British fighters by the time I have 4 transports for England.

I see, I was trying it different.

[Jennifer]

Carrier in the Baltic is meaningless to England.  You are off loading in SZ 4.

In my version, the carrier in the baltic can be sunk without American interference.  But in Classic it’s just a 16 IPC tourist attraction since you don’t want to land in E. Europe anyway!