I love the idea of a strong Italy and especially of exploiting the Greece / Black Sea connection, but your battleplan just doesn’t sound practical to me. Some other commenters have touched on some important reasons why the Allies will almost always win against your Mare Nostrum plan, including (a) Taranto attack drains Italy’s income, (b) UK Atlantic fleet left free to plunder Norway, © high chance of losing battles against UK fleets with so many planes down south, and (d) Moscow is probably safe if you sacrifice that many planes against Egyptian ground units.
Here are two more reasons that I don’t see in the comments yet:
(e) there’s not as much income in the Middle East as you think, especially early on, and
(f) your Black Sea fleet is very insecure, and
(g) Allies can fly fighters to Moscow via the northern route.
So, don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of money in the Middle East, but maybe not as much as you think. New Roman Empire is 5 bucks, Persian Oil is 6 bucks if you get all three territories, and Egypt + Jordan + Syria + Iraq + Persia = 8 bucks. So that’s 19 bucks a turn. You’re not going to be able to break into Stalingrad / Caucasus money until later in the game, if at all, because there are just too many territories in the way. If you’re taking Egypt on I4, then even with perfect can-openers, that means you get to Iraq on I5, Northwest Persia on I6, and you don’t get to Caucasus until I7. Income you collect on I7 doesn’t help you at all with a G8 attack on Moscow, and if you’re much later than G8, you’ve lost your window of opportunity. At that point the Americans have contained Japan and are pouring fighters into Europe.
So let’s say you collect an extra $19 per turn on I4, I5, I6, and I7. That’s less than 80 bucks. If you throw away 8 German planes to take Egypt (easy enough to do when there are 12 land units defending Egypt), then there’s your $80 right there. You’re not actually making a profit here.
Next up is your Black Sea fleet, which apparently is defended by nothing more than 1 airbase with 3 German fighters. Russia starts with 3 planes. When they see you fly 3 German fighters to Greece on G3, then if they’re thinking clearly, they’ll buy 2 more planes on R3. Those planes will be perfectly helpful for trading and defense of Moscow; it’s a reasonable purchase. Then if you try dropping 2 Italian transports in the black sea on I3, then on R4 the Russians attack your transports with 5 planes, and if you scramble the 3 German fighters, then the Germans lose all 3 planes for only an average of 2 Russian planes, which is fine for Russia.
Finally, taking Cairo and Leningrad isn’t enough to stop the flow of fighters to Moscow. You need to take Archangel, which is not going to happen if you’re buying bombers and sending your planes south. Planes from a London airbase can reach Archangel in one move, and then can fly to Moscow from there – there’s no requirement that Allied planes flow through Egypt / the Mideast.
@Cow:
My opponents won’t play Allies unless they have a 24 bid now a days.
It is really hard to bust Egypt when the Allies place 2 subs 2 Arty 1 mech
But busting Egypt before Moscow is a pretty non standard play. Does the second sub go into SZ91?
My new German buys will be
G1: 6 Artillery, 1 Sub (S125)
G2: 5 Bombers (G3 Egypt Raid)
G3: 8 Mech, 2 Tanks
G4+: Bomber Spam
Germany swarms the med and Egypt with its Luftwaffe while preparing a concentrated slow push for Moscow G6 by DOW3. Lack of second round fast movers will be compensated with extra bombers for punch.
I do love having a lot of bombers and a couple of subs available because it makes Gibraltor a difficult spot for the U.S./UK unless they over spend (then Japan can win)
Or use bombers to sink UK transports in Southern side of Suez Canal or even in the SZ next to Ethiopia (you have to land there, but to sink 2 transports? totally worth losing 1 bomber)
And if you’ve still got lots of bombers after round 3, you can just use them to annihilate Russia or slip a few over to China and help Japan.
I do love having a lot of bombers and a couple of subs available because it makes Gibraltor a difficult spot for the U.S./UK unless they over spend (then Japan can win)
Or use bombers to sink UK transports in Southern side of Suez Canal or even in the SZ next to Ethiopia (you have to land there, but to sink 2 transports? totally worth losing 1 bomber)
And if you’ve still got lots of bombers after round 3, you can just use them to annihilate Russia or slip a few over to China and help Japan.
Yes I agree, upgrading your Luftwaffe from 2 to 7/8 bombers in G2 will add a lot of flexibility to your play I think, especially because all Allies need to take their firepower and range into account. Kill that small UK fleet, bomb Russia to hell, strike Egypt, prevent USA landings etc. That artillery buy G1 will add some nice body and punch to your Russian stack while still keeping Sea Lion open.
What do you all think is busting / clearing Egypt with the Luftwaffe worth? It’s some “ok, it will cost me x planes and that’s fine”-acceptance or could it even cost nearly all of the Luftwaffe and that would be fine, too?
I don’t think it would be worth it and have never done it. Better to conserve your Air for flexibility.
@hecatomb:
What do you all think is busting / clearing Egypt with the Luftwaffe worth? It’s some “ok, it will cost me x planes and that’s fine”-acceptance or could it even cost nearly all of the Luftwaffe and that would be fine, too?
It REALLY depends on a few things:
How many planes will you lose?
Will Italy be able to keep it?
Can you get a German unit into Cairo, too, to get your NO bonus which would help pay for the lost planes?
Answer it for me without having a detailed example. Does this tactical advantage could become a strategical disadvantage in the long game? Or would this raid mean a strategic goal, even with short-term hindrance?
If the SZ 110 dice go slightly against the Axis on the first round of rolling, UK might take take 3 hits while the Axis takes 4. The Germans would lose three planes which changes the odds in Moscow on G6. Meanwhile UK is left with an intact battleship and needs two fewer loaded carriers to defend the fleet compared to normal. That is a horrible first round. My guesstimate is that the odds of Axis victory would drop from an initial 75% down to 40% just from one slightly bad round of dice rolls. Why take that risk?
Play conservative when you have an advantage. Take more risks if you are falling behind in the game.
Good pointing out the weakness, I will add at least 1 sub to SZ110 and maybe divert a place? Still 2 subs to S106.
Good pointing out the weakness, I will add at least 1 sub to SZ110 and maybe divert a place? Still 2 subs to S106.
Well, I guess that depends on your goal and your risk factor.
Send 2 subs to sz 106 because you absolutely don’t want the extra troops in London, or them to have the use of the 2nd transport/destroyer.
The cruiser down by Gibraltor is the target if you want to support Italy more.
Or send one sub to each if you’re willing to take a bigger risk at a bigger pay off… the chance to kill all 3.
/similarly I’ve taken to sending Japan’s destroyer at the Caroline Islands down to kill ANZAC’s destroyer/transport. Best case scenario has happened once where I killed them, and then when ANZAC attacked to sink the destroyer, he lost another unit (a plane, I think, rather than the cruiser).
My goal is helping Italy out by/while weakening the UK in the first three rounds while preparing for a succesful Barbarossa. Cruiser is indeed greater priority.
The chance of a perfect defense for UK in SZ 110 during the first round is only 5%. I am willing to take that risk as the Axis. Add in a 3% chance of a horrible outcome in France, along with a chance of a very bad SZ111 outcome, and a chance of a miserable Yunnan J1 outcome, and there is about a 15% chance of a major Axis setback during the first round. I am willing to take those odds and if Lady Luck is against me then try to figure out if a desperate Plan B can succeed.
With a risky SZ110 strategy, the Germans face a 30+% chance of having major losses just in that single battle. That is FAR different than a conservative G1 attack. The only reason that kind of probability is justified is if you are going against a superior player and you need incredible luck to swing the odds back into your favor. If there is someone close to my level of skill, I would never want to have that high of a probability to blow the game, especially since the upside of a good G1 is not nearly as significant as the downside of a bad G1.
I have indeed become convinced a standard overwhelming Axis opener (besides maybe Italy who is in a desperate state with not much to lose and lots to gain) is the best option as Arthur has been warning me for a long time. Fortitude is an important aspect of a good general, but luck can also conceal the skill of a general.
There is one moment in the game you can absolutely decide what happens and that is G1 and J1. To win (important) battles is to attack with overwhelming odds.
I also realized there is no way to attack that UK cruiser while sending two subs to S110. I would like the Bismarck to strafe S111 so the two subs are a must.
S111: 2 sub, 1 bb, 1 fighter, 1 tactical
S110: 2 sub, 3 fighters, 3 tacticals, 2 bomber
S106: 1 sub
here is the way i’ve been attacking UK navy on G1
106 - 1 sub
110 - 2 subs, bb, bomber, 2 tac, 2 ftr
111 - 2 subs, bomber, 2 tac, 1 ftr
Use other tac on atak on S france
you can mitigate the losses next turn
