What are your thoughts on Anzac taking Brazil and building a shipyard there? What you would do is take Brazil as soon as possible build a naval base and then shuck units into Europe. What about A MIC in Brazil for Anzac? Or does Anzac not have that kind of money.
ANZAC has nowhere near the IPCs to build any facilities, especially early in the game.
ANZAC grabbing Brazil is mainly useful if the other Allies have no troops to spare. Otherwise the British or the Americans should absolutely take over instead.
@SuperbattleshipYamato Thanks for letting me know! What would be a case where Anzac would have to take Brazil?
@FranceNeedsMorePower
You can bring ANZAC to nearly 30 IPC if
A) You take immediately Papua and new Guinea; sooner o later you would be at war with Japan
B) British Pacific keep on holding Malaysia
C) you can grab one or two of the money island
D) you move transport to Brasil and take it. better go there with just one artillery; you get 4 infantry for free
Then you will get enough money to build a decent navy and help US, and also build a MIC in Brasil, to hold on on GBTR
Yes, but that situation is extremely unlikely in out-of-box Global 1940 games.
The Japanese should have no problem grabbing Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.
The situation is different if you’re playing with a bid, but even so there are probably better uses of that money. No matter what ANZAC does, they’ll always be subordinated to or have to cooperate with the other Allies in some way, and it doesn’t really matter whether they’re cooperating in Europe or in the Pacific. The 12 IPCs need for a minor industrial complex would be better used building 2 submarines.
The only situation where a minor industrial complex in Brazil would work is if the Allies are preparing to attack the strict neutrals and the Americans were too busy to deal with South America.
@Marco-Luti Have you play tested this before? Is this a worthy strategy? @SuperbattleshipYamato What are your thoughts on this?
What Marco Luti proposed isn’t really a strategy.
All he’s saying is that ANZAC could get to 30 IPCs using A, B, C, and D. He doesn’t say that’s what the Allies should do.
And it’s unclear what kinds of facilities he proposes ANZAC should build in Brazil, if any.
I still am having trouble grasping the reality of this concept in general
@TheDesertFox @SuperbattleshipYamato @Marco-Luti Alright Personally I think we may have stumbled against a great idea. During a lot of times in the game Japan is not threating Sydney that or Sydney is just well defended I think an Anzac Base In Brazil is helpful. I’m also having trouble understanding this to but I think this has potential. If Anzac is able to shuck 2-3 Guys each turn into Africa or some other place that would be very helpful. I think we all need to look more into this and test it.
@SuperbattleshipYamato @Marco-Luti @TheDesertFox So what bases would you buy Marco, do you think this is worth a dive? Meaning a possible strategy? I think this has potential and i think we should give it a chance and not blow it over.
@crockett36 @barnee @Imperious-Leader @Panther @Stucifer @Daaras @Cornwallis It think you all should look at what’s going on here. I think this could be a really good strategy.
As for the people already on here add people who you think would be interested or would be able to support or defeat this strategy.
Again, I really think this has quite potentially if we consider it.
I think this work well with a KGF or a KIF.
@FranceNeedsMorePower I am no expert player, but have watched and studied expert play. A lot of people use 54 as an anchor and a fortress to project power over the money, islands and threatened to recapture them or to capture Caroline, which is very powerful and threatened both the main lands, China and the money islands. Anzac purchases can tip the scales in the allied favor inship versus ship,
The problem of course is this is a defensive action and only counts mathematically for defense. I also find 54 to be too accommodating to a Japanese expansion. It fights the fight exactly where Japan wants to fight the fight, endangering in India and Queensland, and protecting the Philippines further in the war the fleets can move between Queensland and Caroline versus the axis ships moving between Malaya and Philippines, so nothing happens, except Japan, live votes more and more of its aircraft to the new carriers that are being brought on board to keep up with the arms race. Those are solid strategies and not to be disparaged however, they do not advance the football because of the political rules America gets into the game too late and so this trench warfare develops without advantage to the Allied player Andrew AA gamer does this extremely well and you should study his Japan movements. What is a historical about this is that the allied purpose was to avoid trench warfare or stalemate.
What I like to do is have a main battle fleet and then side fleet that makes the Japanese also divide their fleets. I think a fleet should always be endangering the mainland with the transport. See how many games the Japanese are able to hold the mainland with just a handful of infantry and three anti-aircraft. It’s disgusting and obviously bad strategy also the waters of Japan and the waters of the money islands should always be convoy ABLE. In other words subs that could slip into a convoy anytime they are left without a destroyer you ought to have more submarines on the board than his destroyers that is a job for Anzac. I also think you ought to try and have US carriers that have room on their decks for Anzac fighters because that can increase the range of attack from 4 to 7 because the carrier can move three and the fighter can move for the other the other great use of the Anzacs is to block with Anzac destroyers. On account of the need for offensive coordinated action the Anzacs also are the ones that should be taking over islands with transport and ground units so that if the Americans want to attack together, they can so I see Anzac as crucial in capturing islands, providing blockers, convoying seasons, and I have a hard time seeing diverting energy to the Atlantic. I think you are throwing away a huge advantage of having four different, perhaps five different nations, taking down the Japanese.
@crockett36 I understand what your saying and I appreciate it. You said something on the lines of if Anzac focuses just on the pacific you have 4-5 countries trying to take down Japan. So it’s sounds like you dis-favor this idea. Is that correct? Just wanted to clarify. Or are you neutral. My thinking is what if you had another power in Europe? I’m no expert I just think Anzac being able to “shuck” units into Europe is helpful especially when we are talking about Anzac. I think Marco may be onto something.
Also when you said I have a hard time seeing diverting energy to the Atlantic that’s my point. That as far as I know no one has really tried this before which means it could be more benefitable having Anzac In Europe rather than the Pacific.
Again, I’m not taking a side I’m just curious if this should be tried or not or if this is an idea to consider.
@FranceNeedsMorePower I think it is imperative that Anzac stay in its lane in its ocean PTO.
@crockett36 a good experiment for you would be to do the math that it would take the allies to catch up to the Japanese Navy and aircraft. How many rounds of full production in the PTO would it take to catch up to the Japanese?
@crockett36 after that consider the reality of offensive warfare you can’t count your carriers for attackers and then to be even more realistic. Imagine Japan tries to keep up with the arms race.
Hey, another idea if you’re looking for fresh ideas to play around with is sea zone seven which I have called my friend has called the magnificent seven as a place to park every available American ship give the Japanese go to season 3635 or 33. Another possibility is filling the ocean with destroyers from Anzac and UKP and the United States destroyers in order to block their movements, this in combination with magnus seven keeping the Russians in a more moving the Indian troops in the Burma perhaps even Russian fast movers makes for a very bad day for Japan.
@crockett36 Alright, would you suppose that I should use triple a for that?
@FranceNeedsMorePower yes you should and or could and also look up sneaking car pants and not intuitive but declaring war something like they’re doing all this combat action and you can’t stop them until the WDOW, which happens actual combat. It’s really funky silly I am in my opinion.
@crockett36 sticky Carl
@crockett36 I understood nothing you said, sorry. Could you re-explain without metaphors please. Thanks. :)
