Yes, it should, but since the game has been obsoleted by a 2nd edition, it probably will not be. However, in cases like this where a rule is clarified in the 2nd edition which also exists in the 1st edition, it’s safe to apply the clarification retroactively to the 1st edition as well.
Fortress Europe Axis Strategy
-
Interesting… your making a lot of assumptions here…
I like your Turn 1 strategy. but your need for Japanese fighters in Western Europe is Weird.* The UK/US will keep spending money on fleets instead of ground units.
Your assumption of what the allied player(s) will continue to spend their money on in later turns is a bit short sided.
starting in R1 UK could choose to rebuild the Navy or become an Airforce. what would you do if UK decided to send fighters every round to defend Russian territories… Allowing Russians to more actively engage other areas with their fighters cause britain Fighters take over for defense. Dont forget American fighter can also do the same… and america has the money to also build a fleet.Also, why would the allies not at some point change their strategy? with UK losing its fleet entirely in round 1 america may choose to build a complex in sinkiang.
I simply cant see everything you described panning out unless your playing an inexperienced player. You can’t assume a veteran player wont see what your trying to do early on and force you to change your strategy.
for example if i see japanese planes flying to germany… then im going after japan as hard and fast as possible. -
Hmmm. I like this strategy, but I also have a few questions of my own.
What is your recommended J1 buy for this strategy? Are you placing Industrial Complexes on the mainland with them? If so, where?
Also, what turn do you imagine Russia falling on?
-
Interesting… your making a lot of assumptions here…
I like your Turn 1 strategy. but your need for Japanese fighters in Western Europe is Weird.* The UK/US will keep spending money on fleets instead of ground units.
Your assumption of what the allied player(s) will continue to spend their money on in later turns is a bit short sided.
starting in R1 UK could choose to rebuild the Navy or become an Airforce. what would you do if UK decided to send fighters every round to defend Russian territories… Allowing Russians to more actively engage other areas with their fighters cause britain Fighters take over for defense. Dont forget American fighter can also do the same… and america has the money to also build a fleet.Also, why would the allies not at some point change their strategy? with UK losing its fleet entirely in round 1 america may choose to build a complex in sinkiang.
I simply cant see everything you described panning out unless your playing an inexperienced player. You can’t assume a veteran player wont see what your trying to do early on and force you to change your strategy.
for example if i see japanese planes flying to germany… then im going after japan as hard and fast as possible.The need for Japanese fighters on WE is to disrupt the UK/US 1-2 move on Germany. If the UK moves say to the Baltic, then Japan can likely sink one of the two fleets because the US and UK are split in between their turns and during Japan’s. With only German fighters to consider, the Allies can jointly defend against ~4 fighters, 2 bombers. With Japanese planes to consider, the Allied fleet can’t move unless both can defend against Japan’s planes. The Allies either concede the Atlantic, stay in one place, or build enough defensive navy to have the freedom to move around.
The assumption of what the Allies spend on(fleet) is totally logical. If they are to have a convoy system to Europe they need to stay afloat. The alternative of just sending Allied fighters into Russia is inefficient. It does nothing to threaten the German coastline and leaves Russia virtually on their own. Plus, how do they liberate Africa?
If the Allies go for a different strategy, Axis goes for a different strategy. If the Allies go for Asian IC’s and a Pacific campaign, Germany can basically tank dash while Japan tries to build income and play defense.
If the US goes after Japan midgame when their fighters are in WE, how do the Allies keep control of the Atlantic? Suppose US4 is the turn. US builds in z55. J5, there’s no big moves in the Atlantic, so they fly their fighters, probably not all of them, to z34 to be recovered by the IJN’s carriers. Japan’s transports are hiding in either z36 or z61 if there isn’t any naval protection but they’re still serving their purpose of offloading from Japan. US5 move to Solomons or Wake Island. Japan 6 move z34 to z36, US ships are toast if they advance. What have the Allies accomplished and at what cost?
Sure this stuff will pan out, it’s a winning strategy. Give some details of how you’d go after Japan hard and fast, I’m probably not following you.
-
Interesting… your making a lot of assumptions here…
I like your Turn 1 strategy. but your need for Japanese fighters in Western Europe is Weird.* The UK/US will keep spending money on fleets instead of ground units.
Your assumption of what the allied player(s) will continue to spend their money on in later turns is a bit short sided.
starting in R1 UK could choose to rebuild the Navy or become an Airforce. what would you do if UK decided to send fighters every round to defend Russian territories… Allowing Russians to more actively engage other areas with their fighters cause britain Fighters take over for defense. Dont forget American fighter can also do the same… and america has the money to also build a fleet.I prefer actually that the UK builds an airforce than to rebuild its navy. The fighters will help Russia defending territories and can harass Japan on SZ34 or blast lone Axis infantry/tanks but any reconquest of territory will still have to be done by Russian units. And it takes time for the UK to rebuild a powerful enough fleet (which they will have to do), so any turn gained preventing it is a bonus for the Axis.
Also, why would the allies not at some point change their strategy? with UK losing its fleet entirely in round 1 america may choose to build a complex in sinkiang.
I simply cant see everything you described panning out unless your playing an inexperienced player. You can’t assume a veteran player wont see what your trying to do early on and force you to change your strategy.
for example if i see japanese planes flying to germany… then im going after japan as hard and fast as possible.Completely possible but think a bit about it: the plane movement to W. Europe usually starts on J3, meaning that meanwhile the US is has committed its production to Europe for 2 turns and now has to start a fleet from scratch on the Pacific while the Japanese still have their fleet intact on the Indian Ocean or SZ60 and only require fighters for the carriers, plus any bombers can redeploy from W. Europe to India in 1 turn.
Regarding an IC on US1 on Sinkiang I mentioned the Allies at the beginning that it should be obvious that the Allies will not follow a Pacific strategy by Russia’s 2nd round. But if the US only builds an IC then I’d say that this strategy still holds. Just 1 IC on Sinkiang without any US buildup on the Pacific is usually a speed bump for Japan and any US money spent there is money not going to the Atlantic fleet. -
Hmmm. I like this strategy, but I also have a few questions of my own.
What is your recommended J1 buy for this strategy? Are you placing Industrial Complexes on the mainland with them? If so, where?
Also, what turn do you imagine Russia falling on?
J1 buy should be 3 transports, 1 DD. I place 1 or 2 ICs, India is the favorite spot sometimes on Indochina as well. I tend to prefer transports and usually end up with 6 or more to use Japan’s production to the most and to ferry troops to take UK possessions on the area.
Usually Russia falls from turn 8 onwards. Ideally, and to speed it up Germany punches first and Japan goes for the killing blow. But it really depends on a lot of things.
-
I think this is a solid strategy. Fortress Europe makes a lot of sense with the 3 German capital cities counting for 22 IPCs. That alone gives you a decent amount of infantry/defense. If I see the allies going for a KGF this is what I will do. It is logical and makes more sense then trying to take them out on your own as Germany. If you hole up and commit Japan to offense and Germany to defense you should have the upper hand.
Basically, I approve. Thanks for the post.
-
If I see the allies going for a KGF this is what I will do.
but according to this strategy you dont know if the allies are doing a KGF. this strategy is based on turn 1 for germany. I Do like the Turn 1 moves with a change or 2. I just dont thinks its reliable to predict 5 turns into the game. Im sure its possible to win with this if its followed but even rolls can change the outcome
“…meaning that meanwhile the US is has committed its production to Europe for 2 turns and now has to start a fleet from scratch on the Pacific while…”
the us has the money to build for a complex in sinkiang and build a fleet that japan would have to worry about, and still send fighters over to aid UK and Russia, In turn 2
I think whats happening here is that if i saw your germany turn 1 moves… Im more than likely gonna go KJF, which is one of the requirements that disrupts your strategy. I usually go KJF if UK loses there fleet in the 1st round.
Still an interesting strategy.
-
If I see the allies going for a KGF this is what I will do.
but according to this strategy you dont know if the allies are doing a KGF. this strategy is based on turn 1 for germany. I Do like the Turn 1 moves with a change or 2. I just dont thinks its reliable to predict 5 turns into the game. Im sure its possible to win with this if its followed but even rolls can change the outcome
You know if the Allies are going for KGF or not at the start of the 2nd round. The first turn buy for G (1 bomber + ground units) is what most people on this forum and at TripleA purchase and the G1 attacks are also very common.
It is impossible to predict dice, the outcomes stated above for the midterm and longterm game can change by having terrible rolls. Yesterday I had a game where I bought 2 bombers on G1 but failed the attack on Egypt and lost all units and the German fleet was sunk on UK1. On G4 I had to pull back all the German units from W. Europe and keep all the Japanese fighters on Asia because I needed units to deal with the Russians but on G6 I was able to retake it and bring all the Japanese fighters. I couldn’t achieve anymore all the objectives of the strategy but I decided to get back to the Western Europe wall of fighters/infantry because the US was already making a mess of its purchases. Again, following a strategy blindly will get you killed.“…meaning that meanwhile the US is has committed its production to Europe for 2 turns and now has to start a fleet from scratch on the Pacific while…”
the us has the money to build for a complex in sinkiang and build a fleet that japan would have to worry about, and still send fighters over to aid UK and Russia, In turn 2
If you buy 1 IC on US2 that leaves you 27 IPCs for a fleet. That’s 1 carrier and 2 subs to add to the BB and sub (assuming the DD has crossed the Panama channel on its way to SZ10). On US2 you’ll need to buy 2 armor for the IC (10 IPC) plus a 2nd AC (14 IPCs) + 1 fighter (10) to finally be able to move that fleet to the Solomons on US4 (and you’ll also need keep back on the US a 4th fighter for the 2nd carrier since you won’t have enough money to produce it).
I think whats happening here is that if i saw your germany turn 1 moves… Im more than likely gonna go KJF, which is one of the requirements that disrupts your strategy. I usually go KJF if UK loses there fleet in the 1st round.
Still an interesting strategy.
I actually would prefer if you go KJF rather than KGF. It still takes a lot of luck to win with the Allies using that strategy on 1942. :-D
-
If you buy 1 IC on US2 that leaves you 27 IPCs for a fleet. That’s 1 carrier and 2 subs to add to the BB and sub (assuming the DD has crossed the Panama channel on its way to SZ10). On US2 you’ll need to buy 2 armor for the IC (10 IPC) plus a 2nd AC (14 IPCs) + 1 fighter (10) to finally be able to move that fleet to the Solomons on US4 (and you’ll also need keep back on the US a 4th fighter for the 2nd carrier since you won’t have enough money to produce it).
Looking at Germany’s moves on turn 1, Id buy the complex On US1… I wouldnt go to the solomons… Id Build my fleet, adding boats every turn and on a later turn move a larger fleet to hawaii… or break it up and send boats everywhere… It all depends on Japanese position… if they are all the way over by africa… great ill go strraight to the islands and start gobbling them.
-
I think the German opening moves are good, but I would not recommend 2 bombers on G1. At best, you can prevent britain from building a navy on the first round, but there is NO way you can prevent a determend allied player from having a fleet ready to go in sz8 and too strong to attack at the start of G3.
If your opening German moves pan out you should have 4 fighters and 2 bombers and 2 2 subs. But even if you succeed wildly you will have 5 ftr, 2 bomber and 3 subs, heck say you build 2 bombers… for a totaly of 3. US1 builds are 2 CV, DD and either 2 INF or a sub. B1 builds are a bomber, moves are to position air-force and the middle-east for a strike and the german fleet on B2-B3, save the rest. It’s almost worse for the Brits if the Germans don’t sink the BB, its truly a mixed blessing as you have to build a CV and 2 DDs to protect it so it hampers your attack on the german med fleet. So on B2 britain builds another CV and fleet, the US moves their fleet to Sz8 and now you face a fleet of 3 CVs, 6 Ftrs, 2-3 DDs and 1-2 Subs. The fleet gets bigger when it moves off the coast of Algeria with the addition of the US BB and builds from US2.
Based on that, build the sinlge bomber on G1 and nearly all infantry for a few rounds. As Fleetwood Dan says and does well, force the allies to defend 2-3 fleets against the German airforce concentrated in W europe and think about using the Jap air force to disrpt the brit us 1-2 move.
-
If I see the allies going for a KGF this is what I will do.
but according to this strategy you dont know if the allies are doing a KGF. this strategy is based on turn 1 for germany. I Do like the Turn 1 moves with a change or 2. I just dont thinks its reliable to predict 5 turns into the game. Im sure its possible to win with this if its followed but even rolls can change the outcome
Well the turn one moves are fairly standard for what I do with Germany with only some slight differences. So I probably won’t just start out assuming they are going for a KGF. I will do what I usually do and then if I see the US commit its forces to Germany. If they do on G2 I will buy lots of infantry and a bomber or two and play defensively.
-
Interesting stuff. I’ve been reluctant to try this strategy because it seems like there is a trade-off involved…if I send the Jap planes to Western, then I’m not using them in trading against Russia. So that’s the choice…use the air to disrupt Allied shipping or use it to trade with Russia. In Revised, the latter seemed like the better choice, so trying a strategy where I send Jap air to Europe is breaking new ground.
However, in the new rule-set, the weakness of transports and subs against air power is striking. If the Japs keep buying bombers and sending them to Europe then they can use these bombers to SBR Moscow, while also forcing UK and USA to build up navies. Not using the Jap air against Russia will mean Russia will hold out longer, but if Axis is controlling more space (specifically Africa) then they will have the economic advantage anyway and can afford to kill Russia slow.
I’ll have to give it a go sometime. It would be interesting to see a TripleA file of this strategy up against an elite Allied opponent.
-
Interesting stuff. I’ve been reluctant to try this strategy because it seems like there is a trade-off involved…if I send the Jap planes to Western, then I’m not using them in trading against Russia. So that’s the choice…use the air to disrupt Allied shipping or use it to trade with Russia. In Revised, the latter seemed like the better choice, so trying a strategy where I send Jap air to Europe is breaking new ground.
However, in the new rule-set, the weakness of transports and subs against air power is striking. If the Japs keep buying bombers and sending them to Europe then they can use these bombers to SBR Moscow, while also forcing UK and USA to build up navies. Not using the Jap air against Russia will mean Russia will hold out longer, but if Axis is controlling more space (specifically Africa) then they will have the economic advantage anyway and can afford to kill Russia slow.
I’ll have to give it a go sometime. It would be interesting to see a TripleA file of this strategy up against an elite Allied opponent.
I might have one… I’ll need to check my saved games.
On Revised I usually tried to send the entire Japanese fleet through Suez before the Allies close it, together with the airforce to disrupt Allied shipping (better than have them sitting around on the Indian/Pacific doing nothing by transport escort). On 1942 the move is more risky since the capital ships (BB, carriers) will go rather unescorted since there will be no transports to take hits and the US can sink them.
Adding extra bombers to Japan is costly and will get you less units to deal with the Russians, although the bombers can be used on attacks on Asia while on their way to Europe. One sneaky tactic is to base them on India instead because they can reach SZ5 from there and catch an UK fleet unaware of it.
-
Here are a couple of TripleA saved games:
First one is unfinished and was the most competitive. It’s the end turn 9 and the US just defeated a Japanese force in Persia but the Germans seem about to take the Caucasus.
On the 2nd one the game is finished, victory for the Axis. The UK built an IC on South Africa on UK1, while the US decided to switch to a Pacific strat on US3.
Suggested Topics
