First, a replacement battleship is 20 while the air base is 15. So the savings by buying an airbase instead of replacement battleships is pretty small. Second, taking two hits on the battleship instead of air craft casualties is cost effective, so there likely won’t be a battleship to defend if the British roll decently. I’m not as sure about the third reason, an air battle over sea zone 110 to save a damaged battleship. Would you really commit three aircraft against superior numbers of British aircraft? A counter to the air base would be to not scramble against the initial wave of attacks, and then commit say a DD, four fighters, and a bomber into the channel.
I’m not sure about the third reason, but the first two seem reasonable for not buying the air base. I like the thinking though of buying an air base somewhere to provide coastal air defense for advancing naval units.
an airbase in benelux means a 15 ipc which has only limited use
plus, on the long run, it would only mean another territory axis have to protect on western front.
just sacrifice your bb to hit sz110 and keep in mind air units are much more valuable (especially for ger) than ships, since air units are much more versatile.
the way i see it is, thats 5 less infantry that russia has to deal with :)
zzzzzzzzz
Germany can afford to replace the air more than UK can. I think only a foolish UK player would try attacking the navy with 3 extra fighters defending. Still it’s hard to spend that money as Germany in the first round.
what is so great about that battleship anyway? I mean sometimes there are still subs lurking so the bship gets ignored anyway.
G1 CV, DD, SS
G2 2 SS
G3 2 SS
G4 2 SS
Thats enough to keep the UK busy trying to fend them off instead of buying an AB early and dedicating aircraft to scramble over a ship or two.
you do that instead of maximizing your attack on russia?
G1 CV, DD, SS
G2 2 SS
G3 2 SS
G4 2 SSThats enough to keep the UK busy trying to fend them off instead of buying an AB early and dedicating aircraft to scramble over a ship or two.
that s more than enough for uk to sit back and do nothing in atl and let ger waste resources while investing fully in middle east.
as allies, always nice to see ger wasting resources on 1sided navy buys, even nicer to see ger wasting resources without allies needing to do anything.
ps: if u think those ss invesments can make a profit for ger by mass raiding london and scotland, dont forget uk or usa can buy 1 dd (8 ipc) and use existing air(or newly purchased, doesnt matter too much, can always fly away to wherev they r needed) and sink ss stacks
soulfein i think lots of players still try to make a london fleet and drop men on europe. I am not sure why. Sometimes I do this when america brings a fleet for uk. The med is do or die for the UK.
Holland airbase may sometimes be built on round 3 to deter an American airstrike on the German transport fleet after sealion. If you are seriously committed to sealion on the very first turn no matter what, then building the airbase G1 it is a better deal than a carrier because you will go into G3 with a battleship instead of a carrier. Normandy naval base will repair it for you so 2 hits to the battleship saves 2 planes just like the carrier, but the BB also attacks @4 and the base costs $1 less. The best part is they might take the bait and attack it and lose planes, which is good for Germany in any sealion scenario. More likely your extreme level of commitment to sealion should lead the allies to play conservatively with their air forces, so there will be no attack on your battleship, no Taranto attack, and USA may build in preparation for sealion rather than focus on Pacific defense. The big downside to it is you are basically locked into sealion because if you don’t go through with it, you will have to tie up an awful lot of resources defending it for minimal benefit.
