True, threatening Sealion is strong German play, but as Young Grasshopper himself has said, many British players do not fear it much these days, so you might as well hit Russia hard, right from the start, and get the killing blow(in my strategic opinion).
Thanks and God Bless You All from AxisandAlliesGeneral
Are bombers broken? : Axis bombers lead to allied dismay.
-
Operation dark sky has begun with ghr2, I would play more than one game at a time, but I simply have too much crap in my life to play more than one game at a time and to really play it and think about the moves.
I hope others begin to experiment with this strat and give us feedback. I am curious to see if the community comes to the same conclusion or if there is a counter and I just noobed it.
-
JamesAleman and i have just started a game.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31303 -
Thank you for playing me, I look forward to seeing what you do.
I am not saying this is an automatic win, I will be pleased if you defeat me, so that this doesn’t “break” the game.
If it does, I sure hope they pick me as an “out of the box” play tester seeing as Andy and I introduced Operation Hollywood back in the 2004 Revised game, and I feel Krieg may have used my early questions about Canada and KAF questions to influence the Alpha rule that permitted USA to enter the war if axis control any of Canada. I know I also tossed the separate board VC conditions out there in response to people throwing all their weight on one board. (not saying I was the only one or the first to mention it, but that too was in later Alpha rules.)
Prior to that Canadian rule change, it was possible for Germany to secure Alberta turn 3 (with a tank you took Alaska and British Columbia, turn 4 lol), land the Japanese air force there turn 3 (when launched from Soviet Far East-taken turn 1-air base and air force placed turn 2), then build a German air base turn 4 and land all of Japan’s planes in German controlled Eire turn 4. From Alberta they could clear the capital or under defended East and West coast fleets. Either way, you had the whole Japanese air force on the Europe map to strafe London, attack USA, or delay allied navy in the Atlantic as a variant move.
-
You need to look at the money you are spending as well;
For example, you have 12 bombers at a cost of 144 IPCs; The Allies have 18 DDs at a cost of 144 IPCs; The bombers only have a 33% chance of winning!
If it was a mixed fleet-
2 CV
4 Ftr
2 Cruisers
6 DDs
(144 IPCs)Its even worse for the bombers- only a 23% chance of winning.
We can go bigger if you want - in your example of 32 Bombers - 384 IPCs
32 Bombers vs. 48 DDs - Bombers have a 27% chance of winning.
But- no one buys that many DDs; Lets try a mixed navy:
6 CVs
12 Ftrs
6 Cruisers
12 DDs
(384 IPCs)The bombers lose pretty bad here too - 14% chance of winning.
These are all done by the Triplea calculator. So, an equal amount of IPCs spent on Navy and bombers end badly for the bombers. I do agree the bombers give great flexibility, but I think the Allies can create a Navy to withstand it if they spend IPC for IPC. The Allies also need to be fairly aggressive (as much as they can be) because when Germany has that kind of air power, they have no land power.
The Allies could afford to drop a few of those DDs for Transports to get troops to Europe/Africa. Germany would be suicidal to throw away all those bombers to attempt to kill the Allied Navy.
-
You are assuming you can spend IPC for IPC and that also assumes if you do, you are ignoring Japan. You also need to produce transports and men at some point. You are also not including the “free” IPCs that Germany and Japan have when compared to USA in terms of starting pieces. Thats 5 fighters, 5 tacticals, 2 bombers, bb, cv, ca, 1-2 subs, vs likely zero US starting pieces since ignoring Japan is not advisable turn 1. Lets not mention the Japanese navy of 2bb,2ca,3cv,4dd,2subs and 11fighters, 8 tacticals, and 2 bombers in free pieces when compared with USA’s bb,3ca,cv,3dd,2sub,6fighters,tactical, and bomber. I always see most of the starting USA go towards Japan.
And the biggest thing is this, you never attack with bombers, unless you have enough to ensure 1 combat round, never, ever, ever unless the second round is low hits and the mission requires a “non optimum” strike.
Therefor I will not attack unless I will win and win in only 1 combat round. To do so, risks too much of your bomber force and is a desperate move.
Remember USA is fighting a two front war, they cannot match German bomber builds, without ignoring Japan slightly, and Even though Germany has 3 fronts, these bombers cover all three, so I take turns, first I capture moscow, then I capture London, then I’ll sink the fleet. Or I capture London, then Moscow, then fleet. Or I go fleet, London, then Moscow…etc. Normally axis forces are slow moving land units committed to one theater. The bombers (when preserved by starting fodder) are free to redeploy each turn after they complete there task at hand.
Each round the bomber stack grows, the threat to all three fronts grows…London must balance pressure on navy, London, and Egypt. Moscow must balance pressure on land force, bombing, and protecting its production by leaving men in the rear or falling back to the capital. USA must balance bomber forces by Japan and Germany, and still prevent Japan from getting to 60+ IPCs while containing Germany.
So yes, IPC for IPC bombers come up short, but my whole point has been Germany and Japan start with too many “free” pieces that the bomber concept creates a “shortcut” for you production to skew a normal timeline and shave turns off of a game. I literally captured Moscow on turn 5 (I should have survived with a tank and 7 bombers, but I still had a tank and 3 bombers (fighters were in africa and that was a mistake) And that was because I was not patient. If I advance over the Russian factories my task is complete, Russia is gimped, I outproduce their fodder with my own and my bombers move to S. Italy to Threaten London and Egypt while I wait for “good weather”. The speed of the bombers is why with this map and this starting set up, the game is perhaps broken.
Each bomber built in W.Germany can hit Moscow the following turn and land in Bryansk or any of the other 4 territories surrounding Moscow. Same if staged in Southern Italy…but what is killer, is even 12 bombers defending at 1’s prevents your starting pieces from being counter attacked (because the 14 Italian land units and 3 planes take the soil to land German air on), Yes you won’t remove bombers the first combat round, but they will give you 2 more hits…and force your opponent to think twice, at some point you will take off bombers to keep the 10 fighters/tacticals rolling 3’s and 4’s more times…I know defending with bombers is not wise, but on a stack that consists of 81 pieces…it will work and it breaks the battle calculator cause it will tell the ally they will lose since it takes off bombers 1st round…calling into doubt the battle calculator and the opponents psychology.
-
Yeah I think BJcard missed the point
Germany should, I assume, and you did talk about it, be purchasing submarines and infantry whenever starting forces get too low, and/or an objective is near
Again I think this more shows the deficiency of AAA rather than the strength of bombers, but that’s just me
-
You are assuming you can spend IPC for IPC and that also assumes if you do, you are ignoring Japan. You also need to produce transports and men at some point. You are also not including the “free” IPCs that Germany and Japan have when compared to USA in terms of starting pieces. Thats 5 fighters, 5 tacticals, 2 bombers, bb, cv, ca, 1-2 subs, vs likely zero US starting pieces since ignoring Japan is not advisable turn 1. Lets not mention the Japanese navy of 2bb,2ca,3cv,4dd,2subs and 11fighters, 8 tacticals, and 2 bombers in free pieces when compared with USA’s bb,3ca,cv,3dd,2sub,6fighters,tactical, and bomber. I always see most of the starting USA go towards Japan.
And the biggest thing is this, you never attack with bombers, unless you have enough to ensure 1 combat round, never, ever, ever unless the second round is low hits and the mission requires a “non optimum” strike.
Therefor I will not attack unless I will win and win in only 1 combat round. To do so, risks too much of your bomber force and is a desperate move.
Remember USA is fighting a two front war, they cannot match German bomber builds, without ignoring Japan slightly, and Even though Germany has 3 fronts, these bombers cover all three, so I take turns, first I capture moscow, then I capture London, then I’ll sink the fleet. Or I capture London, then Moscow, then fleet. Or I go fleet, London, then Moscow…etc. Normally axis forces are slow moving land units committed to one theater. The bombers (when preserved by starting fodder) are free to redeploy each turn after they complete there task at hand.
Each round the bomber stack grows, the threat to all three fronts grows…London must balance pressure on navy, London, and Egypt. Moscow must balance pressure on land force, bombing, and protecting its production by leaving men in the rear or falling back to the capital. USA must balance bomber forces by Japan and Germany, and still prevent Japan from getting to 60+ IPCs while containing Germany.
So yes, IPC for IPC bombers come up short, but my whole point has been Germany and Japan start with too many “free” pieces that the bomber concept creates a “shortcut” for you production to skew a normal timeline and shave turns off of a game. I literally captured Moscow on turn 5 (I should have survived with a tank and 7 bombers, but I still had a tank and 3 bombers (fighters were in africa and that was a mistake) And that was because I was not patient. If I advance over the Russian factories my task is complete, Russia is gimped, I outproduce their fodder with my own and my bombers move to S. Italy to Threaten London and Egypt while I wait for “good weather”. The speed of the bombers is why with this map and this starting set up, the game is perhaps broken.
Each bomber built in W.Germany can hit Moscow the following turn and land in Bryansk or any of the other 4 territories surrounding Moscow. Same if staged in Southern Italy…but what is killer, is even 12 bombers defending at 1’s prevents your starting pieces from being counter attacked (because the 14 Italian land units and 3 planes take the soil to land German air on), Yes you won’t remove bombers the first combat round, but they will give you 2 more hits…and force your opponent to think twice, at some point you will take off bombers to keep the 10 fighters/tacticals rolling 3’s and 4’s more times…I know defending with bombers is not wise, but on a stack that consists of 81 pieces…it will work and it breaks the battle calculator cause it will tell the ally they will lose since it takes off bombers 1st round…calling into doubt the battle calculator and the opponents psychology.
No, I get the fact that you wouldn’t attack with your bombers unless you will win in one round. Your bombers cannot attack everywhere- even if they threaten plenty of places. It will take a while to build up a large enough bomber force, so the Allies can have a formidable Navy by then. With Italy supplying a turn or so of IPCs to land units, the UK owns the Med/Africa. Have you tried an Allied Mid East Strat?
You have both England and the US building a fleet- not hard to match what Germany is building in Bombers every turn, and have the US build in the Pacific. If Germany is buying 4 bombers/round, then that’s only 48 IPCs that both England and the US have to match (or 16 attack ‘pips’ to defend) When your bombers are in Bryansk, there’s no threat from them against Allied Navies. Additionally, depending on the German and Russian play it will be hard to hold Bryansk by turn 4- Even on turn 5 your bombers will be vulnerable with no German land backup. I have this image of the German army in the east with no land forces west of Poland, only bombers (when they aren’t in bryansk).
You don’t have to beat Japan, just prevent them from winning (Prevent Australia and Hawaii loss), if you are playing a KGF game. It doesn’t seem like Japan is going for the win if they are fighting Russia anyway- looks like they are trying to help Germany win on the Europe side. Germany will have little land units due to all the bomber purchases; I kind of shudder to think how easily Allied troops can get to Berlin with little land troops there.
Of course as I say all of this, I do acknowledge that this game is skewed Axis already, so the bomber strat may be working because of this. Just trying to play devil’s advocate. I am very interested to see how your forum games go.
-
@Uncrustable:
Yeah I think BJcard missed the point
Germany should, I assume, and you did talk about it, be purchasing submarines and infantry whenever starting forces get too low, and/or an objective is near
Again I think this more shows the deficiency of AAA rather than the strength of bombers, but that’s just me
That’s not really what he said, at least what I got out of it, he was talking about 30+ German Bombers. You cannot buy bombers, submarines, and land forces and reach a number like 30 bombers without playing 10+ rounds.
-
The 30 bombers was a hypothetical meant to demonstrate the hitting power of that many bombers as an example. In my games I seldom exceed 20 bombers, because I do build a few units each round….4 bomber=48 if you are in the 50’s I build a mech or two, Once I have Russian factories I switch to 36 ipcs a turn for 9 mech…that leaves maybe 1 bomber a turn or a couple of subs if needed.
-
Ok, fair enough. So it is a bit of a balanced build, just a bomber or two per round?
-
First 4 rounds all bombers and 1 carrier….later a bomber or two plus a few mech as needed
-
Sounds very devastating:)
I actually believe the game is broken because of the VC conditions. When you render one entire side of the board irrelevant, what is the point in playing Global? I think the victory conditions should be that axis or allies win when the other surrenders. People will argue that it would make the game too long. I say, play something else. I think the best part about this game is the scenarios that arise late in the game. You have to play on instinct and strategy on the fly at that point.
Just my 2 cents though it may not even be worth that much:)
-
I am more or less 100% sure you are not even getting to bryansk, and you are never holding it. against a pure bomber strat like this, I am building artillery.
You Dow russia on G2, killing 0 units,
My russian beginning army is ; 27 I, 3Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 Tac.
R1 build; 3 I and 7 A
After R1 it is ; 30 I, 10 Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac. you will not kill anything when you declare, because I wont let you hit anything
after R2 I will have 33 I, 17 A, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, I already have a bigger land army than you are planning on having after G5at the end of R4, I should have at least 40 I, 25 A, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac and 4 AAs in bryansk. I can also have the british using their ftrs to prevent you from stratting moscow.
what is worse is that your bombers will never help you on defence. If the german army of 44 units stands in belo and I can hit with 70+ units, it really does not matter what your units are.
you are never taking bryansk then with your 44 landunits + 16 planes.
-
First 4 rounds all bombers and 1 carrier….later a bomber or two plus a few mech as needed
I am curious about this strategy. First, why the carrier purchase for Germany?
Second, I assume you take France G1 as usual, but do you also try to sink the Royal Navy? If so, how many planes do you usually lose? Does your UK player scramble fighters or leave the navy to get blasted?
Going after the Royal Navy is kind of a standard move for Germany in just about all our games no matter which of us plays Germany. As for the UK, some of us will scramble fighters to try and protect some of the navy, others won’t scramble preferring to save their fighters (I’m one of those).
When UK does scramble, Germany ends up losing a lot of aircraft but also manages to wipe out the RAF too. So you end up with England having no navy or air force to speak of yet Germany also having very little air force left to work with.
However, if UK doesn’t scramble, most times Germany will only lose a couple of planes or so. However, this gives the UK opportunity to sink the German navy with 4-5 fighters plus it’s bomber. In a recent game, Germany (me) sank the Royal Navy and UK did NOT scramble. On G2, Germany sent it’s bombers to hit UK’s IC & Stukas to hit the UK’s bases along with fighter escorts. UK did not send up interceptors since Germany had so many planes to shoot at them with (2 bombers, 4 Stukas, 4 fighters ). The UK had 5 fighters plus 1 French fighter. I felt that if I hadn’t sent the fighters, then the UK would have sent up all those fighters as interceptors and could have torn up my bombers and Stukas.
What I didn’t take into account was that the fighters and Stukas had to land in Holland and NOT West Germany (except for the two planes that landed on the carrier in SZ 112). So, my navy in 112 had no scramble cover.
The UK came out with 5 fighters and 1 bomber against my carrier, 1 fighter, 1 Stuka, 1 Cruiser, 1 Destroyer and 11 Transports. It cost them all 5 fighters, but they sank all my navy and Sealion was cancelled for good.
A lot of people talk about strategic bombing England before Sealion, but what do you do about interceptors if the UK saves it’s fighters? -
I am more or less 100% sure you are not even getting to bryansk, and you are never holding it. against a pure bomber strat like this, I am building artillery.
You Dow russia on G2, killing 0 units,
My russian beginning army is ; 27 I, 3Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 Tac.
R1 build; 3 I and 7 A
After R1 it is ; 30 I, 10 Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac. you will not kill anything when you declare, because I wont let you hit anything
after R2 I will have 33 I, 17 A, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, I already have a bigger land army than you are planning on having after G5at the end of R4, I should have at least 40 I, 25 A, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac and 4 AAs in bryansk. I can also have the british using their ftrs to prevent you from stratting moscow.
what is worse is that your bombers will never help you on defence. If the german army of 44 units stands in belo and I can hit with 70+ units, it really does not matter what your units are.
you are never taking bryansk then with your 44 landunits + 16 planes.
Since you didn’t read my above post, I can get 81 units to Bryansk…yes My bombers defend at 1’s, along with my fighter and tacticals…You see, Italy takes first to provide the landing site, they can move 16 pieces in, along with 22 German air units…now do you see a possible merit to this…Will it work perfectly every game, probably not, but I bet I get your factories and get to produce out of them mid game.
The bombers for the first half of the game shave turns off of the game, then mid game you produce more fodder for them.
Follow my first forum game of this strategy. Remember my opponent knows my strategy and I am still comfortable.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31303.0 -
First 4 rounds all bombers and 1 carrier….later a bomber or two plus a few mech as needed
I am curious about this strategy. First, why the carrier purchase for Germany?
After playtesting, we found not being able to retake Norway posed problems, also with my patented :-D hit and retreat z111 with 2 bombers,bb,2subs I typically have a fleet of cv,bb,ca,1-2subs and 5 air units. That is why I want the carrier.
A) to avoid landing in Holland with 1 tactical bomber since I send 4ftr, 4tac, 2 subs z110
B) to preserve battleship and carrier and provide fodder for navy battles using my bombers as the main hitters.
C) to convoy London with 1-3subs, 2 ftrs z109
D) to provide a safe place to place or keep a transport to retake Finland/Norway if needed.Second, I assume you take France G1 as usual, but do you also try to sink the Royal Navy? If so, how many planes do you usually lose? Does your UK player scramble fighters or leave the navy to get blasted?
See above, and no scramble is typical or they risk losing to a mid game sea lion
Going after the Royal Navy is kind of a standard move for Germany in just about all our games no matter which of us plays Germany. As for the UK, some of us will scramble fighters to try and protect some of the navy, others won’t scramble preferring to save their fighters (I’m one of those).
When UK does scramble, Germany ends up losing a lot of aircraft but also manages to wipe out the RAF too. So you end up with England having no navy or air force to speak of yet Germany also having very little air force left to work with.Unless they scramble I lose zero planes and 2-4 subs. Never lost a plane when they didn’t scramble.
However, if UK doesn’t scramble, most times Germany will only lose a couple of planes or so. However, this gives the UK opportunity to sink the German navy with 4-5 fighters plus it’s bomber.
They have 3 fighters, bomber, ca, dd, damaged bb, and maybe a ca from z111 against German damaged bb, 1-2 subs, ca, cv, 4ftr, tactical…calculate the odds on that one.
In a recent game, Germany (me) sank the Royal Navy and UK did NOT scramble. On G2, Germany sent it’s bombers to hit UK’s IC & Stukas to hit the UK’s bases along with fighter escorts. UK did not send up interceptors since Germany had so many planes to shoot at them with (2 bombers, 4 Stukas, 4 fighters ). The UK had 5 fighters plus 1 French fighter. I felt that if I hadn’t sent the fighters, then the UK would have sent up all those fighters as interceptors and could have torn up my bombers and Stukas.
What I didn’t take into account was that the fighters and Stukas had to land in Holland and NOT West Germany (except for the two planes that landed on the carrier in SZ 112). So, my navy in 112 had no scramble cover.
The UK came out with 5 fighters and 1 bomber against my carrier, 1 fighter, 1 Stuka, 1 Cruiser, 1 Destroyer and 11 Transports. It cost them all 5 fighters, but they sank all my navy and Sealion was cancelled for good.
A lot of people talk about strategic bombing England before Sealion, but what do you do about interceptors if the UK saves it’s fighters?Bombers get to shoot at interceptors along with fighters, So if I bomb London, I sent 2 ftrs, 4 bombers thats 6 1’s vs 3-5 1’s….I will gladly trade air with London.
My reply is in red, my game link for the first public test is:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31303.0I will also play you as well if you are interested in drafting a counter for this strategy. Good Luck, I have tried a lot of things already.
-
Thank you for those people that are opened minded about this concept.
First I am not saying it is unbeatable, just that I have not found a counter yet. That is why I went public, seeking help on this one.
Unlike my typical posts, I am backing this up with real games, if you wish to try your idea against this, I will play you as well.
Remember, as my opponent, you have every advantage knowing from turn 1 what to expect. If I prove successful, that should carry more weight because you are free to deviate from convention…please realize, I am not forced to keep building bombers, and I can switch with little fear of throwing the game. That way I can adjust to in game situations.
Here is what I propose the bombers for the axis do. It greatly accelerates their advances, once gained, they can pause and produce fodder from forward positions. Europe provides the most landing sites for any bomber nation, thus the axis have an advantage going bombers over an allied bomber strategy.
Remember aaguns have been destroyed in second edition, they shoot less and you select what does get hit.
Germany builds 1 stack, that threatens 3-4 fronts…London, Egypt, Moscow, Atlantic…it gets better.Bombers can redeploy world regions quickly…Bombers from W. Germany can land in Kenya, then can open blocking dd’s to enable Japan to hit India quickly…the possibilities are endless.
Conventional forces are stuck in their theater of operations, Bombers can be used and typically redeployed in 2 rounds or less. Instant shifting of threat. Massed bombers permit trading at major advantage, since the best defenders miss 30 percent of time and massed bombers provide a 1 combat round window not typical in most fronts.
Italy can take landing fields for bombers to reach unexpected areas…worse, if Germany lands on italian soil, on italy’s next turn they build and air base, surprising the allies as only anzac and russia can respond…catching USA,UK,China unaware.
-
I am more or less 100% sure you are not even getting to bryansk, and you are never holding it. against a pure bomber strat like this, I am building artillery.
You Dow russia on G2, killing 0 units,
My russian beginning army is ; 27 I, 3Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 Tac.
R1 build; 3 I and 7 A
After R1 it is ; 30 I, 10 Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac. you will not kill anything when you declare, because I wont let you hit anything
after R2 I will have 33 I, 17 A, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, I already have a bigger land army than you are planning on having after G5at the end of R4, I should have at least 40 I, 25 A, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac and 4 AAs in bryansk. I can also have the british using their ftrs to prevent you from stratting moscow.
what is worse is that your bombers will never help you on defence. If the german army of 44 units stands in belo and I can hit with 70+ units, it really does not matter what your units are.
you are never taking bryansk then with your 44 landunits + 16 planes.
Of course, you can be right. If you play Russia conservatively to the hilt, at round 4 its a close call (russia’s favor heavily) for Germany to push up against Russia’s stack. The thing is…while indeed Germany may not be able to take, they just don’t have too. Let’s not forget, we are talking about a Turn5-6 win if Russia isn’t played perfectly.
Time is in Germany’s favor. There is no rush. Continue to press out mec from the other 2 factories and while Russia collects in the single digits locked down with 3 bombers until enough fighters show up to force Germany to simply send escorts. You have to put at least 9 fighters before Germany has to produce an extra fighter to escort…buy by then, they may simply elect to have bombers escort…themselves!
-
I am more or less 100% sure you are not even getting to bryansk, and you are never holding it. against a pure bomber strat like this, I am building artillery.
You Dow russia on G2, killing 0 units,
My russian beginning army is ; 27 I, 3Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 Tac.
R1 build; 3 I and 7 A
After R1 it is ; 30 I, 10 Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac. you will not kill anything when you declare, because I wont let you hit anything
after R2 I will have 33 I, 17 A, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, I already have a bigger land army than you are planning on having after G5at the end of R4, I should have at least 40 I, 25 A, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac and 4 AAs in bryansk. I can also have the british using their ftrs to prevent you from stratting moscow.
what is worse is that your bombers will never help you on defence. If the german army of 44 units stands in belo and I can hit with 70+ units, it really does not matter what your units are.
you are never taking bryansk then with your 44 landunits + 16 planes.
Since you didn’t read my above post, I can get 81 units to Bryansk…yes My bombers defend at 1’s, along with my fighter and tacticals…You see, Italy takes first to provide the landing site, they can move 16 pieces in, along with 22 German air units…now do you see a possible merit to this…Will it work perfectly every game, probably not, but I bet I get your factories and get to produce out of them mid game.
The bombers for the first half of the game shave turns off of the game, then mid game you produce more fodder for them.
Follow my first forum game of this strategy. Remember my opponent knows my strategy and I am still comfortable.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31303.0how are you taking bryansk, I got 75 units there, + 4 AAs, at the minimum about 80., your force is 16 italian units and 65 germans. the 65 germans will NOT be able to kill my 80 unit stack.
-
I am more or less 100% sure you are not even getting to bryansk, and you are never holding it. against a pure bomber strat like this, I am building artillery.
You Dow russia on G2, killing 0 units,
My russian beginning army is ; 27 I, 3Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 Tac.
R1 build; 3 I and 7 A
After R1 it is ; 30 I, 10 Art, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac. you will not kill anything when you declare, because I wont let you hit anything
after R2 I will have 33 I, 17 A, 2 mech, 2 tank, 2 ftr, I already have a bigger land army than you are planning on having after G5at the end of R4, I should have at least 40 I, 25 A, 2 tank, 2 ftr, 1 tac and 4 AAs in bryansk. I can also have the british using their ftrs to prevent you from stratting moscow.
what is worse is that your bombers will never help you on defence. If the german army of 44 units stands in belo and I can hit with 70+ units, it really does not matter what your units are.
you are never taking bryansk then with your 44 landunits + 16 planes.
Of course, you can be right. If you play Russia conservatively to the hilt, at round 4 its a close call (russia’s favor heavily) for Germany to push up against Russia’s stack. The thing is…while indeed Germany may not be able to take, they just don’t have too. Let’s not forget, we are talking about a Turn5-6 win if Russia isn’t played perfectly.
Time is in Germany’s favor. There is no rush. Continue to press out mec from the other 2 factories and while Russia collects in the single digits locked down with 3 bombers until enough fighters show up to force Germany to simply send escorts. You have to put at least 9 fighters before Germany has to produce an extra fighter to escort…buy by then, they may simply elect to have bombers escort…themselves!
Time is actually NOT in germanys favour, however, my estimates is pretty much worst case scenario with good russian play, I could easily have 10-20 more units that I wrote here. If I prevent the german from moving next to my bryanskstack, then russia would not be producing single digits. in a german bomberplan russia would easily produce close to 30 IPC per turn until at least turn 7-8.
Suggested Topics
