I didn’t jack it, the scenario changed. Now we’re talking about the viability of attacking Trans-Jordan in lieu of conquering Egypt. In that scenario you do not have forces available to attack Sea Zone 2. You also do not have forces available for a SZ 7 unification.
I didn’t jack it, the scenario changed. Now we’re talking about the viability of attacking Trans-Jordan in lieu of conquering Egypt. In that scenario you do not have forces available to attack Sea Zone 2. You also do not have forces available for a SZ 7 unification.
But that IS jacking the thread lolz.
I can see the point of not using the Med transport for Africa first turn, but Trans-Jordan means that you committed your Med transport east. As long as you are headed east, you should kill Anglo-Egypt without a doubt. That infantry, tank, and fighter can cause huge headaches for both Germany and Japan early game.
Even if the Ukraine fighter is dead, you can still send 2 inf 2 tank 1 bomber to Anglo-Egypt on G1, or if you are leery of losses on UK1, 2 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 bomber. That will be quite sufficient in most cases to clear Anglo-Egypt. (I assume Balkan fighter is used for safety for the German Med fleet vs UK destroyer)
If you consider that “jacking it” then technically Switch jacked it, I am just replying to him.
And while it is a good idea to hit Egypt, there’s no need to take it as long as you get T-J. Just kill the units there.
Actually there is a reason to hit Egypt instead of T-J… 2 actually.
1 ARM
1 FIG
:-)
The Axis really do not want to let those forces live to be used against them.
Hit Egypt with 3 Infantry, 1 Armor, 1 Bomber (2 inf bid) and hit T-J with 2 infantry, 1 fighter
:)
G2, move your fleet out of the Med and into the Indian Ocean to go harass the Americans. snicker
I didn’t mention this before, but it would have to be bomber against Trans-Jordan, and fighter against Egypt. Germany can’t hit Trans-Jordan with a fighter unless that fighter has long range.
Sure, I guess it’s sound, but I would only try it if the Ukraine kept its fighter for G1. I’d rather not risk a loaded transport or battleship against the Uk destroyer.
Fighter from Balkans to Sea Zone 14.
Fighter from Sea Zone 14 to Trans-Jordan (((Combat)))
NCM Option 1
Fighter from Trans-Jordan to Egypt
Fighter from Egypt to Libya
NCM Option 2
Fighter from Trans-Jordan to Sea Zone 14
Fighter from Sea Zone 14 to Balkans
You don’t need the bomber for T-J. :)
And the fighter from E. Europe can hit Egypt no sweat. (E. Europe to Balkans to SZ 14, to Egypt, Land in Libya)
What map are you looking at?
Balkans and Ukraine adjoin SZ16 not 14.
So that is ONE move to SZ16.
Then they have to enter SZ15 and then on to T-J.
And on G1, Germany cannot land aircraft in Egypt or Persia, nor is there any way to get an AC to SZ15 or 34 for recovery either.
@ncscswitch:
What map are you looking at?
Balkans and Ukraine adjoin SZ16 not 14.
So that is ONE move to SZ16.
Then they have to enter SZ15 and then on to T-J.And on G1, Germany cannot land aircraft in Egypt or Persia, nor is there any way to get an AC to SZ15 or 34 for recovery either.
She’s looking at the map that lets you move from territory to territory when they’re kitty-cornered.
Alas, if only you could!
Sorry, I stand corrected. I wasn’t looking at the map, just trying to remember the board.
For some reason I was thinking the Black Sea and the Sea Zone north of Suez Canal were one…dunno why…I just was.
So you go 2 fighters to Egypt, 1 Bomber to T-J…as if you really need it, 2 infantry, 1 battleship should be plenty, if you want more assurance, 1 infantry, 1 artillery or 1 infantry, 1 armor, 1 battleship should be over kill.
Sorry, I stand corrected. I wasn’t looking at the map, just trying to remember the board.
For some reason I was thinking the Black Sea and the Sea Zone north of Suez Canal were one…dunno why…I just was.
So you go 2 fighters to Egypt, 1 Bomber to T-J…as if you really need it, 2 infantry, 1 battleship should be plenty, if you want more assurance, 1 infantry, 1 artillery or 1 infantry, 1 armor, 1 battleship should be over kill.
There is a UK destroyer in the sea zone adjacent to Trans-Jordan and Anglo-Egypt.
So if you send both fighters that can reach Anglo-Egypt against the UK destroyer, you risk an Allied lucky break that will kill either your loaded transport or your battleship.
Also, the battleship cannot be used against Trans-Jordan because the battleship has to fight the UK destroyer.
Also a lucky break in Trans-Jordan will stop 2 inf, inf/art, or even inf/tank, so I think bomber is probably right.
The BB can’t fire into TJ because of teh DST in SZ15.
2 inf vs 1 inf is still 1.414:1 odds of winning, Switch. That’s what I was getting at.
Also, why bother with sending fighters to the destroyer? No offense, but if 1 BB and 1 Trn cannot take out 1 measely destroyer, you’re going to loose the game no matter what, because your dice are loaded against you.
I have lost that BB too many times going solo on that DST to take the chance.
Also, if you are hitting TJ, send and INF/ART, or INF/ARM to increase your odds.
@ncscswitch:
I have lost that BB too many times going solo on that DST to take the chance.
Also, if you are hitting TJ, send and INF/ART, or INF/ARM to increase your odds.
Yea, I did mention the other two, if you wanted over kill.
Though, I’ve found with Germany, less is more. Take more risks. You don’t need the land all the time, you just need to cost the Allies the majority of their starting units to keep them from making any progress. Especially russia. I’ll trade 1.5 IPCs lost for 1 IPC destroyed against them because Germany and Japan make so much more then they do.
Sea Zone 2: 1 Figher, 1 Bomber, 1 Submarine vs 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
- 1 Fighter from Finland/Norway
- 1 Bomber from Germany
- 1 Submarine Sea Zone 8
Any day, i would attack.
And i play at triple A where youo get 9 bid as axis and a second Sub in Sz8 is nice iand then i attack even when the sub is there. (in SZ2)
