German navy T1

I’m not very good at Classic, but I’ll throw my two cents in.

Typically, I commit 1-2 rounds of shucking INF from South Europe -> Africa to try to rack up some IPCs. After the first two rounds or so you’re going to need 100% of your IPCs to commit to the stack war in Eastern Europe Vs. USSR/UK.

If UK wastes their money on a South Africa/India IC I’d punish them by committing the Germans to a Egypt -> Syria -> Persia -> India trajectory, while also sending as much of Japan’s navy as possible towards India to take the free factory. If Japan/Germany can break a hypothetical India Factory early on, it can give Japan some real momentum in gobbling up IPCs in Africa + putting pressure on Russia.

Remember: In Classic, Germany has to play defensively, as they stand no chance of breaking Karelia unless your opponent is really weak. Japan has to be the main breadwinner for the Axis, abusing the weak starting setup for the Allies in Asia and the typical hyper-KGF Allied strategy to try to either take Moscow or win an “economic victory” before the Allies manage to break Germany.

sid guttridge wrote:Hi Phylo,

Yes. Finland was not part of the Percentages Agreement. This easy to check.

I have never heard that Helsinki and Vienna were ever considered together. Their situations were very different. Berlin and Vienna, yes. Have you a source?

Cheers,

Sid.

Well I think the likelyhood of Japan taking both China and Sinkiang is very low in fact.  If you think about it Japan starts with only 7inf on the ground and 3ftrs bmb for offense.  China with 2inf ftr is more dangerous than one would expect and because of this it is my feeling that you must send at least 3inf ftr bmb just to guarantee a good shot at clearing it.  Additionally, Sink can only be attacked with 2inf + some air and is a lesser priority so in fact it is safe to assume that one of these will go badly.  Further Japan spreading out its offensive ability on turn 1 is a high risk high reward move as you could also lose all these battles which will really slow down Japan.  Losing say 6inf just to kill an irrelevent 2inf ftr or an extra 2inf is not a good idea.  Further, if the Brits pull just 1 Indian guy or 1 Syrian back to Persia they will have an opportunity to attack the infantry put in India by Japan.  If the Brits can nibble at these forces while spread out, and the Japanese hurt themselves by spreading out then it is far easier to slow Japan down than if you play defense where Japan will maintain its relative strength by virtue of not attacking.

Secondly, what gain is there to moving 2inf from India to Sink anyway?  If the Japanese want to risk it they can still attack it, and if they do you risk losing more of what little strength in Asia you do have.  Additionally, Japan can still take India, and Britain is still left attacking with 1inf + air to clear it so what’s the difference?

Finally, your primary reason against abandoning India is that the IPC swing is too great but in fact even with a defense of India or Sink Japan can still attack one or the other, and for that reason the IPC swing is almost as great so in fact the vacating of India actually costs the Brits very little.  Whether the British are in India or not the Japanese should be able to take China and India or Sink which is a 10ipcs swing.  The difference is but only 1guy which is more than worth it for the British.

@theSexualHarrassmentPanda:

The extra trn allows attacks on both AES and Syr. The trn is only a nuisance after that. GBR fleet builds will be slowed down by the 2 Bmbs. And soon, the shift in cash flows to Ger.

Unless the Allies either land immediately into WAfr and then slow down Germany from completely consolidating their hold on Africa. What’s more the Germans can’t really afford to send more inf into Africa than a typicl PAfrica bid would do. Like I said I never mind a G1 purchase of a transport b/c it is easy to kill and therefore a waste of money. What’s more Germany really does need men in Europe if they are to ever WIN the game. Just mastering cash flow will not lead to certain victory.

I normally play RR, so no bids. The games posted indicate that PAf is superior to trn buy. Allies usu do not have enough ships to safely land in Afr until round 3 or 4.

Of course, opposition deployments and battle results should weigh in on any purchase decision.

@Jennifer:

kick his rosey little red tushy!

:o Now that is the spirit of Anglo-American Cooperation!

Heheheh… You said tushy!

Any navy Germany leaves in the UK sz will be sunk by the UK Air Force, and the ftrs can proceed to land in Karelia for defense of the Rodina (the Motherland.) Then UK may place any navy purchased in the UK sz. Maybe a carrier and a transport!
What can the US do to support this move? Think about it.

Here is a recent thread where we covered this topic:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=696

Also, there is a topic below on G1 w/2-hit battleships - 95% of it applies to 1-hit battleships as well. It has some good ideas for Turn 1 German strategies:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=718

On the contrary, thug, the Germans need their Med. navy as long as possible to build defensive might in Africa. The longer they hold Africa the greater their income and the more successful the Germans will be.