German Strategies

Yeah, that’s the same opening I prefer for Germany in 1942 also, down to the bomber purchase.  That seems to be a pretty good opening move there, Granada.  I know lots of people do an all land purchase, and I’ve been toying with a AC purchase to protect z5 to move infantry into Russia quicker and keep a token threat on Great Britain if the chance presents itself, but I think it comes down to what Germany does to react to the Allies G2 and on, which is harder to quantify.

Has anyone tried to take out both Anglo Egypt and Trans Jordan on round 1? I ask because I botched my Egypt attack last game and IMO that’s ends the game since the UK can cross the channel and destroy your navy and cut you off from Africa for good.

Is it better to try and win Egypt strong or give yourself another opportunity to close the channel?

@Col.Stauffenberg:

Has anyone tried to take out both Anglo Egypt and Trans Jordan on round 1? I ask because I botched my Egypt attack last game and IMO that’s ends the game since the UK can cross the channel and destroy your navy and cut you off from Africa for good.

Is it better to try and win Egypt strong or give yourself another opportunity to close the channel?

If you only take Trans-Jordan then the UK player can still kill the German Med fleet, using the fighter on Egypt, the bomber from the UK and the fighter onboard the Indian ocean carrier. To allow the German fleet to survive you need to take Egypt.

I normally prefer and all-land purchase on G1 (10 inf 2 arm mostly) but 6 inf 2 arm 1 bmr is ok as well and I also think 2 subs has some value in delaying landings and force the allies to build lots of destroyers. The sub purchase is especially good if you’re playing with national advantages. Those attacks are my combat moves as well, you never really want to be TOO conservative early in the game as Germany.

@Hobbes:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

Has anyone tried to take out both Anglo Egypt and Trans Jordan on round 1? I ask because I botched my Egypt attack last game and IMO that’s ends the game since the UK can cross the channel and destroy your navy and cut you off from Africa for good.

Is it better to try and win Egypt strong or give yourself another opportunity to close the channel?

If you only take Trans-Jordan then the UK player can still kill the German Med fleet, using the fighter on Egypt, the bomber from the UK and the fighter onboard the Indian ocean carrier. To allow the German fleet to survive you need to take Egypt.

I know this makes it harder to take Egypt. I was hoping for someone to give me a breakdown of the odds for both fights. Depending on what happens, Germany could buy 15 inf on round two if they went up five.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

@Hobbes:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

Has anyone tried to take out both Anglo Egypt and Trans Jordan on round 1? I ask because I botched my Egypt attack last game and IMO that’s ends the game since the UK can cross the channel and destroy your navy and cut you off from Africa for good.

Is it better to try and win Egypt strong or give yourself another opportunity to close the channel?

If you only take Trans-Jordan then the UK player can still kill the German Med fleet, using the fighter on Egypt, the bomber from the UK and the fighter onboard the Indian ocean carrier. To allow the German fleet to survive you need to take Egypt.

I know this makes it harder to take Egypt. I was hoping for someone to give me a breakdown of the odds for both fights. Depending on what happens, Germany could buy 15 inf on round two if they went up five.

Assuming R has killed the German fighter on Ukraine here are the odds if you try to go for both territories:

Trans-Jordan: (1 inf, 1 arm vs 1 inf)  89% attacker, 6% draw, 5% defender
Egypt: (1 inf, 1 arm, 1 ftr, 1 bmr vs 1 inf, 1 arm, 1 ftr) 76% attacker, 8% draw, 16% defender - keep in mind most likely you’ll have to lose a ftr and probably even the bomber to allow for the tank to survive.

Just attacking Egypt with everything available (excluding Ukr ftr):

(2 inf, 2 arm, 1 ftr, 1 bmr vs 1 inf, 1 arm, 1 ftr) = 99% attacker

Just attacking Egypt without the bomber (instead sent to SZ2)

(2 inf, 2 arm, 1 ftr, 1 bmr vs 1 inf, 1 arm, 1 ftr) = 91% attacker, 2% draw, 7% defender

Considering those odds it’s amazing how many times the Egypt fight has gone bad when me and my friends play, and that’s with the Ukraine fighter since Russia usually just straifs Ukraine.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

Considering those odds it’s amazing how many times the Egypt fight has gone bad when me and my friends play, and that’s with the Ukraine fighter since Russia usually just straifs Ukraine.

One thing are odds, another the actual results. Odds are merely mathematical predictions, the actual results may only reach those percentages after thousands or millions of rolls. One example are the battles where the defender wins although he only has 0.1% odds. But if it can happen mathematically, then it can happen any time during the game (even twice or more in a row), because dice have no memory of past rolls.

Hey! :-)

1. SZ2 sub, bomb, fig
2. SZ13 battleship, fig (from WesEu)
3. AA Gibraltar inf, arm (from SEur)
4. (if Ukr fig alive or else skip to No 5) SZ15 2 fig
(5. Counter UKR with whatever is appropriate)
6. Taking Karelia with whatever is appropriate
7. Garrison Algeria (land WesEu fig, arm from Lyb)
On non-combat I mass in EasEur (all Germ, 2 arm from WesEur), inf+art from SEur -> Balk, preparing for a counter if the Russians retake Karel, WesRus or Ukr, and 2 subs in SZ7.

I buy 3 subs, 1 bomb, 2 inf, 1 art and place 2 subs in SEur and 1 in Germ, and the rest in Germ.

My strategy is:

1. Prevent an allied landing in Africa. With Alg inf+art+arm+fgt it will take combined Brit and US landings to make it happen, and even then I can counter from Gibraltar+the bombers. By taking Gibr I prevent brit fgt rush against my BB. I don t mind losing Lybia, I can counter later.
2. Keep the Karelia-Belorus-Ukraine line.
3. Work your way into Afrika.

Lame senario is not sink the SZ 2 battleship.
And fail to counter Ukr.

How do you stop Russia from advancing with so little land forces Advosan? What do you do if UK drops their navy in front of Egypt and reinforces it? You’d never get Africa.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

How do you stop Russia from advancing with so little land forces Advosan? What do you do if UK drops their navy in front of Egypt and reinforces it? You’d never get Africa.

1. I don t stop USSR from advancing.
In R2 they will breach somewhere (Karelia, Belorus or most probably Ukr or in more than one territory) and I will counter from EasEur+Balkans->Ukr, or from EasEur->Belor or Karelia. If a counter is impossible, I retreat to Germany, leaving 1 inf in EasEur, 1 inf in Balk.
The G2 buy depends: If I can t counter, I buy 5 inf, 5 art , 1 arm (usually 40 IPC) and place all in Germ and the arm in SEur, thus preparing for a counter in EEur or Balk.
If I can counter and retake all three (Karel, Belor, Ukr) I repeat the G1 buy.

2. I only hope the brits mass in SZ15, they can put there 1AC, 2 fgt, 1 CR (and maybe 1 DD) and I can hit them with 1 BB (SZ13), 2 subs (SZ14), 1 bomb (SEur), at least 1 fgt (Balk or SEur) or maybe 2 fgt (if in G1 the Germ fgt lands in SEur or Balk).
If they lack the DD, there will be an onslaught. Even with the DD, Germ will crush them.
The only catch is that I have to select the planes as casualties to the UK planes hits, since the Brits lack the DD, but still I win and get the BB alive.
Normally Germ will lose 1 fgt and 1 or 2 subs. Worst case, they will lose the BB and they won t kill all the UK fgt. The UK fleet though is doomed.

Germ loose ground in Europe, but it is easily retaken.

@Advosan:

1. I don t stop USSR from advancing.

Against an aggressive Russia that is doom for the Axis. If Russia takes and holds Bielo, WR Ukr that’s 31 IPCs for her. By giving her the opportunity to take Norway, EE and Balk it raises to 40. To make things worse Russia can deal with any Japanese incursions in India and China with leisure.

2. I only hope the brits mass in SZ15

Strategies that rely on ‘hoping’ that the opponent does things in some way usually go out very bad if the opposing player is experienced. For instance, the Brits can simply attack the German BB and TRN on UK1 with the DD and the bomber. It is a close fight but the odds favor the Allies. If the transport survives then the US bomber can take it out.

Germ loose ground in Europe, but it is easily retaken.

More important is that Russia gains the initiative to deal with Europe and Asia as it seems fit. G will force the Allies to deal with its fleet but once it is gone Germany is dead. And the US/UK can easily block any of the German ships by placing DDs to block them.

@Hobbes:

@Advosan:

1. I don t stop USSR from advancing.

Against an aggressive Russia that is doom for the Axis. If Russia takes and holds Bielo, WR Ukr that’s 31 IPCs for her. By giving her the opportunity to take Norway, EE and Balk it raises to 40. To make things worse Russia can deal with any Japanese incursions in India and China with leisure.

I m not saying G should let R keep those lands. If G cannot counter from EE and reestablish the Karel-Belor-Urk line it must abandon the anti-ship build (sub+bomb) for 1 turn, beef up in Germ and retake them. I m only suggesting G shouldn t press any further towards R, not before it raises 47-49 IPC from Afrika.

2. I only hope the brits mass in SZ15

Strategies that rely on ‘hoping’ that the opponent does things in some way usually go out very bad if the opposing player is experienced. For instance, the Brits can simply attack the German BB and TRN on UK1 with the DD and the bomber. It is a close fight but the odds favor the Allies. If the transport survives then the US bomber can take it out.

If G plans to let UK DD alive, G must adjust G1 buy, get 1 inf 1 art 2 sub 1 DD 1 bomb and block UK DD

Germ loose ground in Europe, but it is easily retaken.

More important is that Russia gains the initiative to deal with Europe and Asia as it seems fit. G will force the Allies to deal with its fleet but once it is gone Germany is dead. And the US/UK can easily block any of the German ships by placing DDs to block them.

Even with Kar-Bel-Ukr , R has 31 IPC and G still gathers 33, 2 IPC more, not to mention that the closer R troops are to Germany the less IPC G needs to dedicate to their annihilation. The Axis and especially Germany lacks initiative at the beginning of the game, because of its low IPC (merely 40, against a combined 30+24=54 of its close opponents, not to mention an american atlantic army).
Arfika (whose capture will rebalance the G IPC to 47-49 vs a combined UK-R 45-47) is the only way to Axis victory, and the key to Afrika is an anti-ship Medit force that will keep a steady flow to Arfika.

I know a lot of Axis players favor the strategy of a combined G-J push against Moscow, but it can never work unless the Allies screw up and let Moscow burn.

@Advosan:

I m not saying G should let R keep those lands. If G cannot counter from EE and reestablish the Karel-Belor-Urk line it must abandon the anti-ship build (sub+bomb) for 1 turn, beef up in Germ and retake them. I m only suggesting G shouldn t press any further towards R, not before it raises 47-49 IPC from Afrika.

47-49 IPC is a long shot for G to reach, usually it will only get there to turn 4-5. Of the initial 40, G will usually lose Norway, making it down to 37. Africa has 9 IPCs (not counting Madagascar) and the UK can withdraw its forces to S. Africa and it will take a lot of time to kill those units. Plus, any units brought to Africa aren’t available to deal with the Russians. If R moves the bulk of this units to Ukraine and G can’t destroy then G will be squeezed. Africa is important for the Axis but focus too much on it and its forces in Europe will be overwhelmed.

I know a lot of Axis players favor the strategy of a combined G-J push against Moscow, but it can never work unless the Allies screw up and let Moscow burn.

Then why do a lot of Axis players favor that combined G-J strategy? Because they like to lose?

First, thanks for sharing strategies Advosan, but second, the strategy your suggesting is only good for guarding the Atlantic for a few turns and getting Africa. It ignores the fact that letting Russia run roughshod over Europe makes them next to impossible to take down. It also delays Germany from taking Russia since they have to wait at least round two to take Egpyt, more if UK decides to guard it amd this means UK has more money for ship builds. If the Allies are patient in the Atlantic, there’s nothing Germany can do to stop them. Eventually they will outbuild Germany, and once they’re able to land, Ger won’t have enough defence to stop them. This kind of game usually ends in round 5 or 6.

I do agree with you that Germany needs African money. My advice is to go for Egypt first and only add boats when you’re up money. I also like the Med ship build on round 2 or 3. Hopefully you can afford it by then (you might be up to 44).

I’m a fan of the round 1 Baltic AC build. I know a lot of people don’t like it but you save 15 ipcs and increase the range of your planes, which will delay the Allied Atlantic ship builds for a couple rounds.

If you ever see Russia build a Sub round 1 then it would be an alright time to do your strategy (although I still wouldn’t do it).

@Hobbes:

@Advosan:

I m not saying G should let R keep those lands. If G cannot counter from EE and reestablish the Karel-Belor-Urk line it must abandon the anti-ship build (sub+bomb) for 1 turn, beef up in Germ and retake them. I m only suggesting G shouldn t press any further towards R, not before it raises 47-49 IPC from Afrika.

47-49 IPC is a long shot for G to reach, usually it will only get there to turn 4-5. Of the initial 40, G will usually lose Norway, making it down to 37. Africa has 9 IPCs (not counting Madagascar) and the UK can withdraw its forces to S. Africa and it will take a lot of time to kill those units. Plus, any units brought to Africa aren’t available to deal with the Russians. If R moves the bulk of this units to Ukraine and G can’t destroy then G will be squeezed. Africa is important for the Axis but focus too much on it and its forces in Europe will be overwhelmed.

You are correct, it takes G4-5 to reach 47 IPC (G1 fortify Algeria, G2 counter Lybia or blast AE, G3/4 blitz FWA and capture TJ and either BC or IEA, G4/5 move respectively towards Persia, attack other Afrikan lands). But still, this is the very quintessence of the Axis game. Axis has no initiative early in the game. By pushing towards Moscow you spread yourself thin.

The question that G has to answer is “how to protect the highly valued BB”. Yoy cannot allow the BB to die in UK1, the arfikan campain dies with it. The only way to keep it alive is  G1 capture Gibr, destroy UK Cr and either kill UK DD or buy a DD and block it (or choose the G1 capture of both AES and TJ, which leaves Algeria exposed and the UK Cr probably alive).

I know a lot of Axis players favor the strategy of a combined G-J push against Moscow, but it can never work unless the Allies screw up and let Moscow burn.

Then why do a lot of Axis players favor that combined G-J strategy? Because they like to lose?

No, Axis choose G-J combined push because the Allies can easily screw up. Most common screwing up is the UK not invading Europe in time, relieving the pressure off R. Allied micromanagement is quite challenging, but Axis cannot really hope to win by waiting for an Allies mistake.

Most times, the Axis strategy mistake is equalled by an even bigger Allies strat mistake, KGF. G can endure a tremendous amount of pain, giving J all the time in the world to grow to an impossible 40 IPC or even more. If J is left unchallenged by the US in the Pacific and it reaches 40, it can easily simultaneously a) invade Alaska, midway and hawaii b) start working its way to Moscow c) go for Arfica and d) go for Oceania, resulting to an inevitable blasting of the G combined pressure. If the dice go by the odds, J needs only to J3 to reach 40 IPC if left unchallenged:

• J1 china (3 Kwan+1 Manc inf), garrison FIC (with 2 Manila inf), buy 2 DD 2 tran
• J2 xingyang, Ind (+2 EasInd inf), counter Manch
• J3 Butyatia, SFA and Persia or Madagascar.

G can easily endure untill G3 everything the Allies can throw at it. And if J reaches 40, it it impossible to bring it down, it can only go even higher, J4 Aussie, maybe Africa, and Alaska or Hawaii, J5 Kiwi, even Brazil in J6 (trans from Hawaii), while pooring troops in Asia against Moscow.

It won’t matter if Japan is up money if they’re not putting pressuring on Russia and if you’re seperating your navy, then you’re making it vulnerable.

@Dylan:

To me it’s easier as the Axis. So with the Germans produce tanks in the East. In the West send many reinforcements into West Europe a lot. Make sure you build a Carrier though first turn. Then Move in closer to the British Navy with planes on the Carrier and Bomb London and land in Germany. Start matching up your units with transports once you take out the Royal Navy.

You aren’t taking into account that the Royal and US Navies can sync as early as rd3. How will you take them out? It is better to wait and see where the Allies commit in the sea. If they go Med, then quick control of the Suez is key, and Japan can move its Indies fleet to Italy sea zone, land Axis planes on the carrier, and you have a solid defense set up there (2BB, 2ftr, 1AC). One of the Allied fleets will have to trade most of itself to take it out, and rebuild for the next 2-3 rounds. Whenever I have used this strat it has paid off big. If they go Baltic (probably more common), building a carrier there is good to help delay landings, but you cannot expect to “take out” anyone. However, forcing the Allies to build more navy and delay major landings until late mid-game (rd6 or 7 i’d say) is a victory for Germany in itself. Also note that time is always on the Allies’ side, which means if the game goes longer than 8 rounds the Axis are most likely screwed, but if they are going to win from that point, it’ll be because of German infantry stacks, NOT navy.

They key to German success and indeed any success is economics.  Africa is key to German economic success and the Mediterranean fleet is key to that end, Germany knows it or should, and the allies do as well.  The allies should go all out to destroy the German fleet, the Germans to protect it long enough to allow forces to flow to africa and require a huge investment by the allies to push the German fleet away to allow landings in Africa.

My philosophy calls for economic success in africa, delay allied invasion of Norway, create asymmetrical economic threats, ie, make the bastards pay more to counter your threat than your threat cost.

The typical Russian move:

Build mostly infantry and a bit of artillery

Russia goes large into West Russian, takes out Ukraine to destory the fighter and goes into a defensive position in the east, sub in with the brit BB.

German builds, now it gets interesting.  Britain should be building bombers and subs to chase the German fleets, moving british air units to the Caucus territory quickly, the time to build german navy is now or never!

A carrier in the Mediterranean add a transport unless Russia really crushed in opening moves as you might be too thin.  The drawback in not building the transport on turn 1 is that the german surface fleet might want to stay in seazone 15 for turn 2-4 to lump forces in to an area where they can do combat and earn you territories quickly and take both sides of the canal.  You will need to combine the BB and Carrier right away.  Later you might sacrafice  1 of the transports to get units to the south of africa quickly or take Madagascar.  Sooner or later, the allies will probably force your navy to run into the red sea and your supply line to africa is lost.  By then the carrier has paid for itself several times in IPCs from africa and forced the allies to invest huge amounts of money in a navy that has no enemy to fight now.  The allies land huge in Africa and now their forces are abut 6 moves away from Russian and the navy useless.

Maybe also sub in the baltic,  make the Brit build destroyers, then make him trade a DD for a sub, your newly built sub plus air units will make short work of lone destoryers.  If the allies don’t chase the subs then they can be grouped with the Med navy to fend off allied landings requiring the allied navy to stay in seazone 12.  The drawback obviously is now Germany is short on land units and has a southern navy designed to moved 4 land units per turn into Africa.

Normally, as German I try to take out the British battleship, cruiser and destroyer, egypt and retake Ukraine (to destory the surviving russian tanks) leaving only the transport off Canada.  The naval battles seem a bit risky for Germany and expensive as you should count on losing about 2 planes using the typical all out against the brit navy tactic.  Egypt has gone wrong more often than it should which is fatal to Germany.

I have tried this exactly once, it worked and will do so tommorow night I believe!  Leave the Brit navy alone in seazone 1 and 2, Blasphemy I know!  Use the sub and 2 fighters against the cruiser.  BB against the DD, invading Egypt with 2 INF, 2 Tanks, bomber and fighter.  The two remaining fighers are used against russian forces.

You should end up with 2 tanks in egypt, the Brits should counter attack with forces from India sacraficing the transport and escaping the cruiser and carrier from the Japanese forces.  With wave 2 of the German forces the brits are a spent force in egypt, let the IPC harvest begin!

I had reinforced Norway with 2 INF and put 1 if not both other fighters in Norway as well.  I put the two german subs in sea zone 6 to attack anything that moved into sea zone 3.  However, just today I read in the AA42 FAQ and much to my horror, I read the Brits can build in sea zone 3?  That would allow the brits to invade norway and build a carrier in sea and 2 destroyers in sea zone 3 and have the US put fighters on it  Perhaps leaving Norway or even evacuating it would be the thing to do?

The next few turns would see the allies building enough navy to move into africa while defending against german subs, air and surface fleet.  The asymmetric costs and IPC differential I feel more than outweigh the initial cost of the fleet expansion and the lost opportunity of re-allocating resources elsewhere.  The German fleet once outnumbered moves into the Indian Ocean and provides cover against allied air for Japanese forays in the theatre and a threat to always move back into the mediterranean.

So, hairbrained or potentials here?

@Dylan:

To me it’s easier as the Axis. Then pretty much do what i said in the German campaign.

Hope that helps :-)

@Dylan, how do possible expect to pull all this off with Germany? Do you play with dice all numbered 1 for the axis? Your conquer-everything-with-no-problems-at-all approach could only work if you playing a 2yr old. How can 1 CV hold off all of Britain’s and US’s air/navy long enough for you to match your land forces up with defenseless transports?