Sealion counter

That’s the point though. Sea Lion is an objective for Germany but there is no justification for doing while the USSR is still a credible threat because once you capture London, there is no way in hell you can defend against the US liberation and the Soviet invasion. Hence, just don’t do it. I am only suggesting that if one wanted to do an early Sea Lion, you will need Japan to put so much pressure on USSR that Germany can focus completely on US thus Japan will lose in the Pacific. I agree Sea Lion isn’t a wise move.

@simon33:

Why don’t you just build a third fighter in Calcutta to defend against sbr? It is well spent.

Because I am worrying about a quick J3 Indian Crunch.  I am preparing for the following Japanese movement:
J1 move 1(2) inf from Kiangsi to Borneo, move 3 inf, 1 art from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to Philippines; J1 build 3 transports
J2 move 3 inf, 2 art, 1 tank from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to sz36; J2 build naval base in FIC; concentrate all carrier groups in sz36 (each with 1 tact, 1 fighter), bombers in Siam, block sz38 with some fleet
J3 attack India with 6-8 inf, 3 art, 1 tank, 3 tact, 3 fighters, 2 bombers (can have offshore bombardments)

According to the build & movement below (no Russian fighter to India), I will have
16 inf, 1 art, 3 AA, 1 fighter in India for defense.
This should just be enough to defend India.  If I build a UK fighter in India, then I don’t have enough infantry to defend India.

Middle East-Indian Wall strategy
[[to counter J1 attack, no matter Germany goes for sealion or barbarossa]]
Turn 1
C1: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 4 inf in Szechwan

UK1:
India 1 tack+fighter to Middle East (Middle Earth strategy)
Sz39 transport 1 inf to Persia
India 5 inf, 1 art=> Burma
Burma fighter=> India
Malaya 3 inf => Shan state
India build 5 inf

ANZAC1: Malaya inf => Shan state

Turn 2
C2: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 5 inf in Szechwan

UK2: (consider the case J1 take Borneo, build 3 transports; J2 build MIC and NB in FIC; move 3 transports to sz36)
Burma 7 inf, 1 art => India
Shan state 3 inf => Burma
India build 4 inf
(if no Sealion, build Persia factory)

ANZAC2: Shan state inf => Burma

Turn 3:
China: aim at taking Yunnan

@simon33:

I haven’t had much success with strategies like the one proposed except when Germany spends some of its money on fleet. That gives ussr a bit ight breathing room to do something.

But I agree with you, in case Germany goes for barbarossa, Russia should focus on wars in Eastern Front.  Again Yunnan and India worries me.  The above implies that China should defend J3 take and hold Yunnan by itself…

6 inf 1 fighter is more common, as has been said elsewhere. It’s still strong enough on its own, and the fighter is far more flexible, especially UK 3+.

I only see/do 9 inf buys when Germany buys transports (plural) on G1, or if you’re super paranoid and Germany saves 30 G1.

@AndreasI:

Just some thoughts from someone who hasn’t really done the math nor played enough rounds to actually see this tactic through.

Can US really be at war, at their own initiative, with Germany on turn 3 (Combat/Movement phase?) so they can actually move to Gibraltar at all? Or are there any second edition additional rules that I have missed?

And then on down to the tactics on getting a strong fleet supporting units into Normandy or other mainland european regions:

Am I correct in assuming that Germany loosing it’s entire bomber force against, let’s say, a strong naval presence from US/UK equals a lost game for Germany? I am aware that Japan can still grow to be a monster and win the game for the axis anyhow but let’s keep focus on europe for now. Creating a fleet according to Nippon-kokus suggestion (or similar) would create a situation that requires Germany to respond with their bombers. Once there is a strong static fleet that Germany can’t attack without risking it’s entire air force it’s quite easy for the allies to maintain that ratio of units so that it stays safe. And what happens then? The US can land units basically every turn once the shuttle is running. 8 or 10 units are not frightening, I admit. Easily countered by Germany but the way I see it is that Germany from then on are forced to use their bombers plus land units each turn against a landing force. Using german bombers on that front every turn makes them unusable against the russians. I can certainly see where there could be a bit of trouble breaking through russian lines.

The way I see it, if the US can do this, why would Dark Skies really matter? Would buying 20 Infantry and 10 Tanks be any different? Germany still couldn’t kill the Allied fleet, would still have to divert forces from Russia, would still face the Allies landing every turn…

…and on top of it, It’d be harder for Germany to counter attack.

Seems like Dark Skies is still an optimal strategy against a US invasion.

The Japanese advance through Russia is annoying, but it very much opens the door to shut Japan down and stall the Japanese advance.

You’ve got two options.  The first of which is to sink the Japanese fleet and take control of SZ6 to prevent Japan from ferrying over units to the mainland while convoying Japan’s eventual income to zero and stopping the flood into Russia.  You can trade your ships for Japanese ships early, sacrificing carriers by absorbing two hits to allow your aircraft to continue to sink ships in SZ6 (which of course means their demise too). Once the fleet is crippled, Japan is going to be stuck putting out a DD or CR at best each round in SZ6 - easily sunk by US DD/SS.  By Japan ignoring income and making a bee line to Moscow, its most likely going to lose the fight in China as I’d expect India to DOW and stack up the Burma Road to get Chinese artillery out, nullifying the Japanese advantage over China.  Losing Chinese income, the DEI income and getting convoyed, Japan’s going to be making less than 10 IPC/round once the US DOW occurs.

The other option is to ignore Japan and just build the US to land on Gib on Round 4 and then onto Norway/Italy/the French Minors on Round 5.  A reinforcement of British units- a combination of infantry and aircraft can help prevent a German counter for the US landing.  The only hope is that you put enough of a threat on Germany that it has to reverse its economic spending getting units into the fight for Moscow so that Berlin has to be defended instead of a factory of Mech supporting what I’d expect to be Armor purchases that were made earlier.  India can also then ignore China and start churning out Armor/Mech and start marching toward Egypt/Afghan/Southern Russia.  Japan will not be able to hold territories near Moscow for long with India spending from India1 forward on a march in that direction.  Particularly as India claims all the DEI to pump its income into the 30’s.  I’d let Anzac just build SS every round and continue to convoy/harass Japanese territories to further compound Japan’s problem of spending to get units towards Moscow whilst being harassed via convoy everywhere.

Basically the Japanese making the Moscow Rush equates to a boring Pacific Theater and UK, India, US all converging on Europe.  Italy can easily be convoyed out of the game with a combination of SS purchases out of S.Africa, India and UK.  Japan has an 8 roundish march to Moscow (unless theres a suicide aircraft punch).  Germany is 7ish rounds out itself.  If rounds 5, 6 and 7 equate to Allied landings in Europe, Germany has a tough decision to face with a convoy’ed Italy, an over-extended Japan and a split economy defending Europe and advancing on Moscow.

Realize you still may lose Moscow, but with the Allies entrenched in Europe with a full economic investment, India may be able to reclaim Moscow for the Russians as Germany has to reverse course instead of swinging south towards Egypt for the win.

@Spendo02:

I don’t see much value in the 70 IPC of Trn once you take London and get your offensive units back on mainland Europe.Â

Spending resources to address their protection seems less efficient than boots on the ground pushing back the Russian advance.

5 Transports and the fleet stay in the Baltic Sea - now you can ferry your infantry/artillery builds directly into Novgorod each round (+13 units a round in Novgorod - there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell Russia is getting it back - ever.)
5 Transports go down to Gibraltar - land in Morocco and join with large Italian fleet - which will probably exist unless England went no defense for England - and take Brazil, Africa, W. Indies and then slide the rest down around the Cape for Madagascar.

There’s a lot of things you can use the transports for.  You could use them to set up a train service to Arkhangelsk through the Arctic Ocean and the other half to shuttle troops from Berlin.

@Alsch91:

Normally I think UK could take back both Shan State and Yunnan on UK 3 before pulling back to Calcutta.
Thus your planes have no landing spot.

Might be costly, but also might be worth it for the reasons you suggested.

Almost every Stat. works when you roll real good dice it’s when they dont go your way and you have to change because your winning game just turned into a losing game
  the forum is good because you can see a wider range of strat.'s
  I would go with the 3 subs to a BB purchase, also the Carrier and planes sounds good