Allied Destroyers do not negate the defending SS abilities?

@shadowhawk

Yeah, I definitely didn’t think of things that way. Mostly the AAA just stays in the US the whole time. I’ll give it a try.

@ShadowHAwk not sure that I would want to play a 40+ round world domination game with stalemates in so many portions of the world. I assume that bombers would become the meta, being able to project power into so many theaters and preventing your opponent’s fleet from splitting to two forces.

OOB is just fine if you are relatively new to the game and playing face-to-face with no battle calculators. Eventually someone will make a mistake or two, and the game will be quickly over. The issue is with PBEM games where you can battle calc every possible option and figure out how many fighters will be required in Moscow to shift the odds from 50% up to 90%. That gives the Axis such a big advantage as they are the aggressor during the critical first 8 turns.

@Moller A submarine is a sea unit with an attack value and a defense value. What makes it special are its “Special Abilities”/unit characteristics as described by the rulebook(s) and (partly) outlined by @WindowWasher above.
Those are:

Surprise Strike (X) Submersible (X) On Station Treat Hostile Sea Zones as Friendly (X) Doesn’t Block Enemy Movement Can’t Hit Air Units Can’t Be Hit by Air Units (X)

An enemy destroyer cancels those unit characteristics marked with an (X).

@Moller said in Battleship/cruiser with destroyer vs submarine:

I tought without a destroyer you can’t detect a submarine so you can’t attacked the submarine.

This is not part of the rules, sorry.

No discussion for a while now…

Any new conclusions about this strategy?

What’s about an airbase at Gibraltar and moving Egypt fleet west? Yet, I guess there was this topic deep down at forum’s splanchnic times ago but couldn’t find it…

@knp7765:

As Russia, you should definitely grab Norway. With the large US fleet there and London getting liberated, it’s very doubtful Germany will be putting any more boats in the water (…)

I agree completely. I want Norway out of the way first round after London is liberated, just to rid Germany of another 8 IPCs. If the Germans position themselves in Finland however, USA will take Norway instead. Otherwise Germany can enjoy those 8IPCs one more turn.

@knp7765:

(…)Do you plan to liberate Paris if US troops successfully land in Normandy or Holland? (…)

I usually wait to liberate Paris for the exact same reasons as you mentioned. It is a matter of being able to hold it or not. Trading it back and forth with Germany is often unacceptable (but not always), especially if the USA has to spend a lot in the Pacific (sometimes I am forced to invest near 100% in the Pacific with the USA from US7 and onwards because the Japs have taken Calcutta and are investing near 100% on also getting Hawai). For that reason I keep my men and TRS next to each other in Gibraltar, London, Normandy or wherever they are safe while being the most aggressive.

In this particular situation however, it remains to be seen. If taking Paris means the fall of Berlin in a series of falling dominoes then taking Paris it is!

Thanks for the welcome Variance!

You are guessing correctly ^.^:
If the UK (in our group) sees that Germany is going ‘full bore’ (I guess that means throwing everything at Moscow to defeat it G6 or G7), then it starts channeling its fighters from wherever it must build them (Britain, Canada, South Africa and India) into Russia and finally into Moscow. All this happens Either via the northern route or via Persia/Africa (building a key AB here and/or there).
  UK is OK to sacrifice its ships in the med. to keep every plane alive, annihilate the Italian Navy first and to prevent any new axis ships to appear there.
Subsequently the aircraft help to destroy the Italian presence in Africa (from set-up plus maybe 1 turn of reinforcements) and then the aircraft flies into the Middle east, ready to go into Russia whilst trying not to disrupt Russia’s NO of having Archangelsk-route. But the UK fighters in russia are more important than the Russian NO if the threat is high enough.

This is why our UK is always strong while at the same time being able to be in Russia with their FTRs on time, giving Germany (statistically) no chance on Moscow, not even if it goes full bore. If it doesnt go in full bore than all those UK FTR can go elsewhere as a very flexible force. For example, fly into the areas in Europe that the US captures, stay in the med, fly to India to recapture Calcutta or prevent it from being taken… you name it).

So perhaps we don’t play Germany as optimally as possible ;-).
The best I have ever come up with myself is hitting Moscow with around 230 attack factors G6 (buying 4 STR G5, 4 TAC/STR G4, ARM+MECH G3&G2, ART+INF G1) while Russia alone I believe cannot have more than around 195 defense factors, their AAA still excluded. Combined with the UK FTR however, this can easily be too much over the 230 German attack factors. This combined with sufficiently enough more allied units, a full bore axis attack on Moscow is in our group a statistical fail.

Anyway, a quick calculation shows me that an all STR German build can reach to approx. 200 Attack factors and has way less defense factors so my guess is it will fail to deliver the message to Moscow.

I am looking for Axis strategies to counter the allied dominance (in my eyes) but Perhaps I should then move on to another thread or start one myself  8-).

I will definately look into the tripleA program if I have the time, thanks!

axis advantage boardgame, just like the new 41 and 42.

Just be desperate, hope for the best.

Mission 1:  Sink Jap Fleet
Mission 2: SBR and Convoy them to the stone age
Mission 3: Hope you get enough into Europe to change the Axis fortune there.