My UK Strategy

@SuperbattleshipYamato

Right, so I found the thread discussing this variant, but I didn’t notice until after I created this thread, but in case you are still confused what I’m talking about:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/23900/global-1942-scenario-by-larry-harris/25

@govz

Thanks, I’ll check it out.

There’s two main house rules for Canada. One is the Halifax rules which basically includes Canada as part of ANZAC.

Second is the one in Triplea. Canada as its own power and develops from BM3. This is not so easy for table top games because Canada doesn’t have its own set of units. Perhaps you can paint a bunch.

Neither of these rules have gained a huge amount of interest or acceptance.

Attacking 106 is pretty important too, it gets the UK two land units. If UK doesn’t do Taranto, their fleet can link in 92 as well with the Malta stuff carried in.

Sea Lion is always an opportunistic play. The resulting German fleet has other uses.

@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.

FAQ (Bottom of page 2, top of 3) is pretty clear on this http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AAEurope1940_2ndEdition_FAQ.pdf

nah I always buy bombers usa 1 when germany buys naval r1. Japan usually DOWs J2. The only exception would be if japan opens with sino russia strategy, in which case I go full pacific buys rounds 1-4… if germany takes london then I can turn around and almost full atlantic (couples subs or dds for upkeep), because I secured the pacific theater with just those 4 rounds of buy (china, uk pac, and anzac can handle after that).

pretty much my allies strategy centers around uk sinking 97 and the spot below it in low luck games, for dice games it depends on what naval germany sunk…

Two different styles of germany, most do 110 and 111 and that dd transport off canada. others do the cruiser off gib, canada fleet, and either 110 or 111 or 109. If 110 is alive, yeah sure you can merge your fleet instead of doing 97 otherwise you pretty much have to sink 97, which kind of sucks because it is only 84% and not 94%

In my experience so far a good Russian player playing conservatively can make Moscow close to impossible to take.   The way Russian territories are set up allows them to fall back and shadow any approaching German army until the Russians have reinforced their stack to the point where it can turn around and chase out or destroy the invaders.  There’s no real downside to this vs standing and fighting as you’re only giving up 1-2 ipc provinces as you fall back and you’re continuing to preserve and grow your Russian stack at a rate faster than the Germans can hope to reinforce theirs (assuming, of course, that GB and the US are putting any sort of pressure on the other side of Europe).  I’ve pretty much given up going for it and instead have resolved to find some way to take Leningrad and Stalingrad.  I’ll admit that Germany and Italy, given free reign to attack Russia can eventually bring them down if they focus all their strength on it but how are they doing this while preventing or counter-attacking allied landings?  There’s just not enough IPC’s available for them to effectively do both.