Strict Barbarossa viable?

You may see equal success with either plan, such is the weakness of Russia against Germany.   However, since you can smash them early or later, you should do it early before they have any chance to consolidate and grow–you have no way to reach threshold income (60+) without Russian territory, and if you take it, you take it away from them and for yourself, a double whammy.    Once you have control of 2 of his factories you are flooding tanks into this front, that moment should be as early as possible rather than building your own fleets or factories in order to do it later.

@Caesar:

@KGrimB:

I know its probably not optimal, but I pretty much always build 6 inf and 1 fighter on London UK1. I always send some aircraft to the Mediterranean and with 60-70 ipcs on G2, Germany can attempt Sea Lion even if they may not have been originally considering it unless you have the defenses.

I would also agree against the factory in Egypt. It can be a little precarious early with nearby German air and I think that normally games where you have an option to build a factory in Egypt are games where the Mediterranean is already in the Allies’s favor. It doesn’t exactly create opportunities the same way a factory in Persia does. Just use transports with South Africa.

Sea Lion on G2 is foolish because ideally, Germany would need to buff its navy, build infantry, and transports so that shouldn’t be done until at least G3.

You misunderstand me. Sea Lion G3 is the most realistic because it is after you buy transports on G2, after SBR, and after T1 convoys. Germany evaluates early sea lion based on what London does turn 1.

With respect to the original question, I think a g1 Dow on Russia to bait UK into not defending for sea lion could work. However, you’re probably short 1-2 transports from strafing Yugoslavia, not hitting other parts of France, missing Russian wheat NO, and committing German aircraft to the eastern front or other riskier battles. Thus you exaggerate your existing problems because you give up all of the pros of G1 and take away units from that front just to get them stuck on an island with 1 VC instead of attacking a country with 3 VC.

It’s too much for one country. You would need to make sacrifices with Italy’s dreams in the Med. You can’t give them the help they need and they would have to spend on forces to delay Russia. They could attack London with their Bomber.

I think what would sell this plan and give Germany a better chance of baiting the UK would be a Japanese attack on Russia. If you bring America into the war you probably have no chance of winning in Europe. If you keep them out you get a better chance at London and Japan can draw some attention from Russia. Otherwise the Siberian infantry are probably garunteed arriving in Moscow and probably other Russian forces would occupy Iraq.

north or northwest persia

G1 and J1 games get wild :D

I like to take the money won from the fall of France and invest in a major complex for the eastern front.  Build a large infantry force that will march north towards Lgrad once Barbarossa begins.  Force Russian player to decide between defending Lgrad or Moscow with infantry.  If I can get the Russian to split off some infantry it helps.  Concentrate all German forces into one attack.  Sometimes the Russian doesn’t split and I’ll take Lenningrad.  I send a smaller force south towards Stalingrad, but they veer north after the marshes to merge with main force right before the attack on Moscow.  I try and push a lot of infantry forward knowing that I can get armor and fighters forward later just prior to an attack.  I keep a lot of my aircraft in Germany to ward off allied invasion in the west and slowly build up a defense force there until I withdraw the Luftwaffe.  Has anyone else invested in a major IC for eastern front with success?

the thing is, not everyone has their sea lion strategy down yet as some people still defend UK/try to maintain a naval instead of taking UK then abandoning it to race Moscow, before UK is liberated and USA becomes a threat to europe.

When I play it is easy to crush UK then turn around drive the russians out of the balkans back to moscow before france/italy/germany is seriously threatened. Once Russia is done, the game is super over.

There are two problems about sea lion.

I don’t mind UK getting conquered. Just if UK gets liberated… it should recover faster. The complex being nerfed to 3 combined with the crappy income generated… is really rough. I find that you can pack UK men on USA boats and drop them off the next turn is better than UK buying their own naval… you actually get more boots on the ground per turn much quicker. Or you can use UK’s 3 production a turn to buy naval pieces for USA or if germany is buying lots of air perhaps UK will buy naval pieces to protect USA naval (so usa can focus on dropping big payloads instead of carriers) and place a few men in africa to ship around (assuming you still have the transport down there).

So with both allied and axis strategies not being fully developed by a majority of the community… the game balance itself is skewed.

Allies have always been harder to play as they require more planning in order to maximize the amount of men you drop per turn into europe or plan ahead and move pieces to wise places in the pacific.
~
Also countering barborossa has a few school of thoughts. 1) archangel shuffle defense 2) france first 3) shutting down italy.

I do feel that cutting the germans out of Norway/Sweden/Finland is good start for UK. no point trading men with germany before taking that out that production.

That is some tough love, Funcioneta!  I’ll make sure not to get on the wrong side of you in a Global game!  :-D

What about conquering PANAMA with the Japanese navy and bring both the Italian navy and then the germany nave on the other side of panama?
Of course the Japaneses must leave a blocker to counter a counter attack there.
Will you have a decent position there to treat W, E and C america with all three forces?
What are the IFs?