Opening moves for AA42

The Germans have no DD! Oh my god, it’s like I’m talking to a brick wall….You win, you’re right…enjoy life…

@Mallery29:

The Germans have no DD! Oh my god, it’s like I’m talking to a brick wall….You win, you’re right…enjoy life…

Did I say Germans had a DD = Destroyer? You said UK can attack German Battleship with UK Destroyer and a bomber, I am saying that there is NO UK Destroyer there after Germany is done with Syria on their first turn!

@AxisBrutality:

Again, you are not arguing why it is a “bad” idea, you just say it’s a bad idea. A new battleship gives BOOST to a exsisting Cruiser in the Baltic Sea OR another Battleship in the Mediterranian Sea. That gives Germany 2 Battleships to attack shores with Egypt OR Syria OR Caucasus because a enemy unit can fire. The same thing if the Battleship is places in the Baltic Sea, both can fire all the time at Karelia and threaten UK all the time. A destroyer which you are suggesting, CAN’T do that and does not secure German fleet. We are talking about a difference of 8 IPC between your and mine suggestion, and I don’t think 1 Armor + 2 saved IPC for next round will do a “massive” difference on the eastern front at all, but on the Seas - a HUGE difference!

OK, Germany buys a Battleship and places it on the Baltic. UK buys 2 fighters on UK1. Germany either buys more ships (at the expense of the Eastern front) or its initial investment will be sunk. The same logic applies to any naval builds to the Med - the Allies only need to buy planes and those ships will be sunk quickly.

Who wins? The UK and the US since all the German money going to boats will be eventually destroyed and they are taking down Germany without having to land units, and the Soviets because those German land units can’t be used directly against them, unlike infantry, artillery and armor.

But feel free to buy naval units for Germany… the Allies enjoy the help :)

don’t forget to add in “and the faster those boats are sunk the more you just helped the Allies.”

@Imperious:

Japan 30 IPC
Builds: 1 CV, 1 AP, 3 Infantry

I’d probably go with the CV, SS, (Tank/Inf or 2inf/art).  I think any hopes of making great advances in Asia are tough until the J2 buy.  Hopefully Japan can knock out all three China territories and if possible hit the Russian front to back them off (depends if they stack or not)… If the one Russian backs up the US FTR/2inf, then I say this territory will have to wait till J2, but that gives the ability to wipe out the Russians a better chance J1.  Be wary of a heavy India build though (CA/2DD or BB/DD or DD/CA/FTR or 3SS)…if UK1 wipes out the E. Indies fleet, this only allows for a 2FTR/Bomber fight against the new India navy or the E. Indies navy, but will leave an UK navy remaining and allow the US to storm into the Pacific. This would also take 2FTR/Bomber away from Japan agains the Battle in Asia for a turn, which could buy the Allies some serious help…any chasing by Japan with all of its fleet after UK would result in the loss of Iwo.  Very curious how this will play out…

@Imperious:

yes but the CV goes in Medd.

I understand that you would put the CV in the Med….I don’t know why you would put it in the Baltic only to encourage a big bullseye.

I just don’t necessarily agree with the CV buy…

Anyone thought of throwing Russia’s 2 Fighters at German fleet on R1 as it will probably result in the loss of Baltic TT? In conjunction with a Baltic States and West Russia attack it looks interesting. Would buy 8 Inf and put 2 in Karelia and 4 in Caucasus.
You would have 10-13 units in West Russia and invite a German attack on  both Baltic States and Caucasus, but surely West Russia is the key territory as it is a tank conduit between North and South and ultimately Russia only needs to buy  time for its allies to come to its aid.

@wittman:

Anyone thought of throwing Russia’s 2 Fighters at German fleet on R1 as it will probably result in the loss of Baltic TT? In conjunction with a Baltic States and West Russia attack it looks interesting. Would buy 8 Inf and put 2 in Karelia and 4 in Caucasus.
You would have 10-13 units in West Russia and invite a German attack on  both Baltic States and Caucasus, but surely West Russia is the key territory as it is a tank conduit between North and South and ultimately Russia only needs to buy  time for its allies to come to its aid.

Not fond of losing Russia’s main weapon against a CA just to kill the transport.  Let the Brits risk it…they have a lot less ground to defend.

In addition to that, even if you escape that battle somehow, you still lose the plane on G1 @ Karelia.

and if you tank your rolls, then what, risk losing the 2nd FTR?

One plane can reach Moscow, other will probably die. Think the economics works and means Germany cannot Amphibiously land on Karelia too. Agree losing a 4 defence Fighter not great, but good disruption plan.

sorry for streaming here…thinking it as I go…so you fail to inflict pain in the Baltic, you still risk 5inf from Scandanavia, 3inf Belarussia and 3FTRs?  (can send tanks, but it would be best to consolidate and attack Baltic with everything else).  Then you’ll be forced to retake Karelia with your W. Russia stack, and lack the planes to defend ( although you would have your AAs), but I might be convinced to change my G1 buy to 4 tanks/2art/3inf if you open with that R1 and lose bad…then you’ve bought the Allies no time…It’s not bad thinking, but aggressiveness may set you up for an auto loss…

@wittman:

One plane can reach Moscow, other will probably die. Think the economics works and means Germany cannot Amphibiously land on Karelia too. Agree losing a 4 defence Fighter not great, but good disruption plan.

Problem is UK has its hands full with losing its fleet pretty quick without much effort put forth by the Germans.  Your reinforcements may not come as quickly as you think. If the Gemans buy a Bomber or any SS to back up France’s defenses for a counter attack, you may never see one Allied soldier in Russian territory (and see lots of German instead).  By keeping both planes alive, I think it makes your super stack a lot more of a force and allows you to hit here and there without sacrificing your line.  Besides if you don’t hit Ukraine (which I think is more vital to Russian survival), no matter what you stack in W. Russia will either be dead or dying in no time.

What units would you send out of Caucus?

Because if you don’t hit Ukraine, I have 3inf/art/3tank/2FTR/1Bomb against 1AA/7inf…even if you keep the tank/art there…you are still only going to defend at about 35%.

can you afford to lose Karelia and Caucus at the same time (on G1 no less?)?  Possibly, but realize Africa is about to be hit G2 hard (at least that’s when I would hit), and you’ll be out spent easily, and the Japanese my try to take 2-3 IPCs from you on the other front….then economics will start hitting the Russians…hard.

which in turn with the Russian collapse may force America to focus on Germany, giving free reign to the Japanese, which never bodes well in any game.

@Hobbes:

@AxisBrutality:

Again, you are not arguing why it is a “bad” idea, you just say it’s a bad idea. A new battleship gives BOOST to a exsisting Cruiser in the Baltic Sea OR another Battleship in the Mediterranian Sea. That gives Germany 2 Battleships to attack shores with Egypt OR Syria OR Caucasus because a enemy unit can fire. The same thing if the Battleship is places in the Baltic Sea, both can fire all the time at Karelia and threaten UK all the time. A destroyer which you are suggesting, CAN’T do that and does not secure German fleet. We are talking about a difference of 8 IPC between your and mine suggestion, and I don’t think 1 Armor + 2 saved IPC for next round will do a “massive” difference on the eastern front at all, but on the Seas - a HUGE difference!

OK, Germany buys a Battleship and places it on the Baltic. UK buys 2 fighters on UK1. Germany either buys more ships (at the expense of the Eastern front) or its initial investment will be sunk. The same logic applies to any naval builds to the Med - the Allies only need to buy planes and those ships will be sunk quickly.

Who wins? The UK and the US since all the German money going to boats will be eventually destroyed and they are taking down Germany without having to land units, and the Soviets because those German land units can’t be used directly against them, unlike infantry, artillery and armor.

But feel free to buy naval units for Germany… the Allies enjoy the help :)

Oc course UK can buy 2 FTR, great. And what are they going to buy on land in either London or India? Any naval units? Oh, I guess not. LOL, 2 FTS + 11 IPC, that’s is NOT a good buy.

If you read what I wrote, I can choose to place BB in either Italy OR Baltic Sea, it depends on the Russian assault. But either way, UK cannot sink German fleet.

If UK buy 2 FTR, fine, then UK will have 4 FTR and 1 bomber. But none naval units added, and a very few ground units added. Germany can on it’s second turn, with my strategy taking Syria, and most likely saving E.Indies, because Egypt and Syria will be under threat ( strange that no-one commented that ) , Germany can again expand the fleet with a carrier, and still have 28 IPC to buy units for which is the same amount Russia had for it’s 2nd turn, so that is a equal match. I could buy 8 INF and 1 ART.

Fighters plans can land on a German carrier right away, so the German fleet in the Baltic would be safe anyway, UK will not risk their 4 FTR and 1 Bomber against German carrier, 2 FTR, Cruiser and Battleship, and the UK will not will that fight either.

I don’t need to mention what happens with a UK Battleship standing there alone outside UK with 1 Russian sub, lol facing at least 2 German Sub in the North Sea and most of the German Air Force.

@AxisBrutality:

Oc course UK can buy 2 FTR, great. And what are they going to buy on land in either London or India? Any naval units? Oh, I guess not. LOL, 2 FTS + 11 IPC, that’s is NOT a good buy.

If you read what I wrote, I can choose to place BB in either Italy OR Baltic Sea, it depends on the Russian assault. But either way, UK cannot sink German fleet.

If UK buy 2 FTR, fine, then UK will have 4 FTR and 1 bomber. But none naval units added, and a very few ground units added. Germany can on it’s second turn, with my strategy taking Syria, and most likely saving E.Indies, because Egypt and Syria will be under threat ( strange that no-one commented that )

Germany can again expand the fleet with a carrier, and still have 28 IPC to buy units for which is the same amount Russia had for it’s 2nd turn, so that is a equal match. I could buy 8 INF and 1 ART.

Fighters plans can land on a German carrier right away, so the German fleet in the Baltic would be safe anyway, UK will not risk their 4 FTR and 1 Bomber against German carrier, 2 FTR, Cruiser and Battleship, and the UK will not will that fight either.

I don’t need to mention what happens with a UK Battleship standing there alone outside UK with 1 Russian sub, lol facing at least 2 German Sub in the North Sea and most of the German Air Force.

If you want to ignore the fact that the previous versions of the game have been played for decades and German naval buys are never an optimal move on any of them, then be my guest.

And if we ever play online and I’m Allies, please play like this as Germany - I love when noobs go for German naval builds on 1st Edition ;)