Italy Strategy

I view the essays as para-historical entertainment from someone who contemplates the board waiting to find an opponent.

Welcome to the forum and try the game online. It’s much more interesting than writing and speculating about the game. :wink:

Don’t hide:  plenty of players are willing to play online with TripleA.  I used to be a horrible player a couple years ago, and now I am just a mediocre player.  I am glad that so many people were willing to school me on proper gameplay tactics.

“Never” is a strong word, and you even went so far as to hold down shift as you typed it and then went back to underline it afterwards.

If the airbase lets you hold Gibraltar for one extra turn, maybe even two, then is that 15 IPCs worth it for you?
Very possibly, sure. Delaying a US entry into the Med for one turn probably saves Italy at least 5 IPCs right off the bat, not to mention delaying its eventual economic implosion by an entire turn more of income.

Is it still worth it if the Americans can fly straight to Egypt or Norway from Gibraltar now?
Maybe they can’t do that yet, and won’t for another turn or two. Very possibly, yes, it’s still worth it. Maybe because you had that airbase, however, your Axis units were able to abandon Gibraltar and get into a better position on their way out. Lot’s of “if”'s. A lot of combinations of them add up to it being worth it.

Is it still worth it if the Americans can scramble planes off of it to defend their navy?
If you weren’t planning on attacking their navy (maybe because you simply don’t have the resources to do so), yes, absolutely, then there’s no difference at all.

So, yeah, sometimes it’s alright to give your opponent a facility if you got your money’s worth out of it first, even if it is only for a turn or two. Plenty of US and JP plays depend on building a naval base that’s only ever really used once in the game. There are some cases where the same is true for air bases all over the place.

oh ok

@otahere34 said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule that aircraft on carriers can launch after the carrier makes its movement, cause in real life, if there were carriers in Japan with planes, the planes didn’t take off and attack midway from there, they took off once the carriers got to midway.

@JayDavis said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule, when I play the US, I get the Nimitz in 1941.

@Peck said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule too. German infantry can cross the English channel without a transport because in real life people can swim across too.

This house ruling is fun!

I have a house rule too.

Obviously it’s only the French, aka Frogs, who can swim over the English Channel. It’s called frog suit. Obviously.

But that is not my house rule.

My house rule partly reflects the installment of the Vichy government, partly builds on French swimming technology being adapted by the Germans, partly includes primitive rocket science and partly simply because Germans are sauerkraut.

With my house rule the Germans can bounce over the English Channel. In fact, they can bounce over most of the annoying obstacles, like Gibraltar, Sahara, Himalayas and the Atlantic. They can even bounce behind enemy lines, if need be.

More or less becoming similar to flying Tribbles.

That is my house rule.

I think the game would be more balanced that way and more fun.

And to answer your question, a lot of people don’t do SeaLion b/cuz it’s not always a guaranteed thing. Depends on what the UK does. If the UK makes it as difficult as possible, then most likely the Germans can take it still but it might be a little dicey and leave them vulnerable to the Russians. If the UK makes it easier then the Germans will be more likely to do a SeaLion. I don’t think a successful SeaLion always means an Axis victory.

Yes but that would be costly for the Brits.

Oh, and the cruiser is left in SZ 97, so if you also drop Inf.Arm in Greece, the Italians don’t have the power to kill them!