@Adam514:
- I already planned on buying 9 inf UK1 and doing a light Taranto, which would essentially almost max UK defense while not losing control of the Med, so I didn’t think you would Sealion. Hence, I positioned my Russians to rush Finland and Norway if you sent your German fleet into the Med.
Yes you bought 9 inf, which made me thinking what to do now… but not continuing on any naval pressure felt like 30 IPC put nto water in G1 would be pretty wasted. With taranto fleet gone and failed G1 on S France my options in MED were minimal. London bought 9 inf, BUT 1 went to Eire, 1 went to S America and none were coming from Canada (normally TT goes to Canada in UK1 and can bring 2 to London)… so that is -4 inf that could be in London UK2, so your purchase of 9 was effectively only as if you only bought 5 and was giving me 99%
@Adam514:
- I did consider, but the times I did it I didn’t like it as much. You lose Novgorod if you go to Romania. Maybe I should have done it here considering the fact that Italy didn’t have tps, so the Balkans could have been secured. However, I would probably have to retreat 1 turn earlier and buy even more expensive units instead of inf to reinforce without the reinforcements getting taken out by German fast (and Novgorod at the very least deadzoned).
Well, I could not really threaten Novgorod, at least not immediately. With German naval being in SZ110 or SZ92 I could not actually attack Novgorod via Baltic as per your sub. Landing via North sea I could only cover with 3 bombers which is quite risky against 3 scramblers. First I though I could possibly deadzone Romania by purchasing fast units, but I realized too fast that Germany is too poor for that so I gave up on deadzoning Romania and started building cheap units
@Adam514:
- What should* you have prevented me from doing?
You bought fast on G4 which was not necessary, but you corrected that quickly in the last 2 rounds. You could probably have afforded to put AAs in Poland and Romania 1 turn earlier too. Making sure you deadzone 91 is quite important too, I was quite close to stacking it.
As for Japan, you should leave a sub in 6 to deter Korean shenanigans, unless you want to invite it.
I was scrambling to recover after India and London fell, I think it was a good strategy. The J2 DOW especially surprised me.
Thanks a lot for feedback. All look like valid points. As per J2, I did not plan for it, I thought that with SeaLion happening, J2 DoW is a no-no. So I even did not look what is going on in Pacific when doing I1/G2… then came to J2 and realized that your Allies are super aggresive, taking DEI’s and stacking Burma and if I did not DoW them they would DoW Japan in T2 anyways as London was about to fall in G3 so US was to enter war in T3 regardless of unprovoked DoW against Japan. And if I let that happen I think Japan would be struggling a lot, India super rich and safe for many turns to come… US would be free to play 100% for couple turns into Atlantic. Also US1 purchase did not really make it any dangerous for Germany if US were in war from T2 already.
@Adam514:
4 and 5) Sealion is definitely viable if UK skimps out on the defense, but I think with 9 inf UK1 and US not failing in sz 91 Germany would have been compressed between Russia and US.
When US couldn’t get a foothold in Gib or Morocco, it allowed Germany to build up vs Russia and hold the line, and eventually push back. Russia had to buy fast while Germany could buy inf and art which are way more cost-efficient.
I agree, still was interesting… London battle went pretty much average, was nice to have all armor surviving. But Germany lost quite a lot of land units in G1 in France/S France and Yugo. I guess normally German position on E. front after sea lion could be little better. But also if Russian stack was in Belarus R1, then it would be extra 12 IPC for Russia in R3 from Slovakia and Romania, I guess Russia could even stack Romania R3 then, which would be pretty nasty. Overall It was not clear to me how Germany shall play post Sea-Lion, shall it buy offensively or defensively. I thought they need to try to push Russians back from their +3 NO objectives… but felt pretty unrealistic with Russia making more than Germany… but then Italy was not poor and I tried to exchange Italian units with Russians as much as I could.
@Adam514:
Btw did you concede?
I think so. The Korea result is a total disaster for Japan. Japan lost most of its airforce and as US can still hit SZ6 with 2 subs and 7 planes, so I had to retreat the fleet off Philis to SZ6. Still I am forced to leave in SZ35 units that moved there in non-combat so they would be an easy prey for US/ANZAC…. losing DEI’s for few turns also. Japan could not even re-attack Korea in J7 as US can simply build a DD. I guess Korea will be allied-held for rest of the game likely. Overall, USA will be free to continue 70+% against Germany for several turns, free Gibraltar and London and then return back to kill weak Japan. I guess it would require a major mistake from you or a major dicing for Axis to have any chance. Do you agree?
But, interesting to see the game to be decided in Korea, though, I think it has never happened to me before. As you said given about average result you would be likely to concede. So there was maybe 60+% chance one of us to concede the game after Korea battle. So in my shoes you would not attack Korea? Why so? Unnecessary risk? To me 5% was pretty acceptable there. I thought Japan did not have immediate better targets… Java was a minor concern, -9 IPC for a turn, max two. But having such a huge allied stack with a US factory right next to Tokyo was quite annoying for Japan… it opens so many options for Allies. With Korea gone… I though US would be forced to full Pacific and Germany/Italy shall be able to keep London/Gibraltar and eventually start pushing Russians home, especially if Japan would be able to take out Russian east economy.
I am not sure I agree that retreating to Amur would be a gameover for Allies. At least in Amur your stack would be safe, Japan would have to bring TTs and planes so much north to even threaten it. Also Japan will be not able to stack both Manchuria/Korea… so as soon as Japan moves planes/TT’s a bit more south you could return to Korea and you already got a factory prepared there. So I think Amur stack would still be pretty annoying. I think losing all the units in Korea (95% chance) would be much worse, even if Japan lost some airforce in the process
