Russian Black Sea Fleet

Generally, especially in the early game, ceding the territory is the way to go.

Rome landings realy arent much of a problem for Germany, as the opportunity cost of those units not punching thru Cairo are enormous.

Personally, I love to see USA extend his shuck in the early game, defending both SZ 12 and SZ 14 is very difficult without spending a bunch of (unnecessary) money on capital ships (BS and AC), and having enough trannies to do so efficiently is very expensive as well.  Every dollar USA spends on non-ground units is a boon to the Axis.

In Revised USA doesnt have an enormous monetary advantage, and so there is only so many things they can accomplish.

Keeping Paris stacked tall is far more important for keeping the Allies out of Europe for as long as possible.  A stack of Ftrs tere make USA extending past 12 very difficult.

Thanks for everyone’s answers. I’ll have to try out the Aircraft Carrier option next time.

I’ll have to read yours in more detail next time I play it (which will be soon hopefully  :-D), Darkman.

Played a game with some friends over the weekend, and the unimaginable happened.  I was playing as the UK and just wasn’t paying attention… left Britain open, and the German player saw the opportunity and invaded me with a tank, a dude, and his air force.

I thought for sure the game was over, especially because I’d been holding a large wad of cash, but the german player didn’t push his advantage.  I retreated some troops from norway and retook the UK; meanwhile a large stack of german tanks headed for moscow… and then the german player got cautious and didn’t push his advantage.

The US player went for some tech upgrades, lucked out and got heavy bombers and long-range aircraft.  The Japanese player was new, and while his strategy wasn’t bad, he just didn’t push into asia fast enough.  US bombers sent his transports to the bottom of the sea, and his IC in India wasn’t enough to win.

About 12 rounds into the game, the axis players resigned.

Unbelievable.

If I had been playing germany and been given that opportunity, I would have won the game in 3 rounds, almost guaranteed.  I’m still shaking my head at my luck.

You know, I have yet to win a game where I put bid units in Ukraine.

I guess if someone lets me bid 2 infantry, artillery to Ukraine I might survive, but I rarely win a 10 IPC+ bid in this game.

@cyan:

if you have excess money to buy navy with russia i’d rather spend it on fighters and then use the one sub as sort of a fodder pieace. that way once your navy objective has been covered you can switch to land easily and i think fighters are great.

Actually, if you needed fodder pieces for Russia, I’d go with Transports.  Then you can shoot down planes. :P

@zosima:

perhaps.  maybe it comes down to knowing your opponent and designing a strategy around him.

Very true.  JSP cleaned my clock a while back with a strat custom designed to defeat my style of play…

@jsp4563:

My personal preference is for the UK to buy 1AC, 1DD placed in sz6 along with the fighters, the BB & Tp from sz2, and the russian sub. Land the Canadian tank in UK.  Follow that up with US reinforcements (2inf, 1art, 1tnk, 1fgt, 1bmb).  If Germany has his BB & TP in sz13 move the US DD to sz12. In order for germany to carry out “Operation Sea Lion” he has to destroy the sz6 fleet.  To fight through that fleet he will have to divert air units he was going to use during the landing and will probably loose some of the transports.  If he does still attack UK he will be opposed by the combined UK/US ground & air forces.  Doubtful he will prevail.

It’s not just a question of preventing Sea Lion, it’s a question of preventing Sea Lion while maintaining a good position, yes?

Given those moves, the Germans can then attack using Baltic navy and air to wipe out the UK fleet without losing most of its air force in the process.  If the Germans can neutralize the Allies in the Atlantic until they take Moscow, Sea Lion is not so important.  And if the Germans keep most of their air while killing the Allied Atlantic fleet early, the Germans can build even more fighters to threaten the Atlantic.  The Allies have to build new escorts and new transports, which all takes time.  Plus, if the Germans kill a couple of UK fighters, that is going to make a difference in the Indian and Norway fronts.

I assume that the Germans built navy (transports or carrier) and that the UK did not attack, as 1) a carrier build supposes fighters, 2) the battle outcome is not favorable for the UK if Germany builds 3 transports.  Even 2 transports, maybe, 3) this thread is about Sea Lion anyways.

Transport, 2 sub, destroyer, carrier, 5 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 27, count 11.  Or perhaps more, depending on what Germany built; perhaps it built no carrier, but built two-three transports.  I think 5 German transports is a very BAD move, but given those moves you listed, it could actually turn out quite well for Germany given the naval battle.  Even this assumes that the Germans lost a fighter by the end of the turn, which is by NO MEANS CERTAIN without very risky play by Russia or lucky play by Russia.  The attack force is much more powerful with

3-4 transport, 2 sub, destroyer, 6 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 29, count 13-14

vs

1 transport, 1 sub, 1 destroyer, 1 carrier, 1 battleship, 2 fighters, defense 21, count 8.

The German Mediterranean fleet retreats to support shot against Caucasus and/or Africa, and the US DD can only unite with a new UK build.

If Russia puts 4 INF on Caucuses in R1, and amphib is out.

What I wrote abvoe was for a single INF left in Caucuses.

Also, that does NOT preclude an Egypt attack, expecially with ANY bid to Africa.  Skip the DD in SZ15 and jsut use Balkans FIG, 2 INF and 1 ARM from Libya.  Still a 70% clear and 60% win.  And if the Ukraine FIG is still alive for the battle it is an 89% win.