@trulpen :) I usually will just try to make sure that I have a transport chain of 1 in Hawaii, 1 in 10 and 1 with the US fleet. This allows me to sacrifice a transport if I need to without losing the landing threat and over time the number can accumulate (I try to prioritize trading ANZAC transports for Japan ones). I think the main thing right now is to have a threat of landing (ideally with both the US and and ANZAC). The chain also gives you a landing threat of 4 land units in Japan. Once I clearly have naval superiority, I might increase the land/transport build if I think I need to.
@trulpen said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:
I want to get the bomber-production going. When having Norway, it’s great for staging multiple SBRs all over Germany.
Makes sense. I’d still see if you can get 2 to 3 fighters built so that on the next turn you can have 10 air on the US carriers in the Pacific and have the US carriers in the Atlantic loaded too. Maybe with the savings from the transport and reducing the sub build, you might be able to get that.
I’m planning to have 1-2 aussie figs on a US carrier, which makes a higher need for J to protect tr’s.
I’ll change the build. Can’t post atm, but maybe in an hour or so.
Um. There is real danger in attacking Norway. G can buy 3 CVs and attack with 4 ftr, 5 tac, 2 sb + 1 SS. 60-40% battle. But the Italians can soften them up, if they kill just 2 guys, the German attack goes to 90% with 70+ TUV swing.
Sacrifices Italian AF and much of Luftwaffe, but killing 7 trans + entire Atlantic fleet is probably worth it.
Maybe, but then Russia is safe. That build and sacrifice will be extremely costly for G. I looked at that earlier and am not worried.
The alternative is of course to land in Normandie, but I don’t think it puts enough pressure on G.
If we are going mostly Pacific this turn, which is a good option, then need to stay in the Med with the fleet. Taking Normandy is possible. We can reinforce the landing with UK units. Will need to buy more, but we would probably have a turn or two before the Axis and push hard at us.
I just hate having a large army, but no follow-on units to make it really hurt for the Axis to defend. Looking at it, I would say that Normandy is the best landing + easy reinforcement.
G has a lot of pressure already with his low income and lots of Allied fighters to stop. It’s hard to pull off, but I think a revamp of the plan is in order if Norway is off the table.
The most pressure would be to attack Italy. Big Atlantic build of transports and inf. Enter the Med with our fleet Eliminate his NO. Move the Indan fleet to Egypt and Meet in the middle next round. He can defend Italy, but only by pulling units away from the front. We still slow the advance on Moscow, but don’t lose 70+ TUV
If G does significantly move south to help the Italians, the large landing force can pivot to Normandy if he moves too many guys. Either way we can gain and he is moving around in central Europe.
I am concerned about attempting a Normandy invasion at this time, however. It typically requires significant investment in London inf to reinforce, which pulls $$ from ME, which isn’t safe yet.
@surfer I’m tempted by Normandy as well because the fleet is better positioned and the us can start using a factory sooner. Plus some of the fleet can still end up in 92 since 110 is pretty safe. But I think the fleet should be safe. It’s quite a risk for Andrew to attack. Trulpen can land UK air on one carrier. They would still be in range of Moscow if needed because the us carrier can move them in range. If he is attacked by Italy he can take one air as casualty and land the French fighter. And UK fleet in 98 might be enough to pressure the med. I’m on my phone though so maybe I’m mis judging but I don’t think the risk to the fleet would be the reason not to go to Norway.
@farmboy I think the fleet should be safe by Norway to be clear
Ok, I did forget about the French ftr reinforcing after the Italians. So the battle is 75-25 for Axis, which I would agree is probably not what @AndrewAAGamer wants to bet the game on. But it is a concern…
He will probably just push ahead on the Russian fronts – which can be a real problem if he presses south into the ME.
@surfer I remember checking the odds on the allied fleet in 112 and got around 12%. If I misjudged it if it really changes dramatically with an average Italian attack I would reconsider.
I am tempted by Normandy as well because one can still push into the med and simultaneously put threats on Italy (with UK). Going all in on the med might be tempting too.
Normandie is nice, but Norway is better. If it can hold, which it should be able to. Axis, and especially Italy, has a very hard task of retaking Norway. The tactical benefit of that landing is simply awesome. Will keep G very much on their toes, looking back at home. If they neglect the defence, Berlin is screwed and the conquest of Moscow is arbitrary.
The Med will have enough pressure from the Cairo fleet. No need to make a pincer maneuver on Italy. They’ve already stated that they will not waste resources on fleet, except that des to scare off some subs, so it’s an easy match. It’s actually enough to just contain it for now, keeping threats in the Med alive.
TripleA Manual Gamesave Post for game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition, version: 4.0
Game History
Round: 4
Purchase Units - Americans
Americans buy 1 bomber, 1 carrier, 1 destroyer, 3 fighters and 1 infantry; Remaining resources: 3 PUs;
Combat Move - Americans
Combat Hit Differential Summary :
A better buy?
Hmm, I really want some more subs. They will be very good for both pressuring kamikaze zones without risking kamikazes as well as convoy disruptions.
