UK Pacific Fleets

I do agree that beginners should stick to the London factory.  It does require skill pulling off the india IC.  But It just depends on how you and your allies play the game.  If each of you are gonna do your own thing, the game will certainly be over quicker than usual.  Thats the key…… Teamwork and persistance.  Control the game by limiting the enemy of options.  Do this and you’ll win no matter who you are.

yeah i agree your plan has some built in flexibility.  carrier + tran build in sz 61 is perfectly safe once you’ve taken out the UK ships.

On the other hand, the UK factory is basically gonna be in great shape given that carrier build and no IC’s.  Correct response of US hitting the atlantic hard and India holding up japan for a long time should make for a pretty easy allies win.  I really don’t think spending $16 on a carrier and getting only 1 transport to support additional land operations on R1 before the US has played its hand is a serious option as japan.  You may not enjoy protecting an IC in kwangtung but it’s far easier than protecting that one transport you built.

@syntaxerror111:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

I move the two subs down to sea zone 7, the rest of the med navy and other sub attack the battle ship (with figs). My opponent attacked the remaing baltic with his air force. He leaves the subs alone because he can only attack it with  his navy, which would put it in range of mine + all my planes in round 2. He has to choose what his air force attacks because it’s to risky to split them up. Sure this tactic delays me in Africa but it helps secure the Med and with a round 1 purchase of all men + 1 art, I can afford the delay. The us bomber has a crack at the subs but at the least I’ll keep one. Two or three subs, BB + tran is a good thing to have in the Med in round 2.

If I were your opponent in this situation I would have attacked the two lone subs with air on UK1 and the rest of the baltic fleet on UK2. You would most likely lose the Baltic fleet and both subs- if one sub survives the US Bmb gets a shot at as well.

@Zhukov44:

Fine with me. Those boats are expendable. If I get to keep the destroyer and Trans for another round, that’s just a bonus. I can get more infantry to a front, I can block, I can use to attack, uk has to make sure they build enough land forces to resist an invasion, which limits their options, like if they build boats or an Indian IC and drop their troops in Norway or Africa and leave their capitol insufficiently guarded. GER goes before uk anyway so they can build an AC round 2 if they really want to protect the fleet, but that’s something I’d never do anyway. Germany CANNOT afford any delays against Russia.

Trying to save those subs is a gamble, I’ll give you that, but the benefits of them surviving outweigh any negative I’ve encountered.

@TRakes:

What if the Russian player lends a fighter to the UK fleet on Rus1?

That makes the odds a lot stronger for UK.

Sure, makes the odds stronger for UK , but means that russian ftr is gone from the Russo-German front for AT LEAST two turns (R1+R2), possibly forever, without providing a single offensive diceroll (it cannot participate in any battle during R1, and also reach BEN).

It results in making trading more costly for the Ruskies, during R1+R2. Russia needs to expose 1 arm/turn , to get the same offensive power to trade land with the Germs. That is a cost of 5 ipc/turn, since that ARM will surely be killed. Furthermore, it might make it possible for Russia to only attack 1 area (WRU) during R1, instead of normal 2 (+BEL or +UKR).

The return is that Japan might loose extra naval units/ftrs, but the combined cost of exposing ARMs, plus the weakened attack power on R1, just doesn’t seem to be worth it. After all, even a combined SZ30 UK fleet, is something of a sideshow. The Russian-German border is the main theater of war.

Honestly, I like unification of the British Fleet in SZ 30 with 1 Infantry from India.  This makes it financially worse for Japan to attack than for England to be wiped out, strategically worse for Japan to attack (since they’ll lose their air force and have to leave Pearl unattacked maybe even not take China’s fighter out) than for England to be wiped out (all those ships are generally dead by UK 2 anyway, so what have you lost?)  BUT

it really tempts Japan to try!  Furthermore, form here, you can hit E. Indies with 4 Infantry, Fighter if Japan leaves you alone, or you can hit Egypt or you can just dump the infantry in S. Africa to bolster the defenses there.

Furthermore, if you build an IC in S. Africa (which negates the risk of losing Africa and thus your paycheck and allows you to stay in the upper twenties, lower 30s) you can be a relatively annoying pain in the butt. (Once Africa is secure, you can always dump a submarine or two in S. Africa making SZ 34 a threatened zone if you want too.  Or at least pose the risk of doing so if you don’t want too.)

That said:

if I had to attack the japanese iwth England, I’d go Destroyer/Carrier to SZ 59; Fighter, Submarine to SZ 45 and land the fighter in SZ 52.  I’ve seen quite a number of Japanese attacks on SZ 52 go south because of that extra fighter.

@frimmel:

God d**n perhaps?

okay i gottch’ya. if your goin swear paintbrush do it right you F*******e(wroung way)  :-)

@Jennifer:

Coulda sworn I amended that in later posts to not have a british invasion of North Africa on UK1 and a joining of the US/UK fleets in Sea Zone 8 instead.  If not, I meant too.  (Perhaps the filter kicked it out because of a perceived bad word?)

Anyway, a UK build of 3 fighters with a consolidation of US and UK fleets in Sea Zone 8 cripple Germany’s ability to do anything more then take some more of Africa and hope to hold out against Russia.  On UK 3 you should be able to sink the Baltic Fleet and make life safe for Transports throughout the Atlantic Ocean.  (5 Fighters, 1 Bomber, 1 Battleship, 2 Transports should take out 2 submarines, 1 destroyer, 1 transport, 1 carrier and 2 fighters.)

Oh, OK then.  Well, if you united at London, then German invasion of London is out.

For the rest - not . . . quite.  Because once an Axis player sees that the Allies have massed air, and have any kind of serious navy near the Baltic fleet, you have a couple options.

1.  If there is NOT a serious navy near the Baltic fleet (say it’s just a lone battleship and 2 transports), you just send the German air force to kill everything.  Lose a fighter or two.  It hurts, but you can rebuild a fighter or two that turn.

2.  If there IS a serious navy near the Baltic fleet (US/UK fleet), you can attack with German air and the Baltic fleet as fodder.  The massed air is usually on London, where it can’t help defend.  You take a huge chunk out of the Allied combined fleet, and usually lose maybe one or two fighters, if there wasn’t an Allied AC there.  If there WAS an Allied AC there, you could then think about building more navy (probably not recommended in most games anyways, but ACs aren’t all that great on attack, so at least the Allies spent 32 IPC on 2 units with  a combined attack value of 2).

But even after 2., there is usually some Allied fleet wandering around the Pacific that’s enough to deter attacks from the German air force.  So the transports are safe anyways; it’s just that the Allies lost a bit more navy.

In reality, did UK had naval industries in the north? If the answer is yes, it must be allowed. If no, it shouldn’t be allowed.