The Irish Sea

@tmartin if the sea battle fails and the Transports weren’t hit during the combat,
at the beginning of the next Round,as the attacker, you can choose to retreat the Transports. They can retreat one SZ from which they came into the battle . There might be 2 or 3 options , depending how many routes were taken to arrive at the SZ.

The units that were going to unload would still be on the Transports , of course .
It would be up to the other side to attack them on their Turn and try and sink them .

@panther

Gotcha, so it’s just a matter of whether or not you wanna lose such an expensive item.

@hengst

Awesome that the Axis won! I have np advice, but I always love seeing game reports! Keep up the good work!

@AlphaAeffchen:

@ Kreuzfeld. You are totally right but the problem is if i do this buys for UK they can do nothing for many rounds in Europe. Italy gets very strong in the med. The USA have to fight Japan. The allies in Europe  are getting a problem because UK is isolatet because of only inf buy and USA has to Focus on Japan (but you are right i have to do this buy for UK).

In the scenario I made, US will only have to buy 2 bombers on US 1 (in most scenarios) and move 3 of the US planes to canada. They are capable of going towards Japan if Germany don’t buy the TTs in G2.

If germany doen’t buy 3 TTs on G1 (and save their money instead), I am doing taronto, and buy 6 inf and 1 ftr and lose no time in the Med. If they do buy 7 art on G1, I am buying a mIC in egypt and 5 inf in UK.

The only “loosing investments” UK has is : 3 inf instead of ftr on UK1, no taronto on UK 1 (I think 3 useless german transports might be too steep a price for germany to pay for this result).

The other losing investment is the canadian airbase and a few allied TTs on UK2/US2, however, they are more than offsett by the 9 german TTs that has to be bought to force me to do it.

The advantage I get for this plan is that no german should try for the sealion after US1, then that is just a lost game if they buy the 9 TTs. This means that I can (if I want to) send everything US builds against japan, including US turn 1 build. I am still taking Persia on UK1, so I can build the mIC on UK2 and shut down the middle east as fast as possible. My favourite way of playing the UK is to have 1 mIC in each of iran, iraq and egypt, and to use them to buy volumes of inf and mechs for a giant uk landarmy that can reach where i want them

I still think the game is favouring the axis, all I was commenting on was that in a J1, it is so much cheaper for the allied to prevent the sealion, so it will never happen.

@Gargantua:

If your sub fails, and the other sub survives you must retreat.

Even if the attacking sub doesn’t sink the enemy’s sub, the transports can still do debarkment.
It needs only that the other sub submerge.

@Cow:

If you have a “chance” to win a battle you can plan to move your carrier through it on non combat.

Imagine a destroyer is blocking your carrier and you got 2 fighters, you can send 1 to the destroyer and the other 3 spaces away where it would land on your carrier after.

Yes, but that’s not what was asked, so let’s not confuse the issue.  It’s not about planning, it’s about whether it’s allowed to moved through a space where combat occurred.  And that is allowed.

Axisplaya,

Thanks for the feedback…I have a board set and will model your conclusions.  In general, I play folks that understand efficiency and that for Russia, every defender is important.  At the same time, blocking a northern approach effectively and possibly interfering with German NOs is like having more defenders, in a sense.  I am not yet convinced it can be done but I will take your observations into account during planning.  It would really be great to stomp Finland and Norway with Russia… Just don’t know of it is doable…

THANK YOU! At least one other person acknowledges this and YES i realize the Pacific ocean is bigger than the Atlantic you jackwagon! US transports should have to travel further and linger out in the Atlantic in the U-boat kill zone where US air power cant reach. Germany then would have a chance at slowing down US landings with relatively cheap.