G1 Taking all of France

@polishpowerhouse

Oh, you’re right. Never mind then. Always thought it was 3, not 2 sea zones, making Hawaii not possible. My fault. :)

I think, that I would have scrambled with 3 fighters to SZ110 because of the lack of sub fodder and 1 fighter to SZ109.
In my turn I would have attacked the remaining sub(s) in SZ109 with SZ106 destroyer and air to prevent convoying.

@WILD:

If I’m going to spend IPCs on an IC I would wait until I have Western Ukraine (it should fall quickly), that way any units I build in W Ukraine and Ukraine could be with-in striking distance of Moscow.  You don’t need more units to push into Russia, but you need more units to finish them off. That way if the allies fly a bunch of ftrs into Moscow you can build more units at the front, Romania isn’t going to help you in the later stages of your Moscow campaign. The only possible help a Romanian IC will give you later is if the allies try to come up though the Balkans mid game.

When I did it, i ofcourse filled all of the w ukraine IC as soon as i got it as well. I also built a minor in rostow and once I had Rostow, ukraine  and stalingrad, I produced 9 infs there every turn, keeping the russian bottled up in moscow, while using the infs/arts to release my more mobile elements to attack the middle east from the north. Persia and iraq should fall once you come crashing down wtih 40+ units. The brit could perhaps challenge this. if UK has the minor IC in iran, iraq and in egypt from UK2/3, they should be able to have a lot of units being able to trade cauc and nw persia for a few turns.

@simon33:

UK1, all landing on it does is add 1-2inf to the defenders and gains 2IPC but costs a transport and 1-2inf. If Germany has activated Bulgaria, that’s 5 inf who will hit it next turn, with planes no doubt. If Germany has left Bulgaria for Italy? Perhaps, but you have to be prepared to fly in a crap load of planes to try to hold it for I2.

I typically do not take Greece in early game, unless I am doing Taranto. If I am doing Taranto, then Greece provides a place that planes from the UK carrier can land. Otherwise, as soon as you take a hit on the carrier the Axis can retreat and kill your planes for free. On the other hand, if the Axis goes light your planes can survive and bolster your Greek defense, and if the Axis does not attack Greece your planes survive.

That being said, taking Greece while it is subject to Axis counterattack does put any infantry used in the counterattack five whole turns away from Moscow. Weakening the attack on Moscow by five German infantry may indeed be worth taking Greece on UK1 and losing eight IPCs (minus any kills that you get on the attacking Axis forces). That of course presumes that Germany activates Bulgaria on G1. On average, you should kill about 1.6 attacking infantry with those Greek forces, which would mean you lose between two and three IPCs in the process but gain Moscow an extra turn of life if Bulgaria was activated with German forces. It’s a trade I would make if I thought it would kill the Moscow attack because of a bad G1 build…

Also, I question sitting there in Greece and waiting for a counterattack if Italy activated Bulgaria – in that case, if you have air support, it would be better to attack the Italian forces instead of waiting to be attacked. It slows Italy down and if your attack is very successful might force Germany to divert forces away from the Moscow attack to prevent an sore from becoming an oozing wound in its southern flank. Killing an Italian tank on your terms could be very helpful for Russia.

A big concern with taking Greece is that it forces you to use the Egyptian transport to not attack Tobruk and also not reinforce Egypt. This could have consequences that you did not intend.

Marsh

What I was talking about is that Russia has more muscle in this set-up then in G40. They can be more aggressive and can help defend the Chinese wall and/or the Middle east against the Japanese once India falls (things they don’t get to do much in G40).

Why wouldn’t the Russian sub at sz115 just submerge and attack your placed transports in sz113? If you instead place in sz112, either the SZ127 Russian Sub or UK would blow them up. I don’t see how this strategy works… If you also build a DD, then maybe.

That is in fact what happened in my recent games.  I do build a DD to place with the transport.  I can also scramble 3 fighters if the sub attacks it.  In fact, the better move turned out to be the sub submerged.  On R1 the sub, 2 fighters, 1 tac attacked my BB and CV that were left.  One game Germany won the battle but clearly defying the odds.  The other time it was Russia winning with all the planes.  I actually am considering waiting till G2 to attack the Russian CV and sub in future games.

Yeah, I know.

I normally drill Ethiopia, often with both loaded transports and both cruisers.
I’m not sold on ALWAYS attacking an Italian fleet right away, though pasting Z95 fleets netted me 2 easy wins (but I got really luck dice both times)

I just attacked Iraq on UK1 for the first time vs. Allweneed.  In hindsight it was brilliant, because the Iraqis never killed a single man - it was like Desert Storm, I guess.  :evil:

I’m not sure what circumstances led me to do that - mainly a J1 attack, I think.  Then you have 2 transports 2 spaces from reinforcing India on UK2 if necessary.  You can’t say that about most other UK deployments.

In the Pacific rulebook it states: “At the beginning of the game, Japan and China are at war. However, none of the other Allied powers…” thus implying that China is an Allied power, and Allied powers are unable to declare war on each other.