Best Feeling in Round 1

If you play NA´s i would encourage you to just do away with super-fortress (USA NA)  Invulnerable SBR bomber is so incrediable unbalanced not even funny.

See this thread in player help.

Jet Fighters neutralize the allied annoying tactic of putting AA Guns all over the place because your fighters are immune.

And I meant 10 IPC for Russia.  6 from the rocket attack on Moscow and 4 from the rocket attack on Caucasus. (Remember you can only fire one rocket to each industrial complex per turn.)  Add in a bomber to get the two point conversion on Russia for 12 though. WEG

Yea, heavy bombers have been completely castrated.  I wouldnt turn them down if they were free, but I wouldnt pay for them either.

@Frood:

I look forward to it! Let me know if I can help.

Yes, I have to work in this field, and it sould be really great if I can join the utility with the fun!

Yes I meant AI … thanks

@Sankt:

Yes, in that respect we will have to agree to disagree. But I think that I feel that in “the average situation” the axis are favored, while you think the allies have the advantage.

Exactly how I see it as well.

There is no doubt that if you can sail the atlantic fleet through the suez the allies are very strong. My experience is that Japan will contest africa for most of the game by staging in sz34.

Sorry I don’t have a map available at the moment.  (don’t have TripleA on my computer at work, and I don’t have a board at work either.)  But if sea zone 34 is near Africa, then Japan still must contend with America building a naval fleet at the Pacific.  If Japan stays near Africa, just one transport, a carrier, and two fighters can really mess with the South Pacific.  Of course, if Japan does NOT stay near Africa, Japan has to spend time sailing west, during which time America can reinforce its navy, and also control the Suez, to pass into the Indian Ocean.  My experience is that Japan in Africa is pretty good, until Berlin falls.

The suez should be closed if not controlled by Japan, any allied med fleet should never be let through. But even that is a very defensive assumption, don’t you think Caucasus usually falls and is controlled by Japan before Moscow falls? That means Japan is building fleet in sz16 before the allied fleets can even move out of sz5. (Assuming Berlin falls by using units shipped from London.) Any us-algeria shuck will be too weak to enter the med alone, even with 5-6 trns for fodder. Any ships in sz14 will be attacked by Japan’s fleet supported by the fighters surviving the Moscow strike.

It’s clear that you and your opponents have quite a different style of play than I and my typical opponents.  In the games I play, Caucasus usually falls to the Germans, while the Japanese attempt to bulk up at Novosibirsk (or one of the other eastern territories adjacent to Russia).  The Japanese will often fly fighters in to reinforce German-held Caucasus in my experience, but having Caucasus USUALLY fall AND being controlled by Japan is something I’ll typically only see in a game in which the UK build an industrial complex in India, and in which I took India early with Japan.  As for entering the med, the typical MINIMUM I typically have will be 11 transports (6 US, 5 UK), UK battleship (from London), US carrier (built in Eastern US), and extremely likely US battleship and US destroyer from Pacific/Panama.  That’s 11 trns 1 destroyer 1 carrier 2 fighters 2 battleships.  There will typically be a few Allied fighters and bombers around as well.  Because the fleet is multinational, it is poorly suited to attack, but the fleet can base in the sea zone adjacent to Anglo-Egypt and Trans-Jordan quite well, because Japan will probably have a hell of a time attacking it.  (Although Japan CAN build naval reinforcements with an industrial complex at India, and WIN a fleet battle, the Americans should also be applying pressure at the Pacific after Germany falls.

Since we can’t agree on any “standard variables” we can argue this back and forth. My point is simply that the axis have some tactical advantages that will pay off more than an ipc advantage. We can probably agree that w.russia is a strategically much more potent territory than e.eur(or similar) in the early front between russia/germany. And similarly africa is “made up” in such a way that it favors Japan. The high ipc territories are along the eastern coast, making it very easy for Japan to take/trade. The BBs will pose a substantial threat to the allied movements. Egypt is a choke point, while the allies can only hit Egypt with troops from libya Japan can hit Egypt with troops from fic/india/t-j/persia/iea. For the allies to reach s.afr, congo etc their supply lines are that much longer.

I think probably one of the key differences is that in your scenario, Caucasus is controlled by Japan, and in my scenario, the Allies control the Caucasus.  Further, in your scenario, the Allies do not control a fat Atlantic fleet, while in my scenario, the Allies have quite a few ships.  I think that if Japan DID control Moscow, and DID have a solid grip on the Caucasus, and DID have its fleet already in the Mediterranean, and DID have lots of tanks in Moscow, while the Allies had really minimal forces in Berlin and throughout Europe, then the Axis WOULD have the advantage.

@Dr.:

Hey guys, I can’t really figure out how to use my med fleet best. I usually use my bid on 2 units for Libya. Then should i still send my med fleet to Egypt to try a take and hold, or should I buy ekstra fleet for the baltic and then send my med fleet west and unite the fleet on G2?
How do you use your med fleet?
do you buy the carrier or transports for the baltic, if you buy any at all?

Those two first listed options pretty much sums it up.

I don’t ever buy carriers for the Med fleet.  German fighters in Western Europe combined with the Med fleet prevent early Allied naval invasion of the Mediterranean.

Late game, I sometimes buy transports to shuttle additional infantry from S. Europe to Caucasus.

You can try to pressure Caucasus extra early on if you make a couple of German transports at S. Europe.  That is, if Russian fighters land in Moscow on R1, 2-3 Baltic transports is not sufficient threat against UK (since Russian fighters can fly to London).  But if Russian fighters land in Moscow on R1, they’re not in position to attack any German transports produced at Southern Europe.

But if you DO produce transports at S. Europe early, remember that they’re not going to do too much.  Even with transported infantry, it is very hard to match up to the bulked mass of Rusisan infantry/tanks/fighters/some artillery.  It is probably a far safer bet to produce infantry early, march east, then produce transports to unload infantry, and have Jap fighters land in the same territory.

BUT if Russia was very aggressive, or very unlucky, Germany can try to run a tank dash to Moscow game, in which case early transports in the Med are decent.  But this should ONLY be tried if a gigantic proportion of the Russian army is destroyed.  Otherwise, Germany simply overextends itself.

I always knew that those NAs combined would make Germany very tough to handle…