German strategy for building AC

If you can add several bid units to same area, then yes - 2inf 1arty in Ukraine are way better than 1 fighter there.
And even if not, 2inf 1arty can help several theaters - like arty Libya, inf Ukraine, inf Belorus (or EEu).

I was victorious. The UK’s navy was destroyed very early in the game, and my Japanese counterpart did very well. Moscow was taken!!!

@Bunnies:

@Cmdr:

Protecting the S. African complex is a synch, really.

The problem is defending South Africa AND Moscow.

Easier to do then not having units producing in S. Africa.

1)  Instead of driving units to Algeria to reclaim Africa, you can start off the bat dumping units into Arkhangelsk on UK 1.  That means at least 3 rounds more unit drops in Russia then otherwise.

2)  With America going through Africa, America has already saved 40 IPC on Transports AND saved on warships. (2 Destroyers, Battleship, 5 Transports is a pretty good deterant in and of itself, against the Luftwaffe.  The Kriegsmarine should be made short order of with the US Air Corps (3 Fighters, Bomber + I like to have two more bombers out of the saved 40 IPC, netting me 10 IPC.))

3)  2 Transports, Carrier, Destroyer, Submarine in SZ 28 (British) + 2 Infantry/Artillery/Armor in S. Africa per round is plenty to stop Germany from even getting the land in the first place, saving cash for England.  And once you get 24-30 IPC in equipment in place down in Africa (I like Egypt, close enough to run south if Japan comes close, far enough to run to Caucasus in a hurry if needed) for England and Africa’s yours forever.  (Don’t forget, America’s landing 10 Ground Units a round into North Africa as well, it’s not JUST the 24-30 IPC worth of British units there.)

I have bid units to Japan before. An armor in Kwangtung is particularly effective and with a 9 bid like at tripleA, I’d even be inclined to place 1 inf in each of the 3 Asian territories.

Yea, the reason for that is America can offset any advances by Japan through exploitation of her islands.  Couple that with the massive fleet Japan has to build up just to keep America from owning everything and killing her Asian units from the rear and you have a mess for Japan.

That is what tanks are for.

and if SZ6 is not working, move to 7.

The point is, if you cede control of the Atlantic by just sitting in the baltic, then you probably ARE wating your money on a Baltic AC.

Build your fleet, then eitehr use it to take out a few units, prevent early landings in Norway and Africa.

But if you are just using it to be just a guardian of Germany and Eastern coasts (which is an acceptible use of that fleet), then don;t complain about the Allies building their fleets up outside your range.  If you go purely defensive with the Baltic Fleet, that is what the allies are going to do.  And when they are done, your fleet is sunk.  That is jsut th way it works.

So…
Either use teh fleet to protect Germany and Eastern while you drive hard on Russia with all you’ve got and deal with the Allied landing swhen they start, or use that fleet and challenge the Atlantic with naval and air.

But don’t complain because the Allies see which way you are going and adjust their strat accordingly.

If UK and US are idiots, and the Germans and Japs geniuses, the Allies will lose.

If you attack a country with ground forces, whatever ground forces you attack with are committed.

For this reason, I like to have three USSR fighters and some artillery.

Tanks are a must-have; if Germany does massive infantry push, the tanks can rush back east to mess with Japan.

Basically, I usually build a fighter, LOTS of infantry, and a couple of artillery every so often.

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.