G1 fleet unification, how does UK respond?

Sweet!  Thanks guys so much.

I don’t much like playing Revised with tech… basically it means the game revolves around whether you get the techs early on.  Like say if you tech for rockets with UK and get them on Round 1 then Axis is pretty much screwed, but if UK techs for several rounds and doesn’t get them then they fall way behind.  Not to mention the fact that heavy bombers are very unbalanced, particuarly if USA gets them.

The game plays out beautifully w/o tech–why screw it up by making game outcomes exclusively determined by luck?

Correct.

It’s nice to have, don’t get me wrong, but I’m not investing valuable IPC in maintaining it.  (I’ll use it as fodder if I attack the allied navies though, if the allies are silly enough to let it live that long.)

@Corbeau:

@timerover51:

Your shore bombardment idea has been picked up in the Anniversary Edition rules, evidently.

Ya, i saw that, that’s great news :)
I can only wish i was the one to propose it to the game designer but it really is a coincidence. That was a house rule we used way back then. Still great to see he thought of it too. :)

I like the also th idea of BB acting as artillery support. Good thinking there too. I would not allow it for planes too, i find them already too flexible as a unit acting both in land and sea. I’d rather have them seperated in 2 classes, Land based fighters and CV based fighters. They already have the different molds for some nations, german stuka and Bf-109 for exemple. anyways, that’s another discussion.

For the BB acting like an AA, that’s exactly what i meant. Would give a reason to have one in a fleet.

You need to remember that roughly 2/3 of a carrier’s aircraft were attack planes, dive bombers and torpedo bombers, that would be used in support of ground troops.  This is the basis for the flexibility in fighters in A&A.  If you had a dedicated attack plane, like the Stuka, you could reduce the fighter’s role by a little bit, but by the end of the war, the US Navy’s Corsair fighter was carrying a bombload heavier than that of the Stuka, and delivering it with comparable accuracy.

As for BB getting an AA roll, that makes a fair amount of sense, and is pretty historically accurate.  Quite simply, BBs normally acted as a magnet for air attacks, even if a carrier was around.  The US South Dakato shot down 26 Japanese aircraft while escorting the carrier US Enterprise at the Battle off Santa Cruz in October of 1942, while Adm. Raymond Spruance deployed his battleline in advance of his carriers at the Battle of the Philippine Sea in June of 1944 to deliberately absorb Japanese carrier plane attacks.  However, the US did have the best naval AA fire control systems of the entire war, so what holds true for the US does not hold true for everyone else.  The Bismarck had major problems with defending against a limited number of British Swordfish, while the Italian BBs had similar problems.  The British were so-so, and the Japanese were close to hopeless until late in the war.  You could make it a National Advantage for the US, but I suspect that would not be acceptable to a majority of Axis players.  Making it universal is a bit of a stretch.  It would be up to you.

@ncscswitch:

The North African Dominance (NAD) strat is FAR superior to the Brazil IC strat for keeping Africa in Allied hands.

It requires fewer transports, achieves the same purpose in allowing for Allied landings south of Sahara, and does so with far fewer IPC’s committed by the Allies.  It also maintains an Allied shift-threat to northern Europe, AND an Allied threat to Southern Europe that the Brazil IC does not accomplish.

But hey, if you want to waste the cash, feel free.

Yea, but you taught me very well how to bottle up the North African Dominance strategy with very little effort and resources with Germany.

Sorry to say it, but NAD is not superior, it’s inferior against a veteran player.  Too easy for Germany/Japan to dump in Egypt and now Germany is +9 IPC and England/America is +2 IPC (Algeria, Libya) for a net +7 to the Axis.

However, if moving from Brazil/S. Africa, the reverse is true.  Germany/Japan may have Egypt, Libya and Algeria but that’s only 4 IPC while England has the rest +7 IPC.

Just the way I see it, though.

They’re all like that.  This is just a typo that was corrected in the FAQ.

@Aretaku:

I am playing a game of Enhanced, and I am Germany.

After a disastrous battle in SZ 30, UK is limited to North Atlantic operations. His Atlantic fleet is in SZ 3 with 1 AC, 1 BB, 2 TRN and 2 Jet Fighters.

I am expecting a Russian sub block in SZ 5, but I can still hit the British fleet with 5 FIGS, 1 BOM and 2 SUBS….

I am set for at least two rounds against Russia, have taken Egypt, and America is two turns away from reorienting to aid Britain should the UK Navy suddenly cease to exist before UK2.

So hit the Brits with planes and subs…or not? And what is your reasoning?  :-)

Does Germany need her fighters else where for offense or defense?
If not, I’d take a shot at it.

You could add wolfpack as an NA (if it’s G2) and go in with 7 threes and 1 four.
You’d be going against 2 ones, 1 two, 1 four and 2 fives.

Germany should get 4 hits, Allies get 4 (give them the good roll)
What do the allies lose?  BB damage, 2 tpts… a/c?  Ftr?

you’d still have 3 ftrs and a bomber on BB (damage) and 2 jet ftr, this is worse case.
Allies could get only 3 hits… letting you trade 2 subs and 1 ftr for 2 tpts and a/c.

I’d take that trade as Germany.

I think you have to go through one round of the battle and see how many hits each side gets, then decide if you want to continue or not.

@U-505:

It’s not. Let Germany do it. It costs the Allies less if they attack after the merger than if they try to block it because Germany’s air support makes any attempt to block a big loss for the UK. My purchase with the Baltic CV build is always 3 fighters for the UK and stack with the US fleet in sz8. If you are concerned about Germany attacking that fleet with the sz13 fleet+aircraft then you can block it with the Russian sub to save UK/US units for the attack on the German fleet if they combine.

Mm.  Excellent, that’s what I often do as well.

If Germany unites its fleet, Germany can’t stay off the coast of Western Europe for long, because additional Allied reinforcements will easily kill the German fleet.  The Germans either have to build an IC at Western Europe for immediate reinforcement (which uses a lotta IPCs, especially with added German naval/air builds), or the Germans have to go north or south.  If the Germans go south, they get Africa and prevent the Allies from dumping from E. Canada to Algeria.  But if the Germans go south, the Allies can feed infantry into Archangel, which means a really powerful defense at Russia.  If the Germans go north, the Allies get Africa as described above.