KJF etc.

@Jennifer:

To be honest, I never saw the financial gain of attacking SZ 5 on UK 1 myself.  I’m risking 3 aircraft to enemy fire (and they have a GOOD chance at getting all 3 of them) for a fleet that’s at most annoying, at best impotent.

That, and I’m much better suited to killing it on UK 2 if no carrier is present, UK 4 if one is.

Yeah I’m starting to think that too … the game with you helped me realize that :lol:

@Jennifer:

To be honest, I never saw the financial gain of attacking SZ 5 on UK 1 myself.  I’m risking 3 aircraft to enemy fire (and they have a GOOD chance at getting all 3 of them) for a fleet that’s at most annoying, at best impotent.

That, and I’m much better suited to killing it on UK 2 if no carrier is present, UK 4 if one is.

I think the intelligent way to hit the Baltic is to strafe it. Don’t stay there after you take out a couple of units; all you need is to take out a couple of fodder units so that a suicide becomes a bad investment since German aircraft is at risk.

@AJ:

@Jennifer:

To be honest, I never saw the financial gain of attacking SZ 5 on UK 1 myself.  I’m risking 3 aircraft to enemy fire (and they have a GOOD chance at getting all 3 of them) for a fleet that’s at most annoying, at best impotent.

That, and I’m much better suited to killing it on UK 2 if no carrier is present, UK 4 if one is.

Yeah I’m starting to think that too … the game with you helped me realize that :lol:

LOL, another convert to the “dark” side!

There isn’t much reason not to strafe the Baltic navy at least, thinning out the subs. The odds aren’t in favor of the Germans.

50/50 you’ll lose at least 1 fighter in the first round of combat.
17/83 you’ll lose at least 1 fighter to the transport in the first round of combat.

That’s a potential of 2 fighters for what?

50/50 + 50/50 + 67/33?

With an order of loss of Submarine, Submarine, Transport, Destroyer you have the following odds:

Attacker results:
Probability % # units / losses
  11.34% 3: 2 Fig, 1 Bom. no units. : 0 IPCs
  29.26% 2: 1 Fig, 1 Bom. 1 Fig. : 10 IPCs
  26.55% 1: 1 Bom. 2 Fig. : 20 IPCs
  32.85% 0: no units. 2 Fig, 1 Bom. : 35 IPCs
Defender results:
Probability % # units / losses
  0.31% 4: 1 Tra, 2 Sub, 1 Des. no units. : 0 IPCs
  2.13% 3: 1 Tra, 1 Sub, 1 Des. 1 Sub. : 8 IPCs
  7.57% 2: 1 Tra, 1 Des. 2 Sub. : 16 IPCs
  13.2% 1: 1 Des. 1 Tra, 2 Sub. : 24 IPCs
  76.79% 0: no units. 1 Tra, 2 Sub, 1 Des. : 36 IPCs

Please notice you have almost a 60% chance to get cleaned out of RAF to get that 75% chance to sink the German fleet, a fleet that’s mostly impotent and just waiting for you to bring out a battleship and some fodder to sink it with less loss.

It allows you to board much earlier. If you have to dance around building a carrier/destroyer just to deal with all that naval fodder, that’s going to set you back a turn or 2, which isn’t good. Weren’t you of the opinion anyways that UK airforce isn’t very useful, since they can’t immediately defend territories? I don’t mind giving up a fighter or two at all, if it means no more threat of luftwaffe strafing.

Please notice you have almost a 60% chance to get cleaned out of RAF

That’s somewhat misleading, since you don’t count the bomber as part of the RAF. I would be disturbed if I lost 2 fighters + 1 bomber, but I do kind of like 66% chance of winning with 1 bomber or more.

If I gave up 2 fighters to clean out the Baltic, then I could land on Norway or Karelia on UK2 without breaking a sweat. The baltic can prevent a crucial landing for a turn.

just waiting for you to bring out a battleship and some fodder to sink it with less loss.

How much less loss, versus the amount of time needed to accrue fodder? Fodder still costs money. Naval units aren’t cheap, you’d probably overbuild 2 tran which is 16 IPCs worth, not a whole lot less than 20 IPCs, but it also took you longer to assemble this fodder and it also required more care in where you deployed your navy so it doesn’t get stung by a massive aistrike with naval fodder.

Also, you never addressed my point - strafing. With strafing, you can limit your losses for the most part. Yes in the 1/12 times you will lose 2 pieces of airforce in one defensive roll, but 1/12 is fairly small (roughly two of these chances equals 1 AA roll). I would point out that there is a 1/6 chance that the UK will strike 3 times, which means it is twice as likely for the UK’s strafe to be more damaging than it is for the Germans’ defense to be more damaging.

I love fighters.  If the allies don’t have a 3:2 lead in fighters over the axis, I don’t think you have enough fighters!

And no, I wasn’t counting the bomber.  But if you do, you still have a 33% chance to clear out all British aircraft.

Meanwhile, you don’t have to build any navy with England.  Just focus on Africa for 3 turns and bring the AC, DD, TRN, TRN, SS from the Pacific/Indian oceans to the Atlantic.

Have to back Jen up on this one…

UK FIGs are more valuable to UK long term than the Baltic fleet is to Germany.  Losing FIGs to kill the Baltic Fleet is a waste of Allied air power.

I used to pull Indian fleet back to Atlantic, while relying on USA fleet for coverage of the UK Home Fleet, ferrying units to Africa in first turns.
Problems arise. Russia is alone against German. USA is alone against Japan in the Pacific. UK fleet cruising the Africa is doing nothing of useful for more than 4 turns.
Last times I played England, I used my Indian Fleet against the Japanese, and slowly built up the English Home Fleet.
My objective is to estabilish US shuck to Algeria from the first turn, supported by British, and by 3rd turn swith UK landings to Norway.
Elimination of Baltic Fleet may be executed on 2nd or 3rd turn.

For the strafing argument I agree with Jen, those British fighters are precious for British.

Russia is not alone against Germany and Japan if you are forcing Germany to dedicate forces to Africa and garrisoning S. Europe and W. Europe.  This allows Russia to stack Sinkiang and Caucasus while trading Ukraine and probably W. Russia or Belorussia.  Remember, this is only a short term solution.  Those naval units from the Pacific will get to the Atlantic in very rapid order!

However, if you are not comfortable with this arrangement, you can always invade Borneo and New Guinea on UK 1 (1.414 odds to win in both battles, not bad odds and it’s +5 income from islands which slows Japan down significantly.)

I, personally, just don’t recommend it anymore.  That’s two transports you’re going to lose that you could be sailing for England, thus saving you 16 IPC.

@Jennifer:

Russia is not alone against Germany and Japan if you are forcing Germany to dedicate forces to Africa and garrisoning S. Europe and W. Europe.  This allows Russia to stack Sinkiang and Caucasus while trading Ukraine and probably W. Russia or Belorussia.  Remember, this is only a short term solution.  Those naval units from the Pacific will get to the Atlantic in very rapid order!

However, if you are not comfortable with this arrangement, you can always invade Borneo and New Guinea on UK 1 (1.414 odds to win in both battles, not bad odds and it’s +5 income from islands which slows Japan down significantly.)

I, personally, just don’t recommend it anymore.  That’s two transports you’re going to lose that you could be sailing for England, thus saving you 16 IPC.

IMHO in round 1 and 2 Allies may not think to attack WE or SE. German player should be very distracted to allow that.
I intend that Russia is alone in the sense that UK/US going in Africa means no reinforcement for URSS in first two three turns.
Yes, I am experimenting in slowing Japan with UK Indian Fleet, in my last games.
I feel better using the British Indian FLeet against Japan.

But they arn’t alone because Germany has to at least keep forces in reserve to stop an invasion of W. Europe or S. Europe (if the allies go to Africa.)  Even if they don’t dedicate forces to Africa, they still have to protect against a 1-2 punch of British and American forces.  That’s troops that cannot go to the Russian front.

And odds are, that’s at least 1 turn’s income in each W. Europe and S. Europe.

Just focus on Africa for 3 turns and bring the AC, DD, TRN, TRN, SS from the Pacific/Indian oceans to the Atlantic.

That’s one too many turns for my liking. Is that all it takes to stall you? If I don’t build any German navy, and leave the Baltic there, you will tilt at Africa for 3 turns? O_O?

UK FIGs are more valuable to UK long term than the Baltic fleet is to Germany.  Losing FIGs to kill the Baltic Fleet is a waste of Allied air power.

The Baltic fleet + luftwaffe could be used to take out 3-4 transports, which is a turn’s worth of building transports that you must replace. You don’t however have to replace British air.

Depending on the situation at Anglo-Egypt, I would or would not try to blow up the German fleet at Baltic right away with UK air.  (If the UK bomber was needed at Anglo-Egypt, though, I’d probably do something else).

Either way, though, I’m always looking to kill the Baltic fleet before I get the Allied Atlantic navy really going.  3 fighters with UK is reasonable in some cases, depending on the German move.

If you don’t build a German navy I’ll land in Africa anyway, to force you to over commit or surrender there and then blow the hell out of your navy with the combined fleet.

Africa’s just too convenient a place to unify Allied fleets and prevent any Sea Lion attempts.

Losing FIGs to kill the Baltic Fleet is a waste of Allied air power

Switch! I think it´s here you are getting it wrong  :-D  :-D

hint Don´t loose them  :wink:

Africa’s just too convenient a place to unify Allied fleets and prevent any Sea Lion attempts.

I know you like to keep saying this, and it’s the correct strategy in many situations, but it’s not the point here. The point is, you’re spending THREE turns in Africa just because you don’t want to lose 1-2 fighters to the Baltic fleet? It will turn into 4 turns because the Baltic will just fly out to stall a landing in Norway after you’ve been tilting in Algeria for 3 turns. That’s too many turns not getting any troops into Europe.

Who’s spending 3 turns in Africa to save fighters per se?

Allied fleets to SZ 12.  Allied fleets to SZ 6 with massive British fighters to SZ 5 killing all in one round of battle and maybe taking a hit.

Very easy to do.  That’s only 1 round to Africa.

Easier is to just unify your fleets and pump Africa heavy while Russia holds Germany off, which is really easy to do for Russia, especially with Germany without African taxes to fund it’s war machine.  Then you move your combined fleets up north and dare the Germans to attack you.

Even if they put out submarines as pickets, it does nothing.  Just kills their submarines since most of what you want to do is done in the NCM portion anyway.  Sink or force them to submerge with a fighter and sail through.

You’re hung up on the idea that the allies automatically lose if England isn’t landing 4-6 units a round in North Asia by UK 2 with America landing the same by USA 3.  Not so.  Russia is perfectly capable of keeping Germany at bay by itself for 5 or 6 rounds before retreating back a rank.

Just focus on Africa for 3 turns and bring the AC, DD, TRN, TRN, SS from the Pacific/Indian oceans to the Atlantic.

From your own post, Jen.

You’re hung up on the idea that the allies automatically lose if England isn’t landing 4-6 units a round in North Asia by UK 2 with America landing the same by USA 3.

Wrong, I think it’s OK for the UK to be in Europe by Round 3. The way I understand your direct quote was that you’re focusing with both UK and US on Africa for 3 turns, which means a UK landing on round 4. My mistake if you didn’t explain well enough.