German AA50 -41 strategy

Cooperation is needed for the both Axis and Allies to win. I usually play face to face Revised games, with other 3 or 4 friends, and we are quite able to cooperate because we see the benefits of cooperation.

I have also played a lot of game on Gleemax, with different people each time and I agree with 03321. Chatting with teammates and reaching an agreement on the moves to be done is the minimum that it is done. The more is the cooperation the better are the results.

Coming back on topic: given tha fact that A&A is a collaborative game the better strategy are usually the ones that involve cooperation. So to discuss a good strategy it have to be a cooperative one.

I simply can not see the usefulness of observation like: German and Italy players will not cooperate. Japan will do what he want. Then they deserve to lose. Next time they will pay more attention to the coordination with his teammates improving his gaming ability.

I do not see the interest in discussing strategies that do not involve cooperation, they are flawed from the begin.

@Romulus:

I do not see the interest in discussing strategies that do not involve cooperation, they are flawed from the begin.

nods

If the other isn’t cooperating then you might win by going solo but if the other side is cooperating then you’ll most likely lose.

Japan has a big benefit in helping G/I secure Africa: it forces the UK to choose between 2 enemies (making him react to Axis moves) rather than letting the UK taking the initiative on the Indian Ocean. Japan might not win IPCs directly but on the long run he’ll profit from it.

@Romulus:

Cooperation is needed for the both Axis and Allies to win.

True, but Allies need cooperation more than Axis, because Germany and Japan can operate alone in most cases. However, a mix of USA and UK fleets is needed both for KGF and KJF. And don’t forget monster-mixed stacks at Karelia , Caucasus or Russia.

Anyway, maybe the word here is not “cooperation” but “coordination”. It’s true than any teammate will try cooperate, but an effective coordination is vital for Allies each turn, and for Axis only in a few cases.

Mmm… I am not english born (I am Italian and this is a bad thing for speaking english… in the best case I speak english-ian, english + italian  :-D) but I suppose that coordination should be a stronger way of cooperation.

According to my dictionary:

coordination = harmony, accord; working together

cooperation = working together

(so in the weaker form they are the same thing but coordination on average is a more strictly cooperation)

English born people opinion will be appreciated here…  :-)

However, I agree with you about Allies needing more cooperation, or even more coordination, to win.

At same time Axis may benefits by cooperation. Axis coordination could be really a deadly thing.

Sure, Axis may win also without cooperation/coordination, playing almost individually, but I am still convinced that the more efficient Strategy are those involving cooperation.

As you get a bonus for conquering Baltic, East Poland & Ukraine, it`s obvioius to attack all 3 territories. Karelia certainly is not a good idea as you need the airforce for something else.

The biggest questin is really Egypt. With the bmb, you have a 61,3 % chance of taking it with arm, bmb (74,6 % to win). But in 19,4% you even loose and the UK-fgt survives and you certainly loose the trn. The trn can be whiped out in any case if UK sacrifices the bmb that lands in TRJ.

What you gain by EGY is 2 IPC fot the territory and UK looses a bonus of 5 and the average gain is 4,7 IPC in unit (calculated with Revised price of bmb, so it`s even more).

The opportunity costs are that you miss the bmb in other fights, that you have a 19,4% risk of loosing the trn “cheap” (with UK-fgt) and a certain 100% risk of loosing it anyway if UK desires.

If you do not attack EGY, attacking cru, des at Azores is a must as otherwise your Italian fleet could be attacked by des, cru AZO + fgt EGY + bmb GBR which has a 53% chance of winning and therefore whiping out both the german and italian trn.

What about Germany taking Gibraltar on the first turn?  Then if Italy can take Egypt OR Transjordan, then he should get 21 or 22 IPC at the end of his first turn because of getting both of his 5 IPC bonuses.  Of course taking Egypt is much better, not only because of the IPC difference, but also because of taking away England’s bonus, but it may not be feasible on Italy’s first turn.  I realize that the UK bomber can take out the German tansport, but the tradeoff may be worth it, because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.

@Bardoly:

because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.

Sorry, this is complete nonsense. Gibraltar borders sz12 (AZO) in the new map and therefore it is easyly accessible for both UK and USA. You would loose it very quick!

@Atlantikwall:

@Bardoly:

because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.

Sorry, this is complete nonsense. Gibraltar borders sz12 (AZO) in the new map and therefore it is easyly accessible for both UK and USA. You would loose it very quick!

I diagree with you.  I DO agree that it would not be too difficult for the Allies to take it back, but I think that it would be one of those things where there would always be something better to do than take back a 0 IPC territory.

Ya really when you are u.s.a d you go to southern islands then japan i think not you send your fleet head to head in the northern pacific to save both of your main spots.

This is really true!  (I would alos pion tout sometimes making o ipcs 1 just for the conquerer makes them really want it!)

Right now I like 8 inf and 1 bomber for Germany.

Hit the British Battleship in sz 2 with the Subs, Bomber and Norway fighter for a clean kill.
Baltic sub and 1 fighter to UK destroyer in sz 6 (with inf and art to back Norway or NW Europe). 1 Fighter to strafe Baltic or W. Poland (land NW. Europe to cover sz 8 ), 1 to strafe/take Ukraine (land in Bulgaria to back the Afrika Corps/Egypt round 2.) 1 tank and 1 inf from France to Libya. Most of the Armor can be used to secure France and Northwest Europe, since the major counter push against Russia doesn’t need to happen for another round anyway. AA gun, 3 inf, 2 tanks, 2 fighters in NW. Europe; 3 inf, 2 tanks in France. This basically scuttles the Baltic fleet, but provides a very strong incentive for the British to trade what remains of their own surface fleet, giving the Italians more breathing room. I think with that much air in range (the bomber and fighters at Norway/Northwest Europe, and the new Bomber in G), you might be able to force the Brits into a naval save, rather than risking a counter strike from the Luftwaffe in the second round, or bomber Blitz on London.

Not 100% on this one yet, but it feels pretty good right now. The Eastern Front seems like a rather different sort of game than what we saw in Revised, since G is so short on fodder, and Russia has no punch in the first round. Going to be like a 2 or 3 round build up before the war kicks into high gear. Even if our info isn’t 100%, I like what I’m seeing so far. This game should be a lot of fun for the first 6-8 months here.

Will be interesting to see what everyone else comes up with. :)

@italiansarecoming:

Ya really when you are u.s.a d you go to southern islands then japan i think not you send your fleet head to head in the northern pacific to save both of your main spots.

This is really true!  (I would alos pion tout sometimes making o ipcs 1 just for the conquerer makes them really want it!)

I would agree, that is the way the war was won. But is nice to try different stratagies from time to time.

Ya but anyways the germans will need to work with/for the japanese (let the u.s.a do kgf then japan all asia )
allies lose russia falls

I like the idea of hammering Russian production with bombers.  If Germany could stop units from Stalingrad and Leningrad then they might have an easier time in Russia, but as it is now Russia makes almost as much money as Germany but starts '41 with very few offesnive weapons so they need to build a tank corps to make Germany bleed and if they are constantly fixing their factories fir say 10 IPCs a tyurn thats 2 less tanks they can build and this puts them on the defensive entirely.

I’ll try this in my next game, if I play Germany.

I like that German attack except I would bring a tank and Inf on the TR to Egypt instead of two Inf. 
I really don’t want the UK fig to survive.  He would kill the Ger. TR and fly to India.

I really think sinking that BB/AP in sz2 is a must.

Unfortunately it pulls the bomber off of the Egypt raid.  I can’t seem to figure out a good attack on Egypt.

The German bombers are amazing.  With all the crazy money flowing around I built a bomber per turn and had a huge strike force that was able to keep the Atlantic free of UK/US shipping for several turns.