@B.:
I think the game is not perfectly balanced for naval combats, due to fighters supremacy. Any number of only ftr would beat (i.e. in an attack) any navy worth the same IPCs!
72 IPC 2 CV 4 FTR
6+16=22
72 (70) IPC 7 FTR
21
Of course, this is with the fighter force at a 2 IPC disadvantage, so for statistics sake,
360 IPC 10 CV 20 FTR
30+80=110
360 IPC 36 FTR
108
So CVs come out slightly ahead, and can protect convoys, unlike FTR only forces.
For strategically defending islands or landing zones, destroyers are ideal. 3+3+3. They are also versatile in the fact that they tactically defend on 3+3+3 as well.
For invading or fighting any other forced battle, carriers are perhaps best, 3+4+4. For strategically defending a sea zone however, you only get 1+3+3. The planes can be switched to support ground combat of course, which is very useful, as a portion of your naval strength can be used on the mainland for an attack, and still fly back to your carrier and deter a tactical attack on your fleet.
Also, against a player relying primarily on aircraft to control the water, CVs are preferable.
SSs are too vunerable to air attack IMO. I dislike using them to any large extent. I use them to soak hits if anything, grouping them with BBs.
I feel that one thing that has been missed is the BB’s reusability. Use along with planes or some subs to attack and to soak up one hit, then retreat. Since UK’s fleet is always split, this can be very useful against convoys as Germany (attack from the Mediterranean outwards). If UK keeps its fleet together… then either invade UK or take all its cash!
I e-mailed them and they sent me some more chips. I forget who exactly it was though, I think Wizards of the Coast.
Suppose I am attacking Anglo-Egypt from Libya, and I attack with one infantry and leave the artillery behind. Am I correct in saying that the infantry will still attack on two, although the artillery is not actually moving into Anglo-Egypt?
If trying to keep sea lanes open, carriers are the most effective with 3/4/4 for 36 IPC IMO. If they simply park their navy in your sea zone, instead of retreating you can attack and also bring in land based (obviously) bombers.
If you don’t have a large air force to help out in a tactical attack destroyers would be ideal, with a consistent 3 for attack and defense.
Artillery can support an attack if it’s from the area where the attack came forth from, but isn’t in the attack itself, correct?
Then you could bombard should Caucus be taken, but yes, it seems rather ridiculous.
I use the Pacific dogfight rules. One pass, attacking fighters attack on one, defending fighters attack on two. After that one round of combat, bombing commences.
I thought destroyers negated opening fire, but not submerge? Or am I thinking of Pacific?
Are you sure you don’t repeat the opening fire step? What about subs?
I believe that the naval and air supremacy would have allowed the allies to successfully assault the beaches.
@Guerrilla:
they didn’t have the navy to do it…
They didn’t historicially, but without having to deal with the Soviet Union, I think they would have been able to build up an Air Force and Navy to defeat Britain by the time the US enters the war, not having to use rescources on preparing for Barbarossa.
I’d explain it if you’d like.
Please do.
Realistically the Germans should have never even came close to Moscow. But Stalin’s purges really killed all the experience the Russians had. I think if he hadn’t done that the Germans either A) Never invade (no Finland-example to investigate) or B) Invade but don’t get farther or to Kiev.
By realistically do you mean hypothetically? That would make alot more sense.
The Soviets were winning the war long before D-Day. The reason the retreats speedened were of course having a second front and split forces are going to reduce effectiveness. Without D-Day, I believe the Soviet Union would still have defeated Germany.
If you are going by historical accounts than the german infantry would attack at 3 and the it would take 3 russian infantry to get a defensive dice of 1.
Yes, if you had already captured all of the territories surrounding the Soviet Infantry and they were trapped in a pocket, as they were in the early days of the invasion.
Ok, so the Allies only confronted a 600,000 strong army. The army that attacked Russia was 3 million strong with thousands of tanks as well.
The Soviet Union destroyed over 500 German divisions. All the other allies combined destroyed about 170.
I agree with the OP, Japan and the UK are the most fun IMO, though I picked Japan because I play them more.