I agree as Russia i’d prefer the axis to take the ‘northern’ path so to speak as there are fewer IPCs there for me to loose, it is further from Moscow, and most importantly, UK can liberate it for me. The only bad thing is it keeps me from taking Finland.
Moscow is the goal, and Karelia is a distraction. I’d rather counter Ukraine on R1 honestly.
A few problems with that idea.
UK can probably retake alaska or atleast weaken your forces there with 1 inf 1 arm.
US keeps there NO because they’d have midway, wake, and Solomon.
You best keep your destroyer alive or else a sub drop alone will secure there coast (just the fact they can sink your carriers in response)
US can easily shift 1 inf, 1 art to central US, pull back the AA gun, and keep there planes in range to retake LA, stalling them at most 1 turn from africa.
I think you’d be better off hitting Hawaii and buying 2 transports + DD and shift the cruiser to japan, then threating a turn 2 grab of alaska + western canada and setting up for a train. The interesting thing as well is if you move the BB to wake and have all 3 carriers plus your DD and within range and hit Hawaii there is absolutely no fleet purchase the US can make that can survive an attack on J2. Not sure what can be done to capitalize on that but hey.
The big way I see subs being used is when the enemy decides to use a large amount of carriers to inexpensively add more offensive punch to your fleet while not worrying about the defensive aspect as carriers are skewed toward the defensive. The only problem with that idea is the subs are absolutely worthless in the defensive aspect against the carrier’s planes unless they bring DDs, or unless you have no surface fleet. I really like purchasing around 3 for the US if i’m going pacific to force Japan to respond with a naval buy or lose control of the seas. The other problem is the destroyer raid where the enemy sends one destroyer plus lots of planes to kill your sub stack. All in all this game really pushes you to use a balanced fleet focusing on destroyers, and subs are part of that concept even if not directly used, all in my opinion of course.
The thing I’m trying to figure out is if there is anyway on earth for Germany to use subs, and I wonder if Italy could get some use out of them. The other problem with subs is of course the DD block, but I’m wondering if later on we may see players in the Atlantic ‘trading’ sea zones because of the sub/DD interaction.
The only problem with that is the allies will probably start trading france on turn 2 and liberate africa as well. I really dont like Italy picking on Russia unless there is a really good opportunity, not to mention its easy for russia to have 10+ inf on caucaus on turn 2.
best way to take Karelia and keep it is the G1 6 tank buy honestly with Italy threatening a can opener on Moscow.
Best approach i’ve seen is have the US harrass Italy and focus on the south pacific. Turn 1 buying subs/destroyers and sending air plus carrier group toward the south pacific and trying to work with UK to get extra troops into europe. Taking finland/norway really helps fix the economic hit UK takes and puts a bit of hurt on germany as well. As does keeping a very real threat on france as letting you trade france will put your income as the allies back where it belongs.
While japan is huge you must remember the quantity of fronts they must fight. South Asia, Northern Russia, China, and all the south pacific and Japan. China dies fast but can make a comeback just as fast with Russian help, India can be taken but it diverts part of there fleet, Japan trannies can bridge but must be defended, stretch Japan out and then break her. I like to do this with US navy/air, and Russian annoyances. And the best part, any headway you make against Japan helps the UK fight Germany. I’ve found the key is UK’s income, if it is high enough you will win, if it drops too low you lose.
The largest problem I see with building ACs with germany is subs.
UK can drop a fleet of up to 7 subs, or replacing 2 subs with a bomber. Germany starts with no DD, all UK has to do is drop enough subs to sink the fleet and buy bombers, then sink it on UK2 OR force germany to buy all DDs on turn 2. I would recommend 3-5 subs as UK plus a bomber or two, bye bye german fleet, onward to the med!
If your going naval purchase I would grab 2 destroyers, 1 cruiser, and 1 inf.
Reason is this defends your fleet from UK air, allows you to trade kar, and gives you alot of firepower to use against a UK fleet. A carrier grants you no offensive gain. Turn 2 you can purchase trannies, suicide the fleet, whatever the game desires. You don’t have the units to transport on turn 2 if you buy heavy navy anyway, nor does russia have the offensive power on turn 1 or 2 to take advantage of your lull. Not saying its a good idea but you would be surprised how large of a fleet 2 destroyers, 2 cruisers, a bomber, and 2-4 figs can kill though :-)
How do heavy bombers fair against improved shipyard destroyers though.
5 @ 2 /w 5 HP +1 IPC
4 @ 4 /w 3 HP
looks a bit more even.
Don’t know how well this will work in the future, but I just tried something and it worked out fairly well. Germany did a standard attack to get there 1 NO but left Karelia alone. I purchased 1 inf, 3 art, 3 armor. I stacked 10 inf/1 art on Caucasus, everything on Moscow I could, and pulled back to archangel with Karelia forces. On R2 I pushed into Ukraine with 11 inf, 4 art and 4 armor, plus an AA gun (i shifted my AAs so Karelia was left empty) and purchased another 4 arm 1 fig. I pulled my archangel force back to Moscow for protection. UK/US was kind enough to grab Norway, Finland, and hit Karelia to weaken the Germans there. This would have allowed me on R3 to trade Romania for my NO, but the game ended before then (other player was tired) so I didn’t get to see how it would pan out. I think me turn 2 purchase should have been inf instead of armor, maybe with a second plane to let me do more trading though. Was looking forward to collecting all those IPCs too :evil:
From a pure IPC point of view, yes, the NOs are off. However, when one looks at what they force the teams to do I feel they even out a bit better.
For example, if your not playing with NOs, trading france each turn is not a big deal esp with italy helping, however with NOs france becomes the most valuable territory in the game from an IPC point of view if you can hold it. (16 for allies, 11-16 for axis)
Also, without NOs when the allies land in Africa its not a big deal, with NOs it is a pita for italy.
With NOs you have a larger desire to hit Egypt G1 to keep UK’s income down, without NOs it is not that big of a deal.
And let us not forget FIC, which i’ve found to be easy to take for a turn as UK on turn 1 to get my NO, then just grab carolinas with one side or the other.
And the second Russian NO isn’t easy to get, but it can be done if you grab Norway and Finland with UK then just look for an opening.
All in all I feel the game is slightly in the allied favor without NOs, balanced with.
I honestly do agree that I feel Germany pushing too hard to fast leads to Russia becoming a meat grinder for Germany. Germany has the advantage of air units to trade dirt for a long period of time with little cost, while Russia does not. Also, defending France is something I feel most people neglect, if you think about it with NOs France is the largest IPC territory in the game. Value 6, 2 allied 5 NOs, 2 axis 5 NOs. Even trading it allows UK to rise above 30ish IPCs to 40ish IPCs, not good. Also with the US cashing in around 50ish IPCs if they play even a little in the pacific allows them to build a landing force in one turn.
Has anyone ever had the UK send there destroyer to SZ 48 to block forcing Japan to choose between India and Australia? Would it slow you down in the Pacific? Also, how likely would you be to strike the US carrier/ destroyer if they took position in SZ 46 or 53 assuming a large US naval purchase? Would you be more likely to attack them if they also landed there two bombers on the respective islands?
On turn 1 UK can easily drop an AC-destroyer-trannie or 2 plus whatever survived, which is plenty, then US can add a destroyer a turn if needed. I"m not advocating ignoring japan, that would be bad idea.
The more I think about it the more I like SZ 12 as a turn 1 to 4 staging area for the UK/US fleets. It offers many advantages.
1- threatens France, NW Europe, Norway, Italy, Balkans, and of course Africa.
2- fairly safe, if you control Algeria, which inst that hard with most German/Italian strats, fighters can only hit you from France and NW Europe, both areas you threaten.
3- 1 SZ away from UK and US for ease of troop shucks.
4- bombers in Algeria can threaten the entire Med, a sub or 2 in SZ 13 can really scare the Italian fleet as well (with bombers helping of course).
Now the downside is your not directly helping Russia, but in my experience Russia can survive a few turns and Italy tends to be the deciding factor in making Moscow fall. Also, the UK cannot drop defending boats into the SZ, but honestly after UK 1 if they are shuttling 4-6 units and building a handful of planes and/or pumping units out of an IC they really cannot afford to anyway, that’s the US’s job. If really pressed UK can load up US carriers.
Has anyone had the allies hang out in this SZ? How has it panned out?
With that start I would hit Algeria with my US trans to take down your fighter, then as UK build an IC on South Africa and bombers relying on SBRs to weaken Germany and wait for the opportune moment to sink your subs with my DD/planes and/or your Italian fleet (when you hit caucus). With that build Russia will live at least to round 4-5 as you have no early reinforcements. I’d also counter Ukraine and hit Finland if I could with Russia, stack Bury and seed atleast 4 inf to china, with an armor or two to follow on the next round. With a 6 armor buy and 7+ inf and an art stacked on belo I should threaten your German forces on my border. I’d probably build a fighter each round for UK as well for when I decide to drop a fleet if you kept building air.
I hate to say it but any build that doesn’t send at least 5 units at Russia on turn one is gonna hurt Germany in turn 2-4 or let Russia punish Japan a bit on the mainland.
Another thing Russia could do is send up to 6! inf (not that I would use 6) into Persia to take Trans-Jordan on turn 2 to let a UK bomber build crush the Italian fleet, or reinforce India.
In reply to the original question, put them on France :-D
Honestly Germany does make enough money to go all armor on Russia and win, eventually. Especially when they buy a bomber a round. The key is not to push to fast on Russia and get trapped or forced into a really bad trade. Just get your NOs.
I think I see what everyone is saying, now I could be wrong but these are my assumptions that I base this on.
A) Most of the pacific early game fighting is for island dominance, mainly Indies, Borneo, Carolina, and Phillipeans.
B) Japan has the fleet advantage, but there fleet is primarily defensive based (carriers)
C) Japan fleet has a perceived weakness, no DDs to start and half of there boats (carriers) and venerable to subs.
J1: hits islands, etc. Importantly, 2 carriers in Japan SZ or 1 SZ nearby, 1 AC/Cruiser in SZ 37 near Burma, 1 BB in SZ 50 near phillipeans.
US1: purchases, lets go crazy 5 subs 1 trannie.
J2: hits india, etc. Cannot send boats within range of subs, cannot even block the dang things. Buys DDs.
US2: sends 5 subs 1 loaded AC, 1 DD, 2 bombers to SZ46/Solomon. Purchases 2nd AC, another trannie, maybe a bomber, more subs, DDs, whatever with leftover.
J3: cannot go into any of the above listed islands or die. Best case rally at SZ 50 with DD, but that fleet is exposed to bombers, 4 fighters, subs, etc. Plus fleet maybe splintered. Doesnt even want to hit the US fleet to sink the surface vessels because subs can submerge and counter next round with reinforcements.
US3: island grab time!
And as far as blocking destroyers, a sub heavy US build best get some UK can opener planes in the area!
So I would have to agree that using the above concept in theory can give the US the initiative in the pacific and force japan to dance to there tune!
Now to build just subs is dumb, but 5 subs US1 can put a hurtin on japan.
Actually the more I think about it I think if the UK has the boats they should move there entire navy to SZ 12 landing all available troops plus placing the 3 fighters in Gibraltar, purchasing 1 more trannie (or 2 if you lost 1), 1 more bomber, and then land units, what have you. If you kept the BB this allows you to seriously threaten Italy on UK2, especially if you have 2 trannies left at the end of turn 1. Now you have to ensure that Germany doesn’t have the planes in position to sink your fleet in SZ12, but if you take Algeria fighters can only reach from France/NW Europe, bombers are another story. Granted Italy could attack Gibraltar, but then they will be exposing there fleet, same if they hit your fleet. This allows you to bring a lot of gear to bear against Rome on turn 2 or turn 3 if you have to clear out there fleet first. Can Germany stop you? Of course, if they leave off Russia for a bit. You can even rely on the US to take back Africa for you with just there one transport.
UK could liberate kar on there turn with ease, 1 BB bombard, 1 inf, 1 arm, 2 fig, 1 bomb, even without the battleship bombard if you don’t want to risk losing it just sac the trannie. Then UK doesn’t even need to buy much fleet to cover landings. Russia, buy 6 armor, place in Moscow, drop 10 inf, 1 art, 1 arm into East Ukraine to force the Germans to commit north or lose there units. If Germany can kill 10 inf, 1 art, 1 arm pull back to Moscow/Caucasus. Just to be a punk since I have so much fleet left i’d send my second trannie to take Algeria to possibly prevent an Italian NO.