Posts made by Chompers2

@Cmdr:

Frank:

No, I think you underestimate just how strongly Russia can defend itself.  There is just no realistic manner in which Germany can get Moscow before Japan is neutralized and America has started landing in Arkhangelsk.

Russia does not need a buff at all, unless you do so in a manner I mentioned above by removing Naval units and replacing them with ground units located east of Moscow.

Germany Units

43 Infantry Starts with 35 Infantry +8 G1 when Germany takes Finland and Bulgaria.
8 Artillery
8 Tanks
4 Mechanized Infantry
11 Planes
Total 74 and lots of attack power.

Russian Units

27 Infantry, not counting the units located by Japan because they are too far away to effect the Eastern front for the first six turns.  They usually end up fighting Japan one way or the other in most games I play.
3 Artillery
2 Mechanized Infantry
2 Tanks
3 Planes
Total 37 and almost no attack power.

By utilizing its starting 2 to 1 unit advantage Germany is very capable or tearing up Russia if the German player decides on operation Barbarossa after France and the US does not pose a threat to Germany.  Not to mention Alpha +2 also upgraded the Factory in Germany to a major making it easier to build mass amounts of units to send in Operation Barbarossa.

The Germans will lose a few units smashing France and build the Baltic Fleet G1 but then on G2 they are free to spend about 70 points on the Eastern Front because US is going mostly Japan first.  They will always be able to produce more units to attack Russia than Russia can to defend because unless the US attacks Europe there is no reason for the German economy to not be much larger than the Russian one.

With the Baltic fleet built and the starting units in Finland and Norway for Germany it will take a sizable force for the Russians to take Norway.  If they do this they are now even more outnumbered by the Germans and that means Germany will eat more of the Russian economy and capture key points such as Stalingrad, Leningrad, and the Ukraine Minor.  Also the Baltic Fleet and the Air Force will then just take Norway right back from Russia insuring Germany keeps it’s five point bonus.

Russia will also never see their five point bonus if the German player keeps a sub in Sea Zone 125.

If the Allies decide to send the US to the Pacific first and stay there until Japan is neutralized they will pay a heavy price in Europe.  Moscow may still be technically alive when the US player makes it out of the Pacific (Though I am not convinced Japan can’t keep them there quite a long time if the US player wants to stay until Japan is neutralized) but Moscow will be on it’s deathbed.

This does not even touch on the growth of Italy, lockdown of Cairo, and anything it sends towards Russia.

The Allies may be able to neutralize Japan first as a viable strategy but there are great costs in doing so even if they are successful in the Pacific.  If they are not careful they risk losing 8 victory cities on the European side of the board.

@chompers:

The US, as the primary force of the Allied side, needs to be unrestricted in it’s ability to deploy on either front as necessary in response to whatever the Axis’s opening moves are.  To me, restricting that is a far more drastic change than an extra 4 inf for Japan, whose presence would only really be felt if the US was spending heavily in the Pacific anyway, as otherwise they would just be making an overwhelming Japanese starting advantage in Asia slightly more overwhelming.

I agree.

@Cmdr:

Oh, and don’t forget you get +3 for each of Norway, Poland, Romania, Hungary, Denmark, Holland, W. Germany, S. Germany and Holland (10 for E. Germany).  Those quickly add up as well.

If the US is spending most of it’s points in the Pacific and Germany has launched operation Barbarossa I just don’t understand how Russia is getting any of these bonuses.  The Germans have been buffed a lot since OBB while Russia has stayed almost the same.  The math is just not there for Russia to accomplish this.  If Russia really wants to take Norway from Germany it probably can but only at the cost of losing Moscow much faster than if they had rallied their units together to defend their economy and capital.  Also if Germany built the Baltic fleet G1 they are just going to take Norway right back.  In my opinion the Eastern front is the most broken front in Global, not the Pacific.

While I do think the game is very close to balanced I would be more likely to agree that Russia is more in need of getting buffed up than Japan.  I have found that Germany can force Russia to retreat or be destroyed very quickly.  Once they retreat their economy collapses and Germany’s explodes.  This is the penalty the Allies pay if they decide to send the US mainly against Japan early.  Not to mention that Italy can grow quite large as well and there is no reason they should not have Cairo on lockdown if US went mainly to Pacific first.  The US might succeed in maiming Japan if it goes there first but the Axis player has many options to respond with.  One very viable option that Chomper’s brought up is leveraging Japan’s power to crush India J3 with the J1 purchase of the Hainan naval base.  From there Japan can either help Italy hold down Cairo or attack Russia and help the Axis seal the deal in Europe.  Yes by that point US might be able to sink the Japan Navy and limit it’s economy but they will have won the battle only to lose the war.

Japan is capable of plenty as is.  If the US goes all in the Pacific the first six turns then Germany and Italy are also very capable of winning the victory cities in Europe.  Germany is capable of killing Russia if left to its own and US does not show up in Europe.  Germany starts with a very large unit advantage against Russia especially after it activates the pro axis infantry in the area G1.  If Russia just builds a wall of Infantry than Germany can advance faster and eat their economy.  If they buy too many offensive units and US has not dropped a cent in the Atlantic by turn 6 they better be very careful against an Axis player who is skilled at attacking Russia.  Russia is big but it is very doable to take their capital if US is not around.  If Russia falls then goodbye bye IPC advantage the allies had and hello Big Daddy Germany.
Italy can also grow quite large and it very capable of recovering from the UK1 fleet attack with no US showing up.

And I just don’t see how a US player could break the back of a skilled Japan player in the Pacific in six turns if the Japan player is conservative with it’s Navy and keeps the Air Force in tact.  Japan can out maneuver the US Navy once it leaves Hawaii and will always be two turns of production ahead of it.  Then if the US Navy trys to come out too far Japan can send it to Davy Jone’s Locker with a one two punch from their Navy and Air Force.

I have read the arguments on here that Japan is too weak but I disagree. I believe Larry Harris came darn close to balancing this game with the research he put into Alpha +2.

@Cmdr:

I would gladly throw away 4 infantry with the allies to kill 1 axis infantry because the allies earn that much more than the axis.  That alone unbalances the game, IMHO.

I just don’t believe IPCs vs. IPCs is the only thing that effects balance in Global.  The US forces are stuck behind two oceans they have to cross to stop the Axis from winning the game on each side of the map.  Also the Axis can win the game on the other side of the board if US goes too heavy in one or the other.

@Cmdr:

America should feel like a powerhouse???  Sure, on the condition that it has to spend in BOTH theaters and cannot dump it all DIRECTLY into one or the other. I believe that was the compromise I agreed too.  My original stance is that the American territories should be halved in value and half their NOs should be removed, since then, I’ve been talked into a much more conservative vantage.  My original point being that if it can act as a unified nation, it should earn what the other unified nations earn, and that’s 40-50 IPC per round, not 80-100 IPC a round…

I see no way the US could accomplish it’s job if it earned 40-50 IPCs a round.  The math is just not there for all the war ships they need to buy to protect their fleet and the amount of transports they need to buy.  Finally they generally need to do this in both theaters or the Allies will lose the victory city game.

@Cmdr:

Now people are saying that America shouldn’t have to split it’s income and the arguments they use are valid even more for England than they are for America!  But they don’t want to get rid of the split for England, which I find just absolutely hilarious. Sorry, but if it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander, so to say.

I think the UK spilt works for the game.  I don’t think you want the UK to be able to drop 45 in one side of the board for various tactical reasons.  I just don’t see it as necessary for game balance to spilt the US income.

@Cmdr:

All in all, I do agree with Geist, there is no pressure to play the allies what-so-ever.  Daring and unheard of strategies can be employed because, after all, you have a two nation income lead on the Axis!  Okay, so your Artillery only strategy failed, so what?  In two rounds I can out build them and have equal numbers in ANY other strategy of my choice!  You can’t do that with the Axis.  If you try a gambit to have even a chance of winning the game, and that gambit fails, your (to continue a theme) goose is cooked…

I am just not coming to the same conclusion.  The Allies must react to what the Axis does in certain situations with spot on timing or they will lose due to victory cities.  For instance if an Axis player does Sea Lion successfully G3 and on J3 crushes India the US will have to balance itself very carefully, as 2 Allied countries just went down.  On one hand the Axis are now probably 1 victory city away from allied surrender in the Pacific.  Then on the other UK got their capital captured so they are not going to be able to stop the growth of Italy or put any pressure on Germany.  The US can’t leave London just sitting in German hands but it will take a very large US force to stop Germany from just trading London with US and looting the treasury again.  On the other hand if the US does not fortify Hawaii or chase Japan down to Australia then it is going to be game over.  I don’t see how US could accomplish these goals if it reduced to a 40 point country.  Going that far I believe unbalances the game big time in the Axis favor.  Also I believe operation Barbarossa is another viable option for the Axis.  If Germany goes hard at Russia with all it’s extra starting units and larger economy Russia with have to choose it’s war strategy very carefully.

I have played a lot of games of Alpha 2 at this point and I am just not coming to the same conclusions.  Cmdr Jennifer you have put a lot of thought into this and I am not saying you don’t have valid points.  That said I believe LH put a ton of thought into Alpha +2 with the help of the gaming community.  I think people need to do some more play testing before concluding one side has the advantage over the other.

Yes the allies get more IPC’s to spend but there is a lot more to be considered than that.  First is the US must spend points in both sides of the board or the Axis will either get 6 victory cities in the Pacific or 8 in the European and then it is game over.  It doesn’t matter if the US goes over to Europe and stomps Italy and reels in Germany if Japan does an India Crush turn 3, repells China and then takes either Hawaii or Sydney.  At that point it is game over and the allies must surrender.  And those are very possible goals for Japan with the use of the starting Air Force, Navy, and added extra lands units in Alpha if US spends too much, too long in the Atlantic.

Now if the US goes into the Pacific early and stays there too long Germany can bring the pain to Russia if it has chosen operation Barbarossa.  Germany has a powerful starting unit advantage against Russia plus it has a larger income and can utilize the major factories in West Germany and Germany to out produce Russia.  As Germany pushes into Russia the communist will be forced to fall back further and further.  Germany can earn a +5 bonus for Leningrad, +5 for Stalingrad and the +5 for the Caucus if Russia decides to turtle.  As it pushes in it will also capture the minors in Ukraine and Leningrad.  At that point it can use the minors to help marginalize Russia and the Majors in Europe to Repel the Allies.

With the addition of so many national bonus Italy also has the potential to become a powerhouse in Global.  I will admit there is the UK1 on the Italian fleet that I don’t think is very fair but skillful use of Big Daddy Germany can help Italy make it through the early hit.  LH added the minor in Southern France so if Germany takes Southern France it has even more options to help Italy out.  Even if UK London sinks the Italian Battleship, Cruiser and 2 transports UK1, Italy can still get back up if the Axis is determined.

Also in the Pacific Japan has options.  The Air Force can be used to paste one major Allied target after another if a proper Infantry shield is utilized.  This is another area that shows straight up IPCs vs. IPCs is not always the best indicator of game balance in Global especially when you consider the victory city conditions.   I also disagree that Japan can not keep pace with US Naval builds.  If anything I have found that it is the US who can not keep pace with Japan naval builds especially if Japan decides to put some of its starting Air Force on carriers and mix that in with sub and destroyer builds.  The US would actually have to spend the points for 2 extra fighters in this scenario (Japan starts the game with theirs) if it wanted to match Japan in Capital Ships.  Also there is the issue of line of supply for the US.  If it wants to venture past Hawaii then Japan can out maneuver it with Naval Bases and it can hit it with both the Air Force and the Japanese Navy.  The US may have a lot of IPCs but it does not have enough IPCs to survive that.

As you know the US has been altered dramatically since OBB and it is possible to peel points away from them especially if they decide to hit Europe first.  I do not think it would be fair or game balancing at this point to restrict the US any further.

Also, I think people may be underestimating just how much the US has to accomplish against the Axis to stop them on both sides of the board.  They most likely need a very large naval fleet in the Pacific and the Atlantic Ocean.  If they don’t build enough fleet in the Atlantic and the Germans have been investing some points in subs and planes here and there they can lose all their transports when they get far away from home and try to do some damage.  And the US has to build transports to fight Germany while Germany does not have build transports to fight the US.  This is a huge factor.

Finally this is only addressing what the Allies most accomplish to stop the Axis from winning the game.  It has not even begun to address bringing Rome, Berlin, and Tokyo under lasting Allie control which is what the Allies must do to win the game.

I am a fan of buying a lot of offensive units (art and tanks) with Russia to help halt the advance of Germany.  I have tried building lots of inf with Russia in the past and it becomes very hard to keep the Germans from taking all of Russia’s economy with that battle plan.  Of course Russia will need the help of it’s allies because it can not stand against Germany alone in Alpha 2 forever no matter what it buys.

I do not have experience with Romanian Complex tactic by an Axis player.  The oppponent I play the most likes to attack Russia with Infantry and Artillery early and then reinforce with tanks and planes as he pushes deeper in.

I think it sounds like you have sound plan.  I don’t think I will spend nearly as much time in the Pacific next game as the allies early because I have seen that Germany becomes a beast if it is allowed to have it’s way with Russia.  I agree that you will have to most likely come back to save the day in the Pacific at a certain point with the US but hopefully you will have accomplished your goals in Europe by that time with the US.

I think it is worth noting that the allies generally have to spend way more on expensive war ships while Germany can spend points on very cost effective Infantry to defend from Allie attacks.  The US has to spend a tremendous amount on transports to really bring the pain to Europe.  They also have to build a Navy large enough that it does not get sunk by German subs/planes or the Italian Navy.  There is also the factor that the smaller Allie countries can sometimes be killed piecemeal by the larger Axis countries.
I think a lot of changes have been made since OBB and at this point a lot of very serious play testing is needed to see if anymore changes need to be made to balance the game.

@JimmyHat:

Nice battle report, I also just finished a long game and had some similar results at the beginning, but divergent strategies later.  I assume that 22 trn threat had also been used keeping Germany honest in France?  Did you try pressuring Germany directly?  Because of the allies 1-2-3 punch in between Italy and Germany its possible to punch your way into the baltic and then really mess with the enemy.

I was too late to the dance in Europe to really pressure Germany and France.  I know that sounds crazy with a pumped up US and 22 transports but I spent a long time in the Pacific, making sure I broke the back of Japan before I left.  While I had a lot of points as US my opponent had almost as many points with Germany but I had to build transports for my units.  While Russia was still alive when I got to Africa it had been forced to fall back to Moscow so my opponent surrounded the city.

Going in the Pacific first with US can be some fun times but in the future I will probably hit Europe first so Germany doesn’t get so out of hand again.  I think it is easier for the US to deal with a pumped Japan than a hyped up Germany.

@HMS_Artemis:

This sounds like a fun game!

did you think putting the USA all in against Japan was a good starting strategy?  I am finishing a game as the allies and I put the first 2 (maybe 3) turns just into the pacific navy and it turned out I didn’t do enough so the USA hadn’t done too much in force, but still have managed to support the British in Africa and liberate France.

First, thanks for reading my report and posting a response.  I honestly think in most games against a skilled Axis player it is better to hit Europe hard first with minimal spending in the Pacific as USA.  That being said I play this game sometimes twice a week for 8 hours at a time with my friends and like to try different things.

The reason I was able to defeat Japan in the Pacific and isolate them was mainly because my opponent decided he wanted to kill India turn 3 no matter the cost.  With Japan building an Airbase and Naval base combined with a J2 attack to eliminate any blockers I see no way to save India on turn 3 if it is hit by the whole Air Force.  That being said the allies can make it very, very bloody for Japan and that is what happened this game.  He took India turn 3 but when it was all said and done he did not even have enough planes left to fully staff his carriers.  Also my opponent moved the entire Japanese Navy down to India to make sure he sealed the deal.  This is the reason I was able to get the US Navy into Sea Zone 6 and capture Korea.  The 18 Russian Inf then moved in to hold it down and they were able to accomplish this because the starting Japanese Air Force was decimated in India.   Also China was able to run wild because of the high cost in Japanese units in India.  So it was a Perfect Storm that allowed me to be so successful against Japan.  I have seen other games where Japan conserves the Air Force and pumps up it’s Navy.  When that happens the US just can not build enough to take that all out in a straight fight no matter how many IPCs it spends.

That being said I still almost lost the game in Europe.  My opponent captured 8 victory cities but I was able to liberate Cairo immediately after Moscow fell thus he did not make it to the end of the turn order with 8 cities to achieve the victory.  At this point USA was at over 100+ IPCS with their gains in the Pacific.  That being said Germany had taken all of Russia and was at over 100+ IPCS points itself.  He conceded because he saw no way to get the 8th victory city with Cairo and London on lock down but in reality there was no way I was going to be able to take down Germany as big as it had grown.

All and all I think it is probably better to hit Europe first and try to rein Germany and Italy in first.   Hopefully if the US is successful enough Russia and UK London will then be able to stand on their own 2 feet while the US then makes sure Japan does not win the game in the Pacific.  It is a tight balance but I think it is more realistic to deal with a pumped up Japan than a pumped up Germany.

In my view the game is very close to being balanced.  I think it might slight favor the allies but I have not played enough Alpha 2 to decide that for certain.  Germany got a lot stronger, Japan can bring US into Pacific and Italy can get quite big under certain conditons.  This did not happen in OBB.  Alot was done to beef up the Axis in my view with National objectives and such.  So far I think Larry Harris did a good job and the game is close to being balanced.

I think making China any stronger would be a huge mistake.  If Japan does not pay attention to it as is it can grow out of hand and retake all of China and lock down 2 victory cities.  Thus US is free to spend 90+ in the Atlantic.

It is also very easy for Japan to under committ to China if US goes in Pacific at all and the 18 Russian Inf attack.

Just finished a game of Global after two days.  I controlled the Allies and my opponent took command of the Axis.

My opponent had Japan go for an India Crush from the start.  I sent the US into the Pacific first in response.  Japan crushed India turn 3 but lost most of it’s air force.  While Japan crushed India it opened up a window for the US to get a very large Navy into Sea Zone 6 and capture Korea.  The Russians then declared War on Japan giving them some points but reinforced Korea with 17 Russian Infantry and an AA Gun.  I had Australia build tanks and inf to insure I did not lose Sydney and allow the axis to gain the needed 6th victory city in the Pacific.  China meanwhile began to grow strong as Japan lost its airforce and many ground units going into India.

Meanwhile  on the other side of the board my opponent built the Baltic fleet G1 and took France, Southern France, and Normandy.  He allowed the Royal Navy to live.  On UK1 I bypassed attacking the Italian fleet and rallied together all the UK starting Navy in sea zone 92 inside the Med touching Gibraltar also landing some fighters on the airbase there.  I left the Battle Ship and Destroyer from Scotland as blockers so that the Baltic fleet would not land units in Gibraltar.  Russia built mostly artillery and tanks early to try and hold the Germans out of Russia as long as possible.  Italy took Greece turn one but was a little starved for points with the sizable UK navy in the Med.  On G2 my opponent built some subs and prepared building large amounts artillery for operation Barbarossa.  UK2 I moved my very sizable Navy to block Egypt from being taken over and then built a minor there.

As the game progressed my opponent sent the German air force along with the Baltic fleet into the Med and defeated my UK Navy but sustained sizable losses in the battle.  The US sunk the rest of Japans Navy as it tried to come back up to sea zone 6.  China went viral and drove the Japanese out of the mainland and captured two victory cities.  Between China and the US they had ended any risk that Japan might win the game for the axis in the Pacific.  At that point my opponent starting mass producing tanks in India, West India, and Persia with Japan and peeled points off of Russia.  He still had owned the money islands so his economy was strong enough to do this.

Germany moved into Eastern  Poland all in turn 4 and I attacked his stack with Russia as I had massed all my starting inf and bought art and tanks.  The battle resulted in just about mutual destruction for both sides.  I realized at this point that Russia was on a timetable for being eliminated by Germany and the tanks from flank from Japan.

At this point the US mounted up to save the day on the Atlantic side of the board.  They also moved to capture the money islands from Japan with the help of Australia.  They produced a large fleet of carriers, destroyers, transports, bombers and headed for Africa.

The remnants of the Baltic Fleet captured Egypt and it was reinforced by Italian planes and Japanese tanks.  Both of us built up for a couple of turns and then my opponent staged himself to kill Russia.  At this point I set myself up to take back Cairo because with the capture of Russia my opponent had all the cities he needed to win on the Atlantic side of the board.

Russia was hit by a one two punch by the Germans and then fell to Japan.  In my US turn I had to retake Cairo or I would lose the game.  Thankfully I had 22 transports full of US troops to attack Cairo with supported by 9 bombers 3 fighters and 1 Tac.  I defeated the multinational force in Cairo handily and had it on lock down with fighter patrol on the way next turn.

At this point my opponent offered me his hand for an Axis concession as he did not see a way to get the last victory city on the Atlantic side of the board.  The US, China, and Australia had conquered all of the Pacific side of the map aside from the island of Japan itself.  I did not liberate UK Pacific because I recaptured West India from the Axis and had a US factory there.  I had also liberated several UK Pacific IPCs from Japan and decided to keep them for the US.

After I examined the map I concluded it was a draw because while my opponent my not be able to get his last victory city I had no plan to destroy a 100+ point Germany even though my US was also 100+ points.  It is also worth mentioning there were over 30 infantry in London and I had a careful eye on that should he choose to Sea Lion at that point.

It was a very fun and close game.  My guess is it is probably better to head for Africa first as US so Germany doesn’t crush all of Russia but I had a lot of fun messing up Japan’s day as the allies.

Final Economies

Axis           
Germany 100+ points
Italy 15 points
Japan 20 points
TOTAL 135 points

Allies
Russia 0
USA 100+ points
China 26 points
UK Atlantic 25 points
UK Pacific 0
Australia 29 points
TOTAL 180

I played about 30-35 games of OBB with my friend before the release of Alpha 2 and the axis won twice and 2 or 3 draws and about 30 losses.  When the game first came out we played everytime I got out of work for the most part then after that averaged about two 12 hour games a week if the axis could hold out that long.  The only time the axis would win is if I went all in the Pacific and tried to kill Japan first and stayed their too long.  I tried that because it was so easy to cruise to Europe and stomp Germany with USA because the consequences of ignoring Japan are not anything like they are now.  Germany and Italy could not handle the US spending all of its points in the Alantic that early.  The German Airforce was too weak to be a threat to an Allied fleet and the minor factory in Germany made it hard to get troops to Russia.  The Italian fleet could be destroyed on turn 1 without any resistance.  You can still do that attack in Alpha 2 but it is with greater consequences and risks for the allies now.

How much does everyone on here use to sink the Battleship and Destroyer off Sea Zone 110?  Do you try to get the UK player to scramble?  Do you not want him to scramble.  If I decide to use too much than I won’t have as many planes to play around with G1 but I will still be able to take Normandy, France and get two fighters to Southern Italy.  I am thinking 3 subs and at least 5 planes into 110 to seal the Battleships fate should UK scramble 3 fighters.

I think putting the 2 german fighters in Southern Italy is standard but what Germany and UK decide to do in the chess match after that is not so standard.  Whatever decision each side makes from there can have strong ripple effects through out the rest of the game.

@manincellv:

All i can say about the British fleet moving into SZ 95 or 97 is by the time my turn with Germany comes around on G2, at then end of my turn, there won’t be any British ships left in either of those Sea Zones.

I am sure you can back that up with the German Airforce but it might cost you.  It seems to be a win for allies if they sink the 2 transport Italian Fleet, 2 german fighters, 1 italian fighter and then as a bonus get to kill some more German planes on the way out.  So far the best counter I can think of to this is Sea Lion because it would probably tip the odds well into the favor of Germany and bail out Italy.

Okay thanks I will focus on taking a hard look at how to get as many points for Italy asap.  It doesn’t help that I like to give Southern France to Germany on G2 so that they have a factory in the Med.

Also I am torn on the two Battleships or Normandy because if the Norm Figher doesn’t die then that is one more figher that can attack either Italian fleet UK 1.

Maybe I will build the 2 transports/Carrier G1 and if too many UK fighters die I will build the 10 ten transports G2 and smash UK on G3.  I am not a fan of sea lion but it does seem to be one way to make allies pay for sacrificing too many fighters in a KIF.  It would also take the heat off Italy if US has to go save UK.

I would rather attack Russia so I will see if there are other options I can think of.

The past two games I was the allies and attacked Chompers 2 transport Italian Fleet UK 1 and sunk it both times even though he scrambled 3 fighters with the BB and destroyer.  And that was without the Normandy fighter because he killed it G1.  Maybe I just got lucky though because I am not sure the odds on that fight.

If my opponent has a blocker to prevent me from moving three into Med for example and I destroy the blocker with a sub or plane in the combat phase.  During the non combat phase can my navy move through the sea zone that combat took place that did not involve them and go right through into the Med.

Thanks and sorry if this has already been answered.

Gargantua and anyone else,

What would you do if even after putting the 2 German fighters in Southern Italy the fleet with 2 transports goes down and US builds up and heads to Gibralter to size up targets once at war.  I understand Sea Lion is one option if the UK loses too many fighters but I do prefer to fight Russia.  Can Italy be saved, Norway protected so that it at least can be taken back if USA hits there and pressure still put on Russia?  I have some ideas but I think it could be tough.  I won’t tip my hand too much on this until after I fighter Chompers on Thursday.

I understand skillful use of Japan is key and maybe I am answering my own question but as Gargantua has stated earlier Japan needs to put pressure on the US to not spend in Europe one way or another.  I think there are ways to do this with some minor variation in each tactic.

Also do you think it is more important to take Normandy G1 or sink both UK alantic Battleships.  I think it is next to impossible to take down all three, get the fighters to Southern Italy and still make France all but a done deal.  My opponent will scramble his fighters in the UK and Scotland unless I go in with overwhelming force.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.  Hopefully Chompers doesn’t read this thread before I play him Thursday but if he does I will just lose the element of surprise.