Posts made by cymerdown

@mikecool70:

If Japan loses its one destroyer on turn 1 AND does not build a destroyer on turn 1 to replace it, then a 6 submarine build on USA 1 and a 8 submarine build on USA 2 can be quite effective at preventing the Japanese from ever moving its fleet away from the Japanese sea zone after turn 3.

Mass subs like that don’t really work in this game due to a simple defensive tactic.  You’re right in that they can’t stop you from getting to Solomon on US2.  Let’s say, though, on J2 I had built 3 DD and 4 land units in response to USA’s build.  Then, on J3, I build 4 DD, and I can put 1 DD outside Caroline and the rest of the fleet in the Okinawa SZ (I call this the “DD wall” tactic).  Now the sub stack is threatened by the main fleet, but can’t reach it, and they’re left with 3 bad options.  One, you could attack the lone DD with your entire sub stack, but that gets obliterated by the counterattack next turn.  Two, you could kill the 1 DD with planes or whatever and move the sub stack out of range of the rest of the IJN.  Third, you could move back out of range of everything (even that lone DD is dangerous to be near since I could send all planes with it).  The last two options are bad since you’re getting pushed back and aren’t really doing too much to slow Japan down.

Even if US wanted to do the “sub cloud” idea where you spread them out into nearby SZ, that’s fine.  Japan can just attack with DD + FIG against each individual sub, and then put the main fleet just behind the wall of “skirmisher” DDs you just made, and the new DDs built join the main fleet.  Subs as a massed unit just don’t really seem to have a way to work in this game.

@captainjack:

Again, I don’t advocate a G1 Karelia attack, but I just want to point out that it is possible to stop these two counterattacks as Germany.  On G1 if Germany sends two subs and a bomber to attack the BB and Transport, that would obviously prevent a UK liberation.  Also, when the dust settles from the Karelia attack, Germany SHOULD be left with and art, and can non-combat 2 tanks - which hopefully would fend off 4 inf and an armor.
Thanks.

Right, it’s just that the Italian navy is then in trouble on UK1.  If they lose that, they get relegated to 3 INF/turn status before they even had a chance to do anything.  But I understand your point was that those two things mentioned weren’t inevitable, strictly speaking.

I have to agree with DM - my personal feeling is that a naval race with Japan by just the US is futile in '41.  The reason is that they just can’t gain superiority over the Japan navy, even if they go 100% Pacific.  Let’s look at the starting setup at everything both sides has to bring to bear in the inevitable stack vs. stack showdown (after typical J1 losses).

Japan
–—
3 CV  (42)
8 FIG (80)
1 BB  (20)
1 CA  (12)

Total (154)

USA

1 CV  (14)
4 FIG (40)
1 DD  ( 8)

Total (62)

Note that I did not include the USA bombers.  This is because Japan will be the attacker, not the defender, in the final showdown, since USA is the one that’s forced to advance into the range of Japan’s navy if they want to liberate anything.

So, in order to reach parity with Japan, the US has about 100 IPC of units to build (a little less, since fighters are more efficient in defense than attack, of course).  However, the US will only have two turns to get to equality (actually less than that, since J2’s build can have 2-3 DDs in it while still taking care of other business), which is impossible.  After that, Japan should be at about 53 IPC/turn.  Even assuming Japan doesn’t grow any larger after that, and subtracting 14-16 IPC for 4 land units/turn to keep Asia together (which should be more than enough while Russia is fighting for its life), they still have about 40 IPC to spend on the naval arms race, which is almost as much as the US has to spend.  Add this to the fact that Japan can build some subs since it will get to attack, and it looks pretty bleak for the US indeed.  I think if the Allies want to try to accomplish anything at all against Japan in the Pacific, they need the UK’s help in Australia.  Even then, it’s still hard.

@Woodstock:

Do you just buy all tanks and bmb in G1 to compensate the lack of units that could otherwise reach the more eastern areas in G2?
Do you attack Karelia in G1?
Which sea zones do you attack in G1?

1. The problem is that you can’t just consider what is going to happen on the next turn when figuring out your strategy.  It’s not really worth it to spend 14 IPC so that transport lives and two more units can get to the east before it gets destroyed by the UK.  You have to think about it this way: is there a way to blitz Russia and just take Moscow within the first few turns, no matter what the Allies do?  If the answer is no, and it is according to what I’ve seen, then you’re going to have to trade units with Russia and fight over territory to win.  What are the most cost-efficient units to lose?  Infantry.  Does Germany have enough to start with to trade with Russia for the rest of the game?  No way.  What units take the most time to get to the eastern front?  Infantry.  So you need to build mostly infantry in the beginning so they have enough time to walk east and become useful by turn 3-4.  Another thing to think about is “Can Germany afford to both compete with a UK/US navy arms war AND a full land unit build by Russia at the same time?”  If you’re only planning on buying a carrier and then giving up on your navy investment, then why spend the IPC on starting the arms war in the first place?  Just having the starting transport live another round isn’t worth the expenditure of the equivalent of 4 land units.  Otherwise, if you plan on continuing to buy navy, then how is Russia going to be stopped from marching west?  Germany just doesn’t have the resources to invest in both, at least not unless they are left alone to fight Russia for a while.

In terms of cost-efficiency, it goes Land > Air > Navy.  So why not defend the Atlantic front with Land and Air units, and let the Allies pour their money in buying Navy and Air to invade with, since they have to?  You’ll be able to hold onto your IPCs and territories the longest that way.

2. I prefer to take Baltic States and EPL hard, so Russia can’t counterattack those.  Then I have 6 ARM, 2 ART and a bunch of INF pointing at Karelia next turn.  Russia’s best move is to 1-man it and trade it with me for a turn or two.  The rest depends on what the other Allies are doing.

3. I kill 2, 6, and 12 to get rid of as much navy as I can.  UK will rebuild, but it will delay their ability to build transports.  Additionally, after turn 1, I build 1 air unit/turn to keep threat over the Atlantic and for mobile attack/defense.  Pretty standard German strategy, I think.

@Funcioneta:

A units (not money) bid to allies (Yunnan mainly, but maybe also India) is needed. Deleting a couple of starting trannies for Japan would be also good

Yeah, it would be very nice if Japan wasn’t able to go crushcrushcrush all over India and China in the first two turns.  I thought the strangest thing between the two setups is that they give Japan 5 transports in 1941, but only 1 in 1942.  1942 was supposed to be the peak of their power, wasn’t it?  I’d say somewhere around 3 trannies to start in both scenarios would be about right.

@KindWinds:

Karelia G1 Attack

For my own play, I’ve rejected this as an inferior G1 opening.  Big problem I see here is that you’re giving the UK too many IPCs.  This is handing them 27 IPC of ships, and a 11 IPC territory for a turn (using NOs), adding an additional 5 IPC for the US if Italy doesn’t retake it.  The UK is going to be able to have a fully floating fleet on UK1 in SZ7, and can build just transports and men from turn 2 out, with about 40 IPC on UK2 given that they take France.  Also, you’re not at least strafing Egypt… I think Italy needs to have their 2nd NO ASAP if they’re going to be of much use in defending their own fleet from extermination, and also Western Europe later on.  In addition, the US can do things like perch a fleet in SZ12 by US2, shuttling units to Algeria while also threatening Italy’s fleet (which will be small since they didn’t get their 2nd NO quickly) and a one-two against France with the UK.  With all of these threats, Axis is going to get spread thin really quickly, and it has every time I’ve seen this used.

@wodan46:

The central concept is that Britain loads units onto American transports one turn, then the following turn lands troops using both the American and British transports, then on the same turn land the American troops brought over by the transports in the first place.  This allows a huge One-Two punch against Western Europe.

This is works mainly if Axis doesn’t sink the UK Battleship/Transport and West US Destroyer/Transport, if they do, a different plan may be advisable.

Before Turn X: Britain focuses on getting an intact fleet with maybe 3 transports.  America builds 3 transports, and pulls its Pacific Fleet to the Atlantic.
Turn X: American Transports reach Britain and land a bunch of American troops there.  Britain builds a bunch of Ground Units.  America builds Bombers
Turn X+1: British Ground Units board American transports.  Britain builds Ground Units.  America builds Bombers.
Turn X+2: Britain invades Western Europe using both American and British Transports.  America then drops all their Infantry and Bombers into Western Europe.  Britain builds ground units.
Turn X+3: Take Germany, by first suiciding the British forces, then hitting it with the American forces.

X is ideally turn 2.  If you wait till Turn 3, you get the Pacific fleet as well.  Doing so lets you use 5 American Transports and 3 British Transports, meaning that you land 16 troops, then 10 troops, with air support.  For naval defense, you have something like 3 Carrier groups, 3 Destroyers, and a Battleship.  US goes to SZ18(Brazil), then SZ7(English Channel).

I think this is pretty interesting… it does put tremendous amounts of pressure on Germany very quickly.  The only thing I don’t like is that Italy will be able to dump max units per round into France at around the time that this is going to be ready to go, so I’m not totally sure that France will actually be able to be taken if Germany and Italy are doing their jobs with throwing units into the defense.  But anyway, the ship convoy can be redirected to other purposes if D-Day seems impractical (Algeria, Poland, or Scandinavia).  I’m going to try it the next time I play as the Allies and see how it goes, thanks for the idea. =)

@chunksoul:

subs turn 1 for america to kill italian fleet turn 4

even building more fleet every turn it can’t survive

then bring american fleet underneath

Just wondering, how exactly do you get the fleet of subs close enough?  If I see 6 subs off EUS on A1, I’m going to take the Italian fleet back to SZ14 and build 2-3 DDs per turn.  You see, the problem is that you can’t get the subs close enough, because if they go to SZ12, I’m just going to move my fleet there and make them defend.  If you scatter, then I’m just going to block with 1 DD, or take out the front sub with DD+FIG.  There’s nothing you can do to get close enough to the Italian fleet, I can just stall the subs forever and keep building more DD.  If the point is just to lure me out to SZ12 so you can hit the fleet with a plane strike, well, ok, you’ll probably kill the fleet, but at the cost of a bunch of subs and planes.  I’ll take this trade at turn 4+, the fleet has done its job and now it’s all up to Japan.  I still think a surface fleet is the only real way to get the job done on the Italian navy in any sort of cost-efficient manner.

Personally, I like this (for LL, though):

Purchase: 8 INF
Baltic States: 3 INF, 1 FIG from KAR (likely to be taken with 1 INF, 1 FIG remaining, or just 1 FIG
Belorussia: 3 INF from Archangel; 1 BMB from Russia (likely to be taken with 1 INF, 1 BMB remaining)
E. Ukraine: 1 ARM from Archangel; 3 INF, 1 ART, 2 ARM from Russia; 2 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM from Caucuses

With this deployment, there is no counterattack possible by Germany against E. Ukraine or Caucuses, since you’re moving the 2 INF on Kazakh, both planes, and 4 new INF on Caucuses.  So, Russia should be able to hold onto all starting hardware.  Karelia will be abandoned, retreating the AA gun to Archangel.  You weren’t going to be able to hold onto that for too long anyway.

@Cmdr:

bear in mind this was written about 80 games ago when I was even less experienced than I am now (since no one is ever a master, certainly not until a year has gone by) but the original idea was to leave France with only an infantry (forcing England to attack it with more than an infantry) and build up infantry and armor with Germany to follow up your attack with Russia

Italy would be responsible for liberating and eventually preventing the fall of France.

That was the original idea.

Ah, ok.  I haven’t played too many games as yet, but it seems to me a bit too strong for UK if they’re able to get that extra income for even just one turn - it seems they would use it to build a bunch of extra men and transports to threaten again next turn, etc.

Instead of taking Karelia, I use an interesting allocation of German units that accomplishes two things: 1) Ensure that any counterattack by Russia on R1 against German starting tanks are long-odds fights, and 2) Have all 6 starting tanks in range of Karelia on G2.

Allocation:
Ukraine: 3 INF from Bulgaria; 1 FIG from Poland
East Poland: 2 INF from Poland; 1 ART, 2 ARM from Bulgaria
Baltic States: 2 INF, 1 ART, 2 ARM from Poland, 1 INF, 1 ART from Germany, 2 ARM from Czechoslovakia

The downside to that allocation is that the southern part of the front is going to be held pretty weakly until the G1 buys start showing up.  Therefore, it is Italy’s job to push a few units east to stand on Bulgaria until they can be replaced with German units, at which time the Italian units will be in a good position to be taken away by transports anyway.

@Funcioneta:

Well, first, LL and NOs but no tech is a very rare ruleset (or at least one I’m not very used). LL alters the game totally, maybe even more than playing without tech. LL, in 1st place, let Germany try that karelian gambit without so much risk as in normal games, but it goes more far. Trades and such are changed dramatically, and also strafing.

True that it’s a much different ruleset than HL, with tech, and whatnot.  I don’t think it’s super-rare though.

@Funcioneta:

Anyway, in any case, assuming 1941, India IC is not possible. Not with 5 starting trannies, because, it will lead to a secure lose of the IC in round 3 as much (even more secure because we are talking about LL. In the long run, also Australia is doomed and maybe I’d attack 1st australian IC and then India IC. Soviets are the only hope for India, because there are no more chinese aid in north as in Revised (Japan should kill China J1, and it’s even easier with LL (you only have to attack Yunnan with 3 inf, 1 fig to take the territory), but soviets will be too busy defending from that german IC in Karelia to send something valuable to India

I don’t really see that both ICs are a definite loss, as long as the Allies are aggressive enough about advancing.  Assuming Japan did something standard on turn 1 (after all, they didn’t know that a KJF would be planned beforehand, so they would probably not distribute their resources in such a way as to slow down their IPC growth but discourage a KJF because they would be behind in a KGF game).  US sending fighters and then advancing their fleet towards the south Pacific should be enough to protect Australia on J2 from everything I can see on the board.  In terms of India, if Russia sends 2 INF, and then the 1 INF from Burma, the 2 INF from T-J, and then the FGT from Egypt if it survives, and we are talking a total of 3 + 1 + 2 + 2 = 8 INF, 1 ART, 3 ARM, 1 FGT standing on India on the start of J3.  Some of those ARM can be FGT if it’s completely necessary.  If that’s even not enough, R can send another INF or 2 on R1 to hold down India - R will fall to G eventually, but they are just trying to survive long enough for the Allies to incapacitate J.  I don’t see the necessary Japanese resources to take that down without sacrificing something important, like FGT to defend their fleet with, or protection of SZ62 transports.

@Funcioneta:

But the thing I see worst with this strat is that leaves too freedom to western axis. Without Atlantic fleet, Germany can buy fleet and make a try against England (1 AC, 1 trannie is enough to divert ressources of any Australian IC that could survive). Soviets will be toasted in no time and also UK’s income (losing Africa). A interesting move for Axis would be moving the italian fleet to Pacific, but italian boats can instead try Sea Lion, Brazil or any other sneaky strat they imagine

UK will have to be ready for a Sealion at any time, which is a bit scary, I’ll admit, but not impossible to defend against if they crank INF on first sign of aggression.  In any case, US will be the big power in the Pacific, UK is just there to lend to the defense during the first few turns until US is powerful enough by itself.  UK will lose Africa, yes.  R will eventually fall, yes.  But they will also start gaining back the Southern Pacific islands around turn 4 or so with solid Allied play, I believe.  The IPC of those islands total up most of Africa.  Then, once Japan is completely defeated/neutered, the Allies can take back Africa and begin going after a super-powered Germany/Italy.  US and UK will gain NOs from Philippines and taking an originally-controlled territory by Japan, which will help them quite a bit.

@RogertheShrubber:

After that, if the canadian fleet is still there as well, you can espect a landig in france with a tank, 2 inf, and art, along with BB support and a loaded carrier for trny support for the NO

Yeah, losing France for Karelia is definitely an unfavorable trade.  And you won’t even get to keep it till next turn, so you can’t really say you’re getting an AA gun.  Add that to the possibility of losing 1-2 FIG and it just seems like a blunder.

My friend and I were doing some brainstorming this weekend over how a KJF strategy would work in this version of the game (using NOs and LL).  Here is what we came up with.  Let me know if you think either of us missed anything major.

R1. Depends heavily on G1, but if G is going for Karelia like they should, R can try to aggressively defend/retake it until the G1 builds start to arrive, at which point it’s a lost cause and they will have to retreat to the Archangel/Moscow/Caucuses line.  Send about 2 INF towards India for the defense.
J1. Standard 31/10 IPC J1 turn, build 2 ARM, 1 TRN.
UK1. UK throws the starting Australia DD into the New Guinea SZ to decrease threat of invasion by J on Australia on J2.  If the G Baltic transport is by itself, UK hits it with the bomber and send the 2 FIG to WCAN, otherwise the FIG and BMB hit the Baltic fleet together.  What remains of the Atlantic fleet (probably just a DD and TRN) starts heading to the Pacific.  Evacuate T-J and buff up India, sending along the Egypt FIG as well if it lived.  UK1 build is 2 IC(!), one for India and one for Australia, save the other 13 IPC.
US1. US goes surface fleet build in the Pacific (maybe BB, CR, DD looks good), sends 2 FIG to Australia, and sends the Atlantic fleet through Panama.  2 BMB stand on WUS to defend the nearby SZ.

J2. With the standard J1 turn we use, J is not really in position to take Australia, India, or Hawaii on J2 given the current map situation.  After calcing odds, anything near WUS is deadzone due to the somewhat scattered nature of the Japanese fleet and the US fleet + bombers nearby.  The best move we see is moving 2 CV into the SZ near FIC and starting a 4-6 land units/turn shuck from Japan.  Since it seems that any threats that Japan can raise against Australia can be defended against by sending additional US FIG, the biggest goal we see for J is to try to pressure Asia and India for as long as possible while the Allies are catching up in fleet size.  J2 build is something like 3 ART, BB, DD, or possibly 3 ARM, BB, SS, or some other similar combination of ships/land units.
UK+US2. UK is going to build 3 ARM in India and start a Pacific fleet this turn.  If the 2 UK FIG are on WCAN, they can build a CV and land the FIG on it this turn.  US should now feel safe in moving its fleet and 2 BMB to Solomon, so long as their new ship builds will be safe from J’s FIGs.  The goal is to move the combined Allied fleet to Caroline on T3, thus forcing J to end the shuck to FIC and combine its fleet in SZ62 on J4, or attack with inferior odds.  Both outcomes are good for the Allies, as the former allows them to start taking southern Asia and the southern Pacific islands starting on T4.  It seems that Japan can maintain a defensive fleet in the Sea of Japan (up to 5 CVs in the water along with DDs to stop subs is a ton of defense) until around turn 6 before the Allies have enough punch to take them out.  This is about the same time that G and I have began to put some serious hurt on R and Africa.

@Sergente_nella_neve:

In my experiences, UK doesn’t take France because Germany had already destroyed UK’s fleet. So, in my opinion, Italy could buy 1 TRN + 1 INF, then unload troops to Egypt or Trans-Jordan with the sustain of the 2 cruisers, while the BB should rest in SZ 14 to protect the newly bought transport. During NCM, FIG from Italy should land in Lybia, from where it can move to all territories in which Italy could combat in I2.

But overall, it all depends if you play with National Objectives or not.

Yeah, I like that build and move if it’s possible, and it usually is.  Especially if the Allies appear to be prepping for a KIF, Italy will need to push as many troops into Africa as possible before the Med fleet is extinguished.  I think the 2 INF, 1 ART build is probably the second best.  This is with NOs on, btw.

@Cmdr:

Jennifer’s Basic German Strategy Guide for 1941:

1)  Amphibiously assault Karelia.  You should get it every time with various losses, once I even got it without loss, which was a fun game!

Cost analysis:
-3 Infantry, -1 Fighter: Cost 19 IPC
Destroy 5 Infantry, 1 Artillery: Benefit: 19 IPC
Capture AA Gun: +6 IPC
Collect for Land: +2 IPC
Collect for National Objective: +5 IPC

Net: +13 IPC (+7 if you don’t consider taking the AA Gun into account.)

Well, you didn’t mention your specific allocations and buys, but if you attack Karelia on G1 and leave that extra Transport and Battleship, what all are you defending France with?