I’m also available.
1. DarthMaximus
2. DutchmanD
3. DY
4. DesertJournalist
5. Zygmund
6. Telamon
7. Bigbadgoo
8. SgtBlitz
9. Pin
10. Questioneer
11. TimTheEnchanter
12. Omega
13. Bardoly
14. Gargantua
15. Lynxes
16. Perrys!
17. Joe Cold (if too many, put me in as an alternate please!)
18. KGB
The factory is more efficient than buying 2 trns (to ship 2 units from EUS to Bra every turn), because it’s cheaper and you can send an extra unit (3 instead of 2). The only downside is that it is slightly less flexible than the transports, though you can still reach WE in one turn from sz 18, which should give the Germans a bit more pause in Europe.
I mean losing 2 ground units more than when you send the bomber to Egypt… We’re comparing sending the bomber to Egypt & skipping sz 2 to using ground units only in Egypt and sending the bomber to sz2.
Is it really a disaster if you lose in Egypt? The tradeoff (if you lose, whereas there’s 40% of a draw or better) is losing a German trn and, say, 2 German ground units, versus killing a UK BB and transport… Seems worth it to me.
Well, I never said you could have it all… What do you think is better, having those extra Egypt odds or killing those British ships? Suppose you could also send sub, fig to sz 2, though that is riskier than not having the bomber in Egypt (and you don’t kill the trn if it’s a draw).
So, given that it is a must that the Germans secure the Italian navy, the German player must a) attack egypt b) attack sz12 or c) both
If b or c, then then one obvious cost is not sinking the British battleship+trans, which is both slightly easier to kill than the dest+cruiser, and also a bigger prize.
You can do all three. What I did in my game against DM was:
sz 2: sub (sz 7) + fig (Nwy) + bomber
sz 12: sub (sz 7) + fig (France) + fig (Ger)
Egy: inf, tank (France) + African units
This leaves Egypt a little light (just under 50% to kill the UK fig probably), but you can quite reliably clear out almost all of the UK ships. I don’t think it’s worth it to bypass sz2 only to slightly increase your odds in Egypt or sz 12.
Looking for a game… 41 or 42, with tech, without NO’s… Please PM me if you’re interested.
If you bid low, you are more likely to play the Axis, if you bid high you are more likely to play the Allies. To me, the side I’m playing matters as least as much as 1-2 IPC going one way or the other, so it is something I take into account when placing my bid.
I would never bid higher than 7 in a perfect world. It’s too advantage for axis having a new trannie. But I bid 9 technically to have allies, because if I bid 7 a get axis 90% of times, and I don’t want play the same side again and again.
Then why not bid 8? Then you can play both the Axis and the Allies from time to time, and if you win the bid, you can profit from the unbalancing extra Axis transport ;)
What about bidding a trn to sz 5 (or even a DD, though 12 bids are extremely rare) in combination with buying a bomber+fig on G1 and running the fleet to sz 7? The extra trn will make an air only attack on sz 7 a very risky proposition, and attacking sz 7 with ships or unifying in sz 12 or 8 have other problems.
I’m also up for a game, if you have a link of an updated 41 Battlemap file.
I already find all those cars starting to move at the command of a signal ‘strange’ enough…
An endless source of intestering news :) Will have to find something else to follow now lol
On Germany 1, a good player tried buying 5 tanks and an IC in Ukraine after I had bad dice on R1. Didn’t work out in that game however.
If Russia does WRu/Ukr you can stack Kar even without a European bid in most games. Even if Russia has good odds attacking it, its still a good move since Germany can afford to replace its losses whereas Russia can’t.
The problem with an India IC on turn 1 is that you have to commit before any dice are rolled in the East, and I feel that Asian ICs (and perhaps KJFs in general) only well if Japan gets bad dice on UK1 and/or J1. Building an IC in Sinkiang won’t stop Japan from capturing India on Japan 3 as outlined in the CSub paper. But this is a bit off-topic probably blush
The Brazilian IC has always fascinated me as an approach to (re)claim Africa - it allows the Allies to approach Sub-Saharan Africa from the sea like the Axis (Japan) can from the other side, and you don’t have to walk through the troublesome Alg-Lyb-Egy route (which takes too long and exposes your units to an Axis attack in Egypt if you don’t invest significant forces there). Furthermore, in a KGF is not as much at risk as a South African IC, to which Japan can pose a highly annoying threat by parking its fleet with 2+ transports in sz 34.
I’m not too interested in using it as part of a US Mediterranian approach - in those games, the US will probably be able to muscle the Germans out of Africa anyway and the German Sub-Saharan presence may be neutralized by moving 2 transports from sz 12 to the Congo seazone once. Rather, its possibilities of acting as a stand-alone unit to secure Africa for the Allies appeal to me. I’ve come up with 2 approaches.
1 - KJF
I feel that in a KJF, the Allies must find a solution to deal with the African problem. If Germany gets it they can cash in ~50 ipc per turn and the UK will be piss poor, which will make it very hard to preserve Russia long enough. If Germany cannot be kept out of Africa, KJF may only be viable if Japan gets extremely bad dice in the first turn.
If the UK counters Egypt (or Germany only takes Egypt with 1 unit), ship all EUS ground units, the bomber (which is usually not needed in the first few KJF turns anyway) and perhaps also the EUS fig to Brazil and set the UK up to wipe out the German Med Fleet on UK 2 (the AC to Kenyan seazone and 2 figs within 3 steps of sz 15/16). On US 2, you can ship the Brazilian forces to Congo to join up with the British SAF inf, a force the maximum 4 German ground units in Egypt will find hard to defeat, and even if they do you can reinforce Africa (from the Brazil IC), and they can’t. The downsides of course are that countering Egypt is not the best way to pressure Japan with the UK and that the extra cost of supplying the IC will slow down the US advance in the Pacific, making this more of a ‘Kill Everyone First’ :-D
2 - KGF
The setup is about the same as in the KJF case, only this time you don’t dump ships off the West Coast but set up a 3x3 shuck to Norway/Karelia. This would make it much easier to establish a stack in Karelia. Without US help, the UK often has to contend itself with some minor annoyances to Germany or dumping units in Norway, whereas an allied stack in Kar can largely or almost entirely free up Russia to focus on Japan (something they can do very effectively the way Japan’s three mini-fronts are set up). This advantage combined with the speed of the Norway route compared to the Mediterranian one has made me favour the Norway route in theory, but how do you reclaim Africa then? I know there are other ways, but this might be interesting as well.
What bothers me here is the possibility of Japan sneaking up on that IC and its lightly protected fleet (2 trn, DD). Would you as Japan swing your fleet (or part of it) around South America if you saw such an approach, or would you think it’s not worth it?
I’m curious to hear whether these ideas are actually viable or rather something that only sounds nice in theory :-P Feel free to shoot at will!
Rolling 1d6: