Posts made by KGrimB

You don’t need to abandon the Pacific if your goal is Calcutta on J4. Calcutta normally falls J4 through the natural progression of your first few buys.

It is important to keep track of your transports. You can purchase 3 of them J1. An artillery is included as well

If you follow a traditional J1 attack you control the following at the end of the turn:

• FIC
• Kwangtung
• Phillipines
• Borneo
• a few northern chinese zones

you don’t control:

• Yunnan

Your transports are at:
2x phillipines
1x borneo
3x Japan

and most of your planes are in Kwangsi

On J2 you buy:

• a factory for FIC
• navy to contest the US and Anzac + more ground units on Tokyo

Your transports in the south Pacific spread out and each take a DEI so that you collect your objective J2.
Your transports in SZ 6 sail down and unload in FIC

Using your aircraft and surrounding ground units you take and hold Yunnan J2. This often requires attacking Szechwan as well.

Additionally 2 of your bombers in Kwangsi attack the India factory.
Send 2 submarines in SZ 35 to convoy SZ 37

Now at end of J2 turn you additionally control:

• DEI
• Yunnan
• Factory in FIC with reinforcements unloaded from Tokyo

Your 6 transports are at:

• 1x Sumatra
• 1x Java
• 1x Celebes
• 3x FIC

J3 you buy:
3 bombers at FIC
naval to contest USA and Anzac + transports / ground units to continue invasion of China, defend DEI, prepare for invasion of Australia

You attack and hold Burma (units that landed in FIC can be picked up w/ 3x transports and brought to assist in this fight)
You attack and hold Malaya (3x transports in DEI + some air can secure Malaya)
You bomb the factory in India again and land in FIC
Move subs in SZ 37 to SZ 39
Kill any remaining UK Pacific Navy and ensure small planes are landed in Yunnan (optional shan state if you have spare units) or Carriers within range of India

UK Pacific should have ~ 5 to spend on defense, their factory has been destroyed twice, and they were convoyed in SZ 37 UKPac 2 and SZ 39 UKPac 3

J4 you buy:
irrelevant to India attack

You attack India with:

• land units based in Burma (feel free to load them on transports and land in India)
• bombardments from battleships and cruisers
• land units based in Malaya (same units that hit DEI J2, these pieces have been moving)
• up to 6 carrier based aircraft
• up to 13 short range aircraft based in Yunnan or Shan State
• 5 bombers based in FIC

You should have more than or about an equal number of planes as India has infantry. (Plus an additional ~20 ground units)

Even if you get really unlucky against AA guns, India cannot defend against this sort of attack without assistance from the European board.

Your total investment is:

J1 - 25
J2 - 12
J3 - 36
J4 - 0

This should give you roughly 120 to spend on other areas of the board as you see fit. If it is all navy you can delay the US from making significant progress while you wait for your navy to return.

J4 is a logical timing because it follows your 3 starting transports:
J1 you attack borneo and the phillipines
J2 you attack the DEI
J3 you attack Malaya
J4 you attack India

It is a very natural expansion.

So as far as what to buy J3 and J4 while your pieces on the board carry out their orders I normally recommend:

• Land units on Tokyo
• Aircraft in Tokyo
• Additional Aircraft Carriers
• Destroyers to block US fleet movement
• Naval Base in Hainan
• Transports to keep the empire well supplied with Infantry

Its really up to you and how the board progresses. The J4 attack is mostly comprised of starting units.

If you encounter delays due to bad luck or countries coming to the aid of India you can normally secure India J6 which is the turn the Infantry in Manchuria can arrive by marching.

@Snigg:

@Tirano:

So if an Italian tank is in Italian controlled Egypt, Trans-Jordan is British controlled and has no units in it, and Iraq has not been activated, on Italy’s turn may their tank from Egypt to Trans-Jordan and into Iraq to activate it?

No.  Moving into Trans-Jordan has to happen during combat movement phase, and moving into Iraq would happen on non-combat movement phase.  The tank can’t move in both phases.

So you could capture Trans Jordan with another Italian unit during combat move and then move the tank to Iraq in non combat. That way the tank is still where you want it to be at the end of turn, you control both territories, and Iraq infantry will be activated.

The first thing I noticed about your board state is how thin you appear to be spread. You need more ground units to reinforce your frontlines and overwhelm the Russians in the East. Additionally without an air force or credible naval threat you will be powerless to stop allied landings. Therefore, I would say you have 3 main problems to address.

1. Center Russian front.
Your invading armies have been pushed to their peripheral factories while your center drive appears to have been extinguished. If you plan to win by conquering Russia you need more ground units built in Germany, Romania, and Leningrad marching east. You need Infantry and Mech to provide cheap units to defend your expensive tanks. Infantry can be built closer to the front while mech can be bought in Germany. Once you accumulate a greater number of units than your opponent you will be able to make safer attacks. Russia will win the current war of attrition unless you adapt your purchases.

2. Baltic and North Atlantic front.
Retaking Norway needs to be a priority. You risk a landing in Germany if you lose control of the Danish strait. Additionally without it you are -8 ipcs. Your troops in Leningrad risk being surrounded at the same time. A transport or two would let you not only easily retake Norway with an invasion force built in W. Germany, but also would provide a reliable way to reinforce your units in Leningrad. Make sure you have enough surface fleet to discourage those allied fighter planes from sinking your transports. You can move 2 infantry and 2 artillery from Paris to W. Germany.

3. Airforce
The allied fleet is either going to make a landing in Europe that you can’t repel or get sunk by you. The planes lost in Leningrad need to be replaced because aircraft are essential to fighting across Europe. Aircraft assist in attacks, protect your navy with scrambles, defend your factories from bombing, and have enough movement to be where they are needed each turn.

If you have 56 ipcs this turn my recommendation for stabilizing the board and turning this into a winning scenario would be:

Leningrad - 3 infantry (9ipcs)
Romania - 3 infantry (9ipcs)
W.Germany - fighter (10ipcs)
SZ 113 - destroyer, sub, 2 transports (28ipcs)

total = 56.

What this allows you to do is:
Begin to stabilize your forces in your factories. They are at serious risk of being overwhelmed. A gradual build up of infantry and artillery will help you.
By moving 2 inf and 2 art to W. Germany from Paris, A new fleet in SZ 113 can either drop them off in Norway the following turn, or send them to reinforce Leningrad.
The fighter plane increases your defensive scramble in SZ 113 against British air and begins the process of rebuilding your air units.

Additionally a gradual increase in your number of submarines and aircraft will allow you to attack the allied fleets in the Atlantic or even the Med using S. France. You’ve made some territorial gains this game, but are running out of steam. You need ground units to get the job done. You should consider building mech when possible in Germany.

I agree with what you are saying. My play in the other game was not optimal, but even if you don’t kill it in SZ 110 it eventually becomes something that you need to address as Germany. You can skip it T1 if you make other appropriate movements, but you can’t ignore those pieces the entire game. Hitting them G1 just gives you more initiative.

I think the biggest problem with not attacking SZ 110 is that it puts Germany on the defensive as a result.

I had developed a similar strategy using mech and aircraft to take all of France and SZ 93 while clearing SZ 111 and SZ 106. GB had 1 transport in the Atlantic and a bunch of boats that couldn’t threaten me, yet. I say yet because there were problems I did not expect that I encountered sooner than expected. The British player made a massive fleet in SZ 109 and 4 of my planes were out of position in Northern and Southern Italy. My purchases turn 1 and turn 2 were geared towards Russia, but I still had a massive threat to the West. I made a very costly attack on turn 2 against that SZ and as a result had to spend most of turn 3 rebuilding my air force rather than additional units for Russia. This threw off timings for Moscow and my attack originally scheduled for turn 6 was delayed until turn 8. I was not able to threaten Egypt in time before the Allies had wrapped up in the Pacific and closed the door on a European win.

So, in my experience while the fleet in SZ 110 is not gamechanging on its own, its survival provides Britain the resources it needs to prepare an invasion fleet or expedite the demise of Italy. German planes don’t want to be sinking battleships all day. If you keep your airforce in W.Germany and sink SZ 110 and SZ 111, any ships the British player builds risk annihilation even with a 3 plane scramble. When you leave those big pieces on the board they provide the backbone needed that requires Germany to invest in nvay to attack the fleet because air alone is too costly. If their fleet is comprised of destroyers and transports you can decimate it. But if not it quickly becomes something that you cannot contest and maintain pressure on Russia with.

The 110 fleet won’t be making any big moves, but it forces Germany to react to where it goes and either strike it in defense of Italy or ward it off. Instead on T1 you can sink it proactively and force the British player to react to what you do instead of the other way around. Germany goes first each turn and needs to be able to dictate the tempo of the game. It cannot do that when an invasion force arrives 4 turns ahead of schedule.

@Charles:

This is a very good question.  I often see new players get frustrated when someone pulls a sneaky move on them, or their plans get ruined by a small technicality in rules.  The key is not to play for them, but make them think with probing questions:

“Is this fighter going to do anything this turn?”
“Are your AA guns going to sit on Holland all alone?”
“How are you going to deal with that Italian cruiser and battleship?”
“Wow, did you know that four planes can scramble to protect Sea Zone 109?”
“Are these guys in Australia going to just sit around while Japan eats my China?”
“Can you try to knock out that ANZAC destroyer and transport so they don’t take Brazil?”
“What if Japan built an airbase on Kwangsi?”
“Do you think you could successfully kill both British fleets?”
“Whatcha gonna to do if my French AA gun kills three of your planes?”

There are to ways to subtly point out a possible problem by requesting the destruction of a certain enemy force as a teammate or making a somewhat cheeky comment as the enemy: “You’ll be ‘rekt’ by my Luftwaffe, hehe.”

Another good one is to simply point out the units that the new player is forgetting to move:  “Are those guys in South Africa going AWOL?”

When suggesting strategy, don’t make specifics.  Instead, argue a certain theory:  “I think that Italy can become a beast if at least two of its transports survive.”

This might be needles to say, but don’t belittle anyone or give the blame for anything.  Although you should never go easy on new players (the hard way is the best way to learn), take an active interest in adapting to your opponents’ weaknesses by trying new strategies yourself.

As a teammate, point out enemy weaknesses and tell your buddies where they are not defended well enough.  Strike up conversations about advanced tactics such as blocking, blitzing, and bridging.  If possible, introduce them to the shorthand of calculating odds: “With six tanks, you should average three hits on the first round because…”

I really like Grim’s idea to try to speed up turns.  Getting bored because of delays is sure to make your new players angry, especially if they wait an hour just to get diced in the battle they engaged in.  Strongly stress the randomness of battles and the fact that nothing is guaranteed.  Give them the analogy that although it is the general (them) who decides operations, it is the troops who have to do the fighting; the dice represent this.

And most importantly, have fun and keep a fun atmosphere ever present.  Tell WW2 jokes.  Play some GI Jive in the background.  Talk about future games and ways to improve.  Rolplaying and comraderie among teammates is sure to brighten the dark days on 1940.

That is a really good tip for new players. Helping them learn about the uses of facilities and factories. Sometimes new players over rely on factories instead of transports so that would be something helpful to address as well.

One of the biggest things that throws off newer players in my experience is aircraft range. Specifically airplanes flying in one direction. When a plane from london suddenly strikes something in the Mediterranean instead of defending around the channel that will surprise someone. When a bomber from California threatens most of the Pacific Ocean and the North Atlantic that will be harder for players to comprehend. New players almost always think about planes in terms of return flights rather than landing in distant far away territory. They are more inclined to fight a Battle of Britain than a Doolittle raid.

Secondly, I would not tell them advanced strategies. I think players learn the game faster by having to respond to their opponent rather than trying to follow a script. A J1 attack is really strong, but a new player might struggle to follow up on the opportunities it creates. However, a new player that goes up against a J1 attack will have to learn how to react quickly which brings me to my next point.

Speed up turns. New players risk getting bored if your turn cycle takes 2 hours before they can get back in the action. It’ll seem weird but try to put players on a timer. They’ll learn quicker and become better at spotting additional units they could have brought to a fight or an area of defense. Mistakes help people learn so let them make mistakes. If you want to avoid large mistakes I would reiterate the victory conditions for each country and emphasize the need to buy units with the future turns in mind rather than the present.

Might be worth mentioning hits on carriers. Players don’t want to lose units in ways they don’t have a say. Advise them to protect transports and their factories. Blocker units are good.

China is like a speedbump to India. You don’t have to flatten them you just have to go ‘over’ them. If Japan can hold a portion of the Burma road, preferably Yunnan, China becomes irrelevant through good infantry positioning. Alternatively, if you can secure Shanghai and Hong Kong, you can focus on the southeast and make more than you lose in Northern China.

Regardless, Japan starts with its VC for China. You’ve already won what you needed there, you just have to stop their ability to effectively harass you. You can eliminate their fighter and men or keep your positions well defended with transport resupply.

I almost never build a factory in a chinese territory unless I’m doing a delayed Japanese attack. A factory in FIC is so much better.

In conclusion, Japan can quickly make China irrelevant which is more effective and less time consuming than defeating them entirely.

G3 DOW Opener

G1 purchase:

• 6 artillery
• 2 infantry

Combat move:

SZ 111:

• 2 submarines (118 & 124)
• 1 fighter (norway)
• 1 tactical (western germany)
• 2 bomber (germany)

SZ 110:

• 2 submarines (103 & 108)
• 3 fighter (holland & western germany)
• 3 tactical (western germany & germany)
• 1 battleship (113)

SZ 106:

• 1 submarine (117)

France:

• 7 infantry (holland & western germany)
• 3 artillery (holland & western germany)
• 1 mech (western germany)
• 1 tactical (poland)
• 5 tank (holland & greater southern germany)

Normandy:

• 3 mech (western germany)
• 1 tank (holland)

Yugoslavia:

• 9 infantry (greater southern germany &  slovakia & romania)
• 2 artillery (greater southern germany)
• 3 tank (poland & slovakia & romania)
• 1 fighter (slovakia) –----------------------------> land in tobruk

Noncombat move:

Finland:
3 infantry (norway)

Bulgaria:
1 infantry (romania)

SZ 113:
1 cruiser (114)
1 transport (114)

Poland:
All units in Germany to Poland

Germany:
2 infantry (denmark) —> by transport

Planes to holland and western germany

Placements: all in Germany

Collect 70 IPCs

This opener:
Expands German income (taking Yugoslavia instead of strafing it)
Clears British Home fleet
Provides German opportunity to attack Greece
Provides additional defense in tobruk on UK1
Leaves Sea Lion open with a transport buy G2
Provides Italy with opportunities to grow their income with Southern France and does not divert Tank in Albania from heading East.

Italians can potentially take Alexandria on I1, reinforced by German air on G2, and capture Egypt I3 after a G3 airstrike.

The plan is a slow concentrated push using the infantry and artillery available early to stack Eastern Poland G3 and move to Bryansk on G5 for a G6 Moscow. Mech and Armor arriving from France and purchased on G2 and G3 can keep up with the stack.

A G2 purchase of 70 IPCs could look like:

• 5 tank (germany)
• 5 mech (germany)
• 1 fighter (western germany)
• 1 sub (112 or 113)
• 1 artillery (france)

The fighter buy replaces the fighter you send to Africa on G1 and I think it is important to buy aircraft and submarines with Germany to delay allied landings. The sub also disrupts the Russian NO for R3. The artillery in France can start a stack to counterattack any coastal landings.

I’ve had 3 wins against different players the past few weeks following this general plan. It becomes very dangerous for Russia to counterattack because you have a larger stack than them, more aircraft, Italian can-openers, and any Russian units that stay too far west can be cut off from having a chance to reinforce Moscow. The overwhelming ground force that you have will force the Russian player to retreat and reduces the number of small infantry casualties you would otherwise suffer. Your air force also has the flexibility to hit Egypt or assist in Russia as long as you buy 1 plane a turn to keep up with your expansion. You are still hitting Moscow G6.

Wow the sub Saharan route is actually feasible. You don’t need to worry about the safety of your transport and if you give Ethiopia to UK1 then your tank should be able to take Iraq with some air power without any difficulty. I think the factory in Iraq is additionally valuable because while you could give the money to UK, together you can produce 6 fighters a turn cycle in the Middle East. UK having a strong grip on the Middle East can save the Allies and I think it is unlikely they would have the production to support 2 factories and 6 units a turn, but the US could easily spend 30 in Iraq each turn.

This strategy would work because there is little opportunity cost to sending a tank US1 and it increases the number of units arriving in Moscow each turn further pushing that battle in the allies favor.

Additionally all of your buys US1-3 are relatively independent (with the exception of maybe some aircraft) of this strategy so while it does take a while to set up, the production of US fighters and UK fighters arriving in Moscow or Calcutta would make the difference in the late game. The remainder of your money could be dedicated to KJF or landings in Europe.

Furthermore, Iraq is connected to SZ 80 and could be used to produce subs for KJF

I don’t think this has been discussed very often so I was wondering if anyone had ever tried to get USA land units into the middle east. I think if it was fast / feasible being able to get a couple of transports of US troops into the Middle East would be useful for protecting Cairo/India or moving north and getting US troops into Russia.

There are 2 paths 1) go through the Med and arrive in Syria 2) go South of Africa and arrive in Persia.

Having a US land army in Russia would help tip the scales against a determined German attack. Has anyone attempted anything like this? Do you have any thoughts in favor of something like this or do you think it is not as optimal as other established US tactics?

This would be instead of landing in Rome or Western Europe. I’m stuck brainstorming because I don’t think you can get more than 1 transport of troops to Persia by US5. Is there a faster route?

@Requester45:

It is more ideal for the Russian player if the Germans move through the north. This takes away less IPC from the Russians, leading to them purchasing more units. From what I have found it is more ideal to draw the Germans into a large stack of Russian infantry and artillery. The power of those large stacks outweighs the power of fewer fast movers.

I will reiterate that this strategy doesn’t work every time. It is more ideal if the German player shows a possibility of Sea Lion on turn 1. However if the German player makes purchases showing a full on Moscow push this strategy becomes more difficult.

Well I think the community has decided Barbarossa is the optimal strategy for Germany. I think if we are going to continue discussing offensive Russian strategies in an attempt to find something more optimal than what is currently standard (fighter reinforcements) in the defense of Russia than we should do the same for our opponents. I think we are making a mistake designing a strategy on the premise our opponent is not playing optimally. It would better to look for ways to fight a German strategy that has a goal to mass in Bryansk G5 rather than a strategy that assumes our opponent buys a sea lion feint as opposed to mobile units / artillery G1.

@Fatespinner:

Hi all,

in our current game (just started) I am playing US + ANZAC + France. I plan to try to Bright Skies strategy. That mean building multiple bombers as the US. The goal is to disrupt Italy and Germany and help UK to get a hold in Europe and hopefully save Russia.

In the pacific I will also use submarines. Here I plan to station the bombers Iwo to use the to threaten SZ6, Japan and the mainland factories and ground forces to support northern China. My fleet will be located in the waters around Iwo, where I will also buy an airfield and station 3 fighters for improved defense against the Japan.

Also I think that there will be no JDOW1, but we will see.

Can this work? Are there any problems that I should be aware of? I am playing US only for the second time and that all strategies can be countered by a good opponent, but as this was never tried in out group before, I might have some success.

First round buy will be carriers and bombers for US.

Your bomber stack can also importantly land in Moscow from Scotland which will allow you to provide extra units to take hits during that battle. I would concentrate at least 40% of your bombers in the Pacific because without a large US navy Japan should be able to hold the money islands for a long time. You have to have a lot of bombers so that you can exert overwhelming power when you attack. Western US is the most flexible place for your bombers while you wait for the board to develop.

@Cornwallis:

The DD is used to kill the russian sub who convoys the entire game + serves to protect any transport ships you might built for a sea lion.
The Japenese 3 TT are used to take the money islands. Off course we don’t attack the russian stack in siberia, that would be stupid. All the things you mention, we do as well. The only thing we don’t always exploit is the strategic bombing of Moscow and India. Do you think this might be a decisive step?

Strategic Bombers not only increase your ability to project power across the board thus forcing the allies to play safer, but they actively limit the number of pieces India and Moscow can put on the board. Strategic Bombers are how you win a battle of attrition instead of getting stuck in a stalemate.

@innohub:

I think it depends….personally I like the variety of strategies R & D brought to the game, on the other side R & D brings more luck factors and it seems to make stronger player even stronger and vice versa.� I forgot the actual rule how token works in G40 but I remember the rule in 50 works pretty well - it’s like you don’t lose all the token if you don’t roll a 6 in 1 turn and you can accumulate which means eventually you would get something out of a research.�

So my suggestion is go with it if both sides agreed to.�

Yeah I would echo this. Play the game you and your playgroup want to play it. The rules present R&D as an alternative to add some variety into games, but my playgroup has usually had a good mix in players trying new things that it seemed unnecessarily complicated. Additionally the potential to lose tech rolls that you miss instead of accumulating them over time can seriously discourage players from buying tech when the game demands more pieces on the board. Try the 50 rules and try the 40 rules and then determine if you like what Research brings to the game and go from there.

@ShadowHAwk:

Dont do a J2 when doing sea lion, this allows US to station troops closer to europe to easy sink your fleet for cheap.
And the 2 extra fighters can make the battle for london that much more expensive.

I agree with that. USA needs to stay out of the war until the turn you do Sea Lion. Otherwise they can smash your fleet without having to worry about the sea zone restrictions. As for a follow up on turn 3, I think Infantry will get the job done. You want to use your major factory to gradually overwhelm Russia’s eastern minors. If you want you could also invest in boats in SZ 110 with a Normandy factory that way your fleet requires more investment from the US to disrupt it.

In your experience, how well does this strategy work if India falls early say J4? If Japan does a focused amphibious landing against India early, by the time the transport shuck has been established only 1 transport shipment of troops will have arrived in the middle east UK4. There is not one strategy that is perfect, but a lot of concern seems to be directed towards Italy’s ability to threaten Egypt. I would counter this argument by saying that the amount of aircraft present in the mediterranean would give the UK the firepower needed to recapture Egypt if it fell. Additionally German aircraft would be out of position and unable to support early attacks in Russia. The real problem this strategy has, as has been identified, is large amphibious landings by the axis. It does not work against sea lion and it does not work against a calcutta crush. Sea Lion is pretty weak, but a naval landing in India is not unheard of.

My criticism is that I don’t think this strategy effectively reinforces India in time. Units moving from Eastern Persia to India are not fast and only 1 or 2 waves could arrive by J6. The incremental advantages gained in the long term from a transport shuck are really strong, but how can you save India with this strategy against determined Japanese attack?

Can you go into detail about some of the games that ended as ties?

@aagamerz13:

@Herr:

My specific reason for buying that sub is, to kill the SZ111 UK battleship G2, while keeping the German battleship alive. On G1, I like to to take out SZ110, but only strafe SZ111, and then retreat the German battleship. Ideally, this would leave the UK with only a damaged battleship in SZ111, and that battleship can’t escape from the range of the German sub and bombers. But I’d rather not loose a bomber when attacking the battleship G2, so that’s where the sub comes in.
If the strafe doesn’t quite go as well - say that the UK cruiser has also survived - then as Germany, I still have a fair chance of killing  both ships with 2 bombers plus the sub if the ships stay together. Or, if they split, I’ll probably just go after the battleship and leave the cruiser alone.

It’s always best to destroy the uk batt G1 even if you lose your own batt uk1.  The allies can easily make it so you either have a low odds fight g2 to destroy the batt or you have to use so many planes to scramble protect you are light in planes for other objectives like the med uk navy counter.  Also, the uk will likely use their destroyer as fodder in the counter against the batt and any surviving subs, which means when u destroy it g2,  if it happened to survive uk1, the sub u purchased g1 can take the 125sz NO from ussr without any counter.  Also, the uk will need to use planes with that destroyer to defeat the fleet left in 111, which means they might go a little light in some med battles, which can open up opportunities there for italy if you have above average dice in those battles.

Are you referring to ignoring sz 110 and instead of strafing 111 you suggest to take it instead?

@simon33:

Yes, but I’m not convinced that it’s worth it G1. If you G3 DOW you can buy it turn two and use the IPCs for artillery which can reach Bryansk G5 but can’t if bought G2. The major thing a ship build G1 allows is defending SZ112 UK1, especially if you strafe SZ111. I usually build a sub for the extra hit though. That also allows blocking the USSR NO indefinitely whereas a DD can be taken out by UK planes.

If the goal is Bryansk on G5 is G3 the optimal turn to DOW? The first reason I think it would be is that all of your fast movers bought turn 2 and artillery turn 1 can attack together. I have heard other people however say that G3 is too late because Russia will be able to defend better and that the purchases are really telegraphing what you are going to do letting England relax. Which of the 3 first turns do you think are best when paired with a J1, assuming the plan is Barbarossa instead of Sea Lion?