Posts made by Saber25

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris I had the same reaction, and I’m pretty new haha.

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris Totally agreed regarding carriers being superior. I didn’t see that he still had the BB in 109, so definitely no need for another. I usually make sure my fleets have one BB. I have mixed feelings on subs in this scenario. In general I usually think they’re close to the best offensive naval piece, but I wonder if building subs could be less helpful than usual given the need to defend against air raid. Subs would definitely help kill the Italian fleet though. Appreciate the critiques, always glad to learn from more experienced folks!

@trulpen As things currently stand, if he leaves the air on Gibraltar (not sure if he would given he likely needs them in the east), you’re going to need a rather large navy to protect your transports and contest Gibraltar. Things are looking dark in the med. That need may be even larger if Italy neglects a Cairo attack, fortifies Gibraltar, and begins to build a strong navy. When I play allies, I try to figure out what my sort of meta-strategy is, given that the British, US and Anzac all seem to work in concert, albeit in different theaters of war. Obviously you have to play the field that you can see, but I still think it is important to have long term goals in play then adjust them as needed. I think your US buys are alright. I can’t think of anything better to do at the moment unless you want to bomber spam to cause Germany deployment problems, but ultimately that would leave getting boots on the ground to UK, which is totally possible. A few ideas I have off the cuff, I will admit I haven’t calculated odds or long term ramifications, just some spit-balling, feel free to shoot me down hard, like I said I am somewhat new! :)

1. Buff UK navy (a carrier and maybe another BB), occupy outside of Gibraltar, and in a few turns try a Spanish beachhead for USA
2. Minor facility in Cairo: As I mentioned earlier, I personally disagreed with your UK1, but to each their own. It seems to me that Italy could use a swift kick in the pants, and moving some of that navy back into the med could help that. Conversely, you could move them towards calcutta
3. Bomber spam US sending them towards UK to bomb Germany and italy back to the stone age in concert with building a large UK fleet (enough to fend off Luftwaffe and at least 4 troop transports. invade normandy, then shuck 8 infantry into the territory every turn, hopefully giving you enough to eventually liberate France and hold it if things go super well.
4. US super spams Japan, building everything pacific in concert with Anzac navy buff, try to KJF strat. Personally not wild about this, but given you already seem to have forced them into naval buys, if you keep it up, calcutta will stay up longer and give you a chance to do some real damage on the mainland between Britain and China.

Like I said, totally off the cuff ideas, like them, hate them, ignore them, whatever floats your boat! Happy hunting my friend.

Seems straightforward enough to me.

Maybe keeping up there slows down Japan though? But at what cost…?

It seems to me that they don’t have much support and there is already a lot of Japanese infantry up there. They won’t really be able to be used offensively without additional aid, but they could stop you from hemorrhaging points in the far east. On the converse, it seems like there is a chance they make it back to Moscow, and that is a big addition to your man power meat shield. I usually like to pull them back, but that’s just my two cents.

I like the all infantry buys for Russia. That is what has personally worked for me in my last few games. I don’t really have any understanding of can-openers or Italy’s role in Russia though. Are you planning to pull the eastern troops back or threaten the Japanese north in a few turns?

Discovered this game tonight, and found it to be very interesting analysis for a newer player such as myself. (But learning fast! Played 3 games on board and 7 online in last month! I have caught the bug lol). The biggest thing I personally disagree with so far was UK in the med. My usual UK1 is Taranto, Ethiopia, take Persia, fall back to cairo from Alexandria, drop the facility in Cairo if there is less Sea-lion threat depending on my bid. If Sea-lion threat is strong, I will do like a few infantry and a fighter in London. I don’t go heavy defense because I’m not convinced sealion is actually effective even if it is successful due to the threat of US counter. Rest of IPC going to either UK navy (where depends on what is dead/what ran away, either Canada, 109, etc). Just my two sense, and I am kind of new so take it with a grain of salt. Really enjoying the show y’all. Keep it up! :)

Thanks for all the advice folks. In our current game, we just finished turn 8. I’ve lost all ground forces in Europe as the US due to a tragically poor roll in Italy. Calculator had my odds at 89% victory. I have a large stack of Russians (72 infantry, 20ish tanks +11 artillery) about to massacre about 40 German infantry in Leningrad. I turtled as Russia and it worked wonders and am now pushing back out. As to Japan, Calcutta fell turn 6 this game, China is dead as of turn 7. With my combined Anzac and US fleets cycling between Queensland and Hawaii, I have +1 net carrier on japan (he has 10, I have 9). He made the mistake of invading Africa without sufficient naval power and a British battleship and a bit of my med fleet seem to have controlled the bleeding down there, but may lose Middle East. I feel like Russia doesn’t have the men to take Germany down, as japan is nibbling them from behind, and they will surely take heavy losses in their upcoming engagement. Though Uk has Normandy and a large force in Greece, German production in Romania and Western Germany has them stonewalled. I fear that japan will move his forces to Carolina islands next and then force me to either hit him or choose between defending Anzac or Hawaii. Thanks for the tips; I’ll try to put them into practice next time I’m Allies, which will be 2 games for us!

TLDR; Europe stalemate/slight advantage, Pacific looks bad.

I’m on the newer side of Global 40 2nd edition. We have played three games so far. The first one was an outlier where no one knew anything and Germany steamrolled. Since adding a bid (34 points- Russia 2 fighters, 2 artillery, Britain sub for Taranto), in games 2-3 I’ve been the allies. I can’t seem to stop Japan. They’re averaging a turn 7-8 sack of Calcutta, but afterwards their navy swells to an absurd size and the US and Anzac fleets combined can’t hold them back leading to a Pacific Victory. My current strategies have managed to stop Germany’s advance into Russia the last two times (gets Leningrad but not Ukraine)but I really think this has been down to the two axis players being significantly out of sync on their DOWs. I’m not sure if I’m over committing on the Atlantic side with the USA, or playing poorly with China/India/Anzac. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

@AndrewAAGamer This is hilarious given the current bids I have been playing due to lack of knowledge. On a 34 bid, I’ve done 2 artillery and 2 fighters for the Russians, and a sub for Britain in the med to help with Taranto. Taranto has become a sure thing basically unless Germany hard threatens sealion, but Russia still can’t seem to hold more than 9 turns except in one fluke game where my opponent left 13 infantry and an artillery alone for me to pick off with my main stack.

@AndrewAAGamer Good to know. I’ve watched a lot of General Hand Grenade videos, and he seemed to picket a lot. I’ve played allies in my group (only 3-4 of us) the last 3 games, and Russia has been steamrolled 2/3. My “blocking” probably had a lot to do with that I’d imagine.
What makes Bryansk a better hold point? I’m new to the game this summer, and I absolutely love it. I find these kinds of guides so helpful! Thanks

@AndrewAAGamer This is a really interesting analysis. Along these lines, I assume you oppose using russian infantry to picket/block the German advance towards Moscow? Based on your analysis it seems clear that it is wasteful, but how would you measure the value of time/turns? Perhaps via incoming British aircraft added by the turn saved? Great analysis!

Thanks guys! That explains it perfectly.

Hi all, as I’m sure you’ve seen from my previous posts, I am just getting into the game. Question regarding the economy split with Britain. How exactly do the points work regarding “mixed” forces, and can calcutta economy increase? The reason I ask is because I have seen a video where a transport from India is used to capture Persia, but then a factory is placed on it using London IPC the following turn and then London troops are deployed there the turn after that. How is this legal? I would have thought that if Indian troops captured a territory, than it would have to be them deploying troops there, but maybe I am missing something due to the combined economy? Thanks in advance!

@AndrewAAGamer one more question if you don’t mind. The same game is going on. The US has captured Norway, and then the next turn placed a factory. Is it legal for the US to deploy ships into seazone 113, which is inside of the Danish straight? Clearly they could not pass through without holding Denmark itself, but it seems to me that there is no reason that the US could not deploy to that zone for additional pressure on Germany! Thanks again for all your help!

@AndrewAAGamer Really appreciate it! Thanks

Title says it all. For example, on the US turn, if it purchases a minor facility, and in that turn, captures Norway, can the facility be placed in Norway at the conclusion of the turn, or can a facility not be placed until a territory is held for a full turn? My group of players is arguing about this heatedly, as it would greatly impact German’s chances of victory. Thanks!

Really appreciate the info. One more question, and this one is off topic of you don’t mind? I see a lot of posts here about building industrial facilities in captured territories, or in neutral territories. I thought that you could only build facilities in territories that you had held from the beginning in 1940 2nd Ed?

@AndrewAAGamer On that note, in what situation does it even make sense to build battleships? Would seem most navies are cruiser and carrier based then if I did my math right. Subs are also a nice value if you have a bunch? Thx again for the help and patience!