Posts made by Septimus

no scrambling

A bit provokative, yes, but I really think the worst mistake the Axis ever made was declaring war upon the entire world and still sincerely hoping to win ultimately.

@soulfein:

disagree with yugo ger factory, sending air is much more optimal in most -if not all- occasions:
fac g2, newly purchased navy g3, doing something with navy g4 seems too slow compared to constant commitment of ger air to med/africa. not to mention air is much more versatile than navy, plus cheaper

I give you that airforce is way more versatile than a small German support fleet in sz97. Actually I agree Axis have to use its planes in the Med as well.
But what if the allies put some bombers in the Med ? your planes help you destroy the allied ships, but won’t defend much your Italian fleet. Do you intend to build an early Italian AC for protection, or a German one (in sz93 ?) for that matter ? no. I think an AB in Greece is a replacement solution for that.
And, the IC in Yougoslavia would help you build the necessary to achieve German NO with a ground unit in Egypt, allow you to help a bit the Italians in North Africa, MidEast more easily than if their fleet came from sz93, should Germany have S France.
And it give a little more power to the Axis fleet itself, earlier in the game than if it was purely Italian.

I know it is a bit costly, but it’s still cheaper than riskying unprotected transports in the Med from sz93 to sz97, leaving your fleet unprotected in sz99 when you land in Syria. And an axis AB in Greece, that would protect all these places, would also give you extra range for fighting the UK on the ground, and even later in the game against the Russian.

I see this as a possibly good response to Taranto to get Italy back faster in the game. That doesn’t mean it’s the only one;

I think building an IC in Yougoslavia for Germany is slightly better than building your German fleet in sz93 from S France.
Granted you have to build the factory, but sz97 is already protected by South Italy airbase, also new German ships you’d build there and the remaining Italian ships will protect each other more efficiently. More over you can build a second AB in Greece and have double scrambling protection, which you cannot do in sz93.
And also, in sz93, US bombers from London (in case of a J2) could (don’t mean they will) destroy you recently-born German fleet from US3 and easily land in North Africa and Gibraltar, that you may not control entirely at the very beginning with your Axis, especially if Italy invaded Greece.
That’s what I’ve come to see so far.

I did call my ex GF… didn’t go the way you said  :mrgreen:
Save that, it’s alright ! Thanks I’m glad I’ll be playing Axis online at last.

@Noll:

It won’t work. If that’s the case USA goes 100% Euro side untill UK can manage Euro Axis alone and then strike back Japan.

I agree. The way I see it, the spirit and aim of the game is to see the Allies share their efforts and work together on both fronts. If they concentrate on just Germany or Japan, they will kill it, but fail against the other because it’s too late, that is the beauty of the game. That is why the Allies are harder to play.
Changing to more VCs would lead to make that possible.

Talking about gambits and risks. Does anyone see any Japan strategy that would not be risky ? I think that by essence every choice the Japanese make is kinda gambit, especially because from that depends the US economy and fleets size and moves. And in that sense, J2 is a gambit too. That being said, it doesn’t mean it should not be done, neither that it is a 95%-gamewinner.

Now, for your J1 strategy. Doing so, you want/let the US to trigger right on US1. I don’t think any of your Allies-playing opponent(s) will prevent you from doing that.
Maybe you are taking an undecisive but, fair enough, early advantage in the Pacific (I’ve read you India/ANZAC/China cash argument and IPC swing - event though I think it may be hard to achieve all you plan to do, ending with a good position),

But, because, the way I see it, IPC is not eveything, you do allow the US (should they want it) to just start building an Atlantic fleet from the beginning (at least more than it should, you’ll give me that). German player gonna hate, and I bet you don’t want that either. Don’t take London, you’ll loose it soon enough. As for Russia, you’re not gonna make it. Well, I don’t see how.
Is it a good strategy for Japan/Axis that Germany be paralyzed out of the game (would it be so ?) even before getting Moscow ?

How do you see this ?

Hi everyone,

I think that this topic reflects less an assumed imbalance in favor of the Axis than the general difficulty to play the Allies well. Maybe because it has to fit to the enemies (first) moves, and that, counting a few turns, is unpredictible (and so necessitates adaptation skills and cold blood, calm mind).
Because G1 is, if we talk about strategies guidelines (Sea Lion, Barbarossa), quite scripted (well, G1 won’t be leaving France alive and play an East Coast invasion pattern, for instance). US1 is “completely” free, Pacific, Atlantic, both, no buy, etc. It requires, in my humble opinion, more comprehension of the game, and less tactical notions, as G1 would.

So, even if I’ve played a too few Global games, but read much on that aa.org forum, I may say if there was such a imbalance we’d know it. By the way, I’ve heard that the Allies had a slight advantage so far in Global history, technically. I don’t know if it’s true though.

Let us play and see what happens. � :mrgreen: