Posts made by thespaceman

Hi all,

I’m interested in discussing whether the German Fall Blau Operation would succeed in the game.

German T1.
1. Normal attack vs British Shipping
2. Motorised inf go to Yugoslavia.
2. Take France/ Normandy / Activate Finland/ Yugoslavia
3. Pick up bonus 5 Denmark and USSR Trade.
4. Air lands centrally to guard against Brit Ship builds but can strike USSR if they stack border.
5. (navy sets up for T2 hit on Gibraltar)
(build 6 INF 3 ART)

Italian 1
1. Take Greece
2. Activate Bulgaria
3. Ethiopian forces Head north
(Builds Mech + Tank)

German 2
Declare War USSR
Take Bessarabia/E Poland/Baltic States/ Karelia/Vyborg
Finish off the French in Southern France
Amphibious Assault on Gibraltar
1 Inf Loads onto Italian Transport
With 70 + cash build 5 Tanks 5 Mech + Planes

Italian 2
Take Egypt
Units from Greece start heading to Bessarabia + tank and mech from T1
Build Tanks/Mech

German 3
Planes Fly East
Take Western Poland Ukraine Novgorod
Unload inf to Egypt
Build more Tanks / Mech / Planes

Italian 3
Continue to move units to Bessarabia including air units
Build 2 Strategic Bombers

German 4
Push gently into Bryansk and Belarus
The goal is to get the Russians to commit their defenders to these locations which can then be bombed or bypassed.
German Italian remaining fleet link up to defend Med.

Italian 4
Hit Rostov with Tanks/Mech/Bombers/Fighters

German 5
Blitz through Rostov into Caucasus and Volgograd

From there Italians can hook back around to Egypt While Germans rampage through Central Asia. One Ukraine and Volgograd are producing it will be very difficult to stop the flow into India/China/ Central Russia.

The key to the Strategy is a single thrust towards Rostov. The double hit from Italians/Germans on T4 allows the Tanks to Blitz through. Decoy units will still operate around Novgorod and Belarus to pin down Russian defences. If Russians do counter the Rostov Blitz then that may leave The northern route to Moscow open.

From T3/4 A mix of subs/ planes and Inf/Art would be stationed in France to guard against allied incursions.
From Turn 5/6 a process of consolidation would begin around the Med and reacting to
US/ UK moves towards Europe and Africa.

Ok So first priority is to prevent any German Sealion Attacks. For this you would build Infantry and a few fighters.

You should have about 25-30 income so a Fighter and 6 inf isn’t out of the question.

Once you have secured you home island its time to consider offensive operations.

A good idea is to reinforce Africa ASAP. If you have managed to grab Persia or secure Egypt a factory here is a good way to boost India’s Defenses or annoy Italy.

Amphibious operations against France or Norway can also be considered but this will require many turns investment in fleet building or else the ships will be sunk as quickly as they are built. Typically a decent fleet will need carriers, destroyers and subs to protect the transports.

Typical build might be (

tank + Mech + Inf = 13 (for S-AFRICA)
Plane (str  ftr or tac) 10 - 12
1-2 inf to round out purchases

After about turn 5 you will see which way game is going (based on uS pacific v Atlantic focus) Then you can turn your attention to helping India or reinforcing US moves in Europe.

Hi great discussion.

I think since playing my first game in 1985 we have all be craving more realism and G40 is so much better than anything that has gone before.

There are obvious problems than any board game will always have.

1. Complete information.
Espionage, code braking, secrecy were all  massive in WW2, but in the game al players can see exactly where everything is.

2. Technology
The tech system has never really works to represent the massive jump between a pz1 and pz 6b or wellington to b29.

3. Scale.
Some aspects of movement and scale are really weird. Like short range interceptors taking off from london sinking a battleship in the adriatic sea and landing on an aircraft carrier.

4. Logistics
What happens when supply lines are cut and troops are surrounded?

Ok so basically having multiple bombers on standby to:

1. strategic bomb JAP / GER/ ITA  factories
2. Support amphibious assault in SE Asia/ NW Europe
3. Take out jap isolated fleet units and destroy ITA fleet in med
4. Force Jap to build naval escorts (DD) instead of transports/ground units.

Subs can do more damage to JAP economy than GER/ITA

But diversion of too much resources to subs/bombers weakens US ground Assault against Europe and South Pacific.

Has anyone tried the following strategy for USA.

Assumptions.
Sea Lion Threat only.
Early DOW by axis on all Allies (J1 G2)

USA builds approx 3 subs + 2Str Bombers per turn then goes after axis economically. (rest of income spent on shucking units to Hawaii/Africa/France/Norway)

1. Bombers relocate to locations such as London, Northern Territory, India, Novgorod, Syria.

2. Subs spread out and hit convoy zones against Italy in med, Germans in Norway, French coast and Yugoslavia. and hit Japanese money islands

3. Since subs can’t be hit by planes Axis accepts losses or starts sending destroyers to combat subs

4. Bombers then hit factories or target lone destroyers, preferably in 2 to 1 odds.

Goals.
1. Force the axis to fight defensively
2. Force axis to build sub optimal units (destroyers instead of land units)
3. Force axis naval units out of preferred position ( ie should be defending the ACs, TRNs or supporting amphibious raids)
4. Force favourable odds exchanges (bombers/subs attacking isolated destroyers)
5. The dispersed sub/bomber force could then act as a screen for future naval amphibious operations

a) Would it do enough damage to justify cost of building and maintaining?
b) How would axis respond by about turn 5 with 15 subs/10 bombers operating?
c) Would you be better to target one axis member or disperse individual subs across board?

Thoughts???

Hi all,

Great ideas,

1. As just mentioned: which countries have convoy-dependent IPCs?  How many of their initial-income IPCs depend on convoys?  Are all convoys of equal value…and if not, how do you keep track of which convoy is worth how much?

I think a workable and simple solution would be that all IPCs must be transportable to a factory. If a land route exists the IPCs are safe. If they cannot trace a land route then they must be shipped.

I think that the easiest way to represent this is that the submarines would be able to launch an attack against the IPC value of a territory. The submarines would be essentially blockading the port or patrolling offshore waiting for the merchantman to leave harbour.

The mechanic would be as suggested before. If a sub is in a sea zone next to an eligible territory then it can fire a single shot. If it is a hit the territory loses that amount of IPCs. (this could be shown by placing markers in the sea zone which the convoying power must remove by paying the damage bill)

If a sub is submerged or takes part in a sea battle on its turn it cannot attack.

Another suggestion would be to increase the subs movement to 3 to allow them to slip past blockades and escape into the ocean and force opposing powers to patrol and escort effectively.

Hi all. Great discussion so far. I have always thought that there should be a sub war built into the game.  Here are a few thoughts.

First. The problem with planes. Historically planes were the nemesis of subs in The Atlantic. Closing the Air gap really was the end of the sub free for all. Asw planes were the liberators welling tons catalina etc not spitfires and hurricanes

Proposal:
1.only bombers can complete asw missions. Fighters do not have range or equipment for asw.
2. When on asw range of planes is reduced by 2.

Is the 1:1 rule to big a drop for the destroyers. A few destroyers would often guard an entire convoy against the wolf packs.
Proposal:
Destroyers remove the surprise strike at 2 subs per destroyer. This would give the destroyer a bit bigger bite.

Submerge.subs should never lose the submerge ability. It is the sub captains choice to attack or withdraw.

Ok,

I will definitely have a look at that, had not realised the british DD was in range of the third carrier.

Do you then use the BB and CA to take down phillipines?

Hi All,

Getting back into AA got a few ideas rolling around my head so please help with the following questions?

Q1.Given NOs are on, at what levels of national income would you consider the Axis and the Allies to be level?

I feel that this would occur between 100 and 110 for the axis. This would be

GE 40-45
JAP 50
ITA 10-15

Q2. What territories (or general regions) would the axis be required to take to achieve parity?

GE First three Russian territories and hold starting territories,
ITA Hold starting territories
JAP- Indonesia/Phill/ Chinese coastal/ India-Burma/ Russian Coastal

Q3. Which NOs are included in this?

GE 2
ITA 1
JAP 3

Q4. What turn would you aim to achieve this.

Turn 3

Q5. Can this be achieved without ITA/GE reinforcing Africa (ie Both go for RUSS first.)

From this position axis can launch 3 way attack on Egy-Cau

Q6. If parity can be achieved and held which side has the long term advantage?

the trick is to keep the 2 tanks in poland in reserve so that when you break the baltic states, you can move the 2 tanks trough to Karelia as reinforcement in the non-combat phase. ) Not my idea, but awesome

pretty sure you can’t move into newly captured territory in non combat moves.

Hi,

That is definitely an option but I can sort of see two possible problems,

1. The carriers are now in range of US carrier+ US land based planes
2. I feel the destroyer could be better used escorting the tranny to east indies for a first turn grab.

Are the carriers essentially sacrificed in the hope that by the time US rebuilds navy,  Japan will have big enough income to counter?

If you move the transporter to take East indies with no escort, Do you sacrifice it to the UK destroyer at india or do you hold back a turn on taking islands and wait for the main fleet to sink the British destroyer or chase it away?

The reason I am leaning towards taking east indies turn 1 is to put an IC there T2 and start a 4 unit shuck into India/Egypt etc.

In the 41 scenario As Japan should I go after the

a) US battleship at hawaii or

b) the trans + Destroyer on US coast.

c) the trans + Destroyer on US coast.

The only forces available for a seems to be the two carriers and it would take all four fighters to have a decent chance of destroying the battleshihp.

But I would also think that killing the tranny is a higher priority to protect the islands in the pacific

Are there better uses for the midway planes on T1.

Should Germany try to punch through Karelia to “liberate” Finland/Norway on T1 or does this leave them to vulnerable to Russias counter attack

Hi all.

Basicall I’m thinking about the numbers of IPCs and where each side needs to be in order to have a reasonable chance of winning.

At start
Allies 30 + 24 + 42 = 96
Axis 40 + 30 = 70

Axis behind by 26 but they only need 13 to even the score.

So if axis can capture in 2 turns.
Africa 5-7 IPCs
Middle East / India 2-5 IPCs
China/ Far Est (bury) 3-6 IPCs

That should find

Allies 20 + 23 + 40 = 83
Axis 50 + 33 = 83

Is that enough to balace the Game and ensure a long term even chance of both sides winning. This assumes that the Russian Front is basically a stalemate and that territories are being evenly traded by GE and USSR.

After this however I can see Germany having a lot of difficulty holding it’s gains in Africa which probably swings the pendulum back in the Allies favour. But this can be countered with further gains in the China/ Far East areas.

By turn 4 (possible)

Allies 20 + 20 + 38 = 78
Axis 50 + 38 = 88

How many IPCs does the Axis need by turn 2-4 to create a balance game or feel confident of winning?

Hi all,

I agree with Dan 100%. I’d much rather have those 5 inf defending. The attraction of building 3 inf per turn 1 step closer isn’t that big.

If it’s an IC you want what about focusing on a grab for caucasus.

Yes Japan will attack China the first round, but they are weakened doing so, especially if britian wipes out the transport in 59.  Again, your taking away options doing this.  I’ll encourage a japanese assault because it will spread them out and a longer line has more areas to defend and creates weak spots.

Attacking China with 7 inf + air doesn’t spread them out it concentrates their poewer into one spot. The allies then have to from their own kill stack by shuttling infantry from Russia or concede territory each turn. T1 China T2 Sinkiang T3 Kaz + Nov + Eve. Remember by turn 2 Japs will be shuttling  up to 8 land units per turn into asia.

.  British IC producing tanks everyturn will quickly out produce Japanese transports

An IC capped at 3 units per turn cannot out produce Japan which can produce 8 per turn and shuttle into anywhere on the East coast of Asia, Plus bring in 2 CV battle groups & multiple air units.

US…… purchases- 2 troopships, 3 infantry, 3tanks, All to be placed in the eastern US.  Combat moves… Move 2 transports, 1 destroyer, 1 tank, 1 artillary, 2 infantry, and 1 bomber and attack algeria.  If you still have China use fighter and attack any troopship of the japanese.  If you still have your fleet in hawaii merge them with your transport and battleship.  You can meet them in wake and attack wake island using 2 fighters, bombardment, and 2 infantry.  This will basically show Japan that you are there and you will attack anything open.  They will have to put some energy towards your fleet.  Don’t attack their fleet, let them attack you.  Carriers defend best and a fully loaded carrier will wipe out a small fleet on defense.  This fleet is basically there to keep Japan honest.  They won’t be able to divert all there attention on mainland asia and if you don’t lose your fleet, you don’t have to build anything else until Germany gets wiped out.  This will allow you to focus shuttling units into Europe.  Germany will most likely lose interest in Africa by round 2 because of the russian advance and the british buildup in Norway.  Non combat moves… move destroyer from sea zone 20 into 10.  land bomber in egypt.  Move fighter from E. US and land it in britian.  Fighter from W. US lands in Hawaii, or on carrier.  Fighter in China should stay.  Move infantry from sinkiiang into China.  Place new units in Eastern US.  Your purchases for the next few rounds should be the same as your first round purchases.  If Germany doesn’t attack your transports in sea zone 12 their next round, you can send them back to the US to bring more units later, or you can keep them around Europe and land them in places in europe to help with taking it.  Doing this constantly will keep Germany pressured from 3 sides and you will limit their options.

I disagree. Unless Japan has self destructed the US does not want an early conflict in the Pacific. Japs can bring 2 Carrier battle groups + land based air to the party. Any early losses by the Allies delay their build up and give Japan more time to capture resources and deploy land units into Asia. Secondly there are no easy IPCs that the US can capture in the Pacific.

The attack on Algeria risks loosing a lot of TRNs as SZ 12 is easilly with range of Germanis naval air patrol from Western Europe. The minimum fleet defence I would go to algeria with is 3 DD + 4 TRN which is easilly achievable by turn 2.

I don’t see an early US carrier build as neccesary at all. They should be pumping out land units to fill up those TRNs. I think that it’s better to leave fleet defence to the Brits as they get to move first. The US can then reinforce the landing zone wherever the Brits go. Alternatively they can just move to spots out of range of the bulk of the German airforce.

SZ 17 is a possible landing site if German fighters are in western Europe.

Once the US has made it’s madatory Land unit builds and TRN builds then topping up fleet defence from T4 onwards allows a more agressive style of attack. This will force Germany more onto the defensive. Early US builds of capital ships means less land units or transports which amkes life easier for the Germans.

@jbriggs:

I say always build an IC in India turn 1.  Build 1 transport, 1 infantry, and 1 artillary to place in SZ3 at end of turn 1.  Use your carrier fighter and sink the transport in SZ59.  land it back on carrier.  Bring your destroyer from 15 and merge it in 35. Bring your fighter from Egypt and land it either on the carrier or in india.  Use your sub in australia and attack japan sub in the solomon islands.  You can move your australian transport towards new zeland and see if Japan will move it’s fleet towards hawaii.  Keep your fleet by india for this turn and see what Japan does with their fleet.  Remember your fleet is to weak on offense during turn 1, but it is stronger than japans fleet defensively if they attack you.  You’ll have 1 carrier, 2 fighters, 2 destroyers, and one transport.  This meaning you’ll be rolling 3 3’s, 2 4’s, and 1 1 on defense.  They will attack with (1) 4, (1) 1, and (1) 3 on offense.  They probably won’t attack and will move their fleet towards Japan, leaving borneo wide open for you on turn 2.  Since you moved your transport up from australia on turn 1, you’ll be able to use your infantry from Australia to take the islands and use your fighters for fire support.  This will allow you to keep 4 infantry from india in india and will keep india protected until you get your tanks built by in turn 2.  turn 3 you should be able to attack burma with 3 tanks and 4 infantry.  Easy victory……

Use your BB and two transports from britian and canada and amphibious assault Norway with 1 tank, 1 art, 2 infantry if Germany still has it on turn 1.  Turn 2 you build 3 tanks in india and an IC in norway.  Turn 3 you should be building 6 tanks.  3 in Norway, and 3 in india.  Britian can shuttle 3 tanks into russian front lines every turn, and pounding Japanese front lines with tanks every turn.  If you build up on mainland europe with russia, Germany will have to build to match.  If germany keeps on trying to get africa, or builds an AC in the baltic, let them.  That makes Europe that much weaker.

There’s a couple of problems with this strategy……

1. The destroyer in the Suez is usually up against the whole Italian navy and airforce. That’s 1 BB, 1 TRN, and up to Bomber, 2 Fighters. ???
2. The fighter from Egypt must survive against the DAK which is also unlikely.
3. This means that defending India SZ we have just 1 CV 1DE 1FIG. Japan can throw at this 1 BB 1 CV 3 FIG. This seems to me to be an easy win for the Japs.
4. India Land battle is 4 inf defending against Bomber, up to 3 FIG and 2 inf. Close but Jap should win with 1 Inf + some air remaining

Granted this has completely upset Japan’s standard opening but a first turn capture of IC India is a rare prize for Japan and sets up an early Blitz through Southern Asia into Khaz/Egy or build TRN to go for AUS/MAD

Even if the first round battle is a UK win, I don’t think that UK can hold Japan 2 with up to 7 Land units + up to 7 air units + BB bombardments.

In short I see the India IC as quite an unsound strategy. It also leaves the Atlantic sea under-defended against German air and delays any Brit landing into Europe or Africa. Brits can’t really move fleet to SZ 3/6/7 without an AC+destroyers etc. due to German 5+ fig /Bomber/ Subs etc.

Similar arguments can be made against an early build of IC Norway. Germans can attack with Massive force to recapture. Then Germany uses IC to build INF next door Russia or tanks to blitz Moscow.

Correct Strategy for UK is to build AC T1 + build up a fleet of 4 trns and drop large numbers of troops in whatever spot Germans leave weakly defended. Fleet of 1 BB 1 AC 2 FIG 4 TRN  in SZ 6 can threaten up to drop in 6 different locations.

UK ships can really mess with Japans opening round. Look for ways to sink as much jap shipping as possible.

For US.
Link up your surviving Pearl / Los angeles/Panama ships and either head to the attlantic to invade africa or use them to further interfere with japan’s build up. I wouldn’t recommend any pacific fleet builds for first few turns as this could lead to Germany running rampant across Africa/Asia.