New German strategy: Western Europe Land Swap

[tempurasan]

You may think I am crazy, but I have a new strategy that has been both sustainable and fun with Germany. One of the big problems with German/Japanese pincer attack against Russia is of course the Normandy. Usually, German player has to rely on Japan's speedy attack on Russia or have enough units to defend Western Europe (whether that be northern or southern france).

My alternate strategy calls for defending Western Europe only for the first two turns (which should not be hard as Brit/Americans would not have enough force to make a decent landing yet). After the second German turn, Germany leaves only a minimal force in Western Europe and remove antiaircraft gun (say 2 infantry/2 tanks, etc.). Pump all the rest into Eastern Europe. Russia will soon fall. What about western Europe you ask? Let Brit/Americans take it. With minimal land force and massive air, retake western europe--without the anti aircraft gun, Americans/Brits cannot keep western europe. Let them repeat the process.

Worried about the extra 6 points you give to the allies? No worries. Since you take it back each turn, your own production does not suffer. You can turn all your attention to Russia without holding back much in the back. This will speed the fall of Russia. So what if the allies have a few more ships because of the additional 6 bucks they get each turn. They cannot convert it fast enough to pose a threat to your main force.

What if the allies do not bite the bait and wait till they build a massive force enough to take Western Europe and keep it? They cannot. It would be foolish for them not to hessle Germany's backdoor and still hope to win. If they don't do it, they cannot defend Russia. But if they do, they will fall into your trap. See, the big reason why Normandy works is because the German player thinks it will work. Usually, the minute france falls Germany turns back its force west, start producing all infantry, etc., which immediately eases pressure on Russia. Germany need not pay any attention to Normandy. Just keep taking it back with minimal force and you will see that Normany really should never work for the Allies. They CANNOT amess enough force in the west before you take Russia, as long as you ignore them.

Please, before you cry out in disgust, try it first. I'm quite a good player who has been trying to find a reliable way for the Axis to win without altering the rules. This strategy should work well as long as the Japanese player knows what he does. Also, you can build an additional factory near Russia to further speed it up. You will be surprised how useless the massive armada of Allied ships on the Atlantic is when you simply let them have western Europe. and I bet you, YOU CAN take it back with minimal loss each turn as long as you remove the aircraft gun from there.

[PaschatKing]

Its not a particularly new strat. and yes it does work to an extent. The German player in our games has often built a IC in Ukraine.

[DaimlerBenz]

It's not new. I use it in different ways from time to time. Downside is big though. The counterstrategy is for the Allies to supply Russia through Norway with the extra gifts that 6 IPC/turn gives. Now you are defeating Russia even though you forced all 3 Allies to stack in Russia, with 6 extra IPC's to do it with? It ain't pretty.

That's not to say you shouldn't be aware of it and never try it. A good look at the board will, every so often, tell you that now is the time to do it. Not necessarily on turn 2. I let the board tell me if and when. I often do it right BEFORE the Allies can take Normandy on their own. Save myself some casualties AND suddenly put more heat on the east. I like to leave enough cheap stuff on France so the Allies have to overcommit to be sure to win. (AA gun stays if they have bigger airforce than I do.) Then I trounce 'em on the counterattack, so that even though they got 6 IPC, hopefully that's the same amount they lost in extra casualties. It can work on some opponents. Mostly though, it's a thankless job having to play Germany at this point in the game.

[pagan]

I don't see it the way you guys do.

Taking back the territory each round to an ever increasing strength of UK/USA respectively forces germany to take it back with ever increasing strength.

Each time germany takes the territory back UK/USA get to attack and kill whatever is left there.

Germany cannot take on this unecessary struggle and send enough to the east to actually push/take russia offensively. It seems to me that a strong russia would get a free 5IPCs per turn to keep building while germany has to sit and hold EE until it has to fall back altogether. I see Russia as above their starting income for many rounds after the starting round.

[AllWeNeedIsLove.]

My alternate strategy calls for defending Western Europe only for the first two turns (which should not be hard as Brit/Americans would not have enough force to make a decent landing yet). After the second German turn, Germany leaves only a minimal force in Western Europe and remove antiaircraft gun (say 2 infantry/2 tanks, etc.). Pump all the rest into Eastern Europe. Russia will soon fall. What about western Europe you ask? Let Brit/Americans take it. With minimal land force and massive air, retake western europe--without the anti aircraft gun, Americans/Brits cannot keep western europe. Let them repeat the process.

it can work, but like benz said it should be assesed by board position and not a rigid 2inf only policy. if you plan on continually trading western europe it is probably is better to just stack it with inf. lets assume you want to trade with your 2inf 2tank and airforce(probably not enough ground units but i will use this example as tempura has suggested it). thats 16ipc in defence of western europe every turn. i believe that non-combat moving 5inf every turn to western would provide a better defence with the benifits of not giving allies 6ipc everyturn, and its 1ipc cheaper, and it does not tie up your airforce.


Please, before you cry out in disgust, try it first. I'm quite a good player who has been trying to find a reliable way for the Axis to win without altering the rules. This strategy should work well as long as the Japanese player knows what he does. Also, you can build an additional factory near Russia to further speed it up. You will be surprised how useless the massive armada of Allied ships on the Atlantic is when you simply let them have western Europe. and I bet you, YOU CAN take it back with minimal loss each turn as long as you remove the aircraft gun from there.

you had me convinced, right up untill you said germany should build an ic.

[Defiance]

this is a well known strategy.... To some extend and in some situations, yes this can work really well, but not forever... There comes a moment where a smart US player will reïnforce W.eur big time with an all out "anti-german ground buy" after the UK player destroyed the troops in W.europe. The moment the USA reïnforces this way, it is almost impossible for Germany to get back W.Eur without temporarely hold or stop the eastern campain.

Everybody knows that once germany has to fight on it's own grounds like that, things will go badly in a 3 vs. 1 setup. It is much safer and sound for germany to go after the transport capacity of the western allies: you need less hits to do more ICP damage in naval combat and stall the UK/US approach, more than germany can even accomplish on the ground. This whole thing is just based upon the fact that naval pieces are a lot more expensive, while the UK/US really needs them. And with revised now, Germany has just got it's own naval cannon fodder.......

This is also perfectly in match as what the allies try to do by sending troops over into Russia: to fight germany on the ground.

Just my 2 cents...

I can remember a very special game I played a few years ago with the MB version..... A game in which the axis won a fair game without any bids.... that game was won by only a single battle during round 8 or so, in which germany was able to completely knock out the transport capacity of the western allies and most of their fleet by sacrificing half its airfleet and their med fleet in a brutal attack on the English sea zone. With *** fighter reinforcements in E.European zones for defense, Japan and Germany managed to take over Russia with only 1 japanese tank, while 6 UK/US planes had defended Russia. That was a notorious game, and the only one I ever withnesses with a true Axis win without bids.

Why did the Axis won? Because UK and US couldn't bring in those really wanted ground forces which were sitting ducks in England.

[SCIPIO]

[Just Copy-Paste my 2 cents written on this thread on the other topic...]

I played various times again a German opponent who uses your strategy of death zone in West. EU, but what normally happens is that in the third or fourth try at maximum the Allies take W.EU AND hold it! Though he never tried to take the AA away, I must admit.

Right now, on impulse, to counter your idea I maybe will try not to land in W.EU but in Eastern EU or Karelia, to stop your advance East... I surely will not land at the first attack, but I will slow your march east and keep you occupied in central europe much more time as you had planed.

AND NOW I ADD, that as Defiance said, German could not do much against UK clearing the territory followed by USA landing strong defence units to HOLD IT!

[ButchOHare1]

In revised I don't see the need to trade WE too often, unless you went with an AC and transport(s) on G-1. It's more efficient to use stack defense than threat defense with more spaces on the eastern front and all those fighters.

Allies should not be able to load WE until the turn you move to Caucasus or West Rusia, if you are doing your counts.

[MatildaMike]

I like to use is to make use of your airforce and a slow, methodical build-in in WEU - say by adding 2 inf per turn. Consider - including leaving the initial 2 inf in WEU, by turn 4, Germany has 8 inf and probably 2-4 ftrs in WEU. This is a pretty good defensive force, considering that the UK has probably spent money on an IC OR has spent a lot of money on rebuilding ships AND the UK should be down a fair amount of $$ due to losses in Afirca and possibly India.

To put it another way, since UK can only buy 8 units per turn in UK, this means at best, each turn, they could muster say, 8 inf (maybe a bit more IF they had the money). It could be less. But, generally, the UK will not have the fleet available to shuttle 4 transport loads for a few turns, if the Germans harrass their fleet or inflcit losses on them elsewhere. So, unless the UK goes with even more than 4 transports, for the most part, the best they can do against WEU if 8 land units, probably a BB shot and maybe a couple of planes - which are subject to AA fire.

8 inf and 3 ftrs should be able to defend that pretty easily. Now - you say, yes, but what if the US follows up with an attack? Well - this is possible - but, WEU is far enough away from the US that once transports are moved to attack it, it takes 2 turns for them to go back and get more troops and then try to attack again (now, I know that a convoy could be set up to allow the US to attack WEU every turn, but this is pretty expensive to do, and means a total ignoring of Japan - AND, by the time you got that going, it is probably later than turn 4).

So, even if the US follows-up and takes WEU, the Germans could take it back and it would be another 2 turns before the UK and US could do another double team. If you consider as well, if Germany continues to funnel 2 inf per turn into WEU, by turn 6, say, there are 12 inf + ftr there - and this force could repel both UK and US attacks.

Just my thoughts...
Regards
Mike

[General Norde]

I agree with that guy who said "do it when it's worth, not necessarily on turn 3". Using this strategy can be good if still have a good fleet in the north as you can easily cover norway, leningrad and germany.

When it comes to counter attacking, using some infantries with your fighters is often the best thing to do as you do not expose yourself to an allied onslaught on their turn. Also, if you play the minor victory game, this strategy is bad as you expose france to your enemy.

About the complex in ukraine, I usually build it in the turn I strike on the caucasus, not before. It should ensure an axis victory if caucasus falls.

[General Norde]

And by the way, giving the UK an additional 6 is a critical gift as the UK often has to spare lots of IPCs in India and has to do with the lost of africa. There's a big difference between a 10 IPC and a 16 IPC budget in europe.

[tempurasan]

I think it's the first time anybody ever replied to my post at this site. :) First, thank you for being civil about your criticisms, and second, i apologize for assuming that somehow this strategy was new to you guys.

I agree with you that this strategy is not a RULE. There are times when this will work like magic, and some times this won't. That is why I said that this strategy is both workable and FUN. If you drag this on for 7+ turns, you will lose, I gurantee you. But please try this with extra aggressive Japan, and you will find that Russia will most likely fall before that. Do try it first--it is especially effective first few times because many Allied players will bite your bait and start landing on western europe each time they can.

To the person who said that Germany is bound to lose a lot of units by keep retaking it, consider this. First, a loss of a couple of infantry and tanks each turn is not a big loss at all. Think about it. What is the best Russian strategy to survive on its own? Hit and run. You let Germany take a territory, somehow lure them to leave a lot of troops, and then you hit and inflict damage and pull out. And when the time is right, retake it with minimal force so that Germany cannot kill your main army waiting behind the line. Because of the Atlantic Ocean, the Allies cannot launch an effective counterattack when you retake western Europe as Germany. That is why you can always retake it and leave a minimal force. Hell, the Allies often cannot even retake it every time like Germany can!

Oh, and I should add, this strategy goes hand in hand with the German player playing hit and run against Russia to simply maintain the eastern front while stacking more units every turn. Then when the time is right, one decisive push against Moscow will end the game. If you are crazy enough to actually go after Russia every time and killing a lot of your troops, I do not think any kind of strategy will help you. It is Germany playing Russia's dirty trick.

Some suggested that with the British/American combination, they can actually leave a sizable force on western europe and keep it for themselves. One you try this strategy, such is impossible for the first 5 turns. And consider this, once you have removed the antiaircraft gun, you can pour all your airforce and infantry with minimal tanks to obliterate whatever pathetic force the Allies have managed to leave there. The beauty of this is that the bulk of your armours are still going to Russia, NOT western europe.

Some suggested that the British/American forces can instead go somewhere else to cut off German advance against Russia. This CANNOT happen any time early in the game. and if it does, remember, you just kill them and keep advancing. Unlike western europe, the Allies cannot retake it, so what's the big deal? you wasted one turn, and they just wasted 3 turns.

Some suggested that building another factory near Russia is a bad idea. I never said you must do it. But you can. I stress again, I'm suggesting a fun strategy that is not crap, I'm not telling you how to play your game.

Most of you already believe, according to the poll I've seen here, that the key to Axis victory is in Japan. What are you really saying when you say that? You are saying that the key to Axis victory is killing Russia. Then why bother with western europe? Remember, by luring the Allies into playing land swap with you in western europe, you will probably tempt them to spending too much money on the Atlantic ocean and leave Japan to do whatever it pleases. If you haven't tried this, try it. You will find that the typical dynamics of the game will lure many allied players to playing into your hands. If they get used to it, find something else.

[tempurasan]

Extra 6 will not help Britain in Asia. First, I stress, you don't let the Allies take western europe too early. Usually it is impossible for them to take it within the first 3 turns even if they tried. By turn 4, Japan would better have taken over India. So the extra 6 bucks Britain gets will only go to keeping up the useless landswap with Germany. If Japan doesn't have enough to take India by turn 4, you already lost the game. I don't really think you guys are thinking through all the possibilities. You should really just try. But if you don't know how to play aggressive Japan, this strategy is not for you.

[tempurasan]

I mean, please guys. Why would I suggest Germany to surrender western europe when it doesn't have to? Some times it could be turn 3, 4, 5, 6, whenever it happens it will. The spirit of the strategy is that whenever it happens, swap the land instead of changing the direction of your panzers.

[Nuclear]

I find it easyer to by pass the caucasus and strike Russia through the North, while keeping 2 inf in the zones that but up against Russia, with about 5 tanks or so that would allow for me to counter attack and thus crush Russia. Then while about 6 tanks are on the Northern Route, the Russian player is forced to move units out of the Caucasus and into Russia, which weakens up the Caucasus for an easy attack. Now it is just a matter of time for Russia to fall, which leads to an Axis Victory hands down, because it is impossible for the Allies to win. I have never seen the Allies win, if the Axis take Russia.