GSv2.00 Axis Oil Levels

[PinkPanzer]

If Axis player wants to commit sizable assets to Atlantic there's little to be done except minimizing losses until US/USSR join. Convoy hunting alone won't win the war though, delaying Barbarossa until '42 and taking Britain and/or Med/Iraq is probably a better alternative.

I usually cap at 6 subs (in 2 groups) when aiming for '41 Barbarossa and unless all 6 are used together they're not overwhelming. 3 subs might take down a 10step low tech DD but that takes luck. As long as Allied player keeps the fleet tight (i.e. single ship can only be attacked from 1 direction without retaliation) it will be too costly. E.g With 6 DDs a single convoy can be escorted without huge risk unless Axis BBs are lurking around and those can be countered with RN BBs/CVs.

Think functional dislocation which means combined arms deprive the enemy of one of it's combined arms branchs.

The counter to an allied dd is an axis bb.
The counter to an allied cv or bb is an axis sub.
The counter to an allied sub is an axis dd.
The counter to an allied strat is an axis cv.

Think positional dislocation. The amibrits naval units have to disperse whereas the germans can concentrate at will.

In operational terms the sea is a highway providing operational mobility for the western allies.
In Clausewitzian terms the amibrits naval units are the center of gravity that allows them to accomplish their objectives.

How many pps should the germans spend on building naval units for the possibility of naval supremacy and what should they spend them on? I don't think spending 180 pp's for 3 german subs is enough.

I'd guess the germans should spend 500 pp's considering they start with 1 dd, 1 bb and 3 subs and 1 more bb in the build queue.

[PionUrpo]

yes, but you don't have six DD's at the start!

That's why you build more.

[PionUrpo]

Think functional dislocation which means combined arms deprive the enemy of one of it's combined arms branchs.

The counter to an allied dd is an axis bb.
The counter to an allied cv or bb is an axis sub.
The counter to an allied sub is an axis dd.
The counter to an allied strat is an axis cv.

Think positional dislocation. The amibrits naval units have to disperse whereas the germans can concentrate at will.

In operational terms the sea is a highway providing operational mobility for the western allies.
In Clausewitzian terms the amibrits naval units are the center of gravity that allows them to accomplish their objectives.

How many pps should the germans spend on building naval units for the possibility of naval supremacy and what should they spend them on? I don't think spending 180 pp's for 3 german subs is enough.

I'd guess the germans should spend 500 pp's considering they start with 1 dd, 1 bb and 3 subs and 1 more bb in the build queue.

I wasn't implying 3 subs is enough for Axis naval superiority, just pointing out what I usually do and saying that isn't enough for dominance.

I'd say 500PPs might come close on the amount Axis needs for superiority but I'd also say that after using 500 PPs on naval assets you'll likely see Soviets rumbling for picnic in Berlin. Also, US/UK don't have to disperse the fleet everywhere. If they concentrate on the biggest convoys they'll eventually get enough through. Even if they lose several ships, Germans lose some too and Allied player still has the Soviets to do the land war.

As Axis, going for an all out naval war is very much playing to the Allied players advantage since US/UK have a serious headstart on that department. Sure it can be done (maybe even with considerable success) but you likely won't win in the end.

[PinkPanzer]

yes, but you don't have six DD's at the start!

That's why you build more.

Given the naval vs subs rule change in GS 2.0 I think the allies ideally need 12 dd's and 6 cv's just for convoy protection from axis subs.

That still leaves allied transports in the atlantic/med and allied bb's and cv's in the med naked without dd protection from axis subs.

That a lot of pp's and pp's don't grow on trees.

Under the old naval vs subs rule where dd's could move and attack subs you didn't need to spend that much for convoy protection.

[richardsd]

I don;t think you can afford 6 CV's, but I could be wrong - never tried that strategy

[PionUrpo]

I usually have 10-12 DDs and 4 CVs (~50/50 for both US and UK) although most of the CVs and some DDs are usually on the Med pounding Italians until their fleet is down and landings on mainland Italy are done. It does leave some of the convoys open to attack but Allies don't need every convoy through. Most of the larger convoys come from middle route and fleet can be used there. Strats can cover the northern route after US joins.

[PinkPanzer]

I don;t think you can afford 6 CV's, but I could be wrong - never tried that strategy

The 6 cv's are kinda like icing on top of the dd cake.

[PinkPanzer]

I wasn't implying 3 subs is enough for Axis naval superiority, just pointing out what I usually do and saying that isn't enough for dominance.

I'd say 500PPs might come close on the amount Axis needs for superiority but I'd also say that after using 500 PPs on naval assets you'll likely see Soviets rumbling for picnic in Berlin. Also, US/UK don't have to disperse the fleet everywhere. If they concentrate on the biggest convoys they'll eventually get enough through. Even if they lose several ships, Germans lose some too and Allied player still has the Soviets to do the land war.

As Axis, going for an all out naval war is very much playing to the Allied players advantage since US/UK have a serious headstart on that department. Sure it can be done (maybe even with considerable success) but you likely won't win in the end.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply anything. I think the changes in naval combat in GS 2.0 are radical enough to justify throwing out what you usually do and rethink axis naval strategy.

In GS 1.07 the brits got about 2500 pps and the ussr got about 1000 pp's from convoys. About 3,500 total.
America got about 4,500 pps and the brits got about 3,000 pps from production. About 7500 total.
If the amibrits spend half their production pps on research, repairs, upgrades, creating transports and overusing railroad capacity that leaves 3,750 pps to build units.
Those units will be on the sea as a naval unit or transports at some point.

For germany to spend 500 pps on a navy to fight 7,250 worth of allied pps on the seas plus the initial pps in amibrit starting units seems like a good investment to me considering german subs can't be attacked unless the allied ship hasn't moved and german subs can repair at sea.


What do you think would happen if an axis player spent 500 pps on naval units and knew how to focus his barbarossa schwerpunkt on a russian COG?
Still think there'd be russians picnicing in Berlin? lol

I think most axis players barbarossa schwerpunkts hit air.

Lets have a game PionUrpo and I'll test out my naval theory on you. lol
What's your email address?

[Plaid]

Whats the point of investing in german navy heavily?
Allied bombers kill subs easy and for free. For 1 attack on convoy you will pay 4-6 steps bomber damage. So you just payed for units, which are good only for consuming *your own* PPs for repair and providing allied air with experience. Sounds like a plan.

500 PP is more then two times lower, then price of *starting* allied navy (3 CV 3 sub 7 battleship 5 destroyers, if I remember all properly, 330+180+490+300=1300. Its not likely to be superiour.

Actually I have seen 1 time axis naval domination. Axis player did closing the MED and seems like built ONLY subs and sub labs with italy.
So there were ~15 high tech italian subs in atlantic (+ roughly 8-10 german). They were taking continious damage from allied bombers, but still stopped convoys from moving and reaching USSR.

[PinkPanzer]

Whats the point of investing in german navy heavily?
Allied bombers kill subs easy and for free. For 1 attack on convoy you will pay 4-6 steps bomber damage. So you just payed for units, which are good only for consuming *your own* PPs for repair and providing allied air with experience. Sounds like a plan.

500 PP is more then two times lower, then price of *starting* allied navy (3 CV 3 sub 7 battleship 5 destroyers, if I remember all properly, 330+180+490+300=1300. Its not likely to be superiour.

Actually I have seen 1 time axis naval domination. Axis player did closing the MED and seems like built ONLY subs and sub labs with italy.
So there were ~15 high tech italian subs in atlantic (+ roughly 8-10 german). They were taking continious damage from allied bombers, but still stopped convoys from moving and reaching USSR.

The new naval rules in GS 2.00 for combat vs subs change the game. So the past may not apply.

4 german subs if carefully positioned can sink a british cv or bb in one turn without threat of counterattack except from nearby cv's. Plus subs can repair at sea.
So goodbye Royal Navy bb's and cv's in the atlantic.

If the germans build a proper combined arms navy they can counter any threat. Plus get a ton of experience along the way early in the game against the UK.

If the germans get naval superiority or supremacy:
subs provide recon.
dd's protect from subs.
bb's sink convoys, because they have a better naval attack. It's more efficient from an oil consumption standpoint. Plus bb's have an air attack so they're not as vulnerable from air attack like subs are.
a cv protects from strats.

If the italians build a proper combined arms navy they could clear med in spite of their low efficiency.

If it's a viable strategy to build a combined arms navy in GS 2, it has to be worth th oil.

[Morris]

Axis oil is quite enough unless Axis use Armor bloc .