Another attempt at an Allied playbook.

[crockett36]

of all the axis strategies, I use to fear this one the most. With a robust American respoonse, I now fear it the least. If we think in terms of setting up dance partners, normal strategy sets up a Russia/Germany waltz. Japan does a foxtrot with everyone but Russia. America must try to cut in to the European festivities, but often arrives too late.

In a Sealion, America and Germany must be paired–to Germany’s doom. It demands nearly 100 percent of resources to take it back or keep it. Thus. isn’t Russia unleashed to kick Japan out of the Asian ballroom

I’ve only played one game against a sealion. I retook London and Russia was crushing the Eastern front and retook Calcutta.

[Tirano]

@AldoRaine

Just so I am clear you are suggesting a SZ 92 Stack with nothing but the SZ 98 Fleet, the SZ 91 CR and then of course scrambled fighters?

I have seen a SZ 92 stack on occasions where Germans go to light on 110 and the U.K. BB survives but never without that.

With this strategy I imagine Italy has a good chance to take Egypt And/Or Iraq. But perhaps I am wrong. I would love to hear more about this SZ92 stack and the Italian and British implications that go with it.

[taamvan]

Hey crew!

I think we are still trading around some great ideas. To throw in my two cents about the original post, I’d suggest some of the following

Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting
Going KJF is much more satisfying in some ways than KGF–with KJF you stand a better chance of toppling or surprising and seriously disrupting Japan than Germany.
However, you can’t defeat Japan and while you’re suppressing Japan: Germany takes the game and so we need to prepare USA for a KGF regardless of what the Axis do or what their plan is
This dynamic means that the everything the Allies do should flow towards moscow and be in place before the culminating battle

ANZAC 3 planes to java (dont forget many players think you cannot land on dutch islands without capturing them that is incorrect) and then all 6 of those allied planes go to persia, then russia

You cant lose on the pac board, so ANZAC should turtle after the intial 3–includes infantry because of limited production then protect sydney.
Taranto must be done, but that costs you alot of fighters–so UK must be garrisoned starting from turn 1 and continuing all game, no exceptions (and no factories, airbases, or tank SA buys until its clearly safe and Germany is headed elsewhere). Not doing taranto makes Italy rage which is way worse over time for the UK than just dealing with them from game start
UK East wants sumatra and ethiopia but you should take persia turn 1 and do what you need to do to keep egypt safe all game (tobruk? turtle? up to you)

The best KGF I’ve seen has the USA transition directly from SZ 91 to norway, then finland, building bases as we go–so at some point you’ll want to destroy the German fleet to ensure they can’t do anything about it. If Germany wastes time or flinches you will be able to go over the top and take back leningrad thats 3 factories pouring out tanks

A combination of US north and UK south rescue forces is the only thing that can prevent the income flop whether moscow dies or not
for russia, more fighters is better than armor or mech or tacticals because they dissuade the crippling stratbombings
for UK, more fighters is better than more men and ships because you go after the US and can support a US landing
realistically, USA only gets 1 wave of ground troops before the russia game is decided–do not waste 1 man

Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*

I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill

good luck have fun boys

[simon33]

@taamvan said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:

Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*

Taamvan mode is all well and good but for experienced players it lacks the strategic depth of Balanced Mod.

[taamvan]

@simon33 I could not agree more. Balanced Mod is the way to go. That pesky China rule… The only quibble with BM is that it would feel unfamiliar the first few times to those used to playing 2nd ed. Otherwise its well vetted and themey.

[crockett36]

Disagree. A voice crying out in the wilderness says check out the allied playbook game.

Also I’m questioning the construction of an industrial complex in Norway. An efficient shuck, naval and air supremacy will make it wasteful. 3 US CVs, 1 Brit CV plus PAC fleet.
to the Atlantic. Make Germany cry.

[weddingsinger]

@crockett36

A transport round trip is, at best, 4 rounds to get 2 units. So 14 pics on 2 transports gets you 1 new unit a turn

Or

A 12ipcs minor complex is 3 of any unit a turn every turn, which would require 7 transports to accomplish the same.

The cost to benefit isnt even close.

[simon33]

@crockett36 said in Another attempt at an Allied playbook.:

Disagree. A voice crying out in the wilderness says check out the allied playbook game.

Also I’m questioning the construction of an industrial complex in Norway. An efficient shuck, naval and air supremacy will make it wasteful. 3 US CVs, 1 Brit CV plus PAC fleet.
to the Atlantic. Make Germany cry.

Who’s building the IC in Norway? I wouldn’t really question that if USA can hold it, even for a few turns, they should be building an IC there. They can always retake it if it’s lost.

[crockett36]

US would build the IC. I just know my system works around extreme mobility. And after turn five a lot of planes have to go to garrison Hawaii. That and the cost of transports, men and replacement planes for the Atlantic make your margins thin.

[crockett36]

[crockett36]

I like this as an opening for Rus if it’s not a G1. Threatens a lot. aggressive in a safe way.

[crockett36]

[crockett36]

if no g2, this has elements that keep the enemy guessing. again aggression in defense.

[simon33]

It’s better to stack Vyborg than Karelia if the German TT is in SZ112. Otherwise amphibious troops can attack - cruiser can block Vyborg.

[crockett36]

I like the variation on a theme. My only question would be, do we want those amphibious troops attacking? We might. Any activity not directed toward Moscow is a win?! But I will try that next time.

[taamvan]

Why would you trap so many of your forces west of the line? Once Germany can take Belarus the slow movers to the left of that line are toast. That’s why a concerted defense of Leningrad will usually fail

[weddingsinger]

@taamvan

Agreed

Normally my only time I send Russians North is a limited set of circumstances

1. mechanized Russians
2. .I’m playing balanced mod or some non-vanilla option
3. Germany is more spread out, so you can pick off some smaller groups to try and slow them down. So… sending 5 mechs or whatever to kill the Germans in Karaelia is an even trade IF I have even 1 Russian mech left that can take Finland next turn AND kills a stack.

Of course, I just tried this move in a game, had fantastically bad rolls, only killed like 3 of the 8 German infantry I was after and even lost a precious Russian plane

[crockett36]

This is out of box. Several reasons this works for me. I’m sending units there. Most German players counter with a major offensive. Any major offensive detracts from Moscow and thus buys me time. Success brings a significant IPC swing. It also provides a base for Allied planes and ships. If Nov falls, it opens another front as the infantry turn and make their way back.

I do it, and it’s working for me. Can one of you, Taamvan or weddingsinger, post your perfect maps for Rus t1 and t2. Fair warning, I’m anti-turtling.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@crockett36 the Problem with a Leningrad stack is, that these units are missing on the defence for mosqwa.
Also they would be taken out with minimal losses for Germany by the units allready in Scandinavia, Luftwaffe and maybe one loaded TT.

No distraction for Germany, actually a gain bc they don’t have to fight them in the end battle for moscow.

In our game you left the Leningrad units to die and the white Russia stack.

A loss wich you can’t compensate in the long run.

Does your idea work?
Ya, of course. But probably one time only.
So this strategy will def. not be a solid or guiding strategy for an overall Allied playbook.

[taamvan]

@crockett36 The perfect map is way simpler than you’re making it–it sticks a gigantic slow force into bryansk and/or belarus, with the fast movers 1 space behind it so they can go into any attack.

Still no matter how you boil it down or what you buy if the Germans stack correctly, all that ends up happening is that you back down and give up ground. There are 2 reasons–1) the italians can open the way for the Germans to hit the stack with all their fast movers 2) even if you have a somewhat favorable attack, that puts you all the closer to the German second line and whatever survives gets wiped so its a one-shot

Besides some cadgy preparation with an eye to turtling up eventually, other Russian actions (preemtive counterattacks) tend to be counterproductive and actually cost you time and position. That’s why I keep arguing for a small increase in Russian striking power which can be used in a variety of ways across the whole game…that still wont make Germany afraid to stack and walk up to moscow