May I ask how that plays out? Has that meant Italy gets Cairo early while UK pressures Germany?
Does taking Spain with USA spell doom for the Axis?
-
You don’t even have to take Moscow. if only Moscow stands they are no threat with 3 IPC’s a round.
Italy gets +18 IPC with the middle East and Caucasus, and Germany gets +26, with some TT’s as a buffer.
You see why I think that purchasing any other units than Infantry for the first 2 turns is a mistake?
Thank you for posting your opening as a response to the proposed strategy.
I see why you think it is a mistake. I do not agree however:I refuse to leave blockers for 1 IPC zones. I would rather the German tanks blitz to within counterattack range, I only place blockers in zones next to Russia when needed later in the game.
I see 10 mechs in Germany turn 2, a large force entering Russia as well. You sank the Russian BB, and yes, Russia will pull back.
By round 3, you capture 1 Russian victory city. You went North, Russia retreated south via Belarus.You have 10 mechs, and 4 armor plus we’ll say 11 air units able to hit Ukraine on turn 4.
Russia will have 2 Bessarabia , 3 Eastern Poland, 1 inf, 1 art W. Ukraine, 3 inf Ukraine, 1 produced in Ukraine turn 1 (3mech in Volgograd, 2 fighters Russia save 2ipcs), 3 produced turn2, 3 produced turn 4, 2 From Caucasus, 3 from Russia with art, by then for a total of:
21 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 aa gun (from Russia) vs. 10 mechs, 4 armor, 11 planes.
That gives USSR 23 vs 25(14land) a tight fight, you can add 4 more armor, I can add starting units in Leningrad/BalticStates/archangle since Belarus is my standard turn1 move from Baltic and Novgorod/Archangle, which adds 10 more inf and 1 more art. Giving Ukraine a total of:
31 infantry,2 artillery 1 aa gun in the south vs 10 Mech, 8 armor, 11 air: 33vs29.My turns 2 and 3 productions are stacked in Bryansk(18 units) turn 4 with 9 units on (russia). Germany cannot go both North and South with armor and still get both, yes, you will get them over time. It is possible for you to add Bulgarian infantry to your Ukraine fight on turn 4. Making it 33 vs 33.
As USSR I don’t want to give the Germans a fighting chance (die rolls) to win, so I will likely do this on round 4 thus denying a fight:
Now, USSR on turn 4 could just stage in Byransk with 50 pieces, and make Ukraine and Belarus a kill zone, as your German reinforcements are all likely north (where the transports can stage them). This will prevent Ukraine from producing for the axis…delay a couple of rounds as Germany will try to shift you North by going Archangle->Vologda.
So turn 5 and 6 Germany is likely stalled, by turn 7 and 8 USSR has retreated to Moscow, without London, the game continues.
This assumes a German commitment production wise by turn of:
Turn 1: 10 mech
Turn 2: 6 land units for transports. More for USSR? or Defense? I say you will need more for USSR to crack it.
Turn 3: more land for Russia needed or south front stalls. 3 land built out of North Victory city. And land units to defend Europe.
Turn 4: land units to defend Europe, 3 units North VC Russia front now slated to stall
Turn 5: defense of Europe….deviate from this and yes you might crack USSR but you should lose Berlin.That is my conclusion: Failure to take London and focus on USSR will see Berlin fall with this allied plan. London must be seized to make a game out of it if I am correct.
I believe it would be wise to trade Moscow for Berlin as the allies with London allied. USA could then leave France and UK to mop up Italians, and focus on Pacific or just finish Italy with some spending in the pacific from the Berlin Plunder. -
Attacking a neutral gives the Axis far too much men… You also neglected to mention Switzerland and I believe Afghanistan would be doable as well…
-
James, Japan will win very quickly with this.
-
James, Japan will win very quickly with this.
I understand your concern about Japan getting 6 victory cities.
This can be prevented using minimal effort with the US as long as USSR participates and India goes Navy. Anzac will survive if Japan does not do a beeline for them. The last two games I participated in I was able to stop Japan without USA builds.
This requires sz 98 navy as well as sz 71 and 72 ships.
The Japanese navy cannot breach the Indian navy at sz 39 without cataclysmic losses.
By turn 3 your force at sz 39 consists of (copied from alpha2 setup sheets):
-
Sea Zone 98: 1 Cruiser, 1 Destroyer, 1 Carrier
w/1 Tac Bomber, 1 Transport -
Sea Zone 71: 1 Destroyer
-
Sea Zone 39:
1 Destroyer,1 Cruiser,1 Transport -
Sea Zone 37: 1 Battleship
-
Sea Zone 72: 1 Destroyer(french)
-
Builds: Carrier(turn1)save 1,Carrier and Destroyer (turn2) DOW turn1 plus 1ipc saved
This gives you: (1 DD scratched off as blocker above)
3 carriers, 4 destroyers, 1 battleship, 2 cruisers and 9 air units via scramble(5 Russian,3 UK, 3 Anzac available for selection) 19 units/23hits
7@2, 2@3, 10@4 = 9-11 hits round 1
Japan max force, can hit that with:
3 carriers, 4 destroyers, 2 battleship, 2 cruisers, 2 subs and 6 air units 19 units/24hits
3@0, 6@2, 5@3, 5@4 = 8-10 hits round 1
Best case scenario:
Japan wins barely, has very little to no Navy left, and now the Anzac DD,Ca and Starting US fleet is stronger than them.
Japan is struggling on mainland, their fleet is fully committed and now depleted.
They likely have few of the DEI islands.
This is if they are in position to strike on turn 3.IF they fail to sink the UK navy turn 3, turn 4 the US and UK fleets meet at one of the DEI islands or australia. That combined fleet is now quite safe defensively and permits island trading and or naval blockaiding of sz 19 or 6….only the whole Jap air force will sink it.
This should buy you plenty of time in my opinion.
-
-
In a recent game as the Allies, I positioned myself to take Spain with the US, and Turkey with Britain. This required troops I had been building in Iraq (conquered GB2, IC GB3 combined with Tartanto to slow Italy). I built a Minor IC in Spain, built an airbase, and between Gibraltar and Spain’s airbase could protect a fleet in SZ91 with minimal effort. Turkey bought me Greece and eventually the rest of the Balkan peninsula.
Unfortunately, I was already losing the game, and this was a desparate measure… still, I was able to apply a lot of pressure to France, and quickly, as well as to the underbelly of the Med.
James - I believe there is a valid and acceptable use of Spain/Turkey for the Allies under certain circumstamces, and your idea merits more examination.
-
Turkey can be gotten too from Greece allowing the Germans to quickly zoom into Caucasus and the Middle East getting all those juicy NOs. Yes, Russia could work to mitigate this, but I am assuming by the Time America lands in Spain (Earliest is round 4, realistic is closer to round 5 or 6) Russia should be on its last legs.
-
James -
Now that you’ve spent everything in the ocean and have declared war on me turn 1, I can just put insane pressure on you through the mainland. You’ll have trouble keeping up with that, having not bought much - if any - land forces. I’ll just take the DEI, considering your fleet can’t really attack mine, and then put enough resources into that fleet. It won’t take much, since your income has dropped to 5-7, and mine has jumped way up. Attacking you won’t piss off America, so it’s just a matter of time for you. Doubly since America isn’t spending much in the Pacific anyway.
I’m not going to attack until I have an overwhelming navy, and that won’t take much time.
Calcutta’s mine. -
James -
Now that you’ve spent everything in the ocean and have declared war on me turn 1, I can just put insane pressure on you through the mainland. You’ll have trouble keeping up with that, having not bought much - if any - land forces. I’ll just take the DEI, considering your fleet can’t really attack mine, and then put enough resources into that fleet. It won’t take much, since your income has dropped to 5-7, and mine has jumped way up. Attacking you won’t piss off America, so it’s just a matter of time for you. Doubly since America isn’t spending much in the Pacific anyway.
I’m not going to attack until I have an overwhelming navy, and that won’t take much time.
Calcutta’s mine.I understand where you are coming from, having played Japan many times it seems accurate. Except for a new wrinkle:
The new twist that you are not used to is the fact that China does not die because of the USSR involvement. This creates a buffer preventing access to India over land. 17 units are moved to Amur turn 1 as bait…hoping Japan hits it, but if not, they slide into Korea and if left alive march through Manchuria to Yunnan. The main difference is that China has the burma road from turn 2-turn 5 typically and specifically because of USSR involvement. 12 units hitting Japans land units without plane cover stops their advance…They’ll need factories if their navy is deployed south…again more time bought.
If you build heavy navy to breach the Indian fleet, you will not have the money to reinforce against China on land.
If you fail to destroy the UK navy by turn 3, it redeploys to link up with the allied fleet at one of the DEI making sure Japan is denied the NO. After turn 3, Land unit builds are likely with India as the fleet goes Island hoping.Once Anzac has 15 land units it will likely go navy also, increasing the pressure that Japan must bear on the allied fleet.
I know this sounds crazy, but I have seen it work out 2 different ways so far. (pacific part)
-
Firstly if you stack on Amur “as bait” I take that, not as bait, but as a nice opportunity. Of course I’m going to hit it, so those infantry will never see Chinese soil. China can’t interrupt me when I’m pumping infantry through southeast Asia; they simply aren’t allowed to because of China’s limitations.
In addition, the forces I start with in Asia are enough to keep China very busy. Sure, I won’t stomp China out entirely, but they definitely will never become something more than a nuisance.I’m only spending minimally on the mainland. A little bit of infantry + my boatload of planes is more than powerful to push into India. The rest is going into subs. By the time you leave India’s shores to “island hop” my fleet’s more than powerful enough to crush yours.
-
Agreed, only I’d follow up the loss with a Mechanized Infantry/Armor blitz into open Russian land.
-
I have nothing against out of the box thinking, and you might be right with the Spain tactic. On the pacific side I’m not sure. I tend to agree with Jenn, but i do see a strong British fleet in the Pacific as a problem. In my experience it’s never easy to conquer India… And that might just make it hard enough for Japan.
Anyways I’d like to challenge you! (If i can figure out how online playing works…)
Heil, from Austria.
-
I have nothing against out of the box thinking, and you might be right with the Spain tactic. On the pacific side I’m not sure. I tend to agree with Jenn, but i do see a strong British fleet in the Pacific as a problem. In my experience it’s never easy to conquer India… And that might just make it hard enough for Japan.
Anyways I’d like to challenge you! (If i can figure out how online playing works…)
Heil, from Austria.
Cool, I just figured out how online works sort of, so you can be my first, would you like me to play the allies?
Greetings from the Midwestern USA. 9 miles(14.4 kilometers) from the St. Louis,Missouri Gateway Arch (which is a 192 meter[630feet] stainless steel archway with elevators inside that permit observation from the top via a number of windows-should be plenty of time to warn us about approaching Austrians from Illinois-especially the kind talked about in the movie “Blues Brothers” Its flank is protected by a river a few meters away forcing an amphibious assault from the shores of Illinois if we knock out the 3 Bridges in the region. That should buy us the time we need to entrench from our current “Lincoln” :) )
-
@Cmdr:
Agreed, only I’d follow up the loss with a Mechanized Infantry/Armor blitz into open Russian land.
That is what happens typically. The reason I stage 17 units, is I move one back out of air range. Yes, I cede 5 IPCs early on, but its not too difficult to slow down blitzing. Typically, I see Russia reduced to 15 IPCs by turn 6 or so…Plenty of time to get your initial pile going. Germany will be the only one strong enough in theater to seize Moscow. Japan will have a smaller force then Germany.
The whole purpose of the “bait” is to draw the Manchurian units North and not south, cutting down mainland Asia from 32 units to 21 units which is enough to keep China alive until turn 7 or 8. Of the 21 moving towards Yunnan/Russia, 4 are typically traded away by turn 2, leaving 15(2 are in siam) vs a typical 15 Chinese inf by turn J3. With 12-16 Jap air units they cannot breach Yunnan as it also has a Chinese fighter, 7-12 Russians(depends of if air is on UK carriers) and 5-6 British units(aagun also). After turn 3, China begins marching as they have sufficient artillery to redeploy.
I like to think that if Japan does go North, they won’t be challenging the allies in the South Pacific. That may or may not be true
Also, I am not trying to focus on the Pacific side of the board, since this topic is about Spain.
This is my response on the Pacific side. I’m sure their are other responses that work.Others may work as well, I’m trying to review the merits of Spain as an allied objective turn 4.
-
I evac China anyway, so baiting me would only help me.
India can be crushed just buy 2 rounds of transports and sail all your units and ships to Siam, attack on round 3.
-
@Cmdr:
I evac China anyway, so baiting me would only help me.
India can be crushed just buy 2 rounds of transports and sail all your units and ships to Siam, attack on round 3.
I’m a big fan of losing capitals(under the right conditions) if it buys me the time I need to win. Lets say you do breach the UK navy and seize India, and Lets say your north Campaign helps you take Moscow, will it be in time?
It looks like 6 turns via the North route, to get fast movers from Japan/Manchuria/Korea built on turn 2 next to Moscow, if the way is clear. Lets assume your tank survives J1 and you manage to land 6 more armor/mechanized by round 2 (don’t ask me how) that gives you 7 land units and 20 air against 7 USSR builds lets say 35 units are there. A lot of people claim they have Moscow by turn 8 if I do what is proposed, making Japan’s efforts irrelevant by then. I of course think it takes longer but that’s just me, so your units would be relevant. :)
If you evac China, then you are not going for a 6 VC win, you are aiming for the 8 VC which is why liberating France becomes a problem with this Spain approach. With France and Moscow the game will not end if they hold London. The trick will be if I can get London,Egypt, Berlin, or Rome before losing Moscow.I like to think that Berlin will tip the game in my favor since they will hold most of the USSR territories. Leaving less IPCs for Italy and Japan to drive me out.
Plus, and this is the kicker….I will be able to produce and use units with France mid to late game!! Show me another plan where the axis don’t just surrender by then. ha ;) (humor) All I have to do is trade Moscow for France :)
-
The idea behind abandoning China is this:
1) The distance from Korea to Novosibirsk is the same whether you go through Manchuria and Jehol or if you go through Amur.
2) China can build on newly liberated territories making it easier to break your lines forcing you to either retreat or trade Mechanized Infantry for Chinese Infantry
3) India is in a much better position to reinforce China than it is to reinforce Russia (much futher away)
4) Japan loses 11 IPC for the territories in China, but saves at a minimum 4 infantry they would have lost trading territories there equating to a wash of cost to income.
5) With the power behind America, India and Australia, Japan IS going to get beat back eventually. So you either have to get 6 VC before the allies can do it or you have to help Germany get 8 VCs before the Allies can turn their attention to Europe. The latter seems to be much easier.
6) China cannot leave Chinese territories. They can have 42 infantry, 16 artillery and 1 fighter in Manchuria and can NEVER attack Korea. -
Deal!
James, I’ll fight you.I’ve a lot of work to do this week, but ill try to figure out ABattlemap etc. and we could start next week…
Of course i want you to play the Allies, since its all about your strategy…I’ll PM you when I’m ready!
Looking forward to it!
-
Well with America going heavy Atlantic, I’m looking for the Pacific win, so I won’t be evacuating China.
That is what happens typically. The reason I stage 17 units, is I move one back out of air range.
3 Armor + 5 Mech do not care about your 1 Infantry trying to stop them. The blitzing will continue.
The whole purpose of the “bait” is to draw the Manchurian units North and not south, cutting down mainland Asia from 32 units to 21 units which is enough to keep China alive until turn 7 or 8.
Sure, China will still be alive. That’s not uncommon. But they will be bottled up in one, very managable spot. They definitely won’t be stopping my march to Calcutta. India has to invest in its own land forces to survive, not hope that China will protect it.
I like to think that if Japan does go North, they won’t be challenging the allies in the South Pacific. That may or may not be true
Okay, fair enough. This is sort of the crux of this issue. That is to say, Japan will very much be challenging them. In a big way, considering America won’t be putting much towards stopping them.
Also, I am not trying to focus on the Pacific side of the board, since this topic is about Spain.
I’m trying to review the merits of Spain as an allied objective turn 4.Okay, that’s more than fair; I understand that.
My point is simply that, although the Allies may see benefits to this Spain-centric strat, they will probably falter on the other side of the world. Any strat discussion needs to consider the repercussions on other theaters that will be had. That’s all I’m trying to do. -
Well with America going heavy Atlantic, I’m looking for the Pacific win, so I won’t be evacuating China.
That would be the best way to capitalize on the allies decision.That is what happens typically. The reason I stage 17 units, is I move one back out of air range.
3 Armor + 5 Mech do not care about your 1 Infantry trying to stop them. The blitzing will continue.
Assuming you DOW on Russia, I’ll turn 12IPCs into 3 mech turn 3, and deploy them to Novosibirsk turn 4. May be able to land an air unit or other units with them based on board. We’ll see if that is needed.The whole purpose of the “bait” is to draw the Manchurian units North and not south, cutting down mainland Asia from 32 units to 21 units which is enough to keep China alive until turn 7 or 8.
Sure, China will still be alive. That’s not uncommon. But they will be bottled up in one, very managable spot. They definitely won’t be stopping my march to Calcutta. India has to invest in its own land forces to survive, not hope that China will protect it.
We’ll I believe they can stack in Burma, forcing Japan to engage or take the sea route which may be contested.I like to think that if Japan does go North, they won’t be challenging the allies in the South Pacific. That may or may not be true
Okay, fair enough. This is sort of the crux of this issue. That is to say, Japan will very much be challenging them. In a big way, considering America won’t be putting much towards stopping them.
The first 3-4 turns they likely won’t be, later they may be. Have to see board to see if it matters.Also, I am not trying to focus on the Pacific side of the board, since this topic is about Spain.
I’m trying to review the merits of Spain as an allied objective turn 4.Okay, that’s more than fair; I understand that.
My point is simply that, although the Allies may see benefits to this Spain-centric strat, they will probably falter on the other side of the world. Any strat discussion needs to consider the repercussions on other theaters that will be had. That’s all I’m trying to do.
That is why I asked for comments. It is a fair concern, and it may prove this tactic unsound. Not claiming automatic success, just looking for another option. It may prove that this cannot be tried too early, only after America has spent 3 turns in the Pacific and then do a Spain turn 5 or 6….we’ll have to see.Responses in Maroon above, I have yet to master the art of point by point quoting.
Thanks for your evaluation.I’m assuming Moscow will be a focus of the axis. I am pretty much resigned to the fact that they will be pressured to retreat to Moscow with or without the far east holdings. Japan will do a good job of Knocking down their income after their 5th turn collection. I further believe that Germany is the main threat to Moscow until late game.
The question about Spain: Does it “speed” up the allies ability to make Moscow “irrelevant” or is Moscow always “relevant” because the USA cannot win on its own? Also, does it permit a trading of Moscow for Berlin, and if that occurs do the axis still have a chance of winning?
-
We’ll I believe they can stack in Burma, forcing Japan to engage or take the sea route which may be contested.
Assuming China will be in a strong position like this, which is a very safe assumption, they probably won’t be in Burma.
To survive long term against Japan, China has to sit somewhere in southern Chinese territories (probably Szechwan). That’s the only way they can continually trade with Japan and achieve their NO. Otherwise Japan can sweep in from the north and cut the road, simply by taking Szechwan. In addition, China can’t build in Burma, so any Chinese infantry there would have to be moved there. I know I’ve fixated on this a lot, but I’m saying that even if Japan attacks and pushes into Russia, they will still be a force to be reckoned with to India.Getting back to your topic -
I’m assuming Moscow will be a focus of the axis. I am pretty much resigned to the fact that they will be pressured to retreat to Moscow with or without the far east holdings.
Absolutely, particularly if Russia is sending resources (mechs/planes) to the East. Germany will basically have free reign to march right up to Moscow. Actually taking Moscow will take a bit longer, but the trip there will be fast.
The question about Spain: Does it “speed” up the allies ability to make Moscow “irrelevant” or is Moscow always “relevant” because the USA cannot win on its own?
Moscow is always relevant. That struggle decides most games, and is important in all of them. And with Spain, it may help the Allies, as you’ve said. It does make actually establishing European landings faster (no need for quite as much naval dominance as in the Channel). However, Germany won’t let you just roll over Western Europe. It will take some resources from Russia, but Germany does not need 100% to take down Russia, if it plays smart. A relatively light infantry force in France enables Germany to repond to the Allies taking Normandy or Southern France. After their initial invasion forces are removed, the Western front will boil down into an war of attrition in that region.
Germany can’t win if America is focusing on it, you’re right. BUT, Germany does take much longer to lose than Japan does. As a land-based nation, Germany can turtle very effectively. Italy will take part as well, having more freedom in the Middle East/Egypt, because America/UK didn’t focus on it before Germany.In addition, Russia has a third front to consider, as there is a Turkish army steaming in to the Caucasus.
Ultimately Germany won’t win - America will simply sap too much from the East Front.
However it probably won’t boil down to something so decisive as taking Moscow/Berlin. Rather it would probably become Russia bottled up in Moscow, but indestructible. At the same time, Germany will turtle up in West Europe against the Allies. Who would actually win this fight is fairly irrelevant, simply because of how long it will take.
Suggested Topics
