We need an allied playbook.

@waxenhen4 said in Allies getting destroyed every game?:

@Contango thanks for the pictures

So is the most optimal counter for an all in Russia attack really abandoning EVERY thing except Moscow? I suppose this would deny the VC but give Germany almost all of Russia’s ipc value for free.

the UK advice seems pretty strong but what do you think makes a better permanent main landing for the allies: Normandy, north/south Italy, or south France? (assume your not playing a mod that appears to have made southern France neutral)

For Russia it might be a bit strong to say to abandon absolutely everything. I think you can justify deviating from a full on retreat under certain circumstances:

You can make a case that your deviation stands a good chance of actually helping your Moscow odds.

Examples:

Trading units to re-take Novgorod, Ukraine and Volgograd -> not only kills German units but also denies factory usage Sending some mechanized units to kill small groups of German tanks/mechs trying to do a Northern run-by to gobble up income If Germany moves ahead too quickly, or splits up and leaves you an opportunity to strafe his army and still be safe afterwards, (a strafe is where you make an attack with intentions of retreating on purpose) or otherwise leaves you a lucrative unit trade Germany has allocated resources away from Russia, so Russia can now flip to offense.

Examples:

German production switches heavily to the Atlantic Germany decides to do a mid-game Sea Lion Germany goes hard with mechanized units into the middle east leaving you outnumbering his slower army

As for my thoughts on an Allied permanent landing:

Normandy is probably the best:

Free factory Opportunity for UK ground troops to use US transports easily UK Air cover (watch the Italians taking out your airbase before Germany’s turn) UK production of extra naval units if things get lively and it’s necessary Furthest from Moscow, meaning German planes have to pick one or the other German infantry/artillery have to move off of defending West Germany to get there Can quickly switch to the Med if you see opportunity Threat of sniping Berlin (US takes Denmark, UK follows up with transports to Berlin)

I find Norway is good, but kind of situational. You can sometimes really annoy Germany with a small investment of suicided transports and not taking your entire fleet out of position and away from air cover.

yes

@Gamerman01:

Getting the money when taking a capital is as old as A&A itself, so what, about 35 years?

Never a good reason if it’s the only reason.

Going through the med is just impossible in pretty much any game. Either Italy or Germany is going to sink that transport with planes.

So with that reasoning, you must hope for a J1 declaration of war on the US, and then you could do this:

US 1: Buy 5 fighters. Sail your single atlantic transport 1/4th toward Saudi (SZ 87)
US 2: Buy 5-6 bombers. Sail transport 2/4ths to Saudi (SZ 82 or 69). US 1 fighters to French West Africa.
US 3: Transport now 3/4ths to saudi (SZ 71). US 1 fighters to Egypt. US 2 bombers to French Equatorial Africa.
US 4: Go time.

Hit Saudi with your transport. Send in 5 fighters and 5-6 bombers from Africa, taking bomber losses.

US 5: Build factory (and an air base couldn’t hurt), land your planes on it or near it. If Iraq/Persia are still available, take those if possible.
US 6: First turn you can purchase units in Saudi Arabia. Buy factories in other middle east countries, if available.

This is about the time Moscow has gone to hell or the Germans are coming into the middle east. Not enough time to really get any ground units over there. But you could build fighters on US 3 and 4 that would arrive US 5 and 6 for a respectable plane stack. With a bit of UK help, probably enough to shut down any hope of Moscow or the middle east being seriously threatened. A huge problem with this is that you’d have +8 Germans or Italians coming from Turkey.

This is a 100% Atlantic buy for the first 2 turns turns and a significant drain for US 3, 4, and 5 as well. Very dangerous. Japan is going to go nuts because, remember, they J1’d you.

Seems like a crazy damn idea–one that is too crazy to work well, probably. Not only that, but it’s completely obvious what you’re up to. However, I think it’d be pretty easy to have UK prevent Japan from killing/blocking your transport J3. And if Japan invested too much in the Indian ocean to stop you for sure, then they’re ruining some of their J1 momentum, so maybe that’s not entirely awful.

edit-
I guess you could also send your pacific transports through the panama canal, building a naval base there. This would give you four more units in the middle east shortly after your first transport arrived.

Better alternative, with nearly the same effect:
Don’t do Saudi, just have UK save you Persia/Iraq. This saves you from having to violate neutrality, and both are reachable on the same turn as Saudi. If you do hit Saudi, do it the next turn, saving the neutrality violation for one round later.

My USA purchase is always 1 Carrier for New York, and 1 Carrier, 1 Battleship for San Fran. The only exception is if there is a U-Boat threat in the Atlantic right away, (destroyers and scramble fighters) or if Japan goes pearl harbour (subs and scramble fighters).

Rules are rules anyway, if you want leniancy, you have to ask for it.  This would not be a case where I would be inclined to grant it, mind you.  If you moved everything from Hawaii to Carlines but forgot to move a fighter there leaving it prone to attack, then I could see a case of “yea, okay, so you intended to move it but it got lost in the shuffle” fine, generally I’d allow that change (for non-league, non-tournament games, of course.)

Well you wanted to know how to slow the allies down. Fucking around with the USA would do it.

@marechallannes:

Q1: A battleship enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. The sub submerges.

Following the rules, the sub emerges after the combat (that doesn’t take place)

Who controlls the seazone after the battleship owners turn?

Is the sub able to raid the convoy zone in that seazone, or is it impossible, cause the battleship owner “won” the battle and controls the sea zone?

Q2: Does the sub emerges before the collect income phase of the battleship owner and is it able to raid the sea-zone of the battleship-owner?

Q3: A submarine enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. Both sub submerges before any round of combat.

Are both submarines are able to make convoy raids? (For example a UK-sub and a Jap-sub in SZ 37)

1:  No power can “control” a seazone.  That’s why you don’t mark it.  The sub is able to raid, because it remains in the seazone during the collect income phase.  Powers occupy a seazone, and a seazone can be hostile, but it’s never really “controlled”.  A power can still place units in a seazone adjacent to its factory, regardless of how many enemy units might remain in that seazone (that may even be disrupting a convoy).
2:  Yes.
3: Yes,  assuming each is present during their respective enemy’s collect income phase (when the disruption occurs).

“Submerging” is simply a term for the option to retreat but remain in the same seazone.  It serves no other function, and it does not have any impact on any other phases of a turn.  After combat, all subs are effectively no longer submerged.