@crockett36 in the introduction it states you proclaim not to attack UK1 but to regroup which is part of the richochet. Can you elaborate on that?
@Cornwallis several first turn innovations highlight OR. I didn’t come up with them, but they indicate the mindset. I was part of the thread that came up with Gibastion after I contended that Taranto left the British destitute in the Med. I originally combined the Egyptian navy with the French. This Kind of thinking rejects the Tobruk attack as well.
It also can be seen in early game withdrawals from Yunnan unless the Chinese are assisted by foreign fighters and the numbers look at least 40/60.
It can also be demonstrated by withdrawing units but being ready to strike when the fighters go home. Fade and strike tactics.
Battles of attrition are to be avoided early game on account of the political situation. Think turn 5 when planning for turn 1. I would emphasize reserves and an uninterrupted logistical train of units to the front. I would also emphasize no region being without a possible front. OR is mostly a British and Chinese operation, although it is coordinating with Roosevelt behind the scenes and the Russians must not be too bold UNLESS the Germans buy navy first turn. That is for another day.
@crockett36 I always wondered if it is better to do Taranto or not, it seems like a majority of the community does it but a growing number of people have decided to to Gibastion, what is more used the really skilled players like @AndrewAAGamer and others because I see it is quite a contentious topic
@jacobgeo24
https://youtu.be/htJEztSxmo8?si=pdWd1Bt5-ndgHJLX
This is something i try sometimes and works pretty good
@jacobgeo24 shiny ships that do nothing all game are my favorite kind of enemy ship.
@crockett36 Ah I see, better not waste our ships on an enemy that will not be doing anything with their
Very nice. I hope this is pinned.
@Cornwallis said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
@jacobgeo24
https://youtu.be/htJEztSxmo8?si=pdWd1Bt5-ndgHJLXThis is something i try sometimes and works pretty good
Took a look. I liked it. Not as much as Gibastion. Gibastion has the advantage of being anti-Sealion. However, if I saw a three plane purchase, I would give it a go! I think I would land the planes in Malta. Be a piece or two down and put the fear of God in them if they divided their navy. Does that make sense?
@SuperbattleshipYamato We should try to get this pinned, good idea
Yes. @Panther thoughts?
Also, as someone who’s looking for new Allied strategies to test, how should I incorporate this into my personal game (I’m playing against myself). I don’t feel like reading almost 50 pages or testing 10 different openers.
In other words, how can I come up with one good Allied strategy for my planned Axis moves (doesn’t matter what they are, but I do know them) for one game only? Thank you!
@SuperbattleshipYamato I’d say that you probably should identify what your weakest aspect of your allied game, and after identifying it, perhaps skim through and find a part of the article you like to get those ideas. I ensure you that there are individual articles or sections of articles on every specific country in the allied camp, and there can be multiple of them. That is just my idea, but I haven’t read all the pages either :)
Phew. Glad I’m not the only one who didn’t. Always feels awkward when you’re the only one who didn’t read everything.
I’ll probably just do the first article’s ideas. They have my head full enough already. 👍👍
@crockett36 said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
@Cornwallis said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
@jacobgeo24
https://youtu.be/htJEztSxmo8?si=pdWd1Bt5-ndgHJLXThis is something i try sometimes and works pretty good
Took a look. I liked it. Not as much as Gibastion. Gibastion has the advantage of being anti-Sealion. However, if I saw a three plane purchase, I would give it a go! I think I would land the planes in Malta. Be a piece or two down and put the fear of God in them if they divided their navy. Does that make sense?
It would be too close without the planes in Alexandria.
I think I would skip 106 and send the destroyer to 92.
@SuperbattleshipYamato Yeah, and the good thing is, if the first strategy doesn’t work, there are plenty more in the paper to check out
P Panther pinned this topic on
Agreed (and success, you got pinned).
@SuperbattleshipYamato Thank you to whoever did that, I am so glad that this was able to happen. Also Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!
@jacobgeo24 You are welcome. Thanks for your efforts.
@crockett36
I´ve tried the gibastion before but then italy gets a good chance of taking the NO in the middle east (landing 2 tpt in syria). Or even egypt on I2.
Plus you can´t unite the UK fleet with the Pac fleet.
My goal is to built and hold a minor in egypt UK1.
The gibastion is vulnerable too bc you need to stack Algeria to prevent italy from taking it.
In my plan you need the UK fightrrs on Alexandria to pair up with the Italian troops in Tobruk plus their airforce. If you land them at Malta they get a fair chance of destroying alexandria.
@Cornwallis without an Allied bid, I view Gibastion as too risky. Something goes wrong and Egypt will fall. Game over.
I also think a factory in Egypt on UK1 would trigger Sealion assuming average dice rolls on first turn. If the money isn’t being spent in London, the Axis needs to punish the bold/foolish decision.
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris i´m not a fan either. Watch my video here above.
Not doing taranto keeps 2 extra fighters on London. A buy of 5 inf there (plus the minor) is even strenger than the 6ind and fighter standard by.
The opening is not as aggresive as taranto but consolidates the forces for a strike on UK2 or 3.
