Commentary:
As is often the case in E&W, diplomacy has played a big role in this game.
The global outrage at the nuclear attack by the US has dramatically changed the face of the game.
My initial strategy for the UK was to rally their fleets in the Red Sea on turn 1, but then to return to the Mediterranean and begin shuttling troops from Africa to Italy, Turkey, or maybe Greece, then to eventually link up near the UK to attack Karelia.
With the Suez Canal closed to NATO, this became no longer possible; all the units in Africa that had been perfectly choreographed for the UK navy steaming across the Mediterranean are now going to be sent to India via Pakistan. This isn’t so bad, since Pakistan is being ignored by the USSR in this strategy (which is generally uncharacteristic in E&W).
As Western Europe, I often rally my fleet in the Mediterranean to keep the Soviets occupied with probing attacks at Greece or Turkey. I decided in this game to instead put as much force behind Norway as possible, knowing that I was planning to send UK ships in that direction anyway. The complete lack of any NATO ships in the Mediterranean has allowed the USSR to keep Turkey and Greece with minimal forces, despite their not being able to gain ground anywhere else.
If the UK or US spies are successful on this coming round, it will be interesting to see what they do. Opening the Suez is a possibility, as is lowering the Chinese contribution to the Soviet war effort. Another option is to steal heavy armor technology from the USSR; in most games, I eventually want the US and UK to both have this tech. Influencing a minor neutral is also an intriguing option; in this game in particular, Thailand would be a good choice for the US, and Sweden is almost always a solid option for the UK.
The US is at a bit of a conundrum in the Pacific; the Soviet air forces are placed in such a way that they threaten the Burma SZ and the Japan SZ. Ideally, as the US I would like to be able to leave 1 transport unguarded in either of these zones to facilitate the shuck-shuck, but if the Soviet forces stay where they are, the US fleet may have to split.
Typically when I play the US, my strategy is to attack heavily into Siberia; this allows you to place directly into Asia, and makes it a lot easier to maximize the number of units you can put on the front lines. With this game, the decision to direct forces towards Indochina means that the US does not have this “release valve,” leading to a weird, unmanageably high income. The US has too many forces currently (more than their transports can carry) but they can’t afford to build more transports, since 1) their income is not expected to increase, and; 2) they already have enough of them for their current unit output. This is why I decided to build an IC in Japan; I’m hoping the US can use this to build Heavy Armor or possibly Fusion Weapons, once they get those technologies, and direct them immediately against the brunt of Soviet forces.
Similarly, it seems clear that the Yugoslavia stack isn’t working for the USSR; it will have to be split so that they can take and hold West Germany. It’s looking like it will be a cat-and-mouse game, with both sides shifting forces back and forth between the France/West Germany border and the Italy/Yugoslavia border. My fear as the Soviets is that the clock is ticking; it’s only a matter of time before the US can start heavily reinforcing Europe. The USSR needs to either crush Indochina before then, or hope for some key diplomatic or technological successes.
Rolls: 1@1 2@3; Total Hits: 21@1: (2)2@3: (3, 2)
