There are some extraordinary circumstances when Italy should own it such as when Russia is about to fall, and therefore Italy can make better use of the Ukraine factory (for the Middle East). But in most games Germany should own it because they need to build infantry and artillery there to attack Russia.
USA to Italy
-
You could try the Japan/Med strategy.
J1 harbour in Hainan. No war. Fleet merge at Hainan.
J2 move whole fleet to India without war.
J3 take Persia and/or Iraq
J4 take Egypt
J5 takes the whole starting IJN into the Med -
Wouldn’t you block sea zones with british if japan move to india sea zone end round 2? I would
-
Wouldn’t you block sea zones with british if japan move to india sea zone end round 2? I would
You can only do that by declaring war on Japan and by doing so the USA will not be involved in the war until after round 4.
I like the Italian focus on the European theater, but with an aggressive Japan that should be done quickly to at least have the US spend some in the Pacific and hold Hawaii and Sydney.
-
No, you put a ship in 78 and one in 79. No iraq or Persia j3
-
No, you put a ship in 78 and one in 79. No iraq or Persia j3
That only works if UK and Japan are at war. If Japan didn’t declare, that means UK would have to for the blocking to work. Once they do that, Japan can attack and it doesn’t bring the U.S. into the war early.
-
No, you put a ship in 78 and one in 79. No iraq or Persia j3
As long as Japan and UK are not at war, Japan may ignore UK ships. Hence they will not block any Japanese fleet movement
-
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
Cow is talking about STEP’s not rounds and about the US to Kill Ita First.
Has not much to do with Japan.
Therefore it would be interesting to know what to buy for this Step Plan starting with the minimum.
Like in every other Plan i see pro and cons… -
This is an interesting idea. My first thoughts are:
1. You want to make sure that the US takes Southern Italy. The US has the money to build at the factory and the UK typically does not. This would also make it easy for the US to reinforce Egypt, the UK, and the Middle East with fighters each turn.
2. I find it hard to reconcile this with having enough force to also deprive Germany of Norway and Finland. While the Axis-to-Allies IPC swing is almost much the same, Germany having 50 IPCs and Italy having 10 is better for the Allies than Germany having 60 IPCs and Italy having none. If you do swing enough force into the Med to take Italy and also swing enough force in the North Atlantic to secure Norway, then you must be leaving the US weak in the Pacific.
3. From my experiences playing the Axis, I was quite happy to not liberate Southern Italy and just collect IPCs for Northern Italy myself (especially if I could hold Northern Italy). I haven’t seen that from the Allied perspective though.I would want to see this in action before I made any broad commitments on how well it works though.
Marsh
-
No, you put a ship in 78 and one in 79. No iraq or Persia j3
As long as Japan and UK are not at war, Japan may ignore UK ships. Hence they will not block any Japanese fleet movement
You are sort of right that if british and japan are not at war then the japanese can move past those ships. However, that means they can not take Iraq/Persia J3, because they are not at war and I think that was the meaning behind the post. If Japan declares war J3, then those ships will block and prevent japan from taking Iraq/Persia
-
I think that’s only the case if Iraq has been taken over by the British. If it’s still a pro-Axis neutral, then Japan does not need to declare war to activate it. If for some reason you were saving it for Russia, it Japan can indeed make the Middle East interesting.
Strangely, when I tried it UK Pacific felt compelled to turtle up immediately – three loaded TTs off India and three more off Hainan, along with all the Japanese fleet, is a persuasive force – it certainly looks like you’re going to for a fast India kill, and the UK has no choice but to try to deploy it’s blockers easterly to keep those Hainan transports from making India. That leaves precious few UK ships that can block in a westerly direction unless you pull them from the Med, and that also makes life interesting in the Middle East…
There are some tradeoffs – it pulls a lot of resources away from the Pacific proper. However, when I tried it I wound up taking all of sub-Egyptian Africa and even though the Allies were doing a KJF I was still pulling in a lot of money as a result. The US was having great difficulty containing Japan because of the African money.
Marsh
-
@Marshmallow:
This is an interesting idea. My first thoughts are:
1. You want to make sure that the US takes Southern Italy. The US has the money to build at the factory and the UK typically does not. This would also make it easy for the US to reinforce Egypt, the UK, and the Middle East with fighters each turn.
2. I find it hard to reconcile this with having enough force to also deprive Germany of Norway and Finland. While the Axis-to-Allies IPC swing is almost much the same, Germany having 50 IPCs and Italy having 10 is better for the Allies than Germany having 60 IPCs and Italy having none. If you do swing enough force into the Med to take Italy and also swing enough force in the North Atlantic to secure Norway, then you must be leaving the US weak in the Pacific.
3. From my experiences playing the Axis, I was quite happy to not liberate Southern Italy and just collect IPCs for Northern Italy myself (especially if I could hold Northern Italy). I haven’t seen that from the Allied perspective though.I would want to see this in action before I made any broad commitments on how well it works though.
Marsh
1 - yes
2 - no one said you would simultaneously take Norway. I think killing Italy will be challenging enough. I agree that the US will probably be weak in the Pacific while doing this.
3 - fair enough. Sounds a good decision if you weren’t going to be able to hold Rome.I also am curious for a suggestion on how this is actually achievable. With reasonable builds in Italy, seems to me that they have enough to defend a reasonable sized invasion force.
-
Agreed, I think once the first round or two of can openers is produced for Germany Italy can withstand a direct assault on its own for long enough to make it very expensive for the US. If you take Norway out of the equation as well for the obvious weakness it produces in the Pacific to do both, that also frees up German air units to defend Southern Italy as well.
Still, I’d be interested to see it – I’m sure there are dynamics to it that I’m not seeing.
Marsh
-
Shouldn’t the Allies simply clear out the Italian ships and camp a bunch of subs off their coast so they don’t make anything?
-
^ That’s not what the OP said.
You also need a bunch of planes camped nearby if you don’t want them buying a DD each turn and killing a few subs a go. Or a steady supply of subs I guess.
-
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
Sicily is a great landing zone to support this invasion.
The big question is - What about Japan?
-
Why Sicily? Are you sending in a suiciding transport to take it then putting an airbase on it next turn to cover your fleet?
-
You will have all the Aircover you need.
Problem will still be: Do you get enough units together for this Task?
While you will end up with at last 6 Bmbrs, what will your Navy look like?
1-2 CV’s, couple DD’s plus 6 TT’s??? -
Why Sicily? Are you sending in a suiciding transport to take it then putting an airbase on it next turn to cover your fleet?
Bombers in Gibraltar (with no airbase) can hit rome and land in Sicily
Bombers in London can hit rome and land in Sicily
Bombers as far away as Iraq can hit rome and land in Sicily.I have done the suicide transport before, although you dont always have to, and sometimes if you have a whack of bombers, you can use this to “surprise” an opponent by suddenly having an available landing zone for your planes next turn that they didnt expect, where they simply cant get enough units built or moved into Rome in time to defend against.
It’s not some “must” move, its just an option sometimes and one that people should be aware of.
It’s also helpful because if your fleet moves there its likely to get swarmed by German airpower. Now you dont have to do the “should I tip my carrier or kill a plane” decision. You can just tip all your ships because your air can always land on sicily. so its better fleet protection just by existing.
Theoretically an AB could be built there, or even a NB to help the movement of ships, but thats alot of dollar for medium gain.
-
I played against a guy who landed on Crete with the 3 Russian planes. Than the UK bought an air base. And on the next turn, the Russian planes cleared the Italian destroyer blocking in sz 92…US landed on s. Italy and n. Italy. Pretty cool. I never got Italy back the entire game.
I won the game due to other circumstances, like UK getting bad dice on turn 1…clearing up Italy in the med/Africa. Plus I sent Japan to further threaten Middle East /Cairo. Let me get Moscow turn 6. But anyways, it’s something to explore; using Russian planes as a can opener. Of course this causes other problems like Russian maybe falling quick. So it’s got to be like all in to reduce Germany quick before Japan grows too much.
-
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
Too many details!
Step 1 buy naval (I guess all subs and transports)
Step 2 buy bombers (I think I got that one)
Step 3 more subs?
Step 4 attack (like what the Italian blocker?)
Suggested Topics
