Oh, you’re right. Never mind then. Always thought it was 3, not 2 sea zones, making Hawaii not possible. My fault. :)
USA to Italy
-
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
I am afraid it is not working :|
-
@aequitas:
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
I am afraid it is not working :|
Too much German air ?
-
@aequitas:
Wouldn’t the Luftwaffe smash your fleet? Or is your plan to use the Rome airbase to defend the fleet?
Two things i am assuming here:
� turn 4 the Luftwaffe is split. Some are in Russia, some are either in Germany or Italy.
The German player may assume no bigger threat since the US build is lightly.� UK needs to make effort to ensure a proper Invasion and Protection.
@SS:
@aequitas:
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
I am afraid it is not working :|
Too much German air ?
Cow’s steps aren’t supposed to be literally translated into turns. If you are trying out the idea you should use them as more of a guiding principle. First, you need transports to invade and naval to protect those transports. You need bombers to attack the factories in Italy that way once the Italians see you coming for them they cannot build defenses in time. You then need additional naval and bombers to either damage more factories, clear naval blockers, or protect yourself against enemy aircraft. Once these conditions have been met you can land in Rome relatively safe from Axis counterattack.
I think it would be a worthwhile idea during your bomber operations to strike at the factory in Western Germany. To support this I think a small landing in Sicily is also a good idea as a location for your bombers to threaten Axis industries.
You can also choke Italy’s income with submarines which the UK should be able to build 3 of over the course of the game without sacrificing too much. Furthermore, The US should be able to maintain a steady deployment of forces to Honolulu without compromising purchases in the Atlantic.
-
@SS:
@aequitas:
@Cow:
Step 1 buy naval
Step 2 buy bombers
Step 3 move naval and bombers in med sea/algeria
step 4 attackDo it.
I am afraid it is not working :|
Too much German air ?
Italy basically has three turns to send can openers towards Russia.
Then Italy starts build home defense (only Inf and fortify or Naval assets if Taranto did not happen).
Italy allways sees it coming, simply by looking at Gibraltar.
Gibraltar is the door and the passage is the door bird/spy glas.Actions can be made by Italy to prevent a Sack.
-
The axis can defend Italy to prevent it’s death. Germany may need to help, but it’s worth doing. Once the US fleet moves into the med, W Germany doesn’t need to be defended any more.
No evidence has been presented otherwise.
-
I don’t know why people are discounting this bovine theory. He tends to have great strats that are battle tested against top opponents. You can argue that a different plan might be more effective, but you can’t argue that this USA to Italy is stupid.
Italy can be stacked to prevent capture, but at a significant cost. If that cost means that the Axis can’t push all the way to Egypt, that means that the Allies have won the European side of the game. A big Allied fleet in the western Med with support from bombers can give a huge amount of mobility. Units can get to almost anywhere except Scandinavia… making it expensive for the Axis to have sufficient units to respond to attacks. If the Allies can get in a situation where attacks and counterattacks followed by another wave of attacks have a net zero TUV change for both sides, that usually is an Allied victory in the long run.
-
Interesting, but that isn’t really the bovine plan. I would say that unless the allies also hold Moscow, such a plan isn’t really a victory. Once the axis have all of USSR and are holding the allies out of Caucasus, they are heading towards economic victory but of course this depends on how well Japan is doing.
-
@Arthur:
I don’t know why people are discounting this bovine theory. He tends to have great strats that are battle tested against top opponents. You can argue that a different plan might be more effective, but you can’t argue that this USA to Italy is stupid.Â
Italy can be stacked to prevent capture, but at a significant cost. If that cost means that the Axis can’t push all the way to Egypt, that means that the Allies have won the European side of the game. A big Allied fleet in the western Med with support from bombers can give a huge amount of mobility. Units can get to almost anywhere except Scandinavia… making it expensive for the Axis to have sufficient units to respond to attacks. If the Allies can get in a situation where attacks and counterattacks followed by another wave of attacks have a net zero TUV change for both sides, that usually is an Allied victory in the long run.Â
Nobody said it is a stupid idea. I Play tested it in four different League games, but came to the conclusion that a) Italy sees it coming and can therefore take certain steps to Prevent this and b) US pacific suffers from this.
It could be me not Performing correctly this Strat or it could be more of a longterm Strategy, wich i thought it isn’t.
For my self, I stud under the Impression that this Strategy could provide a quick Punch into the European Theatre, but it wasn’t the case in my games.
But as simon33 allready explained, Italy with the aid of Germany can fortify Rome in time to Prevent this “USA to Italy” sack in 4-5 turns.
-
What I see missing from these plans so far is British subs and/or a British Atlantic fleet. You either need some kind of northern threat to keep Germany honest in w. Germany, Norway, etc, or if you are going for a 100% kif blitz then you need Egypt factory uk1, Egypt subs uk2, start convoying uk3. If Italy spends 3 turns building can openers then you need to make sure Italy has less than 10 bucks to spend for the rest of the game after buying those can openers.
Italy often defends northern Italy very lightly. 1-2 transports there to stop Germany from quickly recapturing Rome is handy I’d you have that option, but it’s not so amazing that it’s worth abandoning Norway, Normandy, Denmark, w. Germany, Netherlands all without a fight.
-
In recent games I’ve been putting ten or more inf on both north and south Italy. This makes killing Italy or even annoying it with a suicidal landing a total waste of effort for the allies. Of course, starving out its ipcs is still possible.
So I agree with argothair. Don’t kill Italy, starve it.
-
Starving Italy is always a part of every game strategy. A bunch of Allied subs should be raiding all of the zones touching the Med as soon as the initiative can be sustained. Bombers can further deplete the production capabilities.
I also would argue that in most games Germany can capture Moscow. The question is not if Russia will fall, but how many German units are left after the assault. If only a few tanks remain, that will be insufficient to push far towards Egypt. Of course everything depends on how well Japan is doing. A strong crush of Moscow with Japan capturing India while holding China and the Money Islands is almost a guaranteed Axis win.
I would argue that Italy turtling down and building 20 infantry to defend Rome is almost as good for the Allies as capturing Rome. Those units have limited mobility and no offensive punch. The Allied bombers and fleet can pivot instantly to attack Normandy or Greece, or can push into the Middle East or Scandinavia with an extra turn of planning.
-
Exactly. Everyone knows you have to starve Italy, but not everyone seems to realize that you need to do it quickly. If you starve Italy quickly, then Italy has to choose between building a significant can opening force…they can’t afford to do both.
If Italy builds a significant can opening force, you can and should take Rome. You also take Northern Italy if they leave it weak, but that’s optional and not worth diverting an entire extra fleet. If you want a European factory, you can get it by taking Normandy and/or Southern France; you don’t need to base your entire strategy around protecting a factory in Southern Italy. If Germany wants to repeatedly send mechs south to Rome, that’s fine – you can set up a shuck-shuck from USA - Gibraltar - Rome, build a naval base in Sicily, retake Italy’s capital each turn at a profit, and soon enough your transports will start to complete successful round trips, saving you even more cash that can be spent in the Pacific. Transports go to Gibraltar turn 3, Rome turn 4, Gibraltar turn 5, and back to USA on turn 6, so starting turn 6 you don’t need any more Atlantic transports and you can go 80% Kill Japan with America. Meanwhile all those German mechs that died in Rome are no threat to Egypt. Moscow will fall hard, but you’ll have significant pressure on the western front and Egypt only has to fight on one front, so the Allies can still win.
If instead Italy builds mostly infantry to sit and defend Rome, then you can and should move the surface fleet and airforce to take Normandy and Norway while leaving your subs behind to convoy Italy. Italy won’t have the offensive punch to kick you out of France or help threaten Egypt in the endgame. Italy might eventually build a destroyer and whittle down your submarines, but that’s OK. If Italy comes back to life earning 12 IPCs on turn 8 after having bought almost all infantry and destroyers for the whole game, they’re still not going to pose a serious threat to Egypt before the game ends – especially because with no can-openers to weaken Russia, not too many German tanks are likely to be punching through the Middle East. You might even hold a British Persian factory the whole game if you use a Middle Earth type strategy. If Germany also builds mostly infantry to defend the western front, then Europe is safe and you go 100% for Japan to try to win on that side. If Germany builds an extra couple of rounds of mechs and tanks to try to push through to Egypt or India, well, you’re already sitting in Norway and Normandy, so you keep pushing there, take Denmark and Western Germany, and try to get Berlin. I think the Allies have pretty good odds either way.
That’s why I typically use a third strategy as Italy: I build fighters, subs, and destroyers to try to sink whatever boats the Allies put in the Med, I let Italy take Southern France, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and Greece for the extra cash, and I will use German planes to help clear the Med if I can do that at a profit. I can’t force the Allies to give up control of the Med – they can take it if they want it – but I can often force them to pay such a high price for it that it interferes with their ability to run a campaign anywhere else. If Japan is uncontained, Germany holds Normandy and Norway while still making steady progress toward Moscow, and Italy is alive on turn 5 despite finally losing control of the Med, then I think the Axis have a good chance to win. Even if the loss of German planes means you will lose so many tanks taking Moscow that you will never take Egypt, you can still win an economic victory – if you’ve got Norway, Normandy, Leningrad, Moscow, Stalingrad, China, southeast Asia, and the money islands, that should be plenty to win the endgame even if India is still hanging on by a thread and Rome is reduced to building infantry and waiting for the end. Germany is rich enough to hold off the combined US/UK in northern Italy indefinitely while still picking up a few territories here and there (Urals, Kazakh, etc.), and Japan is also rich enough to hold off all remaining Allies while continuing to slowly expand (Western Australia, South Africa, Siberia, etc.)
As a side note, I’m not a big fan of taking Greece unless you’re playing Balanced Mod; it’s just not worth enough money without an extra NO, and it’s not strategically vital if Germany is doing Barbarossa while Italy is camping at home. Maybe ABH can explain why he likes to shift to Greece when Rome is well-defended – it sounds interesting!
-
A big stack of Italian infantry isn’t completely useless though. Good for defending France, W Germany and Berlin. Much better than using German IPCs for such things. You need some planes of course.
To be honest, unless the opportunity to take Egypt as Italy presents itself, I don’t find that Italy achieves much beyond can openers. Obviously you should still do that.
-
@Arthur:
I don’t know why people are discounting this bovine theory. He tends to have great strats that are battle tested against top opponents. You can argue that a different plan might be more effective, but you can’t argue that this USA to Italy is stupid.
It hasn’t helped that he hasn’t supplied any more info but it just seems that it relies on sub par defense of Rome. Rome is important to the Axis, more than Normandy or Norway so you can’t allow it to fall to do something else. Defending Rome also is unlikely to stop or even slow a Moscow take down.
-
Taking and retaking S. Italy isn’t a money maker if Germany is liberating it. The U.S.’ turn is before Italy’s, so no income will get collected for capturing it other than the 3 ipcs the territory is worth.
What about taking Norway or Greece with Russian help instead? If Germany heads north, UK lands in Greece, Russia sends some in that direction, too?
-
Yeah well a bunch of Italian ground troops on N Italy can retake S Italy right away. Of course losing Rome even if it’s retaken straight away is still a significant setback for the Axis.