We need an allied playbook.

[GuamSolo]

@crockett36 In this post I liked your emphasis on waging economic war on an opponent. You listed these objectives: Taking possession of territory (cash value of these), SB factories and convoys. I was thinking to add denying the achievement of national objectives to your opponent when possible. New players often miss this.

[GuamSolo]

@Argothair Of the 4 most plausible targets you list, do you think the US can realistically drive for two of them at once? In particular, drive for one objective each on both sides of the map?

[Argothair]

@Guam-Solo Good question, Guam Solo. In most games, the USA can push for one objective on each side of the map, but not literally at the same time – the push for one objective should start two or three turns earlier than the push for the second objective. The reasoning here is that during the first stage of your campaign, you will need transports and men and warships and some air support in order to safely occupy a sea zone and then gain control of your targeted land territories. This is very expensive and consumes 85%+ of the US’s resources. At best, your remaining resources can be used to garrison a region that is already Allied-controlled (e.g., stack Honolulu with infantry, or stack Gibraltar with fighters). However, during the second stage of your campaign, when you have already achieved regional naval supremacy, you generally do not need to build new warships, and you may even be able to recycle some of your transports by sending them on a loop back and forth between safe sea zones. You can re-fill four transports much, much more cheaply than you can build four new transports, fill those transports, build an escorting navy, and build an escorting air force – and the resulting savings can be used to open a new offensive campaign.

The exception to this rule is when all of the Axis powers press inward toward Moscow, without paying serious attention to contesting the USA’s attacks. If Germany sends its entire air force east and builds nothing but mechs and tanks while Japan sends its entire air force west while building nothing but minor factories, then you can probably get away with an all-out simultaneous two-front war, because your landing parties just won’t be facing much opposition, so you won’t need to build as many escort ships / planes to support each loaded transport.

[crockett36]

@Guam-Solo My preference is 110 because, in coordination with the British, you could land in Germany. I’m in a house rule game with Dessertfox. I had to abandon Paris and W.Germany because of his large transport navies and air forces. 110 makes it an existential war, knife to the throat. Do or die.

My purpose, though, is to be general enough to layout different plans of attack. Also, I will rarely ever do anything the same way twice. In addition, I will almost always have an experiment going on. Right now I’m playing Germany with only the original tanks. The extra money is going into an ever larger air corps. I’m also buying soldiers as Japan instead of tanks or mechs, the extra money going toward air and fleet maintenance. Just playing around.

[GuamSolo]

@crockett36 You made a video about UK turn 1 moves where you preserve units by consolidating the UK Med fleet with French ships and again consolidating off eastern Africa. The purchase for UK is 3 destroyers, but you never place them on the board. How would you allocate them between South Africa and London? And - Doesn’t this purchase go against conventional thinking for defending against sea lion (where UK1 purchases mostly infantry and a fighter)? Sorry for asking so many questions BTW.

[GuamSolo]

The video I’m referencing is on Youtube - English British Strategy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtziXSzJR6o

[crockett36]

love the questions. I would place them off London. 109 specifically. I haven’t gotten to it yet, but I like to swing the American navy around to the Atlantic. That conveys a message, KGF, that should deter the Germans. The destroyers are pesky. Will the Luftwaffe attack such a fleet with fighters that might scramble? Either way is good for me. If they don’t, I’ll build more next turn and a factory in Persia. more to come.

[crockett36]

This post is deleted!

[crockett36]

Nibbling and Sandbagging

From an optical standpoint, attacking Western Europe would seem to be the needed action. From an economic vantage point, however, keeping Germany contained to around 55 IPCs might be enough to prolong the war until the disparity widens in our favor. Therefore, we begin a section of the US playbook on nibbling the edges and laying down sandbags that will hold back the flood and economically support what has been called Operation Ricochet.

Moscow will be attempted. It is the crown jewel for the Axis. If America enters the war early, fighters can make their way to Russia by turn 5 or 6. If every allied surviving aircraft that begins on the board t1 were to do so it would provide a strong dike. Planes built by the English can launch from Scotland and make their way there. Planes in the middle of the board can fight the good fight, make a difference and still make it to Moscow by five or six. Anzac and Indian fighters can battle in Southeast Asia and still make it. A factory in Persia built on t2 can produce units that can assist in the sandbagging of the Russian capital.

Alternatively, seventeen American bombers can make it to Moscow by turn 6. They could act as fodder, but more likely they would deter the enemy from ever attempting the assault. They could also be used to attack any lagging mechanized column that was supposed to ensure the success of the venture.

[crockett36]

@crockett36 Other sandbagging areas include Yunnan and by extension Bombay, Egypt, London, New South Wales, and Hawaii. These are all Axis targets, assuming one is playing with the OOB victory city conditions. Of these, Hawaii rests almost entirely in our hands. In the early game, it is easy enough to get three transport’s worth of troops to the island and a token destroyer blocker or two. If we were to see Calcutta or Sidney about to fall, prudence demands an entire build or two be put toward securing the waters around the island, complete with destroyer blockers. This is more effective than turtling there. One could assume that the bulk of the IJN would be in the Indian ocean. To get from there to Hawaii would take several turns. An air force and navy comparable to the enemy must be produced. Defensively, loaded carriers, battleships and destroyers are amazing. Offensively, a fleet of subs and bombers can do incredible damage on the cheap with versatility for later asymmetrical warfare Probably the most effective defense for the island proper would be a round of air power builds that could not be blocked from landing and be used for the offensive against the blockaders and the approaching fleet.

[GuamSolo]

@crockett36 I like the nibbling strategy. One questions for you on another part of this thread - If you use a transport from India on UK1 to land troops in Persia for the goal of building a minor IC then does this become part of the Pacific side, or rather a Union Jack roundel is placed in Persia? I was able to play a game over Christmas and utilized your opening moves for UK but got stuck when the consensus was that it was Union Jack roundel - and thus UK Europe could not place the Minor IC in Persia. What am I missing in the rules? Is every territory on the Europe map going to always go UK Europe despite British forces from the Pacific side crossing over and taking the territory (and vice-versa)? Thanks.

[GeneralHandGrenade]

@Guam-Solo The thing players need to understand is that UK is only one nation but with 2 economies. The only time you separate them is when it’s time to purchase, collect income, and place units. Other than that they are one nation. Any territory on the Europe side of the map belongs in the UK Europe economy while any territory on the Pacific side of the map is counted in the UK Pacific economy. It doesn’t matter where the UK units come from or where they end up, after they are placed they fight as one nation. So to answer your question, it MUST be the UK Europe economy that places the minor IC on Persia. UK Pacific could not possibly place it there because they must place their units on the Pacific side of the board. The Union Jack roundel does not get placed on Persia because it belongs in the UK Europe economy. The fact that the units that took control of Persia came from India is of no consequence whatsoever.

[A Former User]

But: West India on the European side still belongs to the Indian economy, while British Colombia and Yukon Territory on Pacific map belong to Europe.

[GuamSolo]

@GeneralHandGrenade Ah - ok. That settles it and totally answers the question, thanks again.

[Midnight_Reaper]

@Hecatomb said in We need an allied playbook.:

But: West India on the European side still belongs to the Indian economy, while British Colombia and Yukon Territory on Pacific map belong to Europe.

While true, those are also the only exceptions to the rule.

-Midnight_Reaper

[crockett36]

We can give New South Wales aid. We may be able to create a better sandbag there than in Hawaii, combining our naval might with the Australian ground forces. This should make Sidney nearly impregnable until turn seven at the earliest. This is a worst case scenario if and only if Bombay is in danger of falling or does fall. This could be made untenable if the enemy chooses Australia first. In such an event, however, Calcutta should become nearly impossible to capture, assuming an infusion of British units into the region via a factory in Persia, victory in North Africa or even aircraft from South Africa. Hawaii must become Japan’s final victory city. That should prove easy to defend, given our industrial output and the strategies listed above.

London may be sandbagged by some obvious and some oblique methods. The less obvious method is to draw the Pac fleet into the Atlantic, letting Germany know that any Sealion victory will be Pyrrhic. We can punctuate this by adding to the fleet immediately. Such a fleet needs additional aircraft carriers, aircraft, destroyers, and transports. If kept out of the war, one might stage the fleet in sz102. Given the green light, American aircraft could be launched from 102 and land in London during non-combat. As soon as America is brought into the war, ground units may do the Canadian Two-step. Move them to Canada and then shuttled your ground forces to London either in the combat phase for the recapture of the British capital or in the non-combat phase for reinforcement.

[GuamSolo]

Staging the U.S. fleet in 102 - is this the move you mentioned earlier in this thread that is meant to ward off a Sea Lion invasion?

[crockett36]

It’s a component. The massive investment in the Atlantic is the real clincher.

[crockett36]

The other sandbagging will have to be done by the British, specifically Egypt and Yunnan or where ever you draw the line in China.

As to nibbling the edges, I am calling this Operation Ricochet. The Axis flood rises high. Many areas might be covered. Hopefully temporarily. For the enemy to reach the Middle East is no easy feat. With proper maintenance and investment, it should be an excellent area to begin taking back. For America’s part, parking a fleet next to Gibraltar can aid the English effort there by instilling a sense of fear in the Italians. A build or two will need be devoted to the potential defense of Rome. Those forces may never move for the rest of the game, nor be transported to North Africa nor can-open for Germany in the East. Meanwhile, you are free to choose from several edges where you might land: S. France, Greece, Yugoslavia, and Albania.

Scandinavia is another area that may be easily nibbled. Economically, it could be called a money peninsula, given the gain/loss of IPC and bonus income. It can even be the sight of an American minor complex.

If some of the sandbagged areas are lost, a reserve force in the rear might easily retake the territory after the fighters have headed for friendly bases and the ships quieted their guns. Bombay is the classic case for this (unless the Japanese are willing to lose an airforce to gain a victory city with a minor complex on it). Such trades will most likely lead to short-term losses for you, but long-term gains.

In the Pac, the Caroline make for an interesting get for naval operations. Iwo Jima or the Soviet Far East is more intriguing for air operations. Iwo Jima, however, is not an edge, nor a nibble. Many like to move to coastal Australia and subsequently take back the money islands. Coordination with the Anzac navy can tip the scale defensively in our favor, particularly when Japan is clawing for the quick capture of the Jewel of the Empire. Planes can be launched like spears from carriers and land in the thick of the Asian campaign. If planned properly, planes leaving can be replaced the same turn with planes arriving.

[crockett36]

@Guam-Solo Yes, the problem is that most of the NAs are slanted toward the Axis and very hard to prevent. Grasshopper has made an effort to boost the Allied NAs, but he added new Axis ones. Not a huge fan of NAs, but we play with them. The Med NA is a great one to try and deny.