We need an allied playbook.

[M36]

@Guam-Solo I shall write one up in my notes and post it as soon as it’s complete.

[GuamSolo]

I played a game this week as Britain and the axis won. It was a learning game though as all the players were new except for Germany (and myself as UK). The German player just throttled UK and land locked them. The game is hard to assess in terms of strategy because the newer players are either too cavalier with units or turtle for lack of experience. But the UK struggled so I’m interested in any UK ideas that other players employ.

[Argothair]

@Guam-Solo That’s interesting. What do you mean by ‘landlocked’, exactly? Is the idea that Britain couldn’t keep a navy in the water, so British forces were confined to the UK and Africa, without being able to land on islands or in France?

[GuamSolo]

By ‘landlocked’ I meant that there was no Royal Navy present and not enough UK aircraft to help. G1 took out 110 and 111, built an airbase in Holland and parked a small German fleet with an aircraft carrier in 110. I had a round of destroyer builds in 109 but the Luftwaffe just took it out. By UK 2 the Med fleet was gone primarily to one sided rolling. I saw Crocket36 combine the UK Med fleet with the French destroyers off of the coast of Southern France. This worked for me once before, but in this game it went terrible. The Italians rolled hits with nearly every roll in round 1 of the battle and the UK landed one hit… Order of casualties was tough because the Italians took Southern France first which meant I couldn’t take a hit on the UK aircraft carrier because the 2 planes would have nowhere to land and die if Italy withdrew. So Italy ruled the Med investing in ships each turn while the US was kept out of the war for as long as possible. The UK would have been fine in the long run, but the game was lost early when the (novice) Russian player threw a lot of his forces at a concentrated stack of German Armor/Infantry in Western Ukraine. Russia lost 85% of his attacking forces in the battle and ultimately opened the door for Germany to Russia. The trouble with new players is knowing how much to coach vs. letting them play their own strategies out while not controlling it too much so that they don’t have fun. UK would have recovered in a longer game, but the first two rounds really set them back.

[GuamSolo]

I can also add that the UK went with a middle earth tactic and had help on the way to Moscow if the Russians had stayed in the game even just one more round…

[Argothair]

All right, sounds like an interesting learning game. Sometimes you do get diced in an early battle (or three of them) and then that reverberates across the game. Especially if Japan is not declaring war on the Anglo-Americans, then there’s not much wiggle room for the UK & Russia to defend Moscow; a few bad battles or a few bad choices and Moscow can fall really early, and that’s all normal. I would have discussed the overall strategic situation with the Russian player, and explained why it made sense for them to sit tight and wait for British aid to arrive from Persia/India, but it’s hard playing just one country all day, and sometimes you just want to make a frigging attack, you know? It can be a lot more fun making one big attack and losing badly because of it than literally sitting around all day biding time and then having your friends argue about whether the resulting position was slightly favoring the Axis or slightly favoring the Allies.

I almost think you have to discuss strategies like that ahead of time, and figure out what countries to give people based on what their playstyle is. Especially in a game of Global with multiple newbies – if you’ve got a reckless attacker, give 'em the Germans or the Japanese. If you’ve got a timid turtle, give 'em the Russians or give 'em UK Pac + Anzac + China. That’s hard to suss out; a lot of people aren’t self-aware about what their playstyle is and may not admit to being a turtle even if they know it, but I think as the host you at least have to try to have that conversation.

As far as strategy, I think the British destroyers have to be built in Canada (SZ 106) when the Germans are doing an aggressive forward deployment with carrier and airbases. Building in Wales (SZ 109) is just a gift; it lets the Germans sink 'em for cheap. I’d also be very careful about moving into the Southern France sea zone when the Luftwaffe is still intact, because the risk-reward ratio is all wrong. If your fleet holds, then you deny Italy its Mare Nostrum NO for 1 turn (5 IPCs), and you get some additional boats into the Battle of the Atlantic at the cost of giving Italy a credible threat against Eastern Med targets like Egypt, Jordan, Crete, and Syria. It’s not clear that those results are better than just doing Taranto and sinking 2 Italian transports, which likely denies them the New Roman Empire NO (5 IPCs) for the rest of the game, and that’s what you get when everything goes well – as you saw, if it goes poorly against either the Italians or the Germans on a follow-up G2 attack, then you lose both your Atlantic and your Med fleets and you have very, very little to show for it. But you knew that. :)

Anyway, if Germany is buying an airbase and a carrier on G1, that’s the entire G1 economy, so they have no destroyers on the board. That means one interesting British purchase is submarines for the Atlantic! Hit the carrier, hit the battleship, hit the convoy zones in Norway and Normandy…just generally make life uncomfortable for the Kriegsmarine, and if you bait Germany into buying a couple of destroyers on top of the airbase and carrier, then at that point Russia should be rich enough to hold its own. Alternatively, if Germany retreats into the Baltic, the subs are useful against Italy in the Med.

[barnee]

@Guam-Solo nice report

but you could use some paragraph breaks for easier reading : )

[GuamSolo]

@barnee Will do!

[M36]

@Guam-Solo Wow, sounds like en epic battle. Germany took out both SZ111 AND 110? When I’ve done this I find myself spread a bit too thin and the Luftwaffe takes casualties due to scrambles. That’s actually a win for UK if you trade your fleet for German planes because it reduces their strategic flexibility. As mentioned Canada is the best spot to start building ships. If the Luftwaffe is in range they will just get sunk every round for minimal German casualties.

I’m curious about you’re statement that the fighters from UK couldn’t reach the action in the Mediterranean. Even if they’re guaranteed to be lost should the carrier have to take a hit I always send them. Trading UK planes for Italian ships is a positive for the Allies, because you can build more fighters, while the Italians can’t build ships.

[GuamSolo]

@M36 On UK1 I took out the Italian ships in SZ96 next to Malta with one destroyer and a fighter. With that SZ cleared of enemy ships I moved the remaining UK fleet in the Med to SZ93 where they merged with the French cruiser and destroyer. I then landed 2 fighters on the carrier that combined with the French ships in SZ93. The tactical fighter that starts on the carrier was sent to Ethiopia to take out the Italians there.

London fighters were lost in scrambled defense of UK fleets and the Med fleet was lost when the Italians hit SZ93. The issue in that battle became order of casualties because a hit to the carrier meant the planes would have nowhere to land if the Italians only fought for one round. Which they could do and then leave the remaining ships for the Germans.

[GuamSolo]

@Argothair Those are really good thoughts @Argothair especially regarding assigning countries to new players based on their personality type. The reality is that these new players are new friends of my son who is a freshman in college. I hosted the game for their spring break. My son played Germany so the two experienced players were split.

Here’s the funny part of the story…I did talk about strategy with my allied counterparts. When Germany made their first thrusts into Russia I coached Russia on hitting the Bessarabia stack because the German units were spread across the whole of the Eastern front evenly. With the air units the German player can’t predict where the Russian would strike. He wiped out the Bessarabia units.

Later, I had to leave the game for half an hour. The German player consolidated everything with a thrust into one territory. On Russia’s next move he tried to hit it with his air units and tanks and not enough infantry. When I walked back into the room everything was on the battle board and the other allied players were telling me, “We told him not to do it.” He lost nearly everything and what could be retreated was destroyed on the next German turn leaving them next to Moscow.

The Russians had a stack of infantry in Lenningrad up north but couldn’t get them to Moscow on time now that the Germans were close. But this is were you just have to roll with it and let new players learn and enjoy the fun of the game. And that’s not to say I can’t learn from games like this as well - because my son/Germany played really well and had UK on the ropes despite what other allies were doing.

I think the ship builds in Canada is a great counter move that you suggested. You can bring them over on the same turn you purchase and drop ships next to London. What we ended up doing was swinging the US fleet we had parked in 91 up to relieve London - while at the same time sneaking a group of transports to Rome and taking it while the Italians were busy in Egypt.

In the end we lost 2-1 using YG tournament rules.

[GuamSolo]

@M36 Here’s a link to Crockett36’s English strategy where I got some of the Med UK Naval moves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtziXSzJR6o

[M36]

@Guam-Solo No offense to Crocket but after watching that video I’m not a fan at all of that strategy. So much effort put into destroying four troops and taking 1 IPC in East Africa which is virtually irrelevant in the larger scheme of things. I’ll sacrifice my fleet any day to remove the Italians, and if they scramble and lose planes the French fleet has a good chance of surviving anyway. The only strong Italian force in Africa is in Tobruk, crush it on turn 1 or it will get stronger. The other forces are split and can be destroyed when it’s more convenient.

[weddingsinger]

I don’t have a full playbook, but do have some thoughts on openings:

UK only scrambles on G1 if there is a decent chance the UK fighter will shoot down MORE than 1 German plane.

If UK wants to do Taranto (and they should), the U.S. needs to buy 2-4 bombers on US1. If they can, send U.S. fighter to Gibraltor US1 and a bomber to London. UK buys 1 fighter 6 inf. Send enough to win Taranto if he scrambles, but only the bare minimum.

And agreed about Crockett’s video. I looked and that French/UK fleet off S. France is still going to lose to Italy’s ships/planes, but Italy gets to keep an extra transport. (Italy favored in the attack 72%, but UK will lose 2 fighters guaranteed).

Not seeing how this helps keep London. Certainly makes India easier to take.

[M36]

@weddingsinger I think it all boils down to if you want to play aggresive or defensive. IPCs are not the real currency in A+A, your units are, so don’t be afraid to “spend” those units if it puts your opponent back significantly. I would love to hear more from Crocket on how this strategy worked out in practice.

According to the numbers, the defender has the advantage in combat, but this is a misconception. The attacker chooses where and when to fight, and how many units to bring. A smart player will bypass strong points and only attack when he can bring enough firepower to destroy the enemy in one round of fire. If I’m playing Italy in that scenario then I could care less about the British fleet, cause I’m running wild in Africa and the Middle East, and Japan is probably going to exploit the weakened Indian front J2 to come meet me.

[GuamSolo]

@M36 Just to be fair to Crockett36, I have seen a more recent video where he criticizes moving the English fleet to combine with the French ships for the reasons being stated in the last few posts. He does offer a different move - consolidating the English fleet next to Malta where fighter can be scrambled in defense, and where they can land in the event of an Italian retreat. I think Crockett’s goal is to let the Italians come at him in his combined fleet strength and fighters defending at a four. Here is the video link to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Q0xIxiOwQ&t=9s

[GuamSolo]

I think it is just important that the UK takes out the Italian ships - even if over a couple of turns. If they aren’t, then the Med is difficult to deal with and the US when it gets there must engage in a big battle whereby casualties will force the US to replace ships needed to protect transports thereby delaying shucking into Europe - giving Germany more time to get to Russia. So, back to Taranto UK1. That might be the easiest solution because the Italian fleet can be attacked piece meal.

[M36]

@Guam-Solo Agreed. Maybe forcing the Italians into an attack works in some games, I’m just a big advocate of the best defense being a strong offense. The reasoning for destroying the Italian fleet right out the gate is the same reasoning for destroying the UK fleet G1. Even if it’s costly it takes your opponents options and initiative away, which is very difficult to recover from.

[weddingsinger]

All I’ve got so far is a few basic opening notes:

I’ll need to playtest my ideas about a mechanized Russia, but obviously Russia moves 6 inf back to Moscow from the Pacific side. I usually retreat the 12 and then on R2 move them back to threaten the Japanese to try and freeze Japanese troops from being able to head south to attack China/UKPac. On German side… not much you can do if Italy is successfully can opening for Germany. If not, you just try to group you inf together and look for a counter attack opening that will delay the German advance an extra turn. If Germany is doing Sea Lion, Russia should try to hit southern Europe. Its much harder for Germany to get rid of them there compared to using their transports to hit you on the coast of the Baltic.

UK needs to assume Sea Lion. Their margin for being able to stop Germany is pathetically small if Germany can bring 10 transports and its air force to London (to stop that requires having 17+ hit soakers and 5 fighters) This means a UK1 activate Ireland using your mech (its a landing spot for U.S. bombers if London falls) and buy of 6inf and 1 fighter (and if Germany looks Sea Lion, UK2 buy of more inf and any U.S. forces you can bring). If no J1, you can NOT spare a fighter from London for Taranto. No scrambles on G1 unless your fighter can/will kill 2 or more German air but killing the German battleship might be worth the fighter in Scotland. UK also ignores Italy in Ethiopia other than walking 1inf/1art to Anglo-Egypt Sudan. It’ll cost you nothing right now. UK cares more about sinking Italian transports and getting Persia. If no J1, I also take Sumatra. Taranto raid and kill Italy’s Malta ships. UK’s goal is to 1) keep London, 2) keep Italy from getting N.O.s, and to build a factory in Persia on UK2 if no Sea Lion, and send 3 fighters to Moscow every turn you can (UK3-5)

US… if a J1 you need to send a bomber and fighter to London. If transport at Canada sank G1, they’ll need 2-4 more bombers purchased US1. If Japan never attacks US and Germany gets London, your 5 bombers can sink the German fleet and land in Ireland (hopefully) on US3 as consolation. I prefer to build for the Pacific theater after that, and leave Germany for Russia/UK (mostly… other than help from the 3-5 U.S. bombers that join in). The goal against Japan is to get enough U.S. ships/planes to threaten and take sz6 if Japan commits to hitting India. Iwo Jima is nice to have, too, to stage bombers from. Caroline Islands are great, but in range of a LOT of Japanese planes, so can be dicey, so be careful. I prefer a couple of US carriers and a few subs, but mostly destroyers to soak hits from Japanese planes. The goal is to either freeze the Japanese advance or occupy sz 6 around US 5/6 and start convoying and bombing.

UKPac, China, ANZAC’s job is to cost Japan planes whenever possible. Slow them down and cost them money if possible. This means sinking transports. Grinding away any Japanese troops being used to take islands. Retaking money Islands if you can keep it for 1 Japanese turn and leave 2 inf there to defend and hopefully cost Japan troops.

[crockett36]

gentleman first let me say this is an exciting discussion to be having. I was wondering if i could have your permissions to read this for my channel. I will not disparage anyone or any idea.