We need an allied playbook.

[AldoRaine]

@Guam-Solo I should also mention that I feel it is actually the US’s responsibility to make sure Italy doesn’t grow out of control and not the UK’s. Both are needed but the easist target for the US is Italy so they should be smart and start there. I am not saying they need to assault Rome directly but the need to make sure they stay in Europe.

[Argothair]

I think if we’re sticking closely to the theme of a “playbook” then it is not really worthwhile to debate the relative priority of the UK’s tasks – instead the thing to do is to just name the UK’s tasks, and briefly explain what the Allies need to get done, and then suggest some of the tactics that can work, either individually or as a package, to accomplish some of those tasks.

For example, let’s say for the sake of argument that we all think that the UK wants to defend London, push Germany out of the Atlantic, and defend Egypt in the opening. Fine! We don’t need to rank the importance of those tasks. Instead we can discuss the Taranto Raid, and the Gibraltar Stack, and the Tobruk Attack, and the Ethiopia Attack, and the Middle Earth setup, and advise our readers on how well each of those openings will serve each of the UK’s goals. That way readers can decide for themselves what goals they want to prioritize and then pick an opening that will help achieve their goals.

[M36]

Well said, and ultimately it’s all dependent on G1 and the players you are facing. I think I’ve made my position of Tobruk and Taranto being top priorities for UK clear.

[weddingsinger]

OK, so if a basic goal structure “playbook” is more helpful… most of us use the U.K. to help Russia keep Moscow and to keep Italy in check.

If Sea Lion is such a threat that UK HAS to buy for it, it slows UK down when we buy 6 inf and 1 fighter.

Looking at the math, it appears that if the UK goes fighter heavy on its UK1 and 2 buys, with infantry filling in the rest (so adding 4 fighters and 4 inf to London) and you don’t scramble or only lose 1 fighter on turn 1 (either to a scramble or Taranto), Germany’s Sea Lion success falls to 50/50 assuming 10 transports, 3 fighters and 3 tacticals attacking.

So this would allow a UK1 buy of 2 fighters, 2 infantry for London, and the extra fighters can head to Russia via either the riskier Karaelia route on UK2 or the long way and land on Moscow UK5. (though they can make Novgorod in 1 turn taking off from Scotland so if you’re not worried about German bombers, UK1 you could put them there, then land UK2 in Russia if Germany does Barbarossa G2)

[weddingsinger]

Anyone up for some Triple A games to do some competitive testing?

[GuamSolo]

As this thread is up to 9 pages now, I thought to re-direct readers back to pages 1-2 where a lot has been written for an allied playbook including opening moves for each allied nation. @Argothair detailed some very good opening sequences for the allies, and @crockett36 has written a lot about objectives for the allies.

[Argothair]

@weddingsinger Sure, here’s a couple of options.

Option 1: Low luck or full luck, no tech, either Balanced Mod or ~18 IPC bid, play 4 rounds only just for fun. No glory at stake, not registered on the League…we’re just seeing where the openings go in the name of science. I’d take either side, and either use or play against mechanized Russia and/or the Gibraltar stack. We both know what’s coming and we can both use that knowledge to prepare accordingly. I’m available to start immediately

Option 2: Full luck, no tech, Balanced Mod, no bid, I take Axis, and play a full game against you in the League. You can use Mechanized Russia and/or Gibraltar stack (or not) if you wish; I won’t take any special precautions against them until I see that you’ve committed to them. This will have to wait until my current League Axis game finishes, which is probably about 72 hours, or longer if dawgoneit is stubborn or rolls well. I just took London on G3 with 2 inf, 1 art, 8 tanks and 12 planes remaining, and Japan and Italy are doing average…so I can’t imagine there’s too much left to the game. But time will tell.

I’d be willing to either (a) goof off on TripleA and play a couple of 3-4 round games with low luck, just to get a sense of where the openings might go – no glory at stake, just for fun, or (b) play a Balanced Mod full luck league game, no bid, no tech, with me as the Axis.

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair I’d like to start with some fast low luck games for play testing, then move up to full games, I think.

/I can usually do 2-5 turns a day, depending… weekdays are better.

[Argothair]

@weddingsinger Happy to start with the low luck games for playtesting – but my speed is more like 1-2 turns a day, and I’m more available on weekends, so I might feel pretty slow to you. If you’d rather play with someone faster, no hard feelings! If not, what side do you want?

[crockett36]

What if the playbook was a map with the starting set up icons in it and you drew arrors on it. Or just a blank map and we used p for plane, a for artillery, etc and used arrows and at the bottom gave each bunch a designation “64th” and an assignment for example: “surge into Finland as soon as there is or you can make a declaration of war.” That’s all I have time for. Keep up the great conversation. Synergy and momentum is with the Allied cause! Crack the code! Never give up.

[crockett36]

Btw, if you’re going to playtest for fun I’m up for it, but I take two turns a week maybe. And i only do OOB, no bid.

[crockett36]

Good morning, i will give you four reasons Taranto and Tobruk violate the principles in my playbook: these battles kill a lot of British units in an area where they are already sparse, they weaken the potential defense of London, they slow victory in the Atlantic by robbing the theatre of aircraft and they doubly hurt the defense of Moscow because the aircraft are going to die G2 and, if you succeed, Italy has no where to go but East.

Those are facts. It hinders Operation Ricochet and steals options. Those are the negatives. It sounds like we are moving on. Good for us. We have left those who follow a good debate. I’m looking at 92!

Btw, it might improve Taranto a smidgeon if the planes could land in Greece when attacked g2. What about burning a transport and activating Greece? They still won’t survive g2, but it might kill more luftwaffe. And it’s historically accurate! Yeah for me!

Short answers please.

[crockett36]

One more thing. I’m working with OOB. If you’re not, please let the community know that. Many tabletops and especially newbies will read your posts and try your strategies not knowing that you’re talking about a slightly or not so slightly altered setup or rules set.

[M36]

@crockett36 Thanks for the input, I was confused on what the overall strategy was behind your moves. The Greece idea is intriguing. I’ve always thought of Greece as a trap, since following the historical moves of the Allied and Axis powers tends to lead to a historical result, and the British efforts in Greece were mauled.

[weddingsinger]

@crockett36

I’m also against taking Tobruk UK1. It costs UK a transport so I’d rather wait.

However, If you stack sz92 with the UK, Italy should take Greece on I1, blocking UK’s ability to sink their fleet since you won’t be able to bring enough planes. What does Italy usually do turn 1 against you with your usual UK moves?

Because my concern is that while a nice UK fleet is a wonderful thing to have, a strong Italy is worse. So what I’m picturing is stack sz92, Italy turtles its fleet and takes Greece, Alexandria, then on Italy’s 2nd turn, with 2 transports it has enough to take Cairo unless UK drops 2 fighters on it (even then there are variables that lose you Cairo… like a 3rd Italian transport and extra troops from Ethiopia).

[Gambler6]

@weddingsinger
I have seen and tried the following:

UK1 destroy the Italian fleet off Libya then non combat move the UK Fleet to defend with the French fleet and move 2 fighters to the carrier.

Along with that is an effort to eliminate the Italian east Africa force. It opens up Egypt for a turn but on U.K. 1 you should be able to use the Indian ocean transport to move additional infantry from Persia.
It seems to keep the Italians concerned with saving their fleet but not strong enough to eliminate the U.K. med fleet.

[crockett36]

I knew that I had to write that Greece was a disaster, but I didn’t. And that happened.

[crockett36]

Glad you guys aren’t pedantic cuz that would suck. Lol

[crockett36]

You know what’s even better than a dead Italian battleship? A useless Italian battleship. that’s my approach that’s what I want. an Italian player who doesn’t want to lose his big beautiful battleship. That was a historical reality

Egypt is number 4 on my strategic objectives so two say these strategies give up Egypt from my perspective is just not true. I intend to make it look weak turn one to draw Italian attention. Well I gather her forces from the dominions. The best Italian strategy, the one I fear, is can opening for Germany.

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair said in We need an allied playbook.:

@weddingsinger Happy to start with the low luck games for playtesting – but my speed is more like 1-2 turns a day, and I’m more available on weekends, so I might feel pretty slow to you. If you’d rather play with someone faster, no hard feelings! If not, what side do you want?

That works for me.

How does your time work? Would you like to do 2 games at once, playing both sides? Otherwise, I wouldn’t mind starting as either side, but tend to default to Axis.