@shadowhawk I never though about that , that is really smart. I will make sure to do that.
UK Strategy -"Middle Earth"
-
@luftwaffles41 Hey, buddy, glad you’re still enjoying the game. I think a landing in Syria is often a good idea, because it’s under-defended, it’s worth some cash, it’s conveniently located near other Italian resources, and it threatens an immediate move into Iraq to activate the armies there and the oil income for the Axis.
That said, I wouldn’t design an entire opening around that landing, and I think landing with 2 transports there is usually plenty; it’s rare for the British to have enough units stacked in Jordan or enough fast movers in Egypt to safely kill 4 Italian land units.
The main problem I see with your reasoning here is that while you certain can wrest control of the middle east from Britain by ganging up on it with Germany, Italy, and Japan all at once, that won’t win you the game – the UK plus Canada and south Africa is still earning enough cash that you can’t easily take London even after wiping the Brits off of the tropics, and if all you do is seize the middle east, most of china, and the money islands, then you’re not out-earning the Allies. The Japanese pretty much have to go after at least one of India, Australia, Siberia, or Hawaii in order to pose a serious threat to the Allies in the Pacific, and the Germans need to either take Moscow, take London, or penetrate quite deep into southern Russia – probably all the way to the Caucasus. Just gaining control of Persia from the middle eastern side won’t win you the game if the Russians are still holding Stalingrad, Caucasus, etc. from the north. By concentrating so many resources on knocking the British out of the tropics – where they have relatively strong defensive potential – you are likely giving up on the chance to score a knockout blow on Moscow, Calcutta, Sydney, etc., which in turn means that the Allies will be outproducing you and able to overwhelm you at a time and place of their choosing. It’s true that Italy will become a monster – I’ve gotten her up to 42+ IPCs that way – and that can throw some players off, but that’s still much less than, e.g., the USA is earning. If the USA is dumping 60 IPCs/turn into the north African theater, then eventually Italian income will start going back down. You also might catch a British player off-guard if they build too many factories too soon, and win the game that way, but when I play middle Earth I try to be relatively conservative: one factory in Persia on UK2 if there’s no Sea Lion, and then maybe one more in Egypt or Iraq (not both) on UK4 or so if the region looks reasonably secure. The idea is to use the factories you have to crank out a lot of infantry and subs, which are a pain in the a** for the Axis to go kill. If I see you focusing on the middle east as the Axis, then as Britain I won’t build that second factory, and instead I’ll put some resources into building up an Atlantic fleet that can harass Norway, Belgium, and so on. Nothing requires me to fight to the death over Egypt. I can withdraw to Sudan and then to Ethiopia and force you to choose between pursuing me into less-valuable theaters or leaving my army intact to re-take Egypt later.
In terms of what I do recommend for German strategy, I’m not as skilled with the German pieces as I am with the British, but my insight is that victory as the Germans relies on crippling the Russians at an affordable price, which in turn relies on early control of Leningrad and Kiev – if you own Leningrad and Kiev, you can build 6 slow units a turn to use as cannon fodder while you build mechs and tanks in East Germany to threaten can openers. The problem is that you only have enough tanks in the opening to guarantee one of those two production centers. So, I typically send my tanks south to grab Kiev, and rely on transports to take Leningrad. A German Baltic fleet with 3-4 warships and 2-4 transports is affordable, will protect Norway, and can either force an early Russian retreat from Leningrad or allow you to crush the Russian garrison there. You can also keep shucking German units to Leningrad even after you’ve taken control of the factory; that allows you to place, e.g., some infantry and artillery in West Germany which can then either go west (if the Allies do land in Normandy/Belgium that turn) or go east by transport (if the Allies don’t).
Good luck, and have fun!
-
That’s exactly what I was worried about too is the thing. While I was able to do an Afrika Korps strategy without diverting too many units away from a Barbarossa attack, there would still be something to be said for devoting so many resources to such an unpopulated area.
My sincere apologies by the way for not stating the terms of victory, I was just kind of going off the top of my head and not necessarily considering victory conditions, but I suppose now that I’ve been reminded of it that I should touch on it a little.
So when I was playing the German Reich in a test run of Global 40’ with a buddy of mine, I was able to really test Afrika Korps whilst try to defeat the Russian Fall Back Line that is so popularly used to counteract the German offensive. But frankly, Germany should initially prioritize on the southern quadrant of the Soviet Union, not the North for the very simple reason that the south has much more income then the North, LOTS more income. You’d be surprised just how quickly the Soviet IPC Marker drops on the numbers scale just by take a few territories in the Southern area of the Soviet Union, as well as the fact that it just so happens to be the undefended part due to the fact that the Soviets don’t really see much prioritization in the Southern quadrant they see Leningrad see the situation they’re in and think “Well that’s worth protecting more than the south.”
As for the British building just switching over to the exposed Western European front, I highly doubt this would be optimal for the UK to do. For starters, I’ve tried building a navy from scratch, it ain’t as easy as it sounds. Second, the main philosophy that any British player should follow is wherever the Germans take the fight, you bring the fight. If Germany goes full swing for a Sealion attack, you better meet them with all the units in the world to make em fight for it. The same goes for Africa and the Middle East. the Germans and italians dont even have to take a single bit of sub-Saharan Africa to be making around 50+ IPC’s a turn. And as for attacking the Middle East, like General Hand Grenade said, Middle Earth is something you have to be committed to, you can’t spend some IPC’s on transports and an IC and then just call it a day returning to the fight in the Atlantic Ocean, because the UK don’t make enough income to be able to do something like that, they need to be concentrated in one specific area to defeating the Germans, and that’ll either be Africa or the Atlantic, it just can’t be both, that’d be overstretching yourself too much for a country that tends to make less than 30 IPC’s a turn.
And as for the setup I suggested, obviously 12 units would not be mandatory if the British were not doing a full swing Middle Earth strategy, you’d probably only need 6 to go in there, and secure the factory there and the naval base. But the main reason I say bring 12 units to the Middle East is because you wont have another chance to shuck units back down to Africa, once you set up your designated units in Africa, everything else should be going towards Barbarossa.
Speaking of which now that I’m talking about Barbarossa the other reason I would have wanted to bring 12 units to the Middle East wouldn’t be just to secure the IC and stop the Middle Earth strategy, but to then later move into the Caucasus and flank the Soviet Armies, which I feel that this move is WAY TOO underrated, I seriously feel like people don’t do this nearly enough as they could be. Flank the Soviets form the Middle East up, secure the Caucus and Stalingrad, and just by doing that will get you a whopping 14 IPC’s from securing just those 2 territories, along with the bonus 12 IPC’s for securing the Middle East (Trans Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Persia + 6 IPCs for National Objective).
I could understand why you wouldn’t think that a movement to build a navy and send 12 ground units south just do to what you already would have done doesn’t make a lot of sense, and in some sense I agree with that thinking, but it becomes a lot more worth the time and effort to go down there then what one might expect initially since you’re playing an important role in the fight for Africa as well as giving the role of the Italians to assist you.
As for the victory conditions, I think we all know that the Soviets are going to die, especially with the new war tactic I introduced in a thread I posted just recently on stopping the Russian Fall Back Line and overall moving through Russia hastily and swiftly. Leningrad will fall overtime due to the overextended Soviet border, Stalingrad will absolutely fall with the Blitzkrieg tactic I imposed as well as having taken control of Kiev and the southern German force in charge of securing the Middle East for the extra IPC’s to which will come up and take Stalingrad, leaving Moscow to the Germans to move in and take out all together.
Granted, that’s 7 of 8 cities (assuming we’re playing by the victory city conditions). With the last remaining city being Cairo, in Egypt. Hence, how the compilation of German Strategies all tie together with the immediate cut off of Middle Earth, the Italians will then be able to take Egypt and if they’re just to incompetent to do it then there’s nothing stopping the Germans from coming in and cleaning it up, thus ending the war completely with a swift Axis victory.
Overall, I feel like a standard Barbarossa attack just doesn’t work anymore, since like I said before, you need 8 cities to win with the 8th city either being London or Cairo, and since Cairo is easier to obtain then London than I say why not go for it, the main purpose was to counter all 3 of the Allied strategies that General Hand Grenade would end up imposing on the German player and frankly I say that having done this right, you’ve succeeded in stopping all 3 strategies single handedly as Germany.
If I missed something, don’t hesitate to let me know
-
@luftwaffles41 I think defending London when the Axis come for London makes sense, because building anywhere else is mostly a dead end – if you lose the British capital, then other British units won’t be very effective. Otherwise, I firmly believe in hitting people where they’re weak, not where they’re strong. If you punch someone’s nose, you’ll break their nose; if you punch someone’s shoulder, you’ll just break your hand. So, no, I don’t have to spend 100% of British income in the middle east just because you’re attacking it. Part of winning A&A is learning how to use an inadequate force to extract maximum pain from your opponent. You will surrender the region in response to a max attack, but only slowly and gradually and at great cost to your opponent. If your opponent sends less than a max attack, then you get a stalemate in the region, which is also fine.
Having a sense that Britain needs to focus 100% in one theater is relative. Yes, British income is modest, and yes, they benefit from focusing, but so do the Germans. If the Germans invest big in the Med and then switch gears back to eastern Europe, that will be costly for them, as well. The question is not “can I afford to retool” but “does my retooling cost me more than my opponent’s retooling?” As the UK, I’m buying maybe 1 factory and 1 or 2 transports to enable the Middle Earth defense. As Germany and Italy, you are talking about buying 3 transports, plus the warships to escort them, plus diverting the entire luftwaffe for quite some time. I don’t see that the UK has a harder time pivoting away from the region than germany does.
Finally, the reason why flanking the Soviets from the south is not as exciting as it looks is because it’s a long frigging way away. Unless you pull off perfect can openers (not guaranteed given that Britain can afford to throw away 2-3 infantry at a time as blockers on some turns, and neither the Italians nor the Germans are likely to have lots of extra units at the end of their supply lines), you’re looking at something like I3 Egypt, I4 Jordan, I5 Iraq, I6 Persia, I7 Northwest Persia, so your first little poke into Russian territory doesn’t come until turn 8 or so, and often that poke is quite small and can be batted aside by Russian slow movers built in Stalingrad. If the British actually build a factory in Persia and build infantry there, you’re looking at more like turn 10 or 11. It can be done, and it can win games, but it’s not an opening strategy; it’s a middlegame strategy.
-
Precisely. Though the greatest asset that the UK has tends to be their greatest curse.
To put simply, the UK dont have the power to decide where the game is going to be played. They just dont, ultimately that decision is decided by Germany. And it’s the UK’s responsibility to meet the Germans wherever they try to go. Obviously devoting 100% of your resources to that area would just be ineffective but to get down to the core basics, what else are you gonna do, man?
By G2 I will have already done my big strategic bombing run, ranked up lots of IPC’s on your naval base, air base and Industrial complex, so why bother paying that down when all that’s going to happen is that it’s going to reappear? And back to the very fabrication that the UK’s greatest asset is their greatest curse, I am referring to Middle Earth. The Middle East is largely controlled by the UK with no other Axis power having the ability to take that away, hence why its the UK’s greatest asset. An industrialized area that the Axis can’t get to? That’s a win-win for me. Produce a large concentrated amount of units in one area whilst having that area naturally impenetrable by the Axis powers.
All the same, it becomes their greatest curse when they don’t expect the Axis to come down there. Going off your point of hitting someone in their weak spot, this is exactly that. General Hand Grenade sure as hell didn’t sound like he knew the Axis could make their way into the Middle East swiftly and soundly, and truth be told they sure can, this is the exact weakness of a British player, a so said “Safe Haven” to produce and industrialize penetrated by the Axis powers in such a way you didn’t even think was possible.
The idea of doing a middle earth strategy requires of the British to take the lead, take control, and decide where the fight’s going to be. And in doing this, they’re putting their foot down toward Germany, basically telling them that I decide where this game goes. And the player in charge of Germany can either sit down and take that back talk or back hand the British player for thinking they can step out of line and call the shots for where the fighting is going to be.
All in all, if as the British role in the Atlantic and Africa, that you want to prioritize back up in the Atlantic Ocean I’d be more than happy to welcome that change of pace, because all it means for me is that my Italian partner and myself will have an easier time winning out the majority of the IPC’s that remain in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East.
The Germans and Axis powers overall are trained, prepared, and ready to enact on a swift victory, they’ve more often than not made strategies designed to end the game fast and efficiently, to get in and get out, none of this fiddle around stuff with areas of the globe that don’t matter. And to touch on your point of the so said building anywhere else being a ‘dead end’ well, the dead end is Berlin. It should be the of the Allies priority to make a train with carts full of infantry, artillery, and tanks headed straight for Berlin to capture it, no matter how it’s done, it needs to be done, and they can do it in any sort of fashion they wish, from the North down, the West, or the South from Africa and Middle East.
The British building a factory in Persia won’t delay the Germans to turn 10-11 by then either, 1) the Germans already won the Eastern Front by then, 2) the Japanese are on the doorstep of Calcutta by then so by the time turn 3 roles around the British should already be devoting troops to defend Calcutta, and 3) the approach from south into the Soviet Union isn’t either what this build is based around, since to me that’d be kind of a waste, just a thought to the fact that it’s a win win situation with being able to take the Middle East and the national objective money, stop the Middle Earth strategy, and as icing on the top be able to take the Caucasus as early as turn 7.
And like I said, the Germans have an incredibly open window to get units down to the Middle East and Africa whilst still keeping an effective Barbarossa attack. They aren’t swapping back and forward between the two they’re the good fight on 2 fronts, yes, they are fighting a 2 front war.
As for the Soviet flanking strategy, that’s more of an after taste, and meant for securing the Caucuses in the late game if the Soviets are giving you a run for your money. If I can get the Soviets to build slow movers like infantry, artillery and fighters to put on Stalingrad, than I’m doing my job, and I’m doing it effectively to extinguish the Soviet War Effort on the main Eastern Front.
-
@luftwaffles41 the problem I see is on T2.
You mentioned to sail down to Gib and take Marrocco and/or Gibraltar.This can be simply denied by placing a UK E DD in sz110.
Regarding Germanys Investments of a CV and TT for the course of landing in N.Africa.
Well yeah, you have to spend money to perform so, but these IPC will be missed on Eastern front.
Every ship you buy is weaken your punch against Russia.I am not saying that you have a bad Strategy. The Strategy is clear. Neuter UKE in the Mid East.
But technically and or Tactical vise it is less of an Option bc of when things are not going as plannend.The other thing what comes to my mind is, that you have to know that your opponent is planning on a mid earth game wich has some similarities with other UK openers i think.
Other than that, keep on brain storming.
It is allways good to have peoples here who trying out New waysBest regards
AetV
-
I can absolutely see where you’re coming from. I honestly thought the same would result of me having done my own Afrika Korps strategy but to my surprise, I really didn’t take as many units as I thought I did down to the Med and Africa to assist Italy, atleast I didnt have to take down units I purchased, only units that were used in the invasion of France to which everything else moved back over for the Barbarossa attack. I know, it’s hard taking what I’m saying for granted and I dont blame you, I’d honestly have to show you in an actual game representation what I’m talking about to prove that the Germans really dont take away from their Barbarossa attack atleast initially with the first 12 units sent down to Africa.
Having built a CV and 2 transports only requires 30 of your IPC’s to be spent, which takes all your money up. During G2, all of your money (which is like 70 IPC’s give or take if you’ve done the G1 turn properly) should go to your Barbarossa attack, we’re talking planes, tanks, infantry, artillery, mech infantry, etc. The same for the most part goes with G3, with the except of spending like 8 or 12 of your 50 IPC’s on a boat, since I like to build the occasional boat here and there to help assist the navy down south, to which if I got a destroyer I would merely be negating 2 artillery and if I got a cruiser I’d be negating 2 tanks, which there’s something to be said for that but it’s the fact that I’ll only need it once.
Regarding the so said UK blocker on 110…
-
I suppose it doesn’t cost anything for the UK to do that, but this type of strategy is to make them believe that Sealion is happening, therefore get the British to prioritize on the British Isles.
-
If the UK were to move their only surviving destroyer to 110, all it would merely take for me is to destroy that sucker with one of the many planes I have at my disposal, then on the non-combat stage take my units down to the straight of Gibraltar, which granted I won’t be able to land them but that doesn’t really compensate for anything and the British have just effectively thrown away a destroyer as well as the transport that comes with it without delaying the Germans.
-
-
There is the problem that if you just kill the blocker and hang out on the shores–you don’t take Gibraltar, which means you can’t enter the Med with surface fleet. It delays you a whole turn.
-
Well yeah like I said, then turn 3 you’d land guys in Gibraltar and Morocco, on the non-combat stage you’ll move in to the Med and pick up the guys from Southern France.
Like I said, for a single destroyer being thrown into the mess like that without any actual information that Germany is going to go Afrika Korps, it really doesn’t delay the Germans at all since they’ll still be able to get into the Med before the Americans are at war. Granted, if the British could stop the Germans from getting into the Med AFTER G3, then yah it’d be a worth while tactic but they can’t since most if not all of their navy will be completely obliterated.
And maybe this would be a little bit more significant in the Grasshopper Tournament scenario, but in terms of out of box rules, it really doesn’t matter when the Germans arrive with troops to Africa as long as it’s within the first 5 turns since it takes the Americans 6 turns to complete their Floating Bridge to get to Europe.
-
Oh and I forgot to mention the survived German battleship (assuming you didnt get completely diced) will be in Sea zone 110 with the potential of a sub being left over if you took 2 subs in so sz 110 really wont work out for ya unless you wanna take a potshot with your planes going in as well which would weaken your Taranto Raid significantly to which the 3 plane scramble will potentially give the Axis the victory on that one with some leftover ships.
-
@luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":
Exactly! See, part of what I was developing for a German strategy was to strike at the heart of the U.K’s economy.
So hear me out on this and tell me what you think.
First and foremost, you’d obviously be doing an Afrika Korps strategy which is sending a German navy and German units to help assist Italy down in Africa, whilst doing a successful Barbarossa attack. I actually made a thread in Europe 1940 called “Countering the Russian Fall Back Line” with a well devised plan to counter the counter attacking that the Soviet Union can do.
As for which route Germany should do, I absolutely think they should be taking the southern route since 1) more money, 2) closer proximity of industrial hubs with Stalingrad as well as Ukraine.
I’ve done counting and from the East Poland border to Moscow, it’s 4 turns, which is the exact amount of time it takes for the British to bring their destroyer and transport from the British Isles all the way to South Africa to start their triangular transport process in their Middle Earth strategy.
BUT, I have developed a way to potentially counter the Middle Earth strategy and the inevitable Minor Industrial Complex that will be placed on Iraq/Western Persia with a strategy that I like to call “Naher Osten”. This strategy is still a prototype, but the way it works is basically still the same get go, so let me fill you in on the steps.
Turn 1, Germany should build 2 transports and an Aircraft Carrier to create a fake Sealion build for the British to get all ancy that Sealion will happen, continue normal German moves that you’d do on G1, as for Southern France it’s optional to take it G1 or G2 doesn’t really matter much, but leave Yugoslavia and Greece for Italy since this strategy involves Italy to play a significant role in taking Egypt.
Turn 2, Germany should take the 2 infantry from Denmark, 1-2 infantry from Norway, the tank and artillery from Normandy down to Gibraltar and Morocco to make an official landing in Africa and control the straight of Gibraltar. Germany should next be building tanks, artillery and infantry for the inevitable attack on the Soviet Union. Now, it really doesn’t matter how you divide your infantry up as the Germans, you can either build the 3 infantry on Normandy and take the 3 infantry from Greater Southern Germany to Southern France, it doesn’t matter what you do, you just need to have 6 infantry and 3 tanks on Southern France, as well as having built either 3 more tanks on France, or 2 tanks and an artillery, etc. just buy 3 units made up of tanks and/or artillery.
Turn 3, Germany then moves their transports up to Southern France, taking 3 Infantry and 3 tanks down to Tunisia with the 3 movement they get from the newly taken Naval Base. Now, turn 3 should be the proper assorting build to send towards your Barbarossa attack consisting of aircraft, infantry, tanks, artillery, etc. BUT you must build 3 transports on Southern France by G3 for this strategy to work. So, G3 should effectively be your Barbarossa attack, this is when you can go now and go hard on the Soviet Union. I spoke earlier in a thread I made of countering the Russian Fall Back Line if it is enacted and it was a long post so I don’t wanna just say the same thing here, but the point is you can go now, this is it. or you can wait to G4, I’d go on G3 though. Now, as for your newly built 3 transports, the UK may or may not have a bomber on Malta that can reach. The Italian player should take their leftover cruiser, transport and destroyer and sub, (assuming they are all alive) to the sz 93 bordering Southern France to A) Keep the 3 German transports safe and B) Protect those ships from being destroyed by the Royal Airforce, to which being there the British will only have their bomber to take it out which isn’t very cost effective to trade a bomber for a destroyer being that the cruiser gets a guaranteed 2 shots at the bomber. So you’ll have a total of 6 transports, 3 bordering North Africa and 3 on Southern France.
Turn 4, this is where the strategy is put into play, keep in mind this is the exactly moment where the UK JUST STARTS to get their triangular transport route moving in the Indian Ocean so this couldn’t be better timing for Germany to disrupt the UK. Now, for building units you might wanna consider building a ship or 2 in the Med to help build up the German navy, as well as continually building the proper builds to help assist the invasion on Barbarossa. Now for the combat moves, Germany should take their navy, their 3 transports that will carry 3 infantry and 3 tanks, and their 3 transports on Southern France carrying 3 more infantry, and likely 1 tank and an artillery (It can be whatever you want, you just need to atleast bring 3 tanks), and bring these across the Med and land in SYRIA. The British may or may not know what’s coming, and might have aircraft there as well as some other units, which is perfectly fine, the more units there the better for you. So to recap, you’ll be taking your entire navy, 6 transports holding a total of 6 infantry, 4 tanks, and 2 artillery to Syria, and if there are any units there then you’ll get a landing shot with the battleship and cruiser.
Within the next 2-3 turns you’ll be able to march across the Middle East, taking the IPCs, the Industrial Complex, and the National Objective money from the British player, whilst Italy focuses on taking out Egypt, and while Japan works on taking out Calcutta, and with this, the British player is absolutely overwhelmed, they effectively have all 3 major Axis powers all marching for their base of operations, which the British just can’t afford to take on all 3 Axis powers, I don’t care how many units the British place in the Middle East and Africa, they just can’t industrialize fast enough to take on all 3 Axis powers. Keep in mind that after you make your landing on G4 into the Middle East, your ships should IMMEDIATLY turn back around to face the impending American navy that is coming across the water, and within a span of 3-4 turns you should have built at least 1 boat to put in the Med to help size up the American navy with your own and with the combined strength of the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine, you’ll be able to push the Americans out from their invasion of Operation Torch, therefore winning the game for yourself since the Americans HAVE to make their landing in Africa by turn 4, and if they’re pushed out then its game over, they can’t afford to make another landing because by then the Soviets will have lost the war.
I know this post was super long so I’m really sorry for making you have to read all this but I really wanted to make sure this strategy was devised and well thought out to take on the Allied powers.
Tell me what you think!
I like a med strategy. But I have two issues with the way it’s done here.
First, southern france, Yugoslavia and Greece should all be German and all taken asap. Sf and Y on turn 1 and Greece on turn 2.
Secondly, you do not need to waste time sailing fleet into the med. If you take sf turn 1 you can simply build what you need there t2. Or build what you need with a greece factory t2 to t3.
Finally, if the USA is dropping a navy at Gibraltar on g4 then what has Japan been doing? Because that seems to be a problem Japan should be taking care of.
The allies do not determine how much USA gets and where they go. The Axis should be forcing them to do so and with delayed entry into the war.
-
Thats what I had in mind for the most part. The idea of this strategy was to prioritize the Americans on the Germans whilst the Japanese can then roam free in the Pacific with no American threat.
As for Southern France, I suppose it’s personal preference if you wish to bring a navy down from the Baltic Sea or build one, personally for me I’m just not a fan of building a navy from scratch since it feels that it takes too many IPCs for the Germans and all im really doing is using the moderately sized fleet to help Italy build up its own.
As for Yugoslavia, I suppose the Germans could take that, gain the extra 72+ IPCs on G2 and for the most part just build a minor IC, since that’s really the only reason I can see Germany wanting Yugoslavia is to out an IC for close proximity to the Med, but they won’t need the IPCs with access to 70 by G2 and then 50 from G3 and forward.
As to why the Germans should not take Greece, for starters its important to leave Italy with atleast some IPCs to take, as well as the idea that the Germans can’t be wasting time attacking Greece, since assuming you are going to use Bulgarian infantry to do so, it’ll take 4 turns for those forces to reach the Soviet Border and by then its too late its imperative that they attack on G3 at the latest.
-
@luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":
Thats what I had in mind for the most part. The idea of this strategy was to prioritize the Americans on the Germans whilst the Japanese can then roam free in the Pacific with no American threat.
As for Southern France, I suppose it’s personal preference if you wish to bring a navy down from the Baltic Sea or build one, personally for me I’m just not a fan of building a navy from scratch since it feels that it takes too many IPCs for the Germans and all im really doing is using the moderately sized fleet to help Italy build up its own.
As for Yugoslavia, I suppose the Germans could take that, gain the extra 72+ IPCs on G2 and for the most part just build a minor IC, since that’s really the only reason I can see Germany wanting Yugoslavia is to out an IC for close proximity to the Med, but they won’t need the IPCs with access to 70 by G2 and then 50 from G3 and forward.
As to why the Germans should not take Greece, for starters its important to leave Italy with atleast some IPCs to take, as well as the idea that the Germans can’t be wasting time attacking Greece, since assuming you are going to use Bulgarian infantry to do so, it’ll take 4 turns for those forces to reach the Soviet Border and by then its too late its imperative that they attack on G3 at the latest.
The Germans aren’t wasting time attacking Greece. Greece is key to both the med and russia.
A complex in Yugoslavia is wasted in my opinion. It is too close to already existing German factories and can only put boats in the med.
A complex in Greece gives Germany boat access to the med and the Black sea. And gets german troops and protection for the Italians.
If you do this correctly, italy will get $ from Africa or swapping territories with the UK in taking the middle east. But once the uk is gone, russia has a huge problem.
I think Germany cant get caught up in Russia. You’ve decided on a Mideast strategy. So why are you leaving before the job is done?
Do what needs to be done. Take the mideast. Even if that means you get to Russia on G4.
-
@luftwaffles41 you still can’t enter the med until G4. You have to own Gibraltar at the start of your turn to go through it.
Re SZ110. If you are sending all forces (1-2 Sub + BB) to 110, what are you doing about fleet in SZ111? All aircraft? Ok. But will affect luftwaffe power later.
Brits still have 1 DD. I’d attack 110, and probably lose DD because yes with CV + 2 trans i would fear SeaLion. But have 33% of living ( assuming only damaged BB remains).
Of course, could take hit on fighter to keep the blocker, and then you’re back to waiting on entering med until G4 -
My point really is that this tactic is a possibility–if the opening to Gibraltar is there, then maybe go for it, but can’t be counted on in all games.
-
@surfer said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":
My point really is that this tactic is a possibility–if the opening to Gibraltar is there, then maybe go for it, but can’t be counted on in all games.
There will always be a way for Germany to get Gibralrar. You simply build a German fleet outside southern france.
-
Yup, that pretty much summarizes it. frankly, I suppose I see where you come from with Greece, but being that you put a complex on Greece, the proximity at which you are to the UK may be too close, but I’m not gonna talk about worries, I understand where you’re coming from and tbh that would work out just as well as sending units down to Africa from the Baltic Sea.
The point is though that this strategy is meant to assist the Italians in Africa since even though the Italians have a much closer proximity, the UK still has a better chance of beating them back since they have the ability to do the Taranto Raid as well as attack Tobruk, and before the game even starts put an end to any African Campaign in the Med before it was even started.
-
As for the blocker in 110 or 111 it really doesnt matter, if you put a blocker in my way than I’ll just go Sealion on you since I’m already set up for it. As General hand Grenade would say the point is to win the game however means possible not do your strategy at all costs.
And yeah, Surfer my apologies on the rule for controlling Gibraltar totally forgot, but you’re right this strategy can’t be accounted for in every game.
And if you were brainstorming counters against this German strategy, then they need to be generic and authentic, they need to be strategies that implement multiple steps of action that will fend of the Germans and Italians and win the game all together, my point is that stopping a strategy doesn’t come down to just ‘saying you’d put a blocker down’ since like I said, if one strategy didn’t work than I’d go with the next best thing which is Sealion. So if there were to be a counter strategy made to defeat Afrika Korps, than i feel it should be well thought out and comprised of immediate action that the UK should take to fighting the Germans back like putting a complex in Egypt or Iran, I dont know.
-
@luftwaffles41 said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":
Yup, that pretty much summarizes it. frankly, I suppose I see where you come from with Greece, but being that you put a complex on Greece, the proximity at which you are to the UK may be too close, but I’m not gonna talk about worries, I understand where you’re coming from and tbh that would work out just as well as sending units down to Africa from the Baltic Sea.
The point is though that this strategy is meant to assist the Italians in Africa since even though the Italians have a much closer proximity, the UK still has a better chance of beating them back since they have the ability to do the Taranto Raid as well as attack Tobruk, and before the game even starts put an end to any African Campaign in the Med before it was even started.
As for the blocker in 110 or 111 it really doesnt matter, if you put a blocker in my way than I’ll just go Sealion on you since I’m already set up for it. As General hand Grenade would say the point is to win the game however means possible not do your strategy at all costs.
And yeah, Surfer my apologies on the rule for controlling Gibraltar totally forgot, but you’re right this strategy can’t be accounted for in every game.
And if you were brainstorming counters against this German strategy, then they need to be generic and authentic, they need to be strategies that implement multiple steps of action that will fend of the Germans and Italians and win the game all together, my point is that stopping a strategy doesn’t come down to just ‘saying you’d put a blocker down’ since like I said, if one strategy didn’t work than I’d go with the next best thing which is Sealion. So if there were to be a counter strategy made to defeat Afrika Korps, than i feel it should be well thought out and comprised of immediate action that the UK should take to fighting the Germans back like putting a complex in Egypt or Iran, I dont know.
I would be hoping for a UK complex in Egypt. Like Thanos, I would use the complex you built for me to wipe you out.
Because if I’m going with a med strategy then I’m not joking. Or turning to russia G2 or G3. I’m taking the med and any complexes you have there. Please leave the lights on and fresh towels.
-
Couldn’t have said it better. It wouldn’t involve none of this “give me a half scoop” crap, when I go down to Africa, the UK player better frickin’ clench their cheeks and prepare for what’s about to hit them because I dont care if Italy does it, or Germany does it, Africa, and the Middle East are all being taken.
And I’m not screwing around with Russia either, obviously i’d still do a natural G3 Barbarossa since it’s not too early and not too late and do just as I would normally with Barbarossa, pumping out those tanks and takin’ it to the Soviets on the Eastern Front.
-
It is hard to make definitive assessment of this plan with out defining which rule set is being used and bid, if any.
OOB rules without any bid, and the Axis can probably try anything and win.
So let’s say
40+ bid OOB, or BM3/4 rules.
The Brits will buy 1 ftr+6inf because of you G1 purchase. Assuming the DD dies killing the BB, and therefore G2 is clear to take Gibraltar, Russia is still defensive. The Brits should see the coming invasion, and focus on keeping s. Africa, and werstern front. Norway if possible, but more likely building up to join US on Turn 4… assuming Japan DOW by turn 3, so the US can take Gibraltar back US 3, and start invasions US4.The Brits have invested no money in middle east because the German moves, but gain from the knowledge and adapt going north. Not a guaranteed plan, but Germany would be hard pressed to fight in med+western front +russia. Losing any of these would be problematic.
Coupled with additional IPCs from bid or game rules for allies and the game is not easily won by axis.
Suggested Topics
