@seancb said in [House Rules] Should allies receive a bid?:
one more thing, I’ll take a 16 bid
We actually have 1 game completed (if you concede it). Looking forward to another…waiting in the lobby right now.
Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023
-
-
@crockett36 i don´t throw away the transport. I use it to activate Iran with the inf from Sudan.
I attacked somalia with inf and art From India bc in our games J1 happens alot. -
Oh also I notice a lot fo people attack Iraq Uk1 instead of Ethiopia or just saving the units. They normally do this by using the transport in 98 and taking stuff off of Alexandria and the mech off of Cairo and air support from India to do this. Is this a good idea or should we rather keep these units in the Egypt-Sudan general area and attack Iraq later with Persian troops?
-
Generally speaking, because of the availability of Indian air units I find it easier to attack Iraq than Ethiopia and still attack in other areas.
-
There is so much I would like to do with England on turn 1. But when ABH, perhaps the best current allied player in the world, says to protect the capitol first turn, I think we ought to do that. Andrew also says it repeatedly.
There is a temptation to adventure. You could do sooooo much with your forces IIIIIIFFFF! So a lot English strategies are about controlling impulses.
-
@crockett36 I am hardly the best player in the world, and Allies is not my favorite side. Still, it has been proven that in a typical-luck no-bid OOB game with minimal London build on UK1, Germany can easily take the capitol with Sea Lion.
Of course we have so few examples of high level game play with such a strategy since nobody good wants to be playing no-bid OOB games anymore since the odds of winning for Allies is under 10%, with most of the victories coming from bizarre dice outcomes. Perhaps the playbook should be placing the Axis into situations where luck is important, such as enticing them to do a G3 Sea Lion… roll the dice and see if they get a horrible outcome.
-
S surfer referenced this topic on
-
My tournament that we talked about earlier for December 8th was cancelled but we rescheduled for the 15th, which is disappointing but that gives us more time to prepare for playing the allies. Like I said earlier, I will try to make posts about how the tournament goes with reference to the Allied Playbook PDF.
-
No worries. I look forward to your gsme reports.
-
What is your reaction to a J1 opening and a german land buy signifing a G2 attack on Barbarossa.
Do you go for germany with US, for Japan or 50-50 built.
The 50-50 built seems not to work imo bc it gives you not enough punsh on both fronts. -
I can agree that the US splitting their forces doesn’t really work. Not sure who the overall question was for, or if it was for the whole group.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato it was for everybody following this topic.
-
@Cornwallis Well for that scenario, I think a good response would be looking to try to distract Germany as much from Barbarossa as possible, perhaps by carrying out a Taranto Raid and putting pressure on Italy with UK, buying nothing but infantry and maybe 1 or 2 artillery for the Soviets, now that I know that is the best way to play the Russians thanks to AndrewAAGamer, and try to the the US involved as much as possible. You can position yourself in 91 and be ready with the US to hit the Italians, France, and Norway, forcing the Germans to have to be wary of all 3 areas. In the Pacific, responding to a J1 would be leaving the Soviets in the East as a cautionary force, Japan will be wanting to move fast and with as much troops as possible, so leaving them there would be a good idea to stop Japan from moving their huge armies in Manchuria and Korea south, also preventing them from being used with transports. What we have to understand is that all we need to do to prevent Japan from winning the game for the Axis is stop them from getting the 6 Victory Cities. What we need to do is just make sure that US is pumping defenses into Hawaii, they don’t have to be going out and assaulting anywhere in the Pacific, just sandbagging Hawaii as much as they can. Same for ANZAC, they need to sandbag Sydney as much as they can, and they can ask for help from USA in doing so. UK Pacific just needs to stack men and make life difficult for Japan, and make sure not to loose India, and if they do, they need to have made it stupid expensive for the Japanese and have some operations going in the Middle East so they don’t just sweep up the middle of the board. This way, even if India is taken, Japan will have an extremally hard time getting that 6th VC because for the whole game we have been stacking Hawaii and Sydney so much, it will be a very tall task to take down. So for spending with the US, I’d say 70/30 with the 70 going to Europe. Germany can wipe the floor with the Soviets unless the Allies in some way help by pressuring the European Axis somehow, even with the infantry buys for the USSR. But things may work out if the US and ANZAC challeneg the Pacific and can make their way to the Carolines and establish operations there. This could be game over for Japan because from the Carolines, you can reach the money islands, Phillhippines, China, and most importantly, Japan itself. This would be too much for Japan to handle, especially if they haven’t killed China and Calcutta yet. So a Pacific strategy can work, but when I have seen it, even when Japan was loosing very badly in China, lost Philippines and money islands, and their fleet, Germany was kicking butt without US investment. This has happened in a game I played before. My opponent went very heavy against Japan, I made some dumb moves at times, and I relegated Japan to the Home Islands, and a few holdouts in China, but the stacks of German Tanks and Mechs had just entered China at the right time after completely demolishing the Soviets and Italy was managing the Med, Middle East, and Africa. There was nothing for the European Axis to worry about so they came to Japan’s rescue, and the Allies threw in the towel because when you have 60 German fast movers, a massive air force, and the Italians eating production in the Middle East and Africa with no Allied effort in the Atlantic coming any time soon, the situation is hopeless. So I’d advocate for a more focused attempt to Europe in that situation, and that was my long and rambling reason why! I hope that helps a bit!
-
@jacobgeo24 said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
What we need to do is just make sure that US is pumping defenses into Hawaii, they don’t have to be going out and assaulting anywhere in the Pacific, just sandbagging Hawaii as much as they can. Same for ANZAC, they need to sandbag Sydney as much as they can, and they can ask for help from USA in doing so.
This strategy won’t work. Trying to defend Hawaii and Sydney with ground troops is a recipe for failure. If Japan is not being contested in the water than they will collect the Money Islands, take over China and India. They will be collecting a ton of money and then will turn their attention to taking the 6th victory city. To defend both victory cities requires a duplication of effort that ANZAC and USA cannot afford.
@jacobgeo24 said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
But things may work out if the US and ANZAC challenge the Pacific and can make their way to the Carolines and establish operations there. This could be game over for Japan because from the Carolines, you can reach the money islands, Philippines, China, and most importantly, Japan itself.
This is the correct strategy.
Forcing Japan to spend money on ships helps both India and China survive. Forcing Japan to send their air units out to sea to combat a large Allied fleet removes them from threatening China and India.
Once the US/ANZAC combined fleet cannot be destroyed by the IJN, Japan is in big trouble. From the Carolines the Allied fleet can either move to Japan or Java. Both locations cost the Japanese heavily.
US strategy should be to gain superiority in fleet assets with ANZAC assistance. How quickly this is done is up to the US player.
Two equally valid strategies exist.
- Send significant forces to Europe early on to assist UK in controlling the Med, taking Norway and Normandy. Then, once this is accomplished, spend 90% of US money in the Pacific to gain fleet supremacy. Only additional ground troops are sent, or built, in Europe going forward.
- Spend 90% of USA money in the Pacific and beat down the Japanese with Russia, China, ANZAC, India and US overwhelming Japan’s resources. Then when Japan is weak enough, around $35 or less being collected, swing 100% US monies to Europe to stave off the German win. A minor fleet with a few transports is all that is sent early on to Europe to force Axis defense against a 1-2 punch on Berlin and assist the UK in fleet defense.
The one strategy that will fail every time is to try and balance a response that gains no superiority anywhere.
As I said in my Essay, the key for the Allies, is to stalemate one side of the board while gaining an advantage on the other side, then using a monetary advantage to go back to the stalemated side and knock the Axis out. That is the road to glory for the Allies.
-
@AndrewAAGamer Thank you for the feedback on my post, glad we have experts like you around to help us out!
-
Thank you for clarifying.
-
Great analysis! I find this very useful. I’ll definitely try it if given the opportunity.
-
@jacobgeo24 said in Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023:
@Cornwallis Well for that scenario, I think a good response would be looking to try to distract Germany as much from Barbarossa as possible, perhaps by carrying out a Taranto Raid and putting pressure on Italy with UK, buying nothing but infantry and maybe 1 or 2 artillery for the Soviets, now that I know that is the best way to play the Russians thanks to AndrewAAGamer, and try to the the US involved as much as possible. You can position yourself in 91 and be ready with the US to hit the Italians, France, and Norway, forcing the Germans to have to be wary of all 3 areas. In the Pacific, responding to a J1 would be leaving the Soviets in the East as a cautionary force, Japan will be wanting to move fast and with as much troops as possible, so leaving them there would be a good idea to stop Japan from moving their huge armies in Manchuria and Korea south, also preventing them from being used with transports. What we have to understand is that all we need to do to prevent Japan from winning the game for the Axis is stop them from getting the 6 Victory Cities. What we need to do is just make sure that US is pumping defenses into Hawaii, they don’t have to be going out and assaulting anywhere in the Pacific, just sandbagging Hawaii as much as they can. Same for ANZAC, they need to sandbag Sydney as much as they can, and they can ask for help from USA in doing so. UK Pacific just needs to stack men and make life difficult for Japan, and make sure not to loose India, and if they do, they need to have made it stupid expensive for the Japanese and have some operations going in the Middle East so they don’t just sweep up the middle of the board. This way, even if India is taken, Japan will have an extremally hard time getting that 6th VC because for the whole game we have been stacking Hawaii and Sydney so much, it will be a very tall task to take down. So for spending with the US, I’d say 70/30 with the 70 going to Europe. Germany can wipe the floor with the Soviets unless the Allies in some way help by pressuring the European Axis somehow, even with the infantry buys for the USSR. But things may work out if the US and ANZAC challeneg the Pacific and can make their way to the Carolines and establish operations there. This could be game over for Japan because from the Carolines, you can reach the money islands, Phillhippines, China, and most importantly, Japan itself. This would be too much for Japan to handle, especially if they haven’t killed China and Calcutta yet. So a Pacific strategy can work, but when I have seen it, even when Japan was loosing very badly in China, lost Philippines and money islands, and their fleet, Germany was kicking butt without US investment. This has happened in a game I played before. My opponent went very heavy against Japan, I made some dumb moves at times, and I relegated Japan to the Home Islands, and a few holdouts in China, but the stacks of German Tanks and Mechs had just entered China at the right time after completely demolishing the Soviets and Italy was managing the Med, Middle East, and Africa. There was nothing for the European Axis to worry about so they came to Japan’s rescue, and the Allies threw in the towel because when you have 60 German fast movers, a massive air force, and the Italians eating production in the Middle East and Africa with no Allied effort in the Atlantic coming any time soon, the situation is hopeless. So I’d advocate for a more focused attempt to Europe in that situation, and that was my long and rambling reason why! I hope that helps a bit!
Hi jacob
Some paragraph breaks would make your post easier to read :)
-
@barnee Yes you are right, I kind of threw it together in a rush, I’ll make sure to add that next time :)
-
@AndrewAAGamer the problem with your 2nd option is that Germany can attack moscow by turn 6 so US forces will be too late to make a difference.
Ever tried the US carrier with ANZAC fighters combo? It takes a huge fleet to be able to grab and defend carolines.
-
100% agreement.
Suggested Topics
