@FranceNeedsMorePower said in France's role in Global 1940 SE:
@The-Janus You got a lot of good ideas by chance did you every watch his video I made. It talks about France.
Here’s the link: https://youtu.be/I0nxyB3JwAk?si=K0GHmYXuijhuSVDA
I just went back through this thread earlier today, so I had copied the link, and watched it just now. Here are my overall thoughts:
UK fighter: Generally I don’t scramble planes, ever; in a recent game I saw the Ai send some undefended transports, so I took the option to scramble, then. In the early naval battles around the UK, it just never seems worth it, because the scrambled planes can’t retreat from combat so they’re basically doomed to die.
North Africa: I tend to see the Ai axis take Tunisia but then back off; as I mentioned earlier in the thread, it seems like the thing to do as France is back off as far away from the Italian transports as possible, and add French units from the UK there as well; this basically means defending Morocco until the US/UK can land to reinforce the position. If you push everything into Algeria (assuming the Italians leave Tunisia alone, at first) I worry that they’ll get dogpiled by an amphibious landing; Morocco is a lot safer.
Egypt/East Africa: I don’t typically see the Italians break into central Africa, but just in case they do, I always move the French infantry from West Africa to Nigeria, rather than to French Central Africa. This might be a little bit superstitious of me, but basically, as a general rule I want to leave French territories undefended, so that they can potentially be reclaimed by my Allies, if Italy captures them.
Madagascar: As I said, I tend to send the destroyer to the Atlantic; I don’t find much use in keeping a large fleet in/around Suez. If the Allies can’t challenge the Italian navy in the Mediterranean, they’re best off hiding behind the canal; you only really need enough navy to fend off any planes from sniping UK transports. If there aren’t any Axis planes within range, then I just run the transports naked. What I tend to see happen in my games is that the US and UK built up around Gibraltar, and if the Italian fleet is in range of both those fleets and the Suez fleet, then the UK fleets merge up for an attack. (As I’ve mentioned in this thread:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/1696439 I know it’s popular for the UK to use their planes for a Taranto attack ASAP, but I tend not to.) I also tend not to build ships off of South Africa, aside from a transport or two – sometimes more, if I get in a position to start shuttling guys from the middle east into Greece.
Indochina: I think the obvious reason there isn’t a French infantry there to start the game, is because the Pacific game on its own can then easily have no French pieces, no? I think if it makes sense and/or makes the game better balanced, I don’t see any objection to adding it for the Global game. IMO that’s basically the same idea as how the Global game adds ANZAC infantry to Egypt. (I think if you wanted to represent the French in Indochina when using just the Pacific game, the obvious thing to do would be use an American infantry; they’ll be long dead before any “real” Americans show up, anyway.)
Mediterranean: Now, perhaps because I don’t do the Taranto raid, I see my French ships in the Mediterranean usually get wiped out on the Italian turn – so i tend to discount them from my planning. If any of them do survive, I treat it as a bonus (likewise for the Channel ship) and just try to merge them up with my other destroyer. To me, Gibraltar (SZ 91) is the obvious rallying point for the allied fleets. (edit: That being said, on the first turn I oftentimes send the UK fleets to sz 106, off of eastern Canada, to rally up and drop down a new carrier for existing fighters to land on. That way they’re well out of range of the Luftwaffe.)
Paris: I tend to play pretty old-school, so when I make a landing in Europe as the US, it’s generally all infantry with some planes; not that I expect France to have much to do at that point in the game, but I don’t agree that adding more French infantry for defense is the obvious move. I think if you want France sniping as much territory as they can manage when the opportunities arise (particularly if US/UK are doing can-opener type moves, for them) you might want to mix in another offensive unit, to go with your starting fighter. Generally I don’t change the default 4 inf in TripleA, but once I get France up and running, I always immediately feel like I need tanks or artillery, or else I’m just going to be sitting around defending – like France has been, all game.
Psychological Warfare: It depends on your opponent; if it’s someone who’s running every battle through a calculator, they’re probably not going to be fooled or have any surprises pulled on them. If you’re playing “live” and people are just eyeballing things, then sure.
Can-opening as France: I think the trouble is that most of the time, you’re going to (at best) be attacking with 2 infantry and a fighter. So you’re only really going to win a battle vs. 1 defender. And if you get hit back, suddenly you’re completely out of steam for basically the remainder of the game. I honestly feel it’s better to have French units as a mixed defending force, than trying to use them offensively, particularly since taking territory (even by accident) as France is a detriment to the Allies. (For example: it’s better to have the US land a 50/50 tank/inf force in Morocco, if it’s defended by a handful of French infantry + a fighter; otherwise, the US would want to go heavier on infantry and not risk exposing their tanks.) You make a valid point about opening up Tobruk for mech/tanks to break through; do you often see the UK push coming from that direction, with those types of units? I tend to see everything flowing in from Morocco.
