Can Egypt be saved?

[Jeff28]

I stole that reinforce Alex with German air move from Wheatbeer.

UK strategy in the middle east is so axis dependant that its hard to come up with a plan.

Sometimes it’s best on UK 2 to fall back to Anglo Egy Sudan or TJ and build mech and tanks in S. Africa.

Just because you lose Egypt doesn’t make it game over.

It’s when Italy can re-inforce it is the problem and then build and hold an factory, thereby breaking into the Middle East and Africa.

If you kill sz 97 this helps on UK1, limiting reinforcements. Save the aircraft and land on Malta, the boats are worthless when they get sunk G2.

Building a Persia factory can help.

Building units in S. Africa can help.

You should have one or two Indian ocean transports around that can shuck, along with a cruiser and maybe the battleship for bombards. Killing Ethopia UK1 can help.

You can strafe Iraq with Persia to get them to TJ.

Usually my goal is not to retake Egypt and hold it, but preventing a factory build if possible and containing the Axis and holding the middle east, while getting Iraq for Russia and Italian Somaliland for Russia on your transport. Those extra IPCs for the NOs can make the difference in Moscow.

Also a Persia factory + airbase can fly planes straight to Russia in one turn, if Russia doesn’t fall the allies can win.

Hope this helps you beat me.  :-D

–Jeff

[Eqqman]

@Jeff28:

It’s when Italy can re-inforce it is the problem and then build and hold an factory, thereby breaking into the Middle East and Africa.

Support from German air guarantees that they can reinforce as early as I2.  I’m starting to think that Italy should always buy a Transport round 1 if you don’t have 2 left over after the UK turn.  The UK might have a good starting force of planes left in Malta if things went really well, but on average you might just see a Bomber and Tac there.  This won’t be enough to threaten the Italian navy in the period of the game where it really matters.  Italy never needs to build an IC since doing shucks from Rome is going to allow them to outproduce whatever the UK makes in S.Africa + a Middle East IC.

@Jeff28:

Building a Persia factory can help.

Building units in S. Africa can help.

You should have one or two Indian ocean transports around that can shuck, along with a cruiser and maybe the battleship for bombards. Killing Ethopia UK1 can help.

Lots of cans in there.  Really you only have 1 Transport, unless you are willing to hurt the UK-Pacific economy by preventing them from using the one they get to take DEI islands while they can.  The TT is also very vulnerable to Bombers coming in and landing on places like Italian Somaliland.  You can use the Pacific fleet to guard it, which means these ships are unavailable to use as blockers if Japan threatens a J3/J4 India hit.

@Jeff28:

Usually my goal is not to retake Egypt and hold it, but preventing a factory build if possible and containing the Axis and holding the middle east, while getting Iraq for Russia and Italian Somaliland for Russia on your transport. Those extra IPCs for the NOs can make the difference in Moscow.

Also a Persia factory + airbase can fly planes straight to Russia in one turn, if Russia doesn’t fall the allies can win.

I like the idea in theory of Russia getting money from its NO, but this has been too unwieldy in practice.  With the typical I2/G3 I’m seeing, you won’t be able to get a Russian unit into Africa until R6- just in time for that extra money to go into Germany’s bank account (R5 being possible if you use a 2-movement unit).  This also ties up use of a British TT which really needs to be shucking in units.  Iraq should also not be available for Russia in turn 5.  Italy has more than enough time to send somebody through Syria to force the UK to seize it if they haven’t already.  It’s also somewhat hurtful to UK’s income to let Russia have these territories as Italy outproduces UK-Europe the minute they start collecting NOs in round 3 or 4 at the latest (especially if you took any territory from the UK that blocks their all original territories NO).  Iraq & Persia are at least 4 IPCs that Italy can’t convoy away once they set up shop in SZ98.

I like the idea of the Persian air shuck, but the game is likely going to be over long before the UK is in a position to be able to spend most of its income on air for Russia.

[KaLeu]

If Russia is beyond rescue anyway, then perhaps its forces could be put to better use on the defense of Cairo. With a G2 attack on Russia, Russian planes can reach Cairo R2, and the first ground units can arrive R3. An odd plan perhaps and not based on any actual game play by me, but I can see quite a few Russian tanks and mechs arriving in Egypt before Russia falls.

[Jeff28]

Russian inf in cauc takes nw persia R3

bryansk mech and tank go to Cauc

UK 3 persia + tank or air strafes Iraq and retreats to TJ/persia

R4 inf + mech + tank takes Iraq

R5 something loads on tranny

R6 takes Italian Somolia

So yes. R6.

But when the German stack goes south for the money that +8 comes in handy

[Eqqman]

@Jeff28:

But when the German stack goes south for the money that +8 comes in handy

And that would be a big mistake in my opinion for the German player.  I read a lot of I like to get the factories around Moscow and outproduce the Russians posts.  You already outproduce the Russians with a big artillery buy G2 and then all Mech Infantry after that.  Buy your wave of Bombers the turn your ground forces are adjacent to Moscow and poof- so long Russia.  Just take Moscow and then scoop up the south later.  You probably already have the south anyway as Russia can’t afford to leave too much behind there if they feel they can squeeze out a 1 turn delay by leaving more in Russia.  If the Allies are flying fighters in to save it, then they must be weak in other areas of the board that should cost them their economic advantage.

I’ve debated the idea of sending the Russian stack from Bryansk south for Cairo to try and either liberate it or make it harder for the Axis to take it to begin with, but such a plan has a certain amount of risk to it.  If the Axis allowed you to keep Cairo, then it is probably better to just turtle in Moscow to force as many German pieces to come off the board as possible before you go out.

[KaLeu]

No, I’m not thinking about Russian income - I’m thinking about basically not defending Russia itself, but getting as many Russian units as possible to Egypt as soon as possible, in order to hold on to Cairo and buy time for the US and the UK to make a difference in Europe. If Italy’s only goal in life would be to take Cairo, Russia’s only goal could be to stop them from doing so. So Russian planes, tanks and mechs to the Caucasus R1, UK strafes Iraq, and then if Germany attacks Russia G2, send Russian planes to Cairo R2 and the first tanks and mechs to Iraq R2 and to Cairo R3. Meanwhile, keep pouring mechs out of the Ukraine, Volgograd and Moscow for as long as possible and send them all south. Sacrifice all Russian infantry just to try and slow Germany down a little.

It’s counterintuiitive and from any sort of historical perspective it’s totally idea of course, but it could just work.

[KaLeu]

(that was in response to Jeff’s post btw)

[Cow]

Yes and No.

[Guest]

Bid sub and inf middleeast will help alot. Also considder buying UK bomber on turn one to deal with leftover Italy fleet (always hit z97) if germany did full landunit buy, especially with mec/tank buy.

In you math regarding london defence considder that germany has to buy 1 dd to take London if you can block z119 and Italy cant can open there. If Germany do not buy dd, then uk can buy 3subs their turn (+defence inf) and when/if germany attack they scramble 1french fgt to force combat in seazone 110 so germany cant ignore the subs.

Then it be something like cruiser,2fgt,2tac vs 1fgt and 3 subs. But planes cant hit the subs so germany battle the cruiser alone against 3subs. 83% victory chance to the subs. If germany deside to go scotland it be even worse as the 3 subs kill of their fleet.

Sure germany might try london turn 4, but then again ignoring Soviet for that long is a Axis dissadvantage.

This is a advanced move that require extencive calculation and gameunderstanding. I would not recommend it to new players.

[Whackamatt]

Statistically, buying all Inf gets you the most defensive firepower for your dollar.  It does lock you into a turtle stance and leaves you unable to react and counter-attack much, but it’s the best defense if you know where they’re going, and they always go for Russia.  (They have to get 2 VC from Russia even after a successful Sealion).
Also, I’m not sure how it’s that easy for Italy to take Egypt.  They can do it, no doubt, but it’s the holding it that I find difficult vs. a good UK player.
After the obligatory Rd1 buy of all Inf, the UK player should move units up from South Africa and fly planes into the Med via Gibraltar.  Egypt can tighten up pretty fast if Italy doesn’t take it Rd 2.  When does Egypt usually fall in your games?
Once it’s clear that German isn’t going for the UK on G2, the UK player can fly 3 Ftr to Gib, and place an Airbase there.  On Rd3, 3 Brit Ftrs and 1 French Ftr can land in Egypt.

A Japanese player willing to hurt their position on the Pacific board can also send over Carriers + Air to also pick up where Germany leaves off if necessary.  It doesn’t matter how badly the Pacific goes if you guaranteed the win on the Europe board.

Is this just theory crafting?  Have you ever TRIED this?  India can use blocking ships to delay any Japanese fleet from reaching Egypt until at least Rd 7.  Combine with DD blockers placed in South Africa if needed.
Plus, if Japan gives away that they’re not even trying for a Pacific victory, 90% of US spending can be spent in the Atlantic.  Combine that with German plane losses clearing out a Med navy, and landing planes in Africa, and the US needs even less protection for its transports.

Also, I have never seen the Allies attack Tobruk.

Scenario 2, Turtle: UK focuses on the Tobruk attack and skips SZ97.  In this case Italy skips the French fleet (if present) and slaughters the UK on its own.  In this scenario Italy gets its full income in the first round and possibly the NO for no Allied ships right away.  The German air force still goes down to Africa to clean out whatever pocket of troops the UK might have built up.

If Germany throws its airforce away clearing out land units in Africa, then the US can sail in pretty much unprotested.  And you’re also incorrect.  If Italy skips the French fleet as you say, then they would NOT get their no Allied ships NO.
In your German opener, do they destroy all of the UK navy?

• Spend everything in the Med.  The Axis can just send more so you’ll lose, but this at least drags the process out a bit.  Expect Cairo to be lost the same time Moscow falls, if not earlier.

I disagree.  What do you mean the Axis can spend more in the Med?  It starts out 28 vs 10, with no way for Germany to place units there.  Plus anything Germany manages to place there isn’t going after Russia.

• Spend everything in the Atlantic.  Italy expands rapidly and outproduces UK-Europe.

Italy can grow to be a monster, yes, but it doesn’t happen “rapidly”.  Nothing does in this game.  Only Japan can see great increases due to the large IC values of the DEI and NOs.  Italy will not outproduce the UK for a good 5 turns, which isn’t rapid at all.

• Have the US go all-out Europe.  Japan counters by not attacking the Western Allies, which is detrimental to Japan’s long-term interests, but since you win in Europe, it’s irrelevant.  There is nothing the US can buy that will allow them to get Paris, Rome, or Cairo by the time the game ends in round 6 or 7.

I disagree.  The US, going all Europe, can have an airforce that clears the way Rd 5 in the Med for a Rd 6 sacking of Rome.  Especially with strategies as stated above that Germany has thrown it’s airforce away so Italy can take Egypt.
It then goes into the back and forth of, If German rebuilds its airforce, then that’s less land units vs. Russia, and Russia doesn’t fall Rd 6.
The key for the US is to only buy as much protection as necessary, consolidate and strike once.

In sum, it seems your stated premice is that the Axis will win, and there’s nothing the Allies can do about it.  I disagree.

[Whackamatt]

I do agree that if the Axis spend enough resources, they can take Egypt.  Without question.  However, I think the Allies can make them pay for it in such away that victory is now removed from their grasp.  It can be retaken and liberated shortly thereafter.  In some games the UK has nothing to do but buy Ftrs and Tanks in South Africa every turn.  Italy can’t counter that spending for a long time.

[Eqqman]

After the obligatory Rd1 buy of all Inf, the UK player should move units up from South Africa and fly planes into the Med via Gibraltar.  Egypt can tighten up pretty fast if Italy doesn’t take it Rd 2.  When does Egypt usually fall in your games?

This game has my longest record for holding Egypt against determined Axis attack, I think I finally lost it G6, which fits in with perfect Axis play, since they have it right in hand when they take Russia:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29680.0

I will state up front I was careless and tried to clean out Italy too fast from the south and didn’t take into account the possibility that German air would come down there.  I also should have dumped a US full Atlantic buy at least one round sooner, but I was trying to take a long-term strategic view and guarantee that Japan wouldn’t have a resurgence in my absence.  The real point is that when I try to correct these mistakes, I actually lose Egypt all the faster since the Axis responds by putting more resources of their own in there.

Once it’s clear that German isn’t going for the UK on G2, the UK player can fly 3 Ftr to Gib, and place an Airbase there.  On Rd3, 3 Brit Ftrs and 1 French Ftr can land in Egypt.

This seems to imply you didn’t do a full-strength attack in SZ97.  If you don’t go all-out in 97 then Italy usually (depends on dice of course) has enough resources left on its own to finish off the SZ98 fleet wherever it goes (unless it hides in the Red Sea) unless Germany left enough Allied ships alive around down there to make a stack that discourages Italian attack.  If Germany went with the 2 TT buy then they can dump a serious force in Gibraltar if you didn’t block it, which sacrifices your fighters for nothing.  I think it’s actually better to land in the French sub-Saharan territories since you can still get to Egypt in 1 more move.  The downside being you can’t get back to London if Germany suddenly does something to change your mind.

Also, I have never seen the Allies attack Tobruk.

I read about this in posts that were very old, it seems to have fallen out of favor to attacks in Ethiopia or holing up in Egypt.  I’m starting to warm up to it since it denies Italy & Germany the landing spots they need to have a successful attack in Egypt I2.  This could allow the UK to have enough time to reinforce it if they didn’t build the IC on UK1/2.  If you have the bid sub in SZ98 this option gets more attractive since you can send it to Malta to make that more of a lock as you don’t really need it in the SZ97 attack.

Is this just theory crafting?  Have you ever TRIED this?  India can use blocking ships to delay any Japanese fleet from reaching Egypt until at least Rd 7.  Combine with DD blockers placed in South Africa if needed.

50% crafting, maybe.  I agree that this won’t happen until J6/7 depending on what the Allies do.  I don’t agree that it is quite so easy to just block Japan with no consequence.  It is difficult to predict what is happening in the Indian Ocean at that stage of the game.  Strategically though the Allies cannot tell the difference between an India-crush and a potential Egypt-crush.  I would expect that India has already lost its blockers trying to prevent the J3/J4 attack on Calcutta.  If London buys blocker DDs for South Africa, then you’re not buying the 2x Mech Inf that need to be trickling up north to save Egypt from Italy.  I’m sure India won’t buy any replacement blockers because their income is about to drop dramatically and they need to avoid losing Calcutta.  Also, I don’t see how you can reasonably expect the Allies to be able to block everything an Indian Ocean Japanese fleet can threaten.  You can go back and hit Calcutta, land in Persia and possibly drop an IC there, go down to force the UK to defend South Africa, or move on to Egypt.  If the US is countering with full-on Atlantic buys, then this move is very safe for Japan and you will still be matching US income after taking the DEI.

If Germany throws its airforce away clearing out land units in Africa, then the US can sail in pretty much unprotested.  And you’re also incorrect.  If Italy skips the French fleet as you say, then they would NOT get their no Allied ships NO.
In your German opener, do they destroy all of the UK navy?

You’re right about the French of course.  Typically I see Germany sink the British BBs and the Gibraltar cruiser.  The French may or may not be there.  If the Axis has decided to make Egypt a priority I would expect Germany to hit the French round 1 and then land planes where they are of use on offense or defense round 2.  Frequently the UK only starts with the DD & TT off Ireland with the choice of sending everything to help the Med. or going after a damaged German BB.

I disagree.  What do you mean the Axis can spend more in the Med?  It starts out 28 vs 10, with no way for Germany to place units there.  Plus anything Germany manages to place there isn’t going after Russia.

That 10 appears in the Med round 1, the 28 does not unless the UK risks the round 1 IC buy.  Lots of advice for Allied players goes for a full London buy round 1 and round 2.  From what I can see, 2 rounds of London buys means you can kiss Africa goodbye for sure, and I’m also fairly convinced even 1 round of a full London buy means the same.  I disagree that Italian income doesn’t rise as quickly as Japan’s.  It is not hard to get Italy up to 20 with 1 NO + French & Balkan territory on round 2.  Then you only need 1 more NO to basically match the UK in income round 3.  Very easy to get by taking Gibraltar or Egypt (pushing through to Morocco is also easy but slower).  Germany doesn’t need to place anything there, that is part of my point.  Just do the small trickling of naval buys you might have done anyway to annoy the UK in the Atlantic.  The German Air Force is only sacrificed if the UK player managed to get enough defenders to Cairo that Italy can’t take it solo.  There is plenty of time to redirect it for a G6/7 assault on Moscow, although from what I’ve seen you don’t even need air to take Moscow if you went heavy ground in all the turns prior.  If you do, just buy all Bombers the turn before your attack.  Continue to buy heavy air after to defend Rome or sack whatever fleet the USA tries to commit.

Italy will not outproduce the UK for a good 5 turns, which isn’t rapid at all.

I’ll agree that it can take a while for Italy to exceed UK’s income, but it does not take that long to get close enough as to make no difference.  Especially when all of Italy’s buys are directly at the scene of the action while the UK is funneling in troops slowly from London or Cape Town, if they backed off making a more local IC.

The US, going all Europe, can have an air force that clears the way Rd 5 in the Med for a Rd 6 sacking of Rome.

I think this relies on too many assumptions:

• US went full Europe from round 1
• Germany cannot toss out a blocker(s) to prevent US arrival in Gibraltar US4 (this would be the perfect time to sacrifice the starting German fleet, if it is still there)
• Italy doesn’t have enough ships to block US5 and US6 (a possibility if Italy has something stashed in SZ97, 98, or Cyprus).

So many things can have happened in the Med I don’t think you can argue that the US can be guaranteed to take Rome, especially in a situation where Italy felt safe enough to do heavy Infantry buys I4 & I5.  It’s all speculation that relies on what exactly happened in Egypt.

In sum, it seems your stated premise is that the Axis will win, and there’s nothing the Allies can do about it.  I disagree.

I would love to be convinced otherwise.

I do agree that if the Axis spend enough resources, they can take Egypt.  Without question.  However, I think the Allies can make them pay for it in such away that victory is now removed from their grasp.

I disagree that this forfeits an Axis victory.  The opportunity cost for the Axis is much less to seize Egypt at any price than it is for the Allies to hold it at any price.

[AK_Grown]

Take Persia round 1 - yes this leaves Italy with some choices.

Place factory round 2 - begin to reinforce Egypt/Help Russia.

[barney]

I don’t know if this would help save egypt or not but
what do you all think about russia having china rules after they die
only can build infantry  make the germans have a occupation army or is that too much?

[Gekkepop]

You make some good points Eggman but I don’t agree with all of them and don’t think the situation is as bad as you make it out to be. First of all you cannot block the US from Gibraltar, he will just clear your blocker and NCM there. Once he is there he doesn’t just threaten Rome, he can still go Western Germany or Denmark-Berlin with help from the UK, especially if Germany has been buying bombers. Also flying fighters into Russia to save it can be very strong against plays like this. If you make a gambit for Russia and it holds, the Allies should just win no matter how much you sacrificed in other theatres.

[Eqqman]

@Gekkepop:

You make some good points Eggman but I don’t agree with all of them and don’t think the situation is as bad as you make it out to be. First of all you cannot block the US from Gibraltar, he will just clear your blocker and NCM there. Once he is there he doesn’t just threaten Rome, he can still go Western Germany or Denmark-Berlin with help from the UK, especially if Germany has been buying bombers. Also flying fighters into Russia to save it can be very strong against plays like this. If you make a gambit for Russia and it holds, the Allies should just win no matter how much you sacrificed in other theatres.

It varies a lot depending on what has been happening.  If Germany went with the 2 TT buy and the UK has been spending everything to save Egypt, then it is usually a safe assumption to say that Gibraltar is in Axis hands.  This will make the block effective since the US will be forced to spend a turn taking Gibraltar back.  The best Egypt-killing play is to probably do the 2 TT buy, and clear SZs 106, 91, 110, and 111.  The UK can then use the DD to block loss of Gibraltar G2, but that just means you lose it G3 if Italy didn’t take it already.  This is probably likely if the Allies didn’t go 100% into making Egypt a fortress.

I have grave doubts the fighters-to-Moscow strategy has any real merit.  What turn are you starting this chain?  Doing this is also going to hand the Med to Italy on a silver platter, so the UK can only send something like 2.5 a turn.  Will 10 UK Fighters be enough for Moscow to hold?  The German player can also contest the landing grounds if they see this is going to happen, unless the Russian player helps out by leaving the Novgorod stack behind to defend it… meaning less men in Moscow.  Since I haven’t seen a single league game where anybody does this, I assume it doesn’t work.  But Can Russia be saved? is its own thread.

[Whackamatt]

This seems to imply you didn’t do a full-strength attack in SZ97.

 Not the case.  The planes I refer to start in Great Britain, so they can’t participate in a SZ97 assault regardless.  The only question is if you use the starting Gibraltar fighter or not. Â

If Germany went with the 2 TT buy then they can dump a serious force in Gibraltar if you didn’t block it, which sacrifices your fighters for nothing.

I’m not seeing the big negative.  I didn’t give all the details, so the airbase Gibraltar move usually involves at least one transport landing in Gibraltar (either the 1TT from Canada, or if one survived in SZ109)  So it would be 2TT vs. 1 TT + 4 FTR.   I’ll take those odds. Â

Plus, those TTs are now not sending an extra 4 units into Russia every turn.
And if German needs to bring planes if at all possible, those planes aren’t attacking the UK fleet in the Med.

I think it’s actually better to land in the French sub-Saharan territories since you can still get to Egypt in 1 more move.  The downside being you can’t get back to London if Germany suddenly does something to change your mind.

Which is why I wouldn’t land there.  Moving them out with no way to return can open up Sealion.  It’s all conditional, of course.

I read about this in posts that were very old, it seems to have fallen out of favor to attacks in Ethiopia or holing up in Egypt. Â

It probably was more favorable in OOB setup and turn order, as well.  As it stands now, I’ll have to investigate.  
The main focus is on protecting Egypt.  If you attack Tobruk, many of your land units will be too far to double back.  If you attack Tobruk UK1, then you’d probably need Ftr support, which would lessen any SZ97 attack.  I’m not sure it’s worth eliminating land units for land units when Italy can reinforce with transports.
I’d say it could work, but it’s very conditional on what your plan is, how you deal with the Italian navy, and where Germany lands its planes.

50% crafting, maybe.  I agree that this won’t happen until J6/7 depending on what the Allies do.  I don’t agree that it is quite so easy to just block Japan with no consequence.  It is difficult to predict what is happening in the Indian Ocean at that stage of the game.  Strategically though the Allies cannot tell the difference between an India-crush and a potential Egypt-crush. Â

I disagree.  You CAN tell.  You get suspicious when Japan isn’t setting up to take the DEI in one fell swoop.  They’re not positioning anything for an after-attack on ANZAC.
Even if you couldn’t, the starting India fleet usually withdraws towards Africa (my experience).  And if Japan doesn’t attack J3, UK can declare war and have blockers lined up. Â

I would expect that India has already lost its blockers trying to prevent the J3/J4 attack on Calcutta. Â

Not me.  Perhaps it’s a style difference.  I know that there is 100% NOTHING India can do to stop Japan from taking it.  The key is to make it as costly as possible.  Japan needs those 3TT purchased Round 1 to take India.  Plus they can declare war on Japan to free Yunnan, the usual landing spot for its airforce that attacks India, moving from an airbase and landing in Yunnan.  Deny them a landing spot, and they can’t bring their entire airforce.
I reserve the starting Indian fleet and bring it to Africa.  Then they get offensive if Japan ISN’T crushing India, say an economic grab of the DEI.  I keep one near the West Indies to sail east as a blocker if needed, (meaning Japan has an AB and they can attack with everything).

If London buys blocker DDs for South Africa, then you’re not buying the 2x Mech Inf that need to be trickling up north to save Egypt from Italy.  I’m sure India won’t buy any replacement blockers because their income is about to drop dramatically and they need to avoid losing Calcutta.

They start out with one in South Africa.  Combine with 1DD 1CC 1BB from India, and it’s a lot of blockers.  Neither London nor India need to buy any.

Also, I don’t see how you can reasonably expect the Allies to be able to block everything an Indian Ocean Japanese fleet can threaten. Â

I never said they could.  However, must of what Japan can hit, and more importantly WHEN they get there, make the point moot.  I don’t care if they take Peria if the Germany into Russia assault runs dry, or Italy still doesn’t have Egypt.  They can attack Peria all they like.

You can go back and hit Calcutta,

Not really.  India is buying nothing but Inf.  The amount of land units and air Japan can bring is finite.  If Japan sails past India, then doubles back, that’s another turn for India to buy more fodder, pushing the chance of winning statistically out of reach.
ANZAC is going on the offensive as most of the Japanese navy is out of the theatre, and possibly Russia or the US are moving in.

land in Persia and possibly drop an IC there, go down to force the UK to defend South Africa, or move on to Egypt. Â

By now we’re talking Round 6-7.  Egypt could still be in UK hands with a factory and 7+ Ftrs on it.  Whatever Japan gets there either won’t be enough, or is no longer needed.

If the US is countering with full-on Atlantic buys, then this move is very safe for Japan

Safe in terms of pressure from the US.  I’m not a fan of all-in buys in one theatre over another, so that would never happen with me.  Plus they wouldn’t need the US’s help.  India is helping China, and ANZAC is taking some of the DEI back.
It’s very tough for Japan to take all the DEI and hold them, fend off a slowly building US force, and clear out all of China after handicapping yourself by removing 6 planes, 3 CVs, and 6TTs worth of stuff out of the theatre. Â

and you will still be matching US income after taking the DEI.

And THIS is where the strategy falls apart.  I don’t see how Japan can take the DEI without weakening its initial fleet, meaning less going towards Egypt.  If you buy more TTs and Inf after Round 1, then it’s not as many land units being placed with factories in China.  How much protection do you have against ANZAC which can buy a DD a turn and starts with 3 Ftrs?  What if Russia had 18Inf squatting in Korea?  What if the US had been spending a scant 16 ICs a turn in the pacific?

Lots of advice for Allied players goes for a full London buy round 1 and round 2.

I whole-heartedly disagree with that advice.  Round 1, Yes.  But not a mandatory Round 2 buy.  If Germany does NOT buy naval units Rd2, then they CANNOT make Sealion a success.  They statistically cannot bring enough to London otherwise.  I suppose a caveat would be to watch for them “saving” money for a surprise TT buy, but that’s easy enough to watch for.

I disagree that Italian income doesn’t rise as quickly as Japan’s.  It is not hard to get Italy up to 20 with 1 NO + French & Balkan territory on round 2. Â

We may be discussing two different concepts.  It’s dependent on when Japan attacks.  So if Italy attacks with German support while Japan waits to hold the US off, then yes, Italy can gain more than Japan who is doing nothing but pushing into China.
However, on J1, Japan can get +15 ICs from territory.  If they wait and do a J3 money grab, they’ll get +27ICs not counting a few from China.  
My point was, once Japan pulls the trigger, Italian income will never increase at the same rate.  I have yet to see a turn where Italy gained +27ICs in one Round.  It happens fairly regularly for Japan.
I have been on the winning side where the Italian economy was bigger than Germany’s.  Sealion was a success, and the Allies became confused thereafter.  Italy ran free and I won the game as Japan through VCs.  Italy should never be ignored, for sure.

Very easy to get by taking Gibraltar or Egypt (pushing through to Morocco is also easy but slower).  Germany doesn’t need to place anything there, that is part of my point. Â

Does this go back to Germany taking Gibraltar?  I rarely see that.  Italy starts with 1TT a lot of times, and they gain NOs for taking Greece, or just plain getting land units is more important than stopping non-existent Allied ships from moving into the Med.

Just do the small trickling of naval buys you might have done anyway to annoy the UK in the Atlantic. Â

I would actually welcome such buys as the UK, is you don’t go Sealion, that’s less land units against Russia.

I’ll agree that it can take a while for Italy to exceed UK’s income, but it does not take that long to get close enough as to make no difference.

I agree there.  If you ignore Italy, it’s to the Allies’ peril. Â

I think this relies on too many assumptions: Â

Doesn’t everything in an Axis & Allies forum?  LOL.  That’s why I love this game.  Nothing Past G1 is guaranteed.

So many things can have happened in the Med I don’t think you can argue that the US can be guaranteed to take Rome, especially in a situation where Italy felt safe enough to do heavy Infantry buys I4 & I5.  It’s all speculation that relies on what exactly happened in Egypt.

I agree.  I did not mean to say it was guaranteed, only that some forum posts make it sound impossible.  I think it could happen either way depending on strategies involved and sometimes dice.
Ultimately, I wanted it stated as something to plan against.  All too often in the forums I see speculation about a strategy that ends up with guaranteed victory.  Some people seem to discount all of the other turns that go between them from one round to the next.
I have seen Rome get crushed, and I’ve seen games where the US could do nothing about victory, even though they’d spent everything in the Atlantic.

I would love to be convinced otherwise.

Then game on!  :o)  I hope you’re not right either.  Care for some Triple A games by email?  (Sadly all I have time for, but I can guarantee several turns a day). Â

I disagree that this forfeits an Axis victory.  The opportunity cost for the Axis is much less to seize Egypt at any price than it is for the Allies to hold it at any price.

I didn’t say it forfeits an Axis victory.  I believe it could.  If German has to throw away it’s airforce to take Egypt, then there’s nothing to stop the US fleet.  The key would be in timing of said “throwing away”.

[Guest]

Ill keep it simple this time!

1. Bid middeleast units
2. Dont bid London, no need
3. Dont scramble if you dont get tradevalue 1.5 german planes(not ships) per 1 british fgt. You want to use that genius brain of yours to win, no need to gamble.
4. Sink z97 always
5. Be offencive with UK buys if you can, dont always fall back on 9men turn one.
6. Buy many fighters r2-4 and land them on american carriers when possible, they get 7 moves (3+4).

Try these fun brit1 buys:
5inf, bmbr (ita fleet not safe anywhere but 95/97)
6inf, fgt (rather defencive, but longterm good with US carriers)
5inf, 3mec (good cheap option instead of Egypt IC)
8inf, mec (very defencive, but 1 unit can make a big difference in Egypt)
7inf, tranny (tranny goes south africa)
6inf, mec, sub (joker build)
5inf, 2sub (high risk, high award)
5inf, egypt IC (not as good as it seems, high risk, if you loose it your 100% done for, id recommend buy your units in southafrica and sail/drive up)

[Eqqman]

@ErwinRommel:

Ill keep it simple this time!

1. Bid middeleast units
2. Dont bid London, no need
3. Dont scramble if you dont get tradevalue 1.5 german planes(not ships) per 1 british fgt. You want to use that genius brain of yours to win, no need to gamble.
4. Sink z97 always
5. Be offencive with UK buys if you can, dont always fall back on 9men turn one.
6. Buy many fighters r2-4 and land them on american carriers when possible, they get 7 moves (3+4).)

I almost never ever scramble since I need to save the planes for SZ97.  Assuming a flawless victory there, you have DD, CA, CV, + 2 Fighters to defend against 3x Fighter, 3x Tac, 2x Bomber from a typical German player.  If they planned their landings well they can attack with even more, this setup as it is gives 99% odds with a loss of 3-4 planes.  If the German player is planning on the I2/G3 Barbarossa then these planes have nothing else to do round 2.  The German player can then land as many as they like in Alexandria if it was taken I1 (the assumption being that the UK had to retreat out to cover Cairo).  If the Italian player was left with 2 TTs in I1, then the UK definitely has to pull out from Alexandria.  The German planes then provide cover for a growing Italian stack.  They can then make a suicide hit on Cairo if needed, or be used to kill any fleets hiding in the Red Sea (which might have guard ships that are covering a Cape Town shuck).  None of your points 1-5 solve this option.

The Fighter shuck is an interesting option.  You can skip the Cairo IC and try to shuck Infantry from Cape Town.  Then the Fighter shuck goes London -> French West Africa -> Cairo.  This might work and discourage the German hit to soften up Cairo.  The downside of this is that it is a very defensive plan.  In this situation I foresee the Italians still getting rich off the 3 NOs they can get without taking Cairo.  It will also be very hard for Britain to maintain fighter production if any German subs survived the first turn since you have to make DDs to hunt them down.  The US is not going to be available to do it for them (see below).

I think you (and most of the people who are replying) also are giving too much weight to the ability of the US player to affect events (the idea that the US can just make a bunch of Carriers solely to hold UK planes seems a bit much).  A smart Japanese player will never issue the DoW J1 - J3.  This degrades their ability to get the Pacific win, but who cares, when you will win in Europe in round 6-7.  So in most scenarios the US can do nothing at all in the time available, except maybe keep spitting out Fighters that could possibly land in Cairo US5 if the Allies still hold it.

I’ve been toying with the idea of a naval buy for India round 1 to help get some extra ships over to the Red Sea, or even using the starting TT to help reinforce the attack on Ethiopia.  I’m not convinced either plan is wise since India starts out on such thin ice already.

Gibraltar is a coin toss.  If Germany went heavy against the UK navy G1, then in UK1 you might only have the SZ109 DD & TT.  Is it worth the risk to lighten the defense of London and risk the loss of these ships to a G2 counterattack in order to reinforce Gibraltar?  If Germany did the AC/DD/SS buy, then you will likely lose the ships but hold Gibraltar for quite some time if Italy is trying to keep up with a Cairo arms race.  This is one of the reasons I think Germany should always do the 22 TT buy over the DD/SS buy.  By taking Normandy you clear a place for the Italian bomber to land to clean out any place the UK can leave a blocker if they have the DD left and want to use it.  If they don’t block, or you don’t want to use Italy on the blocker, then just move up the fleet to be in a position to sack it G3.  If the UK defended Cairo with everything they had, the German fleet will be untouchable.  If they didn’t defend Cairo with everything, then perhaps Italy won’t have a problem getting it.  I’ve held Gibraltar in numerous games and it didn’t solve any of my problems in the Med.

@Whackamatt: SZ97 is 5 spaces from London, so your Fighters there can attack it and land on the Carrier.  This means every other air unit in the battle (including the one that started on the Carrier) has to land in Malta.

[BJCard]

Do people actually lose Cairo with a Taranto attack?  Italy is all but out of the game when this happens and requires little additional UK support in Africa, especially if Taranto goes very well for the UK.