Bomber Strategy and Karelian Gambit.

[The Man in Black]

Here’s an Allied strategy based on strategically bombing Germany into a wretched state of poverty and submission:

TURN ONE:

Russia1: Build 6 INF, 2 Tanks, save 2 IPC’s

Attack into Finland with 3 INF, 3 Tanks, 1 Fighter.
Attack North Sea Fleet with TNS, SUB, Fighter

…or use both fighters in Finland if you feel lucky at sea.

Move all INF to Moscow with 1 left in Karelia and 1 in Cacausus.
Move Karelian Anti-Aircraft into Moscow, Move Moscow Anti-Aircraft into Kazakh.
Consolidate in Yakut, leaving 1 INF in Soviet Far East, Tank retreats towards Moscow.

UK1: Build 1 Bomber and 1 Factory (In India)

Kill the German Navy, try to land fighters to support Russia (Finland, Karelia, Moscow etc.)
Bomb the clear skies over Karelia if the Germans have taken it, land in Moscow.
Reinforce India with troops from Egypt/Syria if Germany doesn’t commit to Africa.

US1: Build Two Bombers and 2 INF.

Invade Africa if possible, ignore Japan.
Bomb the undefended Karelia and Land in Moscow.

Move fighters to UK (or Finland) and Canada.
Abandon Sinkiang and possibly China to reinforce India.
Move Pacific Fleet towards Panama unless a juicy target appears. If possible, retreat the submarine to the West Coast during Japan’s attack.

TURN TWO:

Russia2: Build 6 INF, 2 Tanks. If the Germans have taken the Karelian Bait, counterattack. The object is to kill as many German tanks as possible so that the Soviet Army can achive armor parity with Germany. Russia can also decide to invade Manchuria if things go well in Karelia and the Japanese are fretting over the Indian Factory. If the Indian Factory looks safe, move the Anti-Aircraft battery in Kazakh into Persia.

UK2: Build 3 Tanks, 1 Bomber. Cause havoc on the high seas if the Kriegsmarine is still alive, Bomb Germany (in Karelia if possible), Land as much of the Royal Air Force in Moscow (or Karelia if the Germans fail to retake it). This allows the Bombers to select between German and Japanese Factories on the Mainland. Drop the Three tanks into India.

US2: Assuming 34 IPC’s: Build Two Bombers and 1 INF (saving 1 IPC) or 1 Bomber, two Transports and 1 INF if the existing US Atlantic transport has been sunk. Bomb Germany, land in Russia. US Air Force should also land to support Russia. Continue to press in Africa if possible, to threaten Southern Europe.

TURN THREE:

Russia3: Build INF and Tanks. Press the assault against Germany, expect devastation and ruin to come to the Far Eastern Soviet Army. Move the Anti-Aircraft in Persia into India to shield the Factory.

UK3: Build at least one Bomber, and some stuff for India (3 INF, 2 Tanks and 1 INF etc). Bomb Germany some more. Possibly Bombing Japan if they haven’t put up any anti-aircraft in French Indo-China. Hope that Germany has abandoned efforts in Africa to worry about the Russians.

US3: Build some Bombers and stuff. Bomb Germany. Maybe Bomb Japan. Hope that you present a credible threat to Southern or Western Europe by now (4 INF, 1 Tank, 2-3 Transports). Land Bombers at the (by now) luxurious international airports of Moscow.

CONCLUSION:

This strategy has been quite devastating on the Axis in the several games that my group has played it. We’re still tinkering with ways for the Axis to Monkeywrench it. Mostly, our plan is for the Luftwaffe to sink every Allied ship without taking losses, so it can enter Russia in full strength on turn two. Axis Anti-Aircraft must also roll really well. Japan also has to hustle to take that Indian Factory with every damn thing the Nihon Empire can muster, or her “land war in Asia*” program is sunk.

Anyway, I’d be delighted to hear your witty insights into this blindingly brilliant strategic plan, and I’d be equally delighted to mock any blitheringly idiotic ignorance that might happen to be exposed as well.

*One of the three classical blunders.

[BigBlocky]

If russia can counterattack karelia so well (and it could) why do you expect the germans to just park their tanks in Karelia waiting for them to be attacked?

Russia builds 6 Inf, 2 tanks and saves 2 IPC on turn #1? By my calculations that’s 30 IPC, what game are you playing?

With the brits building a factory in India they really can’t build lots of bombers as well so it’s going to be only the US player doing strategic raids and it takes time to get 6+ bombers going and that’s what you well need to affect germany making 35+IPCs. With no real allied navy in the Atlantic the germans will be able to mass forces against russia without fear of protecting against allied landings.

Try playing it with the correct russian income levels and see how it works.

BB

[Ozone27]

Not only that, but it seems to depend on Germany hitting Karelia & maybe North Sea SZ on T1 & nowhere else.

Japan is just asleep or drunk or both! USA has abandoned Ssinkiang & China & yet Japan has lost Manchuria & sluggishly (even begrudgingly) moved ahead, into China I guess, on T2–since as you said USA still has 34 IPCs. They apparently won in Hawaii T1, but their mighty fleet did nothing thereafter but sit & watch while the remnants of the US fleet slipped out of their grasp. Why didn’t they take Australia? Japan should (as has worked for me :wink: ) ignore Manchuria and just pump all her units through China taking Ssinkiang T2 & threatening India. On T3 The Australian force can sweep in in conjunction w/ the Ssinkiang force & just whale on India whatever UK out there! Meanwhile Manchuria has been retaken utilizing the additional TRs built on the last 2 turns & now USSR is paralyzed. End of turn 3 Japan owns virtually every important territory in the Far East, has 0 threat from USA Pacific fleet & faces NO units in USSR. Better hope Germany has been defeated by T5, 'cuz otherwise you’re sunk…

Ozone27

[BigBlocky]

I usually don’t do Pearl (since I haven’t played outside my box that might be a mistake but…… :-) Japan will have 5 ftrs and a bomber and be landing 8 inf/round into asia. With 2 BBs air and naval mobility there is little chance for the allies to do much in asia but back to the russian border and play territory exchange. The problem for the allies is that russian has only 2 ftrs, japan has 6 air units which gives a huge attrition advantage to the Japs when exchanging land.

I wish I could get my AA CD to play over my internal network never mind the internet… sigh

BB

[C_F]

I always like ideas that are a little bit different. I pretty much agree with blocky and ozone, except that if I usually do a reduced Pearl Harbor. If the US has it’s own carrier and BS it gives the allies a little more latitude when transporting troops to Europe.

I guess you don’t play Russia restricted, which pretty much gives the game to the allies if you are not bidding. The strategy of giving Karelia to Germany so you can run bombing raids on it is interesting, but I have to say that as Germany I would let you keep Karelia and use my German and Japanese bomber to bomb Russia. 7 IPC’s a turn being taken from Russia is going to hurt them especially since they get no support from British and US transports. Also the lack of a serious allied navy is going to let me go wild in africa and collect 35-40 IPC’s a turn. I can just sit in EE and the Ukraine, straif Moscow now and then, and wait for Japan to swallow Asia. If the allies see after a couple of turns that I am not taking the bait and decide to start transportnig troops to WE, FN, and Karelia then the Japanese have gained much needed time to win the race.

I really do like the idea of giving someone a IC so you can bomb them though, but only the allies are rich enough. Maybe let Japan have the UK complex or have the US build in Sinkiang, since they have more disposable $$$. As soon as they put an AA gun there though it is not very attractive.

[BigBlocky]

It is an interesting idea, if the Germans do take Karelia even with a tank in-out then it is open to an average of 7 IPC bombing, which really nets 4 since Germany gets the 3 IPC for the territory. You are net ahead and saving the russian tanks is great rather than losing in a slug fest in EE or Ukraine. A couple of pluses for sure.

However, since russia can’t build on Karelia nor land allied fighters once it was re-taken it would take longer to be able to retake it and hold it in latter rounds (unless the allies take it after the German turn, but with no navy that is a tad hard….). Also, if Germany moves up to Ukraine they can exchange caucus for 3 more IPCs. Russia’s income would be down immediately and Germany’s up but going down as the bombers take their toll. I few minuses then as well.

I think by the time the bombers took enough of a toll on Germany, Japan would be rocking and there would be little chance for the allies to help defend the India factory. IMHO at least :-)

It’s nice to see new ideas however, keep 'em coming!

BB

[Guest]

What about this.
G1: Bomb Karellia but otherwise leave it alone. Move the AA out of Southern Europe to Eastern Europe.
G2: If Karellia is still an easy bait, take it, move your AA into it on your non combat turn and, if necessary, build a new one in SE. Else proceed as usual.

[BigBlocky]

I pret near always move the AA from SE to EE, but it’s also true we always play russia restricted. It would be natural to move it into Karelia in R2. The question is could Germany hold Karelia on R2. As Germany I’d take Karelia and let them SBR me. The bombers can only do an SBR or conventional attack. If Karelia is SBR’d then those mediteranean transports will be busy stocking Africa making Rommel a happy desert fox.

BB

[The Man in Black]

@Ozone27:

Not only that, but it seems to depend on Germany hitting Karelia & maybe North Sea SZ on T1 & nowhere else.
Ozone27

Germany is expected to be conservative in Africa and to send the Luftwaffe to sink the royal and US navies on turn one and two. The Germans will probably take Caucasus as well.

@Ozone27:

Japan is just asleep or drunk or both! USA has abandoned Ssinkiang & China & yet Japan has lost Manchuria & sluggishly (even begrudgingly) moved ahead, into China I guess, on T2–since as you said USA still has 34 IPCs.Ozone27

In order to take and hold Sinkiang, the Japanese must leave French Indo-China vulnerable to a counterattack from the British Factory in India. (which could have four infantry, three tanks and a fighter ready to go on turn three, leaving two american infantry (from Sinkiang) and three more tanks left to defend it). This, combined with a Russian attack into Manchuria on Turn Two, tends to give them a lot of problems. The Russians won’t hold, since the Japanese should pull the fleet back to use the battleships and carrier planes against the soviet army before they can advance down the coastline or into China.

In the games we’ve played, Sinkiang tends to fluctuate between the British and Japanese. Granted, when I play Japan, I devote 100% of my resources to crush India on turn one.

@Ozone27:

They apparently won in Hawaii T1, but their mighty fleet did nothing thereafter but sit & watch while the remnants of the US fleet slipped out of their grasp. Why didn’t they take Australia?Ozone27

The problem with taking Australia is that it allows for precious few reinforcements into Asia. The Japanese Fleet spends turn one winning the Battle of Midway in Hawaii. Then spends Turn Two ignoring the US Navy, which usually runs towards the panama canal. Chasing them to panama puts the Japanese fleet two turns away from asia, which means they can show up in Australia on turn three, and back to asia on turn four or five. Meanwhile, the surviving carrier planes and battleships are needed on turn two to hit the Soviets on the coastline of asia. This leaves them with no time for dilly dallying in Australia.

@Ozone27:

End of turn 3 Japan owns virtually every important territory in the Far East, has 0 threat from USA Pacific fleet & faces NO units in USSR. Better hope Germany has been defeated by T5, 'cuz otherwise you’re sunk…Ozone27

This is similar to my timetable for Japan, which I will cover in another post. Mostly, I transport troops from the Philippenes and Japan to the continent in my program to destroy the british factory and seize china/sinkiang. My other dirty trick is to lure the Soviet army (maximum size of seven infantry and a tank. and possibly two planes if the soviets are nuts) to the coastline where the battleships and carrier planes returning from the victory in Hawaii can strike them on turn two. This leaves no time for an Australian expedition, especially as turn three and four require that Japan replenish it’s infantry supply on the mainland.

[The Man in Black]

@BigBlocky:

If russia can counterattack karelia so well (and it could) why do you expect the germans to just park their tanks in Karelia waiting for them to be attacked?BB

If the Germans take Karelia on turn one, the russians counterattack on turn two. Then the german armor is whittled down from 10 to about four to six units. If they ignore Karelia, then the war is fought in Eastern Europe and Germany gives up six dollars of income from Caucasus and Karelia. They’ll end up being bombed in Germany or Southern Europe instead of Karelia.

@BigBlocky:

Russia builds 6 Inf, 2 tanks and saves 2 IPC on turn #1? By my calculations that’s 30 IPC, what game are you playing?BB

Oops, that should be four inf and two tanks for Russia on turn one.

@BigBlocky:

With the brits building a factory in India they really can’t build lots of bombers as well so it’s going to be only the US player doing strategic raids and it takes time to get 6+ bombers going and that’s what you well need to affect germany making 35+IPCs. With no real allied navy in the Atlantic the germans will be able to mass forces against russia without fear of protecting against allied landings.
BB

Actually, Britain builds one bomber a turn, alternating between tanks and infantry into India. By turn four the UK has four bombers. The US builds one or two bombers a turn. So by turn four the US Air Force should have about four to six bombers, depending on how US Naval procurement is going. This assumes that the Anti-Aircraft causalties have been limited by forcing Germany to build an anti-aircraft battery or just being bombed in an unprotected Karelia.

Consider this table:

Turn Allied Bombing German IPC’s
1 2d6 32-7=25
2 5d6 40-17-23
3 7d6 42-24=18
4 9d6 37-30=7
5 11d6 32-37=-5

This table is moderate in both the allied production of bombers, which could be slightly more, and the amount of territory that Germany has been able to hold onto, which could be much less.

[BigBlocky]

MIB, like I said, if you left 1 infantry in Karelia, why would the Germans put all their tanks in there knowing they would be lost, is he drunk? The other guy should always determine what can hit him.

The Germans, assuming they are not drunk, would take Caucus for sure and most likely Karelia. They would do it with 2-3 units each. They would move up all their armour and infantry to both Ukraine and EE because you can’t attack them since Karelia and Caucus is occupied. Germany then out-builds Russia for at least 3 turns before SBR’s reduce their 35-40+ income.

Britain will lose Africa quick as you can’t defend India and counter the German build up via the untouched med fleet. The English income would rapidly fall to the 20 IPC level. You have to build 3 units/turn in India and use all your fighter airforce to defend it. You’d be lucky to build 1 bomber/round.

Your IPC table doesn’t make any sense. The Germans get their full 32 IPC build on R1 as the bombing takes place AFTER the german turn. At the end of the German turn it’s income after taking 3-4 IPC in Aftrica on R1 as well as Karelia AND Caucus is in the 40’s right away. As your bombers scale up so does the German income as it takes more of Africa. It will be 3-4 turns before you get Germany below 30. By then the Germans have soundly out-built the russians that are now feeling the affects of an ever increasting Jap pressure. Russia falls before you get Germany below 10 IPC builds IMHO.

BB

[The Man in Black]

@Meijing:

What about this.
G1: Bomb Karellia but otherwise leave it alone. Move the AA out of Southern Europe to Eastern Europe.
G2: If Karellia is still an easy bait, take it, move your AA into it on your non combat turn and, if necessary, build a new one in SE. Else proceed as usual.

If this occurs, the Russians should be able to grab and hold the Ukraine on turn two. This forces the battle into Eastern Europe for turn two and three instead of Karelia. I’d say this puts the German timetable back a turn. Also, Germany spends 5 IPC to build an anti-aircraft, weakening it’s land forces by a tank or two infantry. The bombing contines, only this time, the USA should strengthen it’s commitment to Africa, threatening Southern Europe with both Strategic Bombing and Amphibious Assault. Furthermore, if the Germans send their bomber to an unprotected Karelia, then it won’t be sinking allied shipping. This seems like an acceptable trade-off for the Allies.

Even with anti-aircraft coverage, the bombing continues. See my poorly rendered table in my other post for average losses to Germany for turns one to five.

[The Man in Black]

@BigBlocky:

Britain will lose Africa quick as you can’t defend India and counter the German build up via the untouched med fleet. The English income would rapidly fall to the 20 IPC level. You have to build 3 units/turn in India and use all your fighter airforce to defend it. You’d be lucky to build 1 bomber/round.BB

This is the worry factor for me, that Germany will defend on the continent for the first couple of turns and attack aggressively in Africa. But then I said earlier that the strategy assumes Germany will be conservative in Africa…

If Germany pursued an aggressive African campaign on turn one and two, I would build Fortress Russia (all infantry builds from turn two onwards, with numerous UK and USA fighters to reinforce Russia). I’d also pursue a vigorous naval program to liberate Africa and threaten Southern and Western Europe with the UK and USA.

The med fleet is too much of a wild card for the allies to predict accurately. Sometimes Britain can inflict casualties on it on turn one or two, sometimes they steam into the Black Sea to deliver Italian troops into the Caucasus or Ukraine (putting them in range of the russian fighters). Sometimes they stay put to guard Southern Europe from the USA (who sinks them with air power), sometimes they conduct amphibious landings in Africa etc etc.

@BigBlocky:

As your bombers scale up so does the German income as it takes more of Africa. It will be 3-4 turns before you get Germany below 30. .BB

Math was never my strong suit, but the gist of it is that Germany has less and less money every turn. Your assumption of Germany’s income level relies on a Rommellian Africa, which is contrary to my previously stated assumption of German passivity on the Dark Continent.

[The Man in Black]

@C_F:

I guess you don’t play Russia restricted, which pretty much gives the game to the allies if you are not bidding.

It depends on the relative skill levels of who’s playing and what sort of strategy we’ve decided to test that determines whether the “Go For Broke!” boys of the 442nd Axis & Allies Regimental Combat Team plays with a restricted russia or not.

@C_F:

The strategy of giving Karelia to Germany so you can run bombing raids on it is interesting, but I have to say that as Germany I would let you keep Karelia and use my German and Japanese bomber to bomb Russia.

If Germany refuses the Gambit on turn one and proceeds to aggressively attack in Africa (remember that the bombing assumes that Germany will relinquish Africa) , then UK/USA must spend 30-40 IPC for turns 1-3 on Operation TORCH in Africa. They can also send bombers to africa and bomb Italy to irritate Axis players who like to drag the Southern Europe AA to Eastern Europe.

@C_F:

I can just sit in EE and the Ukraine, straif Moscow now and then, and wait for Japan to swallow Asia. If the allies see after a couple of turns that I am not taking the bait and decide to start transportnig troops to WE, FN, and Karelia then the Japanese have gained much needed time to win the race.

This is why the UK builds a Factory in India. This annoying move, combined with a Russian invasion of Manchuria on turn two, delays the Japanese Invasion of Russia until turn 5-7. It also destroys any illusions the Japanese might entertain concerning Africa. It would be devastating to the Allies if the Japanese were able to take India on turn one or two though.

@C_F:

I really do like the idea of giving someone a IC so you can bomb them though, but only the allies are rich enough. Maybe let Japan have the UK complex or have the US build in Sinkiang, since they have more disposable $$$. As soon as they put an AA gun there though it is not very attractive.

A factory in Sinkiang by the USA, and/or a UK Factory in India would be something to look at. I dunno if it would prove successful, but it would certainly be interesting… I’d fear that if the Japanese could capture the Sinkiang Factory on turn two, and they build a factory in French Indo-China on turn one, then Japan could outproduce the UK in Asia on turn three and beyond. Not a good thing. Perhaps the Industrialization of Asia could prove fruitful in an all out allied effort against Japan, but that ill-considered plan usually becomes a bottomless pit for IPC’s…

[BigBlocky]

With no Russia restriced and no bidding the allied player would have to be much much weaker a player then the axis player to lose.

I’ve played the allies this way, moved the russian navy in with the brit BB/transport and put everything I could into Karelia save 1 INF. The germans built a ftr thinking they might lose one. They took out every single allied naval unit including the USA transport without taking a hit… I was whining something fierce… But the allies can be patient, as long as they don’t make a huge mistake it’s always gonna end the same. Either Germany fails as the Japs are almost ready to take Russia or the Germans are bottled up and allied units run wild over asia, the allies out build and bide their time…

BB

[Xi]

If it works for him let him use it until someone finds a hole in his plan.

[BigBlocky]

Xi, this is a forum where we critque each others strategies, I don’t like to be told effectively to shut up. You really seem to have a problem with me in particular, is this just my imagination I hope?

BB

[Ozone27]

I agree w/ BigBlocky’s 1st 1/2 (though he may be being too sensitive about the alleged “personal” nature of Xi’s posts. If not, I’ll stay out of it!).

If you post a strategy on the forum, you MUST be expecting SOME critique from fellow players here. Personally, when I post a strategy or a question, I am usually SOLICITING responses because I want to see what other (especially more experienced) players think.

Of course if a strategy works for you, then there is no reason to change it until the enemy catches on. But it’s often useful to acquire the opinions of other players–especially their means of countering the strategy–to see the limits of your ideas. The forum ought to be a give-&-take: by posting here it seems to me one is accepting whatever feedback one gets (as long as it’s not mean-spirited or unproductive–neither of which I’ve seen on this topic)…

JMO

Ozone27

[BigBlocky]

Ozone, hear hear. Perhaps I am a bit too sensitive. I don’t however recall telling anybody NOT to use a strategy, I get a bit defensive over false charges I suppose.

By playing ‘devil’s advocate’ for each other we become better. It should never be personal and hopefully it itsn’t.

BB

[Meijing]

That’s exectly what disussion should be about.
And this site certainly helped me to get better.