UK1 Med and N.Africa 2nd Ed.

[capnstak]

I know there are alot of variables that can happen in the north sea and the Baltic when it comes to UK’s navy. My question however considers the game in the Mediterranean. I know for a fact I will go hard in SZ 97, but what else should I do? Should I pull back forces from Cario to Egypt and build a minor IC in Egypt?

Thoughts?

[BJCard]

I never build a minor in Egypt.  I feel like it is just asking for the Axis to go for it harder and take it.  I prefer a stead stream of land units from South Africa along with naval buildup off Gibraltar.

[capnstak]

A naval build up in Gibraltar? With I minor I assume? And Why Gibraltar?

[BJCard]

No, you can’t build a minor in Gibraltar.

A Naval buildup with UK and USA off of Gibraltar when they are strong enough navy-wise to hold up to a Germany air/sub attack.

From Gibraltar (with its naval base), you threaten North Africa, Southern France, Italy, Normandy, Denmark, Norway, and even Western Germany.  When there, German air (outside bombers) cannot reach you without owning Spain or Morocco.  Very powerful position.

[Eqqman]

@BJCard:

…When there, German air (outside bombers) cannot reach you without owning Spain or Morocco.  Very powerful position.

Don’t forget Algeria.

Also, the IC in Canada is the perfect place to produce naval units that then get shuffled to the stack waiting in Gibraltar the next turn.  If you place them off Wales, you risk being sunk piecemeal by German air waiting in Western Germany.

Make absolutely sure you have Morocco & Algeria, or you have an Air Base in Gibraltar to give extra cover.  I’ve lost plenty of fleets by thinking I was untouchable by planes based from Italy only to forget that planes have just enough moves to fly in from the north by swinging around France.

A really good situation for the Allies is if the Axis takes Morocco and then the Allies claim it back.  Now you can plop another Air Base there to give your fleets twice the coverage.  For spending 1 IPC less than a Carrier you get to defend with 1 extra plane, and you get to cover the SZs on both sides of Gibraltar.  When you fleet decides to move out, your ability to scramble will allow you to leave less ships behind to cover any TTs you are using in a shuck from the US/Canada/London.

[capnstak]

So that’s what I can do on the water but what about on the land in Africa? Should I pull back my troops from Cairo to Egypt and from transjordan to Egypt while slowing moving the one inf from west india to Africa?

What kind of troops should I produce in South Africa to send aid? (P.S. we have a house rule to allow mechs to move 2 without tank). Should I upgrade the minor IC to a major in South Africa?

[BJCard]

@capnstak:

So that’s what I can do on the water but what about on the land in Africa? Should I pull back my troops from Cairo to Egypt and from transjordan to Egypt while slowing moving the one inf from west india to Africa?

What kind of troops should I produce in South Africa to send aid? (P.S. we have a house rule to allow mechs to move 2 without tank). Should I upgrade the minor IC to a major in South Africa?

Mechs can move 2 without tank.  they just cannot blitz without tank, as in, attack an empty enemy territory and then attack another.

[capnstak]

So should I do the above with converging all troops for Egypt?

[Witt]

Hi Capnstak. Just noticed you asked whether you should upgrade the SA IC.
You cannot,  as it is only worth 2 and must be worth 3 to become a Major IC.

I like building 2 Mech or Mech and a Tank in SA and sending them north towards Egypt, but only if you feel the UK is not in danger of a German Sealion. Otherwise build 1 Mech for SA and 8 Inf for UK. All you can do as UK in the first few turns is make life as hard as possible for
Italy.

[capnstak]

So what I am guessing for Africa at least is to save Egypt at all costs. Send troops from South Africa north, troops in the East sent west and fall back from Cairo.

[rmcbride]

@capnstak:

So that’s what I can do on the water but what about on the land in Africa? Should I pull back my troops from Cairo to Egypt and from transjordan to Egypt while slowing moving the one inf from west india to Africa?

What kind of troops should I produce in South Africa to send aid? (P.S. we have a house rule to allow mechs to move 2 without tank). Should I upgrade the minor IC to a major in South Africa?

Do you mean to pull troops back from Alexandria to Egypt?  (because–from Cairo to Egypt doesn’t make sense–they are one in the same)  :?

[capnstak]

I don’t have the map in front of my but I think you are right. My Mistake!

[Commando Brado]

Depends on what Germany does. If they SeaLion or threaten SeaLion you need to build as many ground unit in the UK to defend or take out as many Germans as possible. Usually Turn 1, build 4 Inf, 4 Art. Turn 2 build 10 Inf. That’s if Germany builds 2 Trans Turn 1, invades Scotland Turn 2 and builds more Trans on Turn 3. Generally building an IC in Egypt is not a good idea. If Germany doesn’t SeaLion or threaten SeaLion, then it’s ok. If Germany doesn’t SeaLion or threaten SeaLion, then focus on scaring away the German navy w/the Brit navy w/help from the US navy and build units out of S. Africa.

[MinusCelsius]

@capnstak:

So what I am guessing for Africa at least is to save Egypt at all costs. Send troops from South Africa north, troops in the East sent west and fall back from Cairo.

I don’t mean to talk down to you if you’re an expert at this game, but certainly NOT AT ALL COSTS. Cairo is just a naval base and 2 IPC/turn. Don’t lose sight of the overall objectives of the game. It only matters as a victory condition if the Axis have 7 others. 2 IPC a turn is quite a bit (4 pt swing), but fighting out a decisive battle, you could lose 10 or even 20 relative IPC to your opponent and you still lose Cairo. Losing Cairo is one thing, but losing Cairo and your presence in Africa is probably the game right there.

If your army is alive in Africa, you can: 1) Force him to defend Cairo and 2) Continue to control the rest of Africa. He might have a bigger army, but he can’t use it for anything productive while he’s anchored to defending Cairo. If he throws in a lot more resources, maybe he can take South Africa, but it’s going to take a long time and he’s throwing IPC away from Russia, away from the US beaching sites, and away from a direct threat at the UK. As far as I’m concerned, that’s Allied profit.

This applies to any capital, but particularly Leningrad and Cairo and particularly for the Allies. If the Axis want it, they can get it.

[Eqqman]

@MinusCelsius:

I don’t mean to talk down to you if you’re an expert at this game, but certainly NOT AT ALL COSTS. Cairo is just a naval base and 2 IPC/turn.

I would disagree due to the fact that it’s a VC, and arguably one that it will take the Axis the longest to take if they simply wait until Russia is totally gone before they make a play for it.  If the Allies make it too easy for an early grab at Cairo, then the game will be essentially over right as Moscow falls since Volgograd will likely have nothing in it.  Unlike games in which the Axis let Cairo be their last VC, in which case a large stack of units probably awaits them.

Leningrad is a different story, since it’s impossible to hold it without gravely weakening the defense of the other Russian VCs.  The Allies can make sure they try to hang on to Cairo as long as they can, in this case, it will actually help Russia, since the expense for the Axis fighting in Africa will mean less units available on the Eastern Front.

[MinusCelsius]

@Eggman:

@MinusCelsius:

I don’t mean to talk down to you if you’re an expert at this game, but certainly NOT AT ALL COSTS. Cairo is just a naval base and 2 IPC/turn.

I would disagree due to the fact that it’s a VC, and arguably one that it will take the Axis the longest to take if they simply wait until Russia is totally gone before they make a play for it.� If the Allies make it too easy for an early grab at Cairo, then the game will be essentially over right as Moscow falls since Volgograd will likely have nothing in it.� Unlike games in which the Axis let Cairo be their last VC, in which case a large stack of units probably awaits them.

Leningrad is a different story, since it’s impossible to hold it without gravely weakening the defense of the other Russian VCs.� The Allies can make sure they try to hang on to Cairo as long as they can, in this case, it will actually help Russia, since the expense for the Axis fighting in Africa will mean less units available on the Eastern Front.

It’s not worth losing 40 IPC worth of guys to take 15 IPC worth of Italians off of Cairo. This is an expected fight on IT2 without British mediterranean intervention in the OOB 1e: EDIT: I’m not allowed to post links, imgur / vbNAKDn.png, it shows a battle scenario calculator with the max defensive pull to Cairo against an expected Italian full force engagement on Cairo without mediterranean intervention (so double transports landing on Cairo, along with the airforce remnant, assuming ITA’s turn 1 buy replaces their losses in paris), so with most of the italian fleet intact. Expected losses are 42 IPC for British and 17 IPC for Italians with a 99.9% Italian win. Minus the bombardments, you lose about 22 IPC and still don’t hold Cairo. The 42 IPC army can be a strong anchoring force and allow the British the threat to take back Cairo.

Either you don’t understand the point I’m trying to make, or I’d love to play against you for money. To reiterate, it sucks to have to give up Cairo, but it sucks worse to lose your army as well. If you can’t make a good defense, just retreat. “At all costs” defenses just lose games. Also to reiterate, if you understand this, then refer to the text you quoted.

[JDOW]

@minus: While I agree that “all costs” must always be used carefully and is hardly ever right I think you should also consider the following things:

1. Cairo underlines one NO of Italy even if Gibraltar might fall into the hands of US/UK for 5 IPC each turn
2. You must consider that saving units cannot win the game once the income somehow gets imbalance and time will clearly play into the axis’s hands

So it clearly depends on if even w/o Cairo the allies have realistic chances to win even in the longer term. If time will only play for axis in case Cairo falls, I can imagine there are situation where you should either stand or resign.