Take Spain

[MistaBiggs]

Agreed – it’s all a matter of timing and circumstance. Taking Spain is an excellent idea if you don’t have much attacking strength (i.e. loaded down with infantry, but no tanks or planes). If you can place a good number of infantry into Spain … this will force Germany to either attack Spain or heavily fortify W. Europe. Another good reason to take Spain is to avoid the aa gun in W. Europe.

[haxorboy]

If you are in the position to throw 8 troops on the Europe mainland and want them to count, then Spain is an excellant option esp. if the UK can’t hold the waters around them for a landing in Norway. And you would be surprised how much this throws the Ger. strat all to the way side if the US starts up a train of 8 troops per round landing in Spain, WE falls pretty quick and then it is just a matter of time.

[EmuGod]

@haxorboy:

If you are in the position to throw 8 troops on the Europe mainland and want them to count, then Spain is an excellant option esp. if the UK can’t hold the waters around them for a landing in Norway. And you would be surprised how much this throws the Ger. strat all to the way side if the US starts up a train of 8 troops per round landing in Spain, WE falls pretty quick and then it is just a matter of time.

And if the UK cannot hold out for landings in Norway, what stops the Germans from pounding the transports used to attack Spain when the troops land into nothing and forcing the Allies to completely rebuild the transports they need to funnel troops to Europe? If the Japanese are advancing in the east, Germany can just being to build up for an invasion of Spain while the US and Britain have to rebuild those transports (losing 4 of them is quite a bit of troops lost).

[haxorboy]

The US can plant 6 INF and a ARM on US2 if they want…causing G2 turns to focus on not only sinking the tranny’s but removeing those troops. In doing so would leave the UK navy that was rebuilt to be added to…you could try to attack both but the focus clearly would be on sinking those 4 US trannys. Since you gave the UK a turn to beef up, it could have a carrier and maybe BB depending upon money. US3 lands 2 fighters on that carrier, and buys 4 trannys…the tactic was a huge success even though a money loss for US as UK has a defending navy, germany was forced to turn it’s attention eastward giving the USSR some help in setting up defenses on both sides and putting Germany in the hole offensive wise. And if I have errored in any math here please make corrections as needed…

[Grigoriy Ivanovitch]

I agree with your overall assessment of the situation…while it would still take a while for Germany to go down, after G2 there will likely be nothing but inf. in WEu, and they will have to reinforce, so Russia would soon be able to make some attacks in the against East Europe.

[kyrial]

The more fronts one can open against Germany, and the sooner one can open those fronts, the better (hence my earlier arguments in another post about the viability of threatening SEu, even if minimally). Although Germany is strong enough to deal with multiple threats, at least in the beginning, having an attack ready for WEu by T3 can change the situation on the Eastern Front, perhaps relocating even 2 fighters to the west.

Usually with US I’m busy sending troops into Africa, but this is an alternative that seems creative enough, and within a few turns the US can afford to both send troops to Africa and land in Spain simultaneously.

[El Jefe]

If I do the Spain takeover it’s UK then US reinforcement including ftrs. Germany ain’t gonna beat that combination often, but if it tries then the pressure is off USSR.

The advantage to it is that you don’t have to commit everything “to the death” as in an amphibious invasion.

[MistaBiggs]

@El:

If I do the Spain takeover it’s UK then US reinforcement including ftrs. Germany ain’t gonna beat that combination often, but if it tries then the pressure is off USSR.

The advantage to it is that you don’t have to commit everything “to the death” as in an amphibious invasion.

I agree with El Jefe.

[El Jefe]

Oh my G-D! :o

:D

[morten200]

All good points! It´s weird that taking Spain isn´t discussed more often considering how many people think it´s a good strategy.

Having another front against G is great - especially when it isn´t coming from the seaway. G ends up having to defend against three contries at the same time early on. Bad news!

[El Jefe]

I think it has something to do with that 6 in the little circle on the WEu territory. :lol:

[Guest]

Caution…Warning :)

Do NOT go to Spain too early and definately do NOT go to Spain on US 2. That is a game losing move.

Germany WILL blow those trannies out of the water on G3.

And she WILL retreat from EE, sending a few Inf from Germany to WE, landing her Ftrs in WE and massing her armour in WE or Germany.

She will be impervious to attacks on either Germany or WE on UK/US3.

Only modest UK 3 reinforcements can arrive in Spain.

On Rus 4 she can take EE for free, but it matters not.

On Ger 4 she will have a MASSIVE armour & air heavy attack on Spain…but she won’t take Spain…just kill 90% of your forces and then retreat.

Or she will throw everything at EE and blow out the Russian, evac WE and then turn around and kill you in WE next turn.

You will have no US 3 reinforcements, since you’ll have to rebuild the trannies.

You will have no US 4 reinforcements, since you have to build then men as well :)

Basically, this leaves the US without fleet AND without follow-on forces in the US…she needs to build BOTH again.

UK 3 forces in Spain are just more dead meat and make the strafe more juicy.

UK 3 forces in Finland or Karelia are useless and cannot help defend the Russkie if she moves to EE on R4 from getting killed on G4.

The Russian/German front is not as scary as you think. The Russian supply line is extended by 1, while the German supply line is reduced by 1. Unless disaster strikes, Germany can deal with one front then turn to the other, without serious risk.

The only real risk to Germany is if they accidentally take Spain :)

So, you lose the tranny fleet and most of the forces, while Germany will take very minimal casualties.

Establish the pipeline first.

Get enough combat power in Karelia that it cannot be threatened, and it poses a real threat if EE is evac’ed.

Then land in Spain and squeeze…as noted usually UK first then US with Ftr support. A one turn double load of 16 troops or so with air makes a hit on Spain unlikely. Especially if the armour MUST defend EE or Germany and can’t afford to move. This is a bit later when enough forces are in play on the Allied side.

SUD

[haxorboy]

Jefe is right, if I can take WE and have even a chance of holding it for a round then it’s on…but as a much better way to throw a kink in Germany’s plans for global domination is the Spain route…

[Guest]

I wonder why noone considered the US move of sending 1 Tr with 1 or 2 Inf to take Spain. That is a minor loss, but lengthens the western front for the Germans. Then the above scenario (probably presented by SUD) is less costly (you will lose one Tr), but the German flexible response will not come (or only by fighter strafing, if it dares that!)

[Guest]

That is a pretty stupid strategy.

[El Jefe]

Daggum, SUD!

You take all the fun out of learning. Now everybody knows the secret. I think part of the fun is getting whooped. The best fun is when you figure out how to defeat the other guys “Grand Plan!”

guest, I dissagree F_alk’s notation has merit. He explained his reasoning! Yours is nothing but insults which F_alk can ignore like water off a duck’s butt!

[Grigoriy Ivanovitch]

@LJ:

You take all the fun out of learning. Now everybody knows the secret. I think part of the fun is getting whooped. The best fun is when you figure out how to defeat the other guys “Grand Plan!”

I don’t think it’s any fun getting whooped, but then I’ve never played anyone I thought was any better than me. If I got the chance to play against the masters here, I’d probably get the sh*t beat out of me…and enjoy it! :wink:

[El Jefe]

I don’t lose wars(Vietnam was LBJ’s loss, not mine!), just games!

GI, if you cannot have fun losing I wouldn’t want to play against you.

It’s just a game.

I find losing gives me more of a challenge. That’s one reason I have to keep finding new opponents or a new game to play.

Except for Monopoly. I get the game to the point where I know I’m going to win, then I make some dumbsas deals to make it more of a game again while. Sometimes I gotta eliminate myself from the game to balance it, but… what the hey!

[DarthMaximus]

Ahhhh yes, the ole IC in the Solomons strat. Easily countered by the New Zealand IC though. :D

[Grigoriy Ivanovitch]

@El:

GI, if you cannot have fun losing I wouldn’t want to play against you.

What GI really meant by that statement:

While I don’t enjoy losing, it does not generally in any way detract from my enjoyment of the game. However, it does usually result in me obsessing over the conditions that led to my loss until the next time I play. So, overall, winning is probably better for my state of mind. Also, it’s more of the beginning and middle of games that I enjoy, where the outcome is still in doubt. Once a side or person gains a large advantage, then I tend to just want to give up and start over (even if I am the one winning)

There! I finally got it into a form that I was satisfied with.