Bid art in Alex, tank in Egypt and kill Tobruk on UK1! If you don’t do this the Axis can stack Alex with Italians+ German air and deny your bonus for many turns. I hit the DD and Tranny off Malta with the standard cruiser +gib fighter and then I tuck my fleet to the backside of the canal (SZ 81 I think). Here my carrier allows a tac and a fighter from India to land on it. I leave the Italian BB alive in SZ 97 because it will not be able to stand up to the UK fleet I shove into SZ 98 on UK. On UK I will link up with a cruier/dd from india, air base Egypt and put my entire fleet back into the med. fighters from UK will land in Algeria where 3 French fighters will give them a safe landing spot and it’s check mate for the Italians. Only way to save the italian fleet is a German air base in Yugoslavia, which is 5 infantry Russia will never have to deal with and will only delay the inevitable. It put India in a tough position early, but that is already the case and those units will contribute greatly to putting Italy into it’s box by turn 3 or 4 at the latest.
I always destroy the Italian main navy force in round 1.
I have to give Pherman some credit for the tobruk bid play. He didnt invent it or anything, but he’s been using it so massively effectively in games recently, its almost demoralizing the shutdown effect it has on the axis in africa. Im pretty solidly a believer in it now.
Sure, Italy feels strong with its boats, and it gonna get paid for a turn or two, but it just isnt going to accomplish anything significant other than its own doomed presence for a few rounds. It will take greece, maybe go get gib once before USA arrives, and thats it.
There is so much UK pressure on itfrom boats and the huge RAF on its way to moscow, that unless G is willing to invest in a yugo airbase, the Italians will be dead by UK4, or earlier, no matter what choices they make.
You can accomplish the same thing without the bid though. The bid frees the transport so you can take Persia but as knp7765 posted you can do it without the bid. I honestly believe the bid system tips the favor greatly in the Allies favor. Maybe I have not played enough games yet , hehe
It could be Cyan, however the bid take the chance away from the matter, and yes freeing up that tranny is huge, opens up Iraq on R3, which is monster, as it also means ethiopia on R5 and Somali on R6, which is just sooo much money, replacing the ipcs Germany is taking away in Russia proper, and it also effectively counters anything Italy might try to do in lower Africa.
We found for a long time that nobody could beat our best axis play, Japan in particular has gotten really sharp, Pac wins have been quite common lately…I feel our Allied game is starting to catch up but it is so hard to find the right balance between Moscow defense needs, British Europe play, and USA asset allocation to stop Japan from getting out of control in the Pac, while supporting UK with the right amount of bodies to bleed Germany effectively.
I understand and agree with you. I just think that you can get by without a bid. Its easy to build a complex in Egypt and protect it without attacking Tobruk and use that transport to take Persia on UK1.
Another reason I don’t care for bids. I still say the standard setup is fine and provides roughly equal chances for either side to win. From what Demandr3d describes, just bidding that 1 artillery to Alexandria opens up a lot more options for UK and seems to give Italy almost no chance. It also seems to give Russia a lot more chances to gain money from taking Italian properties in Africa.
Of course, that kind of opens up another can of worms for me. Russia getting extra money by reaching down into Africa and gobbling up easy Italian properties, two of which aren’t even worth any IPCs. So Russia gets an extra 12 IPCs per round for four nearly useless territories in an area that Russian forces never really occupied in the actual war. Yeah, I know this game isn’t TOTALLY historical, but this just seems stupid to me – not so much that Russia would actually go down and capture those territories, but that they get so much money for them.
This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule.
+3 IPCs for each original Axis territory, Pro-Axis Neutral territory, Pro-Allied Neutral territory first occupied by Axis forces and Strict Neutral territory first occupied by Axis forces within Continental Europe and Scandanavia. (Turkey is included in this grouping).
This means NO African territories and NO islands. In other words, no Russian infantry hopping on a British transport to grab Sicily or Sardinia for an extra 3 IPCs each.
However, we have also added the following NOs for Russia:
+3 IPCs for Soviet control of Korea.
+2 IPCs for each Victory City that the Soviet Union controls.
With these NOs, even if Germany comes on hard against Russia, it is still possible for them to collect a little NO money to help their cause.
Well said knp. I agree 100%
This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……
I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).
Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.
IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).
What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.
Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).
In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.
@WILD:
This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……
I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).
Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.
IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).
What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.
Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).
In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.
The med island thing is no big deal, since 1 axis plane in SITA stops any russian landing. But, I do like the NO changes you proposed. It should only affect Original axis in Europe, and all neutrals in Europe/Middle-East. (No islands).
