Best spot for US to land?

[jwo1984]

hi there.  I am currently in a 1940 2nd ed game around turn 7.  Germany has advanced deep into Russia with heavy stacks and is about to take her down.  As the allies,  I chose to land my 7 US transports in normady.  The axis player withdrew all his defences and stacked them in France. Since second edition US goes turn 3 with britian turn 4, I am able to offload troops from uk using the us transports to reinforce the landing back to back as the one sea zone connects Britian and Normandy.  Just wondering what areas typically allies players like best for landing there troops?  Anyone try to recreate Dday and /or have success?

[General Haig]

Denmark for the U.S. then Germany for the British on their turn. Remember tho if you are using U.S. TT that you load on your turn and disembark on your next turn.

[jwo1984]

whats your reason for US landing in Denmark?  with the ipc value only at 2 wouldn’t you rather find a 3 to build a major?  I find the shuck shuck with the US takes too long and Germany with there ipc’s well in the 60’s late in the game, can be building red stacks of inf for defence, or a good counter force in France, west Germany and Berlin to reclaim the allied landing.

[Witt]

I think he meant as a can opener.
Germany has to always be prepared for that.

[ItIsILeClerc]

From top to bottom, my preferences are:

-Can the allies leapfrog the UK into Berlin (US taking Denmark + Norway)?
-Can Rome be taken without being kicked out next turn immediately?
-Can the allies safely land in Normandy?
-We can land in Norway (which is a great aircraft carrier to launch RAIDS from on German factories)!

But it depends of course a lot on how the axis positioned their strength. Norway should  always be possible and if Mainland Europe is nowhere safe (at this moment) I comfort myself that all those German defenders are NOT active in Russia.

The only downside of Norway is that the allies loose, for a couple of turns, their flexibility to strike everywhere they want. The Axis forces can be less stretched. It shouldn’t be too much of a problem but the allies must still be aware of it.

So, yes, DDay can be a success but imho the Axis dictate if it is possible or not.

[Razor]

I figure that the ultimate spot for US to land is true neutral Spain.

Get reinforced by UK, then build a naval base next turn. Now you can chuck units from USA to Europa in one turn, so you don’t need many trannies. And with airbases in both Spain and Portugal, you can scramble 6 fighters into seazone 91 and don’t need to spend money on a lot of warships for protection. Since Spain is adjacent to 5 different seazones the 30 IPC you will spend on airbase and port is put to good use. Maybe build a minor IC too.

From seazone 91 you can reach everything north to Norway and east to Italy, and from sz 92 every territory adjacent to the Mediterranean sea. From Spain your army will easily liberate France, threaten both Berlin and Rome, and for sure deny Italy 15 IPC worth of NOs.

the only but is that every other true neutral in the world will turn against you, and join the Axis evil cause. But don’t worry. South America is easily taken, the 8 infantry in Turkey are far away, and UK can block the sz 125 convoy, take Sweden and deny Germany the 5 IPC NO.

Based on this facts, I will say that Spain is a strong strategically spot for further US operations, if you want to win the game

[jwo1984]

Spain hey, looking at the board that could be a great spot with naval and air bases.  Ill have to try that strategy out next game

[ItIsILeClerc]

Just be careful not to shoot in your own feet by doing this  :-D.

Italy could still have easy access to neutrals (=extra troops + income) in Africa and Germany…
…Well, Germany will have easy access to Sweden and Turkey if you attack Spain. Turkey may not be as easy if the UK (right after the USA) can take it (and hold it) but that ofc depends a lot on how the war in Africa is going.
And last but not least, the USA is going to loose units by attacking Spain. Not a lot but some 2-4 depending on the dice and this might just be enough to limit further operations for a turn or two, leaving Germany in its comfort-zone a while longer.
Normally I am not fond of loosing american units in situations like this, because the war in the Pacific may make it very hard for the USA to replace lost troops in Europe (you don’t want Japan to snipe 6VC there and the USA plays a key role there).
But since this is Europe only, there is no Japan to worry about and it will be easier to replace lost troops.

Anyway, you get the picture  :wink:.

[Razor]

@ItIsILeClerc:

…Well, Germany will have easy access to Sweden and Turkey if you attack Spain.

OK, so Germany get a one time disbursement of 6 Swedish and 8 Turkish infantry. But USA get something better, they get Spain.

As you know only amateurs talk tactics, the professionals talk supply. Of course, if you play against a kid and Germany is free of units, you can use tactic and take Denmark with US and next UK will sail into Baltic and land one inf in Germany and game over. But in 99 % of the time, a game is won by the guy that can shuck a big stack of infantry the fastest way to the enemy capital. Its all about speed, tempo, momentum, effectiveness etc.

The map is designed so a tranny with inf need two turns from USA to UK or France, but only one turn to Spain. Now that is half the time, and you need half the trannies to move a unit into Europe. Same with fighters, they land in Spain in one turn, but need two turns for UK or France. And when in Spain, a tank reach Italy the next turn. There are no other routes on the map that shuck US units to Berlin and Rome as fast as the Spanish highway.

[ItIsILeClerc]

@Razor:

OK, so Germany get a one time disbursement of 6 Swedish and 8 Turkish infantry. But USA get something better, they get Spain.

IF it is better… that remains to be seen and varies from game to game. I didn’t say be careful without a reason. I mean to say, yes taking Spain may be your best option, but you may also be shooting your own feet if you do it.

@Razor:

As you know only amateurs talk tactics, the professionals talk supply. Of course, if you play against a kid and Germany is free of units, you can use tactic and take Denmark with US and next UK will sail into Baltic and land one inf in Germany and game over. But in 99 % of the time, a game is won by the guy that can shuck a big stack of infantry the fastest way to the enemy capital. Its all about speed, tempo, momentum, effectiveness etc.

Except for the part about ‘amateurs’ and ‘professionals’ (no comment): I couldn’t agree more!
So let’s assume the USA plays against a grown up GE. They will have a strong, fast stack of units in West Germany and Paris combined with some Luftwaffe, ready for a counterattack. More than strong enough to wipe out US invaders + UK reinforcements.
This effectively means it does not matter if the US comes from Spain or Gibraltar, because the USA cannot advance further than Southern France/Normandy anyway (remember: we cannot blitz through facilities) after which they will be annihilated by the German counterattack forces. The only place where the USA is safe for this, is in Spain itself (or, Gibraltar for that matter).

@Razor:

The map is designed so a tranny with inf need two turns from USA to UK or France, but only one turn to Spain. Now that is half the time, and you need half the trannies to move a unit into Europe. Same with fighters, they land in Spain in one turn, but need two turns for UK or France. And when in Spain, a tank reach Italy the next turn. There are no other routes on the map that shuck US units to Berlin and Rome as fast as the Spanish highway.

Given my comment above, I agree that you’d need only half the trannies but not that it takes only half the time. And half the trannies only if playing Europe w/o Pacific (since this thread is Europe only I better not elaborate on that). IF you want to keep the deadly flexibility to strike almost everywhere you want in 1 turn with ALL forces from Spain/Gibraltar, not just Normandy/SFrance, you still need the normal amount of TRS, not half.

[WILD BILL]

Admittedly, I don’t have much experience playing Europe only. I would imagine that the US goes to war in most cases at the collect income phase of US3 (no early entry). Being that the US is pretty much tied down at port in Eastern US until at war, that means that US4 it normally moves fleet to Gib sz91, then threatens a landing US5, and axis need to prepare multiple def.

The thing is that the US could land in Spain US4 (w/min loses to the Spanish defenders) instead of preparing to invade the following turn. This would be a full turn sooner, possibly catching the axis off guard. Because of the turn order, on UK4 the English can also put some boots in Spain (from Canada if necessary using Can NB to sz91), and land the entire RAF to defend the new American colony. I can’t see the allies loosing Spain any time soon. The axis aren’t going to be loaded up in S France, they typically load up in Paris, with inf/art, and W Germany with the same, plus some mech for mobility, but they are normally expecting a US turn 5 landing on the beaches of France, Norway, Italy, or N Africa so may not have bulked up yet (last push to Russia, before setting up defenses in W Europe). Fast moving units in W Germany can only get to the French coastal territories, but not to Spain itself, so you should be able to hold Spain to build a US minor IC in Spain, and an Air Base there would be cool to protect your transport fleet (depending on your needs). sz91 would still be the optimal sz to invade Spain because the UK naval base in Gib services sz91 (shuck-shuck), and an English air base built in Gib would help defend the combo fleet in sz91 until  a Spanish air base could be built (depends on how the UK is doing in the Med, and how safe Gib is).

You should be able to bring in more reinforcements (US/UK troops, and more air) the turn after you take Spain as well, and can decide if you want to build an IC or air base in Spain. Should you advance into the French coastal territories to grab those coastal IC’s (could be difficult to hold), or set-up buffer/kill zones there allowing you to bulk up in Spain. The US will need to keep the sea lanes open having transports coming and going every turn for reinforcements, and an air base in Spain would help protect them. You have the UK naval base at Gib sz91, so you don’t necessarily need to build a US naval base in Spain for the shuck-shuck. It also forces the Germans into a 2 front war a turn earlier, so it should help relieve pressure on Russia.

Depending on how the UK is doing in the Med, they might be able to kill off some of the Turkish units before the axis claim them, but the damn Swedes are going to throw in with the Germans LOL (just for you Razor). My concern with this strat isn’t can I hold Spain, but that opening up Turkey could aid the axis getting into southern Russia, and the oil territories in the Mid East. Italy could be a real problem if the UK doesn’t knock them down before the neutral invasion. The UK/Russia could have a hard time holding this theater, but then Germany could be fighting a 3 front war so IDK.

The US can use some of their mech in Central US to take Columbia (undefended) the turn they attack Spain, then claim Brazil the next turn. Add a little air power and the US will conquer all of S America w/o using transports lol. Then transport any survives to Europe later.

I know that the Axis can foil this plan if they know its coming by building mech in Paris, or stacking S France etc…. but they are pretty vulnerable on the French coast if you don’t go for Spain. Plus the first time it is done, you should catch them off guard (like anything else), so they will be reacting to you, instead of setting the tone for your probable landing spot. It might be a one trick pony, but after that the possibility could stretch the axis defenses even further in future games. It could also force the axis to build up more defenses in W Europe, taking away from Barbarossa a turn earlier then they would like…

Plus the Western Allies could defend Spain drawing in axis forces, and can still hit any of the coastal targets that they normally could from sz91, so the axis still need to def multiple territories.

[Razor]

This is just a policy paper, and in a real game we must expect counters.

I will now post 4 pics.
Pic 1 is the shuck to Spain, where US need two trannies for the to and the return. US will only need warship protection in sz 91, so this is a cheap strategy. It is also fast since you land a tank in Spain turn 1, and reach Belgium, France or Northern Italy in turn 2.

Pic 2 is the shuck to N. Italy, here you need 5 trannies for the back and forth, you need warship protection for 3 seazones, and you land a unit in N. Italy turn 2, but are using a lot more resources.

Pic 3 is the shuck via Canada, UK and land in Belgium turn 3. Here too you need 5 trannies for the back and forth, and land in Belgium turn 3, one turn later than the Spain route.

Pic 4 is the Norway shuck, via Iceland, her too you need 5 trannies and a lot of protection, and land in Norway turn 2, which is good.

[Razor]

and pic 3 and 4

[WILD BILL]

I agree the shuck to Spain would be great, and requires defense in only one sz. I don’t think the allies would have to much trouble holding it, or reinforcing it because it is only one move away from DC, London and Canada via transport, and air have a direct flight (no layover lol). A US IC built in Spain also adds units (fleet, ground?). Plus they still get the benefits of sz91 (Gib naval base), but can quickly adapt adding naval/air base to Spain if Gib is in jeopardy giving them even more range.

The 9 IPCs available to US/UK for taking Spain, Portugal, and S America vs the 7 IPCs for Sweden,  Turkey, and Saudi probably claimed by the axis are a slight advantage to the allies (but the Mid East can be contested). You will be giving the Germans 6 units in Sweden, but depending on how the UK did in the Med, and if Russia/UK are in position near Turkey, the allies may be able to kill off the Turks, and fight for the Mid East.

You can also still threaten all the coastal territories you normally would from sz91, and create kill zones in the French coastal territories from this forward base of operations. Opening up a 2nd front for the Germans a round early should help to stall Barbarossa.

I think that the unknown is what happens in the Mid East? I have doubts that the allies can win that theater, and there are a lot of territory IPCs, and bonuses to be made for the axis there. The allies will need strong play from the UK to set-up there own shuck shuck from S Africa/Egypt. Do they try to build an IC for Egypt, or is it too risky because you opened up Turkey?

Ohhhh I love this game

[Razor]

@WILD:

I agree the shuck to Spain would be great, and requires defense in only one sz. I don’t think the allies would have to much trouble holding it, or reinforcing it because it is only one move away from DC, London and Canada via transport, and air have a direct flight (no layover lol). A US IC built in Spain also adds units (fleet, ground?). Plus they still get the benefits of sz91 (Gib naval base), but can quickly adapt adding naval/air base to Spain if Gib is in jeopardy giving them even more range.

The real benefit with Spain as operational base, is that you can power project more than twice with land units against the Axis capitals, than with the classic shuck shuck chain. With 6 trannies you can land 12 land units in Spain in one turn. With the classic chain, 3 trannies will be at the sea, and only 3 trannies with 6 land units can land in Western Europe, and it even  need two turns. The pic will be even more skewed, since most of the warships that are needed for protection in the classic route, can be put into land units and trannies with the Spain strategy. And on top of that, fighters from US arrives in Spain in one move only. No unnecessary delays.

The downside is that I don’t think the Spain landing would have worked for the Allies in the real war. Of course they would have preferred to land in a shore not defended by German guns, but Spain is all mountains and so far away they would need two years from the landing until they reach the gates of Berlin. UK tried it during the Napoleonic wars, sir Wellington landed in Spain in 1808 and would fight for 5 years, but was never able to cross the impassable Pyrenee mountains and get into France. On the other hand, Napoleon walked on feet from Poland to Moscow in less than 3 months, and back to Poland again in 3 more months. Plain terrain is easier than mountains
See the attached pic

We can only hope Larry will cut Spain in 2 or 3 territories for the next edition he is planning for 2016

[ItIsILeClerc]

I agree that in Europe (only! not with Pac in play) Spain is a cheaper landing spot but the shuck does NOT reach Belgium/Paris/Italy the turn after landing in Spain. You canNOT blitz through facilities and must stop in either Normandy or Southern France (which have facilities…).
The German counterattacking machine is more than adequate enough to deal with that, so you have to build up a couple of turns anyway, not leaving Spain for as long as the build up is required.

So in short, it is cost effective, but threatens all the same (not more) as landing in Gibraltar for a decent amount of turns and is therefore not faster. AFTER the allies have taken (and hold!) either Normandy or Southern France, THEN the shuck is expanded inland.
Also consider that IF using only half the amount of trannies to cost-effectively channel troops into Spain, Germany also only faces half the threat on West Germany and can thus station more troops in Paris! Defending Europe suddenly becomes cheaper for Germany and I suspect by the same amount as it is cheaper for the US to channel troops into Europe!

Attacking South America (etc.) causes the USA to loose tempo, also a very important thing to consider! I think taking Spain is an OK strategy like any other with pro’s and con’s, but the USA should not overdo it by also investing time and resources in taking South America. That would relieve Germany of a lot of pressure for too long allowing it to focus on Russia longer.

By the way,
the allies always only need naval escorts in 1SZ (where the transport fleet is located). The UK can build a Naval Base in Guyana South America (or Iceland when Norway = liberated) where transports can stage safely if the escorts are in the channel or the Med. From there they can get to the escorts next turn.

[pidlerohotmail.com]

Am I missing something when it comes to U.S. invading Spain?  I thought you couldn’t build IC’s on true neutrals.

[Panther]

@ODF:

Am I missing something when it comes to U.S. invading Spain?  I thought you couldn’t build IC’s on true neutrals.

You can build minor ICs on any territory (with a value of 2 or more) that is under your control from the beginning of your turn, except on islands.
Once Spain is attacked/invaded it is no longer neutral.

[pidlerohotmail.com]

I thought you could build on Hostile or Friendly neutrals under your control, but never on “true neutrals” like Spain, Sweden, Turkey.  Even after you invaded them.

[Panther]

@ODF:

I thought you could build on Hostile or Friendly neutrals under your control, but never on “true neutrals” like Spain, Sweden, Turkey.  Even after you invaded them.

Major ICs can only be built on originally controlled territories (value 3 or more). Other than that there is no rule supporting your thoughts, sorry.  :-)