The Spanish Beachhead: American Strategy

[DCWhat]

@AldoRaine:

If the allies accept that it is in their best interest to attack the neutrals as soon as logistically possible the best thing UK can do is to stack sz 92 and forgo Taranto turn 1 with a AB purchase for Gib.  The next moves involve locking down the middle east.  I have a unique set of moves that I make in order to do this and if you would like I am happy to go into detail but to keep this post from being to long i will hold off on the specifics.  The end result is that the UK navy is still intact and Egypt/ME is safe.

I would very much appreciate this explanation as I’m sure others would as well.

Also, another great video YG. I’m looking forward to your mentioned remake of your tutorial series with added strategy and run through’s(mentioned in channel update).

[AldoRaine]

@ProtesT:

@AldoRaine:

If the allies accept that it is in their best interest to attack the neutrals as soon as logistically possible the best thing UK can do is to stack sz 92 and forgo Taranto turn 1 with a AB purchase for Gib.  The next moves involve locking down the middle east.  I have a unique set of moves that I make in order to do this and if you would like I am happy to go into detail but to keep this post from being to long i will hold off on the specifics.  The end result is that the UK navy is still intact and Egypt/ME is safe.

I would very much appreciate this explanation as I’m sure others would as well.

Also, another great video YG. I’m looking forward to your mentioned remake of your tutorial series with added strategy and run through’s(mentioned in channel update).

This is the part of the strategy that I have been working on.  I assume a bid of at least 12.  With 12 I buy 2 inf and 1 sub.  The sub goes either off Gib with the cruiser or off Egypt with the carrier.  The two inf will go in Alexandria and Egypt.  Part of the combat is attacking the Italian Transport off Malta with the sub, the tac from the carrier and fighter from malta.  This battle is absolutely critical for this strategy.  The path must be clear for the navy to stack sz 92.  The only other attack is Iraq.  Unless i am doing low luck I attack Iraq with the lone mech from Egypt.  If he survives one round retreat to Jordan if not oh well.

The reason for the suicide in Iraq is so that the two planes in India can now land in Jordan as well.

For non-com I move the west India inf to eastern persia.  Use the transport on India along with 1 inf to activate Persia.  Use the transport off Egypt to pick up the inf and AA in malta and drop them in either Egypt or Jordan.  I pull all the troops from Sudan back to Egypt and all but 1 from Alex back to Egypt.  Ideally you want 3 land units in Jordan along with the fighters and the rest in Egypt.  With this you should be able to hold both.

As mentioned before I stack sz 92 with every ship that can reach and buy an AB for Gibraltar.  I also move every ship east of Africa as close to the med as possible.  This includes the BB off Malaya and the Cruiser and destroyer off India.  The idea is that you can then converge the UK navy in the Med round 2 in sz 93.  I also buy an AB for Jordan round 2 just to add extra protection.  This also allows fighters to flow from London to Gib then Jordan then India.  As long as you hold sz 93 Egypt is safe even if Italy stacks both Sudan and Alex.

The major downfall in this strat is that it leaves the Italian navy alive but i find that leaving it can actually lull the Italians into thinking they can make a fight of the med and then start buying navy.  This plays right into the Spanish beachhead as it leaves the Italians even weaker on land.  It also leaves India weak but I am a firm believer in stacking India and not moving much and with the AB in Jordan you can get a sizable UK air force in India by round 5.  Full disclosure, I know my pacific allied game needs work.

I hope this gives you an idea of what I am saying.  When trying this strategy I usually find myself spending the first 3-4 turns as UK london buying AB’s and IC’s for the med / africa. It seems like a waste but I just find them very useful for projecting power as the UK from the Middle East.

[MeinHerr]

What if Italy drops off 2T+2Inf on Syria on Italy 1 (assuming you go to SZ92 with your Egyptian Navy… on UK1 ), Germany lands FTRs on Syria on G2… Bulgarians take Greece G2

I2 drops off 4 Inf in Syria… and Transjordan and Alexandria are strongly Italian Held…

Even without any Italian Investment in navy… just overland they could take Egypt… or if not… then the Middle East…

[Tirano]

@MeinHerr:

What if Italy drops off 2T+2Inf on Syria on Italy 1 (assuming you go to SZ92 with your Egyptian Navy… on UK1 ), Germany lands FTRs on Syria on G2… Bulgarians take Greece G2

I2 drops off 4 Inf in Syria… and Transjordan and Alexandria are strongly Italian Held…

Even without any Italian Investment in navy… just overland they could take Egypt… or if not… then the Middle East…

The problem is you are assuming that 2 Italian Transports survived and it is more than likely only 1 did

[AldoRaine]

@MeinHerr:

What if Italy drops off 2T+2Inf on Syria on Italy 1 (assuming you go to SZ92 with your Egyptian Navy… on UK1 ), Germany lands FTRs on Syria on G2… Bulgarians take Greece G2

I2 drops off 4 Inf in Syria… and Transjordan and Alexandria are strongly Italian Held…

Even without any Italian Investment in navy… just overland they could take Egypt… or if not… then the Middle East…

If Italy lands troops in Syria r1 I then I can attack the navy on UK 2 with up to 5 fighters, 2 tacs, 1 bomber and 1 destroyer.  At least 1 fighter and 1 tac can land back on Egypt.  This would give Italy a best case chance of 11% to take Egypt round 2 and that is as close as they will ever get.  Italy has no way of getting more troops into Africa.  Plus the whole scenario plays right into the allies hand.  Italy will fall early if they commit to much to africa if US is going this hard in the Atlantic.

[MeinHerr]

I did write in ( assuming you go to SZ92 with Egyptian navy)… scenario of No Tobruk and No Taranto… after taking in the UK play on Turn1

The Syrian drop off, is a scenario only when the UK Egyptian fleet goes to SZ 92, East of Gib on UK1.

Also where UK keeps the air is important. DD blocker in Malta is impt too.

If the SBR goes to kill Subs in Canada (lets say there are 2-3 Uboats there) … FTRS from London stay in London (due to fear of SeaLion) …FTRS from India stay in India (J3 crush scenario)… then usually RAF will have 3 planes (TB, Gib FTR, Malta FTR) only + maybe SA -DD…  enough to kill Italian Fleet (BB+2 CRU)? Close call…

In these circumstances, UK is likely to be more prudent and turtle Egypt.  If they lose the battle to kill the BB+ 2 CRU+ Sub+  2 TRs… (unless the French DD can kill the TRs… ) Egypt and Middle East will be in serious jeapordy.

In case they turtle Egypt… then Middle East is in play… and Soviets or India may have to help out quick… because… if Iraq is held for a whole turn , with 3+ German FTRS there… things can go bad for Allies.

This a play Italy has to make and take its chances (even if SBR is there in striking range)… again, if no Taranto and no Tobruk.

[AldoRaine]

@MeinHerr:

I did write in ( assuming you go to SZ92 with Egyptian navy)… scenario of No Tobruk and No Taranto… after taking in the UK play on Turn1

The Syrian drop off, is a scenario only when the UK Egyptian fleet goes to SZ 92, East of Gib on UK1.

Also where UK keeps the air is important. DD blocker in Malta is impt too.

If the SBR goes to kill Subs in Canada (lets say there are 2-3 Uboats there) … FTRS from London stay in London (due to fear of SeaLion) …FTRS from India stay in India (J3 crush scenario)… then usually RAF will have 3 planes (TB, Gib FTR, Malta FTR) only + maybe SA -DD…  enough to kill Italian Fleet (BB+2 CRU)? Close call…

In these circumstances, UK is likely to be more prudent and turtle Egypt.  If they lose the battle to kill the BB+ 2 CRU+ Sub+  2 TRs… (unless the French DD can kill the TRs… ) Egypt and Middle East will be in serious jeapordy.

In case they turtle Egypt… then Middle East is in play… and Soviets or India may have to help out quick… because… if Iraq is held for a whole turn , with 3+ German FTRS there… things can go bad for Allies.

This a play Italy has to make and take its chances (even if SBR is there in striking range)… again, if no Taranto and no Tobruk.

I would agree Italy should take its chances.  But the SBR would be in Gib along with at least 3 fighters.  There is no spare destroyer to kill the subs off Canada since all ships that can reach sz92 were sent there.  Yes it is unfortunate that the subs will get to convoy but the SBR and destroyer are better used early in the med.  Unless Germany bought 2 transports r1 the UK can afford to and should send at least 3 fighters to Gib.  This means if the Italian navy leaves sz 97 it will not get far.

So lets say Italy goes to Syria loses its transports but takes Iraq with help of German air force.  I can see the argument that this is good except for the fact that the USA is coming and Italy has most likely bought very little in terms of defensive units.

[MeinHerr]

There is also this scenario, I have faced playing Italy…

The German player wants to only kill the Atlantic fleet and will not land planes in Tobruk or Rome.  Germany wanting to get to Moscow on G5/G6… Moscow or bust. CRU off Gib lives…no attack on it.

The Japanese player wants to DOW on J2 , and wants to get India by J5…

You as the Italian player have to :
A) Provide 2 Tanks and FTR+SBR as can opener.
B) Defend Rome and Paris
C) Once Moscow and India fall, Italy is promised to be let off the leash

In that scenario…  if there is No Tobruk/Taranto…  then , it is preferable to use the 2 Transports to WITHDRAW troops from Libya and Tobruk… (and hit Greece with these)

There are 5+2 = 7 troops (Tank+Mech+2 Art+ 3 Inf) = 27IPCs = 3.5 TRloads… worth a lot of money… that can be used defensively…in Rome… allowing for the Albanian and N. Italian tanks to go forth as can-openers.

If you do not withdraw them… they will be killed for cheap by UK/US… and achieve nothing twiddling their thumbs in Tripoli

Just a thought…

[simon33]

@AldoRaine:

If the allies accept that it is in their best interest to attack the neutrals as soon as logistically possible the best thing UK can do is to stack sz 92 and forgo Taranto turn 1 with a AB purchase for Gib.  The next moves involve locking down the middle east.  I have a unique set of moves that I make in order to do this and if you would like I am happy to go into detail but to keep this post from being to long i will hold off on the specifics.  The end result is that the UK navy is still intact and Egypt/ME is safe.  If this is the case the UK navy can then be used to protect sz 91 by the time the US are going to land allowing more money being sent to the pacific.

This point increases the strength of your strategy. I’m struggling to come up with a counter to it. The obvious counter seems to be sea lion but the naval power projection from SZ92 to SZ109 and SZ110 makes things hard.

I still wonder if you wouldn’t be better off doing Taranto anyway just keeping the CV out. The sub bid in SZ98 makes that a really live option so long as you lose a fighter in the attack. I guess you need a plan B for when that doesn’t happen, a tad under 1 in 6 times: proceed as normal maybe?

I doubt the AB is needed on Gibraltar if Germany has forgone the attack on SZ110. That’s a pretty good fleet you can assemble in SZ92.

Perhaps the best counter is to focus on Japan. You do mention going to a fair bit of length to fly the Calcutta planes to the Middle East. But that’s not much of a counter - more of an admission of defeat.

I guess also going hard against Moscow. G2 DOW is a move I position for as USSR (mainly with a tank in Turkmenistan) but it rarely seems to happen.

[bulawdog]

I am not allowed to post links, but Google “Wassom + axis + allies” and you should find the link on YouTube to our game 9 video, deploying the SB strategy.  Discussion of pros/cons and highlighting some of the discussion on the forum.  OOB rules; J1 DOW, India fell T4 and Axis won T9. Â

Would love comments/thoughts from the hive mind of the forums.  In particular, successful strategies for Allied on a coordinated J1 DOW using OOB rules (i.e., no bids).  I don’t think SB can ever work under these conditions, but I remain open for further (re)education. Â

We will play Game 10 this weekend.  I am braving the Allies again and trying to slow the J1 DOW war machine.  Video update to follow.

Thanks, Young Grasshopper, for your continued commitment to additional content.  We appreciate your efforts and the time you devote to this project.

Chris

[simon33]

@bulawdog:

We will play Game 10 this weekend. � I am braving the Allies again and trying to slow the J1 DOW war machine. � Video update to follow.

Good luck.

I don’t DOW on J1 any more. The UK1 Pac buy of 1 arm 1 ftr makes strat bombing difficult for Japan, and unless planes are positioned to strike Sumatra J2 they can’t make it. Bombardment leaves alive the TT too. Anyway, You’ve got a bunch of my other comments so good luck and we’ll be interested to see how it goes.

[Ehpic]

used this build order twice as america last weekend, worked both times.  Against different players so none of them knew what was up.  Both times Germany went sealion too which was weird but fine with me as i’m used to germany doing barbarosa…  We were able to defend UK(barely) both times and allowed the US to drop into spain turn 4.  Thanks for the tips YG! :)  (this is Billthecanuck from youtube)

[Young Grasshopper]

@Ehpic:

used this build order twice as america last weekend, worked both times.  Against different players so none of them knew what was up.  Both times Germany went sealion too which was weird but fine with me as i’m used to germany doing barbarosa…  We were able to defend UK(barely) both times and allowed the US to drop into spain turn 4.   Thanks for the tips YG! :)  (this is Billthecanuck from youtube)

Awesome Bill, and welcome to the forums.

[simon33]

I think that this strategy is worthwhile even if you don’t get into France. What it does is forces the Axis to come west towards USA and take pressure off USSR. If USSR survives a lot more turns, that helps the Allies massively.

[Amalec]

I think there’s a lot of value in taking Spain with America, but I think this should always be a situational strategy rather than one you dedicate yourself to from the beginning.

Some thoughts:

I’d stage my forces in Gibraltar, rather than landing them directly into Spain. Taking Spain and moving your transports home at the same time will allow your transports to hit Spain again  immediately if the Germans manage to take it from you. You do not want to let the Germans attack you in Spain with their air force behind them and then withdraw their vulnerable units before you can kill them. It also keeps Swedish and Turkish men and money out of Axis hands for an extra turn for no real cost to you.

I also think you’re underestimating the devastating impact you’re having on the rest of the map:
Japan easily has the resources to kill your subs in the Pacific for nearly no cost, and defend their destroyers afterwards - their fleet has very little else to do with your near complete Atlantic commitment. I’d be very surprised if a good Japan didn’t take Hawaii the turn after you move your fleet to the Atlantic, and I’m not sure you could kill Germany before they win on VCs.
The Swedish forces given to Germany will pretty effectively secure it’s hold Norway and it’s NO there, and may be turned against Russia - which has plenty of problems already.
The Turkish units, backed by a couple of Italian tanks driven through Greece, will be very hard for the UK to contain without it having defeated Italy decisively and while trying to hold off an unbridled Japan. I’m not sure you can count on that by turn 4.
Russia will be in a very rough place, since Germany has no immediate need to redirect forces to Spain nor hold much back.

Suggestions:
Keep your starting fleet in the pacific, and build it up a bit sooner. The Cruisers and BB in the Atlantic just isn’t worth it for the softenings and an intelligent Germany is simply going to ignore your incredibly expensive flotilla and redirect it’s resources to smashing Russia and building infantry to keep your landings at bay.
Split your TT flotilla in two. 10 units every turn is better than 20 every other, because you can always counter attack. It also keeps Germany and Italy honest by keeping constant landing threat on W. Germany, Rome and Norway. If Germany does decide to build bombers or even ships to try to hit your (no longer invulnerable) Gibraltar fleet you’ll only lose half your TTs, but you should be able to see that coming and reinforce as necessary. If Germany attacks anyway that’s a feature, not a bug - Germany building bombers and having them killed off the coast of Gibraltar keeps pressure off of Russia.

[Young Grasshopper]

Great post Amalec, you have made some excellent points.

[MarshmallowofWar]

@Amalec:

I’d stage my forces in Gibraltar, rather than landing them directly into Spain. Taking Spain and moving your transports home at the same time will allow your transports to hit Spain again  immediately if the Germans manage to take it from you. You do not want to let the Germans attack you in Spain with their air force behind them and then withdraw their vulnerable units before you can kill them.

To my thinking the whole point is to relieve pressure on Russia as fast as possible. If the Axis accumlates a stack big enough to attack your landing, pressure on Russia is effectively relieved. So you actually want the German player to hit your stack because if he’s hitting Spain he’s not hitting Russia effectively. Furthermore, Axis logistics being what they are, it’s difficult for him to keep hitting Spain without continuous builds that have to walk a long way, so hitting your forces in Spain would actually make it easier for the US to advance in Europe.

@Amalec:

I also think you’re underestimating the devastating impact you’re having on the rest of the map:
Japan easily has the resources to kill your subs in the Pacific for nearly no cost, and defend their destroyers afterwards - their fleet has very little else to do with your near complete Atlantic commitment.

The issue is that Japan does not have enough destroyers to annihilate subs faster than the US can build them. If Japan is building lots of destroyers, then it is sacrificing somewhere else and not achieving victory. Also, if Japan is reacting to the US it may lose strategic focus – it’s very easy to do when the US is sucking away your Japanese income.

@Amalec:

The Turkish units, backed by a couple of Italian tanks driven through Greece, will be very hard for the UK to contain without it having defeated Italy decisively and while trying to hold off an unbridled Japan. I’m not sure you can count on that by turn 4.
Russia will be in a very rough place, since Germany has no immediate need to redirect forces to Spain nor hold much back.

Agreed.  Turkey is very hard to contain if you give it to the Axis this way. The UK cannot be in a position to kill Turkey before Italian activation and also be in a position to properly defend Egypt unless Italy has really messed up.

@Amalec:

Split your TT flotilla in two. 10 units every turn is better than 20 every other, because you can always counter attack. It also keeps Germany and Italy honest by keeping constant landing threat on W. Germany, Rome and Norway.

Yes, this is a much better plan than alternating waves with a turn between reinforcements.

Marsh

[Amalec]

@Marshmallow:

To my thinking the whole point is to relieve pressure on Russia as fast as possible. If the Axis accumlates a stack big enough to attack your landing, pressure on Russia is effectively relieved. So you actually want the German player to hit your stack because if he’s hitting Spain he’s not hitting Russia effectively. Furthermore, Axis logistics being what they are, it’s difficult for him to keep hitting Spain without continuous builds that have to walk a long way, so hitting your forces in Spain would actually make it easier for the US to advance in Europe.

In retrospect, it should be pretty obvious from the state of the board whether Germany can counter a 20 division drop into Spain on their upcoming turn. But I would argue that if those units are already in position to attack Spain on the following German turn the pressure against Russia has already been relieved - no reason to let them actually attack you. Still, most likely Germany won’t be in position to counter and so a direct landing in Spain will make sense 9/10 times. My bad.

@Marshmallow:

The issue is that Japan does not have enough destroyers to annihilate subs faster than the US can build them. If Japan is building lots of destroyers, then it is sacrificing somewhere else and not achieving victory. Also, if Japan is reacting to the US it may lose strategic focus – it’s very easy to do when the US is sucking away your Japanese income.

Japan starts with 4 destroyers, and has had no reason to use or commit them elsewhere up to this point. It also has an enormous fleet that is effectively unchallenged. It should be able to kill 3-4 subs per turn with those destroyers and protect them afterward, with little to no loses to itself. I don’t think that’s going to work for USA unless it has a large enough fleet to counter attacks on it’s subs in range - and I don’t think it’ll be able to do that until turn 5-6 after moving the Pacific fleet to the Atlantic. Plenty of time for Japan to go crazy.

[MarshmallowofWar]

@Amalec:

Japan starts with 4 destroyers, and has had no reason to use or commit them elsewhere up to this point. It also has an enormous fleet that is effectively unchallenged. It should be able to kill 3-4 subs per turn with those destroyers and protect them afterward, with little to no loses to itself. I don’t think that’s going to work for USA unless it has a large enough fleet to counter attacks on it’s subs in range - and I don’t think it’ll be able to do that until turn 5-6 after moving the Pacific fleet to the Atlantic. Plenty of time for Japan to go crazy.

It would be foolish of Japan to detach all its destroyers from its fleet if the US is playing sub swarm though. Furthermore, if Japan is protecting its destroyers Japan has definitely got its priorities wrong and is not using its fleet to achieve victory but to stave off defeat. Allied victory this is!

Marsh

[Amalec]

@Marshmallow:

It would be foolish of Japan to detach all its destroyers from its fleet if the US is playing sub swarm though. Furthermore, if Japan is protecting its destroyers Japan has definitely got its priorities wrong and is not using its fleet to achieve victory but to stave off defeat. Allied victory this is!

Marsh

Sub-swarm is a bit of a misnomer here. YG is advocating no Pacific build until A4. That leaves 2 DD 1 SS 1SB in the Pacific until the end of A4, and 4 DD 5 SS 3SB at the start of A5. A5 those can move to Hawaii - if America stills controls it (big if) and Japan doesn’t have enough ships staged in Japan or the Carolines to kill a handful of 1s and 2s parked off Hawaii (bigger if). A6 they can begin to harass Japan, supported by America’s A5 Pacific builds now in Hawaii - which will be at best 2 more subs because of the 60+ IPC needed to build 20 units for the Atlantic transports on A5.

By J7 when those subs have their first chance to raid Japan the Dutch money islands will be securely Japanese and the British/ANZAC fleets will be destroyed or contained.

I’m not saying sub-swarm is a bad idea, or that KGF is a bad idea. But if you send most of the Pacific fleet to the Atlantic and don’t build anything else until A4 then you’re simply praying for the Japanese player to be terrible, because if he isn’t he’s going to win the game on VCs before Germany even starts to sweat.

Keeping the Pacific fleet intact and adding 2-3 SS/DDs a turn is absolutely necessary to keep Japan honest. Without it they barely have to defend their builds in the Sea of Japan, so they can go all out elsewhere. They can easily take Hawaii. They can split their fleet into pieces to move against India and Australia at the same time, instead of having to choose.