Countdown to Moscow!

A lot of Axis players do this, but I see it as a good development if I’m allies. Any left over French units could be annoying in the early rounds. You have to be sure you can counter France if they take it and get the bonus infantry.

Axis won’t get the +2. Just holding Normandy for 3 turns is 2 more infantry. Axis will need a larger force in France than otherwise to prevent Allies from getting a foothold because USA will be able land their planes in Normandy right off the bat. If you don’t contest the allied landing in Normandy, Allies will be able to trade for Southern France.

A combined Italian-German stack in Normandy is strategically preferable to a stack in France, provided you have the manpower.

If USA could concentrate all its resources on the Atlantic front it would be a different story. But dual victory conditions means that if USA invests enough to make Germany pay for taking Normandy, then they likely didn’t invest enough in the Pacific to stop Japan.

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Moscow has fallen, how do I recover?:

You tie up more working capitol of fast movers trying to shuttle from South Africa towards the front lines than it would have cost to build a factory or two right near the battle lines in the Middle East.

You can accelerate movement with a couple transports and a naval base, but again this is expensive. Also vulnerable to German or Japanese bombers.

The only reason not to have Middle East allied factories is if you have to fall all them way back to Egypt but still have a chance to stay competitive with a strong Western European foothold, such as liberating Paris or Rome.

Well depends what you do with the egypt transport you start with. If you just add 1 additional transport you already got your supply chain there for 2/3th of a factory.

But yea your right that they are verry volnerable to air attacks but can be usefull in mopping up italian forces in your rear areas.

Just finished up a game a couple days ago with some friends, and it always seems to come down to a valiant last stand at Moscow followed by either an admission of defeat or (as is the case with the game we played) Italy is contained and the Allies can still hold Egypt to some extent.

That is an interesting idea that could be considered when the Germans look as though they are a couple turns away from taking Moscow. I’m not sure I’d do it just because of the amount of time to move those infantry would make it totally obvious to the Axis what you were doing. At that point you are completely giving up Russia’s IPC income to the Axis which is not very wise. The advantage to this Alamo battle is that the Axis also lose a lot of units and Germany remains licking it’s proverbial wounds for a turn of the game at least.

So while it’s interesting and I have never considered it, I’m not sure it would be worth it.

You may still want to send the overkill as interception scrambles are becoming more and more common and so sending extra bombers to hit the bases (or just the factory) and also tacs and fighters is smart as free casualties, and overkill is a method of deterrence, not just damage-dealing.

The total power/money imbalance (Ger v USSR) of the Dark Skies is so great that guaranteeing the 20 damage on Moscow must be worth 1 bomber lost per run, because our house players consistently bomb Moscow into dust turn after turn losing 1 bomber on average per round (to AAA and interception).

In general, I agree with what you are saying. My theory is that it’s better to take two equal but losing positions on separate areas of the board than to take one position of strength. The problem in this case is that the northern Russian stack and British-held oilfields, although in separate areas of the board, aren’t equal positions - Britian is much easier to take down and the reward is much higher. Therefore, in this case there is no alternative but to take one position of strength.

The assumption behind my first comment was that if the Russians link up with the British, the combined stack would actually be enough to create such a position and keep the Germans at bay. In a game where it cannot, what have the Allies been doing for 8+ rounds?

The two scenarios I can think of where the Allies still have a chance after Moscow falls, but the British are weak in the Middle East are 1) Japan does something like an India crush that targets Britain or 2) Britain and America have been making landings in Western Europe. In either of those scenarios, if Russia is to retreat, I agree they should not go down south.

If neither scenario applies, and the British have been attempting to build strength in the Middle East, yet it isn’t enough to stop Germany even with the entire Russian stack, the appropriate move is to concede.

a losing battle does not become better by standing, there has to be a very narrow margin if standing with 7 extra inf and dying is better than retreating. For one thing, He might relocate his airforce allowing you back into moscow.

I think you seriously underestimate the strength of infantry on attack, if you have two inf stacks, then the attacking stack need to be 1.41 times the defending stack for it to be an even fight. with some artillery and planes, you should be quite formidable on the attack. Once you realise you will have to retreat the next round, you could always do a 100% art build if you have too many infs.

You will almost always be able to bind up more german resources by leaving than you would kill by standing.

by all means if he has a 55% shot at winning, sure you can stand, but when he has 70% chance of winning, and 60% chance of not losing planes, then you will always lose more IPCs compared to what he will lose.

3 subs a turn with a fighter now and then isn’t hard, and it should be enough if Japan looks threatening and SBR’s do well.

Its just a rare opportunity to have them left open. Also makes it more likely the Italian fleet will live and gives the UK an opportunity to flub up and underprepare for sealion.

I really like your thoughts on the eastern front.  In my current game Italy is making twenty something so they can push a couole troops into Russia and have been ‘backed up’ towards the Caucasus or India by the brits who are pushing north from south africa.