UK1 Strategy Blue Print

@Cmdr:

If you are accepting the loss of London, then I don’t think you should be buying industrial complexes…

Ok Jen, fair point, I could fore go buying the IC for egypt and just concentrate on reinforcing South Africa and possibly Canada.

@Young:

With the loss of London G-3, the Italians should be able to capture an IC in Egypt by I-5.

Well, to put it bluntly, with what? If I, as the UK, open with a Taranto attack in the Med. Theater, and then proceed to reinforce my fleet with the (assumed) Battleship and cruiser from sz110 and cruiser from sz91, how are the Italians going to reinforce themselves in Africa to take the factory in Egypt? They are near equal to the British in the initial set-up with only a few infantry more which is not enough to give them a clear edge. This also seems to ignore that for atleast 1 turn I could place, say, 3 tanks in Egypt on UK2, giving me a clear advantage over the Italians. By the time UK3 rolled around the fighters I had flee London would also be in position to further reinforce the UK position, and any forces I delpoy to South Africa would just be arriving in Egypt. Also, the US will be able to make combat moves on R3 further strenghting the Brits in the Med (though the US is likely to focuse on retaking London). So I am asking for you to explain to me how Italy is going to over come all this and still capture Egypt (because to me this would mean you have one hell of an Italian strategy).

Clyde,

If I receive Taranto then I am going to do Sea Lion, you won’t have the firepower to come close to stopping me, but it sounds like you are okay with that.  What I’d do afterwards is focus on Infantry builds for Italy, get those units up and press them down to Greece.  England’s not reinforcing the fleet, so it’s only a matter of time before you can overwhelm them with German submarines (SZ 105 can get to 92 in one round.)

That’s just me.

All valid points Grasshopper, and I agree with you, but I dont see Italy being able to over come the battlefleet the UK would have in the Med by the end of UK1(not to mention the French fleets there). It would be a juicy target, but I dont see how anyone could get to it, short of the Germans focusing on navy builds in the Med(assuming they have south France), but given that the Soviets AND the USA are in the war I dont think that would be a very wise decision on their part. Im just wondering why someone should focuse all their economy on trying to defend London in what seems like a lost cause? You said that once London falls that my IC in Egypt is done but how is Egypt in any better shape in your scenario where you dont send any extra forces there and London still falls? If we accept that London will fall, why bother trying to defend it with anymore then a token force? Wouldnt all those units lost in the inevitable fall of London be better spent on other fronts?

@Cmdr:

England’s not reinforcing the fleet, so it’s only a matter of time before you can overwhelm them with German submarines (SZ 105 can get to 92 in one round.)

Can subs pass through the straits of Gibraltar with out it being Axis owned? Are they not held to the smae rules as surface ships? I ask because I really dont know. Also, since you’re doing sealion the US is comming on turn 3, how would the subs get past the US fleet that would surely get placed in sz91? or are you planning on building them in sz93?

@Clyde85:

@Cmdr:

England’s not reinforcing the fleet, so it’s only a matter of time before you can overwhelm them with German submarines (SZ 105 can get to 92 in one round.)

Can subs pass through the straits of Gibraltar with out it being Axis owned? Are they not held to the smae rules as surface ships? I ask because I really dont know. Also, since you’re doing sealion the US is comming on turn 3, how would the subs get past the US fleet that would surely get placed in sz91? or are you planning on building them in sz93?

Yup.  Gibraltar is a special case, explicitly written so that submarines can pass through even when surface ships cannot.

You know what Grasshopper I apologize, I realize this is its own topic and I really shouldnt be posting it here.

I didnt realize until I re-read through the thread that I was hijacking your thread and I didnt mean to do that.

Sorry mate, I’ll start my own thread on this topic

@Cmdr:

Yup.  Gibraltar is a special case, explicitly written so that submarines can pass through even when surface ships cannot.

Thanks for clearing that up Jen

BTW, that’s a two edged sword!  Watch out for American submarines too!

@Cmdr:

BTW, that’s a two edged sword!  Watch out for American submarines too!

……what??  :? The US and Britian are allies, why would I, as the UK, need to worry about American subs?

@Clyde85:

@Cmdr:

BTW, that’s a two edged sword!  Watch out for American submarines too!

……what??  :? The US and Britian are allies, why would I, as the UK, need to worry about American subs?

The Germans and Italians might need to hide behind the protection of Gibraltar just as England and America may one day need to do the same.

Destroyer in the Gib Straights negates the ability for enemy subs to cross undetected, no?

@Spendo02:

Destroyer in the Gib Straights negates the ability for enemy subs to cross undetected, no?

Well, the destroyer would force a fight, but it only takes 1 submarine (theoretically) to kill the destroyer and let 99 submarines pass through undedected.

@Cmdr:

The Germans and Italians might need to hide behind the protection of Gibraltar just as England and America may one day need to do the same.

This still dosnt make any sense to me, what are you trying to say here? I am picturing a US fleet sitting in sz91 creating a problem for the German subs to pass through undetected, please tell me how the above statment is related to this.  :?

@Clyde85:

@Cmdr:

The Germans and Italians might need to hide behind the protection of Gibraltar just as England and America may one day need to do the same.

This still dosnt make any sense to me, what are you trying to say here? I am picturing a US fleet sitting in sz91 creating a problem for the German subs to pass through undetected, please tell me how the above statment is related to this.  :?

Imagine 9 American submarines in SZ 91 and small Italian fleet in SZ 92.  That’s one edge of the sword.  The inverse (surface fleet in SZ 91, Italian submarines in SZ 92) is the other side of the sword.

The problem with the Egypt IC (with or without losing London) is it is very hard to hold agianst Italy.  Not impossible (if London is around) but very hard.

@Cmdr:

The problem with the Egypt IC (with or without losing London) is it is very hard to hold agianst Italy.  Not impossible (if London is around) but very hard.

How? How does Italy recover enough from a UK1 Taranto raid to become an issue to Egypt? The Italian starting forces in North Africa are not really all that threating to the UK position to begin with. A strong defensive posture on land couppled with an agressive naval posture should keep Italy from doing much of anything in Africa and the middle east.

Alexandria + Sudan with Italians flanking you when you can no longer build units in Egypt can feel very threatening.

@Cmdr:

Alexandria + Sudan with Italians flanking you when you can no longer build units in Egypt can feel very threatening.

If this statment is based on the idea that the UK has built an IC on Egypt then I dont see how this situation would occure. I believe that UK forces (ships and airforces) operating out of India can work in conjunction with Mechanized forces from Egypt and take out Italian forces in Ethiopia on UK1 before they even get to move. The Italian thrust across Alexandria, which Im assuming would come on I1 wouldnt really have much impact either as by next turn the UK could (and likely would) use the IC to reinforce themselves and counter-attack the Italians on UK2 or 3, effectively wiping out all axis threats to Africa for the next 2 or 3 turns.

Alternate set of UK moves with the aim of attacking the German fleet in sea zone 112 on round 2.  No changes to the Indian side.

United Kingdom #1

Purchase new units (London) = $28

4 submarines
1 mech inf

Purchase new units (India) = $17

4 infantry
1 AA gun

Combat movements

Attack SZ#96 with
1 tactical bomber from SZ#98 (Egypt)
1 fighter from Malta (Egypt)

Attack subs in #106 or #109 if any destroyers left but all three should be gone

Non-combat movements

SZ 91 cruiser holds

SZ 110 to SZ 91 BB and CA (hiding from german air attack on turn 2)

SZ 98 to 92 all ships, pick up AA gun and infantry from Malta, move to Gibraltar.

Move destroyer from 71 to 81

Move cruiser and destroyer from 39 into 76

Move battleship from 37 into 78

Move 1 infantry and 1 mec infantry from Egypt and 1 tank from Alexandria to Anglo Egypt Sudan

Move 1 infantry and 1 artillery from Alexandria to Egypt

Move 2 infantry from south Africa to Rhodesia

Transport 2 infantry from India to Celebes

Fly both India air units to Madagascar

Fly Burma fighter to India

Fly Gibraltar fighter to London

Fly fighter and tac bomber from SZ 96 to CV in SZ 92 or Gibraltar

Move Canadian forces east

Transport Canadian infantry and tank to London (if possible)

Block Gibraltar with destroyer from 106 (if possible)

Transport 2 infantry to Gibraltar (if possible)

move 1 infantry from west India to eastern Persia

Move 1 infantry and 1 artillery from India to west India

Place new units

Place 4 submarines in sea zone 110
Place one mech in south africa
Place 4 infantry and 1 AA gun in Calcutta

Collect income

London = $28 - convoy disruptions

Calcutta = $17 + $3 for Celebes Island = $20

On turn 2, the following attack should be possible

To SZ 112
UK
1 BB, 2 CA, 4 SS, 4 fighters, 1 bomber
Germany defending (expecting the Corrigan patented 13 transports for Sea Lion)
1 BB, 1 CA, 1 CV, 5 fighters, 13 unarmed transports

www dskelly com combat simulator shows this attack winning about 80%.