Can Egypt be saved?

@ErwinRommel:

Ill keep it simple this time!

1. Bid middeleast units
2. Dont bid London, no need
3. Dont scramble if you dont get tradevalue 1.5 german planes(not ships) per 1 british fgt. You want to use that genius brain of yours to win, no need to gamble.
4. Sink z97 always
5. Be offencive with UK buys if you can, dont always fall back on 9men turn one.
6. Buy many fighters r2-4 and land them on american carriers when possible, they get 7 moves (3+4).)

I almost never ever scramble since I need to save the planes for SZ97.  Assuming a flawless victory there, you have DD, CA, CV, + 2 Fighters to defend against 3x Fighter, 3x Tac, 2x Bomber from a typical German player.  If they planned their landings well they can attack with even more, this setup as it is gives 99% odds with a loss of 3-4 planes.  If the German player is planning on the I2/G3 Barbarossa then these planes have nothing else to do round 2.  The German player can then land as many as they like in Alexandria if it was taken I1 (the assumption being that the UK had to retreat out to cover Cairo).  If the Italian player was left with 2 TTs in I1, then the UK definitely has to pull out from Alexandria.  The German planes then provide cover for a growing Italian stack.  They can then make a suicide hit on Cairo if needed, or be used to kill any fleets hiding in the Red Sea (which might have guard ships that are covering a Cape Town shuck).  None of your points 1-5 solve this option.

The Fighter shuck is an interesting option.  You can skip the Cairo IC and try to shuck Infantry from Cape Town.  Then the Fighter shuck goes London -> French West Africa -> Cairo.  This might work and discourage the German hit to soften up Cairo.  The downside of this is that it is a very defensive plan.  In this situation I foresee the Italians still getting rich off the 3 NOs they can get without taking Cairo.  It will also be very hard for Britain to maintain fighter production if any German subs survived the first turn since you have to make DDs to hunt them down.  The US is not going to be available to do it for them (see below).

I think you (and most of the people who are replying) also are giving too much weight to the ability of the US player to affect events (the idea that the US can just make a bunch of Carriers solely to hold UK planes seems a bit much).  A smart Japanese player will never issue the DoW J1 - J3.  This degrades their ability to get the Pacific win, but who cares, when you will win in Europe in round 6-7.  So in most scenarios the US can do nothing at all in the time available, except maybe keep spitting out Fighters that could possibly land in Cairo US5 if the Allies still hold it.

I’ve been toying with the idea of a naval buy for India round 1 to help get some extra ships over to the Red Sea, or even using the starting TT to help reinforce the attack on Ethiopia.  I’m not convinced either plan is wise since India starts out on such thin ice already.

Gibraltar is a coin toss.  If Germany went heavy against the UK navy G1, then in UK1 you might only have the SZ109 DD & TT.  Is it worth the risk to lighten the defense of London and risk the loss of these ships to a G2 counterattack in order to reinforce Gibraltar?  If Germany did the AC/DD/SS buy, then you will likely lose the ships but hold Gibraltar for quite some time if Italy is trying to keep up with a Cairo arms race.  This is one of the reasons I think Germany should always do the 22 TT buy over the DD/SS buy.  By taking Normandy you clear a place for the Italian bomber to land to clean out any place the UK can leave a blocker if they have the DD left and want to use it.  If they don’t block, or you don’t want to use Italy on the blocker, then just move up the fleet to be in a position to sack it G3.  If the UK defended Cairo with everything they had, the German fleet will be untouchable.  If they didn’t defend Cairo with everything, then perhaps Italy won’t have a problem getting it.  I’ve held Gibraltar in numerous games and it didn’t solve any of my problems in the Med.

@Whackamatt: SZ97 is 5 spaces from London, so your Fighters there can attack it and land on the Carrier.  This means every other air unit in the battle (including the one that started on the Carrier) has to land in Malta.

@BJCard:

Do people actually lose Cairo with a Taranto attack?

You can lose it all too easily, but only if Germany sends it air force south to deal with the UK.  In the vast percentage of games I’ve played, Italy doesn’t scramble at SZ97.  Then either Italy or Germany wipes out the UK remaining in SZ97 (this usually depends on what is left of the French fleet).  So even though you did do a number on Italy, by the end of round 2 they are ready to come back.  If the UK didn’t build the Egypt IC, then they come back quite quickly.  The UK gets off to a nice head start, but if Germany is willing to send their planes down there, the situation turns quite quickly.  Many of my opponents are also mating this with sending a small trickle of subs out into the Atlantic, which slows down the Allies’ ability to bulk up Egypt since you either have less money to spend from convoy losses or you spend your money on DDs.

My typical round 1 progress is to have Italy only collecting 7 IPC, but then in round 2, Germany has Greece, Italy or Germany has Gibraltar, and then Italy is up to 20+ IPC since the UK Med fleet has been wiped out.  More than enough to put holding Cairo into question when the UK has to waste money on ICs or TTs for a Cape Town shuck and the Italians still have their nice chunk of men that started in Tobruk.

Part of what concerns me about Cairo is how quickly Russia can fold.  However, I’ve done some more tests and seen that with max Infantry buys you can get Russia to last past round 6 (how much longer past that they can go, I’m not sure, as their income will basically be pretty nil).  So I think the Allies should certainly focus on making Cairo a crisis point for the Axis.  If the Axis don’t divert all their resources to taking it out, then Italy will be out of the game sooner rather than later.  I think this is more cost-effective than threatening the Axis through northern Europe since the US player is free to spend more in the Pacific and ensure than Japan will never be a problem.

@BJCard:

True, if germany commits significant support to the Med then Italy can get Cairo.  To be honest I haven’t seen that happen very much in my games.

Whatever you see is likely just a direct response to whatever level of interest you are showing yourself down there.  If you start making moves that threaten Italy’s long-term viability, expect your opponent to suddenly show a keen interest in wiping Cairo out.

@elevenjerk:

That was the only time in our games that the axis were the dominant controller of Cairo and the Allies still won with not much scare of losing.

If Russia held out and was in no danger of going under in the next few turns, then yes, you can handle losing Cairo- especially if the Axis committed a lot to it.