Best spot for US to land?

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.

and pic 3 and 4

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

@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

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.

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

@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.

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.

@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.  :-)

@P@nther:

@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.  :-)

No need to apologize :evil:  Taking true neutrals and building minor ICs sounds like fun.

In Europe the only way to win as the allies is to land in Spain. The axis will know this and will position to take Sweden/turkey right away, but the ability to have a safe landing spot for your tranny shuck is too worth it. Also US should only take venezuela/brazil in South America. The tempo lost with taking Chile and Argentina isn’t worth it

My personal preference is to land in Spain, but you need to build up  a lot of transports and land units to land there because of the infantry defence and that there is usually (in my experience) quite a lot of Axis forces in Southern France/Normandy. The gains of the Axis moving into the now Pro-Axis controlled Turkey and Sweden can be countered with a constant stream of transports in the following turns and a minor IC on Spain.

When the U.S. is landing in Spain you need to commit all your resources bought to it or you can possibly lose it. Always land prepared.

If Italy is cornered but has too much of a stack, I like totake the Balkans.

I love to get the allies into Greece,but its so far away from US.If Us takes Greece ,they’ll need to re-enforce with UK and or Russians.Last game I played I picked up French inf from Africa rather than send my tts back to EUS.In Greece you 'll likely cut-off axis from activating a pro-axis Turkey.(if you’ve attacked Spain).
  Another good aspect is that your fleet is convoying axis from sz97 while parked off balkans.

The reason the only landing spot that works is Spain is because Germany’s threat projection from his 12+ planes makes having to protect two sea zones from possible attack hopeless. Also US needs to be sending 18 ground over a turn. That is 18 transports needed for the shuck from East US to Spain, 9 off Spain and 9 off East coast. To land anywhere else throws off your shuck really bad, and there aren’t any other good “staging” areas on the map. Say you want to take Norway and hold it. You would have to have at least 10 ground troops. That is 5 transports that you’d have to defend, and then you’d have to defend it with your entire fleet, making the defense of your other transport fleet really difficult. Not only that but Norway is a million miles away from the US and you have to defend two sea zones to make that shuck work.

After Germany takes Moscow, around turn 8 or so, he can easily build 20 ground units a turn in West Germany/Germany to defend. If you haven’t been stacking Europe with guys already you have no hope of overcoming Germany’s defenses.

This is why Global is so broken. US can’t really do much In Europe other than land in Spain and shuck back and forth. You can’t do this shuck in global because Japan will surely win in the Pacific.

If Russia is down turn eight, you obviously mismanaged the war effort ;)

There is literally no way to stop Russia from falling on T8 if you are playing low luck. In dice you can get really really lucky I guess…

You might be correct that Spain is the way to go but I’m skeptical.  It seems too easy for Axis to win if they get control of Turkey and activate additional reinforcements as they move south. But I might be underestimating the long-term benefits to Allies from controlling the neutrals (if they can block an advance from Turkey, which is what seems dubious).  I don’t see much opportunity for Allies to take out the neutrals safely while also bringing sufficient pressure on Axis to avoid defeat.

Most prefer to land in Normandy if the opportunity presents itself but it’s also evident that if Axis are determined to prevent that they can.  Yet even a failed Normandy landing could be a long-term benefit if Axis are delayed from taking Moscow.

If Axis have Western Europe covered, there is always Norway.  Sure, Norway is far away from the major fronts.  But if Allies get a fleet established off Norway, Axis need defensive cover for Normandy, Western Germany, and Germany.  That ties up alot of forces from being deployed in Africa or against Russia.

@theROCmonster:

There is literally no way to stop Russia from falling on T8 if you are playing low luck. In dice you can get really really lucky I guess…

Really? How much of the German economy is being spent on Russia in your games? Are you trying to put enough pressure with Britain and the US? Is Germany ignoring its other interests?

With Russia are you making sure you pull back most of your troops? Never get in a battle that has odds against you. Only defend a territory if you can do it successfully.  Make sure Germany can’t outrun your troops to Moscow. Build plenty of infantry and fighters if Germany is trying to bomb you. If you are playing Global, think about getting some of those 20 units from the Pacific side.

I may be missing a rule or something, but to me Gibraltar is the lynchpin to the US invasion.

Once taken, it allows access to all of Italy, Southern France, Normandy and Holland. If the US builds up to 4 loaded transports and escorts before T4, then buys 4 each (transport, tank, infantry) at 64 IPC for a few turns, it’s very hard to defend since there’s wave of 8 pieces each turn.

If the UK ties up Italy, Germany is exposed on three fronts while fighting Russia.

I just finished a game with my son. He was pressing Moscow and had a sizable force in Normandy, but  after landing in Southern France and surviving the first wave, with RAF softening from UK, the next wave hits Normandy, then the fighters go in to defend and no matter how much Germany builds on France, it can’t stop the buildup as UK bridges.

I had the UK take Denmark as a pause to keep the German Navy enclosed, but ultimately a destroyer screen by the UK outside of Denmark, plus a simple destroyer screen and roving Battleship for the US
to protect the transport cycling is enough to sustain.

Am I missing a rule regarding Gibraltar? If so, a naval base in Morocco would do the same (provided the Med was clear of Italian Navy).