2nd edition strategy Allies

ok i get it now! i will be pushing to play with this mod in my 2016 league games (which starts this November actually). i’m hoping i can convince others to give it a shot, and maybe it’ll catch on. again i think it is a very elegant and well-thought out mod, so i’m super excited about it. and while i don’t know your background and experience with the game, i do know adam is a master at the game, so i can trust it’s been properly play tested. your programming it into the file is much appreciated!

@Karl7:

Indeed, one of the great “fails” of WWII history was the Italian navy’s inability to do anything.  They were strong on paper but weak in execution.  Interesting history there.  The Italians designed their ships to be sexy, fast and lightly armored which made them sitting ducks to UK air power.  Plus their chronic lack of fuel further hampered them.  They had bad leadership too.  But for German intervention in 1941, the Italians would have been completely ejected from Africa and their country blockaded.  IMO.  Â

In WWII, I think basically ALL surface ships were “sitting ducks” to air power.  What, were six battleships “sunk” at Pearl Harbor and the US shot down 27 of 300+ aircraft?  It was turkey shoot.

Even Taranto the UK used 24 WWI (yes World War “one”) biplanes to attack the Italians.  The HMS Illustrious only had 24 or so of them and each carried a single torpedo.  That is all they needed to wipe out the Italian battleships.  In Axis and Allies Global basically to simulate that, the tactical bomber north of Egypt would have to have more fire power (all by itself) than the entire Italian fleet in the Med.  And that was basically the history of what happened.

I mean the Yamato was what the largest battleship ever built and the Japanese brilliant strategy in using the wreckage of what would be our future Starblazers is to “sink it” close to a shallow beach and have a stationary unsinkable set of huge gun turrets.  That was the plan for operation Ten-go, real smart.  It just took a few planes to sink it and kill 1000 men.  WWII basically ended the surface ship as any kind of serious threat in military combat.

Really enjoy your post, but would point out that of course the battleships at Pearl Harbor were sitting ducks.  They were sitting in the docks and it was a surprise attack.  Japan and the USA weren’t even at war yet.

Not saying your points aren’t valid - just that I don’t think Pearl Harbor is a good example

And aren’t aircraft carriers surface ships?  :-)

@Gamerman01:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ujxn3r0e5sekcVPS8CbkH3KByB1iVrNJimiwA3e_BiI/edit#gid=2

I would be interested in a list of naval battles and dates in the Mediterranean starting from spring of 1940.  The domination I was speaking of was domination of the MED, not North Africa.  I am not aware of any great Italian victories over the Allied fleets in the Mediterranean

Here’s what Google turned up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Mediterranean

Relevant quotations from the article:

• “Italian small attack craft lived up to expectations and were responsible for many brave and successful actions in the Mediterranean.”

• "Only five days after Taranto, Campioni [Italian] sortied with two battleships, six cruisers and 14 destroyers to disrupt a supply convoy to Malta. Two of the three damaged battleships [from Taranto] were repaired by mid-1941 and control of the Mediterranean continued to swing back and forth until the Italian armistice in 1943. Measured against its primary task of disrupting Axis convoys to Africa, the Taranto attack had little effect. In fact, Italian shipping to Libya increased between the months of October 1940�January 1941 to an average of 49,435 tons per month, up from the 37,204-ton average of the previous four months.[8] Moreover, rather than change the balance of power in the central Mediterranean, British naval authorities had “failed to deliver the true knockout blow that would have changed the context within which the rest of the war in the Mediterranean was fought.”

• “The effort to prevent German troops from reaching Crete by sea, and subsequently the partial evacuation of Allied land forces after their defeat by German paratroops in the Battle of Crete during May 1941, cost the Allied navies a number of ships. Attacks by German planes, mainly Junkers Ju 87s and Ju 88s, sank eight British warships: two light cruisers (HMS Gloucester and Fiji) and six destroyers (HMS Kelly, Greyhound, Kashmir, Hereward, Imperial and Juno). Seven other ships were damaged, including the battleships HMS Warspite and Valiant and the light cruiser Orion. Nearly 2,000 British sailors died. It was a significant victory for the Luftwaffe, as it proved that the Royal Navy could not operate in waters where the German Air Force had air supremacy without suffering severe losses.”

• “For a time during the Siege of Malta, it looked as if the island would be starved into submission by the use of Axis aircraft and warships based in Sicily, Sardinia, Crete and North Africa.”

• “The Regia Marina‍ '​s most successful attack was when divers attached limpet mines on the hulls of British battleships during the Raid on Alexandria on 19 December 1941. The battleships HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Valiant were sunk at their berths[.]”

As for the issue of the starting bid in the Mediterranean, your assertion that it is more historical because it facilitates early-game UK dominance of the med kind of misses the mark, in my opinion. Obviously, the Taranto raid can be done with or without the bid, so naval dominance is really not the issue. Rather, the way the bid is usually used is to set up a round-1 crushing of both the mediterranean and North Africa, which would otherwise not be possible. That is where the ahistorically comes in.

Thank you

I rarely see anyone attempt to crush both North Africa and the Italian fleets simultaneously even with an entire bid placed in that area.

I don’t know what country you’re from, but I wonder if my incomplete knowledge of Mediterranean warfare in the early 40’s is due to getting information from British documentaries and from being American myself.

I will keep this in mind when completing my houseruled game, which has not been progressing at a glacial pace - I haven’t worked on it at all since last winter.  Glaciers move.

I’m no expert. Grew up watching the History Channel (which, back in the day, was pretty much 24/7 World War II). Also, easy to use Google to drum up supporting ‘facts’ and act like an expert. heh

I read your spreadsheet. Some stuff I liked (true-neutral ‘blocs,’ with Persia being one). Some stuff I didn’t (eliminating Mongolia treaty, removing France). Some stuff I didn’t quite understand (Flying Tigers? “Chits”?). All-in-all, seems like you might be onto something.

Flying tigers to be more like kamikazes.  Kamikazes are 6 chits

Main reason is the flying tigers did not function to attack with the Chinese army like they do in the game.  They did a lot more air to air combat, hence they may be used to defend against Japanese air attacks, and can’t assist the Chinese army on attack.

I have changed my mind about eliminating France and ANZAC.  Was thinking in terms of making it more like old A&A with only 6 playable powers.  I didn’t like that ANZAC is a powerful separate playable power

Personally, I don’t find ANZAC’s presence that troubling, but one interesting house rule for those that do (from the recent “Redesign” thread) is to restructure UK into two powers, as follows: (2) UK Commonwealth nations (ANZAC, South Africa and Canada (excluding Newfoundland for historical reasons) with its capital Ontario); and (3) UK and its Colonies (everything else)).

food for thought. . .

Gamerman,

I really like a lot of the ideas in your variant, keep up the good work and let me know when you’re close to finished (would like to playtest it).

Since this thread has been hijacked to discuss NO and how to avoid bids I am offering my two cents here. How about keeping it simple? If a capital falls the money is lost. Meaning, no +19 money for Germany to spend G2. Likewise, if/when Moscow falls, no money. same for Japan when India falls. Drawback is it makes sea lion less likely.  But London must still be careful and not spend too much in the ME,  UK1. Thoughts?

@oysteilo:

Since this thread has been hijacked to discuss NO and how to avoid bids I am offering my two cents here. How about keeping it simple? If a capital falls the money is lost. Meaning, no +19 money for Germany to spend G2. Likewise, if/when Moscow falls, no money. same for Japan when India falls. Drawback is it makes sea lion less likely.  But London must still be careful and not spend too much in the ME,  UK1. Thoughts?

Making Sealion less likely is fine for me personally, since Germany never had a chance of succeeding at it historically.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@oysteilo:

Since this thread has been hijacked to discuss NO and how to avoid bids I am offering my two cents here. How about keeping it simple? If a capital falls the money is lost. Meaning, no +19 money for Germany to spend G2. Likewise, if/when Moscow falls, no money. same for Japan when India falls. Drawback is it makes sea lion less likely.  But London must still be careful and not spend too much in the ME,  UK1. Thoughts?

Making Sealion less likely is fine for me personally, since Germany never had a chance of succeeding at it historically.

I don’t know how others feel and think about this idea,
BUT I want to be rewarded when I take a capitol.
It cost me blood and sweat to capture it!

Historically:
If I am the invader, I keep what i find.
Unless I am told that it is forbidden.

I know this is going down the house rule rabbit hole, but……

I think the plunder of a capital is an out dated rule and should be tweaked. Something like take a capital get a one time 15 ipc bonus regardless of what that power had in their bank. The power losing the capital forfeits all income back to the bank. You only get it once not multiple times so that the territory can now be dead zoned or traded w/o giving the opponent extra ipcs every time he takes it back.

While we are on the subject I also think the NOs that deal w/VCs (that are not capitals) should be a one time 10 IPC objective and all VC should be included (Sidney and Calcutta would be treated like a VC not a capital).

The other NOs that you have to do something to maintain or hold multiple territories should still be given every round that you have it.

Just my 2 cents

Getting the money when taking a capital is as old as A&A itself, so what, about 35 years?

It’s as A&A as infantry defending on a 2, and purchase, combat movement, combat dice, non-combat movement, place units, collect money.  You want to change any of those things too?  :wink:

I’m just keeping you honest…. those are good ideas you have  :-)

“Getting the money when taking a capital” - no reason to throw out this rule, imo.

However, I agree that plunder should only occur the first time a capital is taken. That seems like a no brainer.

@Gamerman01:

Getting the money when taking a capital is as old as A&A itself, so what, about 35 years?

Never a good reason if it’s the only reason.