Deterrent to Egypt mIC on UK1 -"Ram-rod" play


  • I think we can assume that UK_P weren’t dumb enough to DOW UK1. That would be suicide.

    @Marshmallow:

    J2: More China and Russia, keep the US out. If UKP and ANZAC were dumb enough to attack you, capitalize on it to deprive India of as much income as possible. Secure Yunnan as a landing field.

    Often not possible. I will generally attack Hunnan China1 with 1art 2inf 1ftr. Hopefully, one inf has already been killed J1 but if not I will still chance it for at least one round. Two rounds if we both lose one but not two in the first round. Yunnan is attacked with a few inf. Depending on what is around I might go all in or just a few. You want to take it though.

    Assuming that you don’t win the battle in Hunnan, what do you have in Kwangsi that can’t be beaten J2?


  • @simon33:

    I think we can assume that UK_P weren’t dumb enough to DOW UK1. That would be suicide.

    @Marshmallow:

    J2: More China and Russia, keep the US out. If UKP and ANZAC were dumb enough to attack you, capitalize on it to deprive India of as much income as possible. Secure Yunnan as a landing field.

    Often not possible. I will generally attack Hunnan China1 with 1art 2inf 1ftr. Hopefully, one inf has already been killed J1 but if not I will still chance it for at least one round. Two rounds if we both lose one but not two in the first round. Yunnan is attacked with a few inf. Depending on what is around I might go all in or just a few. You want to take it though.

    Assuming that you don’t win the battle in Hunnan, what do you have in Kwangsi that can’t be beaten J2?

    The entire Japanese air force, including aircraft from carriers unless UKP/ANZAC was dumb enough to attack me, and forces offloaded from transports from Japan. There is no way China can hold Yunnan alone. Yeah, you might get a plane or two, but I’ll kill ALL the Chinese in a single round of combat. Until China builds again, the only forces there will be Japanese.

    Oh, and a number of folks on these boards do advocate UKP declaring war early to collect its NOs. That can be deterred by positioning Japanese fleet off India and other UKP convoy zones so that they if they do declare war you are doing convoy damage immediately.

    Marsh


  • @Marshmallow:

    J3: More China and Russia, keep the US out. If UKP and ANZAC were dumb enough to attack you, capitalize on it to deprive India of as much income as possible. Land all your planes in Yunnan. Get ready to kill India on J4.

    This is where it may not be dumb to DOW. If not at war with Japan, if you are on Yunnan already but China don’t have enough to hold it and UK can make the difference. This is where it’s sensible to DOW. Attacking Kwangsi UK2 is also a possible and interesting move if there isn’t much there.

    @Marshmallow:

    The entire Japanese air force, including aircraft from carriers unless UKP/ANZAC was dumb enough to attack me, and forces offloaded from transports from Japan. There is no way China can hold Yunnan alone. Yeah, you might get a plane or two, but I’ll kill ALL the Chinese in a single round of combat. Until China builds again, the only forces there will be Japanese.

    Oh, and a number of folks on these boards do advocate UKP declaring war early to collect its NOs. That can be deterred by positioning Japanese fleet off India and other UKP convoy zones so that they if they do declare war you are doing convoy damage immediately.

    Marsh

    Don’t get too worked up. Those aircraft can’t defend until you’ve held Yunnan for a turn.

    Are you sure that people are saying to DOW UK1, not UK2?


  • Well, as I said it is broad strokes. I didn’t do a full board playthrough with analysis and branching.  :-D But, as I said, if UKP declares early, as long as you are in a Pacific to convoy them during their collect income phase and you capitalize on it to deprive them of income on your next Japanese turn, I don’t see that it hurts you – it actually hurts them more, since their slow movers cannot make it back to India in time and their fast movers can be cut off by a J3 capture of Burma. You’re actually kind of pinning them in Yunnan – if they move back, you get to take India’s money away AND kill the Chinese. If not, you get India cheaper  :mrgreen:

    Marsh


  • I think your argument relied on being able to land planes on Yunnan J3. I don’t think that is particularly difficult to stop with reasonable dice. That’s why I suggested a game.

    Perhaps Shan State is a reasonable alternative but harder to get to overland.

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @simon33:

    I think your argument relied on being able to land planes on Yunnan J3. I don’t think that is particularly difficult to stop with reasonable dice. That’s why I suggested a game.

    Perhaps Shan State is a reasonable alternative but harder to get to overland.

    I’ve never done online games and don’t really have the time to start until September due to my study and work burdens.

    If the UK declares early, Japan could always take Ceylon and build an airbase on Kwangsi on J3. But in this case, if India knows what’s coming they are actually better off if they do not declare early. If they declare early I may not take Yunnan, but they have still split their forces (meaning slow movers can’t make it back to defend India proper) and will actually collect a lot less money on UK2 than they would otherwise. The India stack looks a whole lot more impressive if the UK does not declare til UK3.

    Marsh

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    Problems with the MM (potentially):

    1. Sun Tzu says to attack the enemy where he isn’t. In this case, UK Atlantic has zero pressure on it. It might be spending the bulk of its money in Egypt, but it might still be necessary to keep some air force back to keep it from doing early transports. Given all the money spent on fleet, I don’t like the idea of building additional air early in the game.
    2. There is a possibility that the UK might try to use the South Africa MIC to try to contest the Middle East. This should not be dissuaded, as it is a strategic error on the UK’s part – that factory is the only thing keeping Italy from swaming over sub-Saharan Africa. If the UK wants to build fleet in South Africa, dance the happy dance and make sure Egypt can’t fall to an amphibious assault while Italy shows UK the error of the UK’s naval build…

    I’m sure other issues will become clear as I think about this more.

    Marsh


  • @Marshmallow:

    If the UK declares early, Japan could always take Ceylon and build an airbase on Kwangsi on J3. But in this case, if India knows what’s coming they are actually better off if they do not declare early. If they declare early I may not take Yunnan, but they have still split their forces (meaning slow movers can’t make it back to defend India proper) and will actually collect a lot less money on UK2 than they would otherwise. The India stack looks a whole lot more impressive if the UK does not declare til UK3.

    Marsh

    I position to convoy on a UK2 DOW too.


  • @Marshmallow:

    @MeinHerr:

    1. Killing French DD,CRU in SZ93…allowing Italy’s Navy+Air to do other things
    2. Allowing the Italian BB, CRU and *most imptly * the  TR to live and do something.
    3. Giving a chance for Ethiopians and Somali Italians to survive a round and concentrate…now they have to be hunted down…diverting UK resources
    4. Help Tobruk forcE survive.

    Exactly what else do Italy’s navy and air force have to do that is worth sacrificing a German air unit to French ships in sea zone 93?

    **It will help Italy kill off UK blockers in Malta and Greece Seazones.  Removing French Navy in Med frees up the Italians. **

    You still have done NOTHING to deter Taranto. The UK can do it, or not, as it pleases – the choice is not up to you. Please explain how anything you have done deters the UK from making the Taranto attack?

    This depends on your definition of “deter”.  Given a choice between Taranto and Keeping Egypt , which would you choose?!  If it is Egypt, then you cannot do Taranto.  That is what I mean as “deter”  .

    You wrote this earlier…." UK can have in Egypt at the end of UK1: 1 AA gun, 7 infantry, 2 artillery, one tank, one mech, one fighter, and one tactical bomber."

    So, on UK1, if the FTR and TB are on Egypt, it is not possible to do Taranto, correct?  Especially, if UK-CRU off Gib is sunk on G1

    **If 3 German planes are lost, please remember, you did not flush down $30 in Navy… you built 2 SBRs…   **

    @MeinHerr:

    With Tobruk and Ethiopians,  Italy has option of not sacrificing them, should the German Strafe, be called off.

    Since UK goes before Italy, there is time to decide, whether to go with strafe ….or not!

    If not, then they can be:
    A) Kept in Libya and Kenya for a future threat. As long As Italian Navy exists in strength, the potential to take Egypt /Syria/Gib remains!

    If you move those forces into Alexandria on I1, enough of the German air force must land in Alexandria on G2 to deter the UK from killing those forces. If Germany does not reinforce via air, the Italian forces in Alexandria are dead. Your only choice is whether or not to move them to Alexandria.

    Also, if you move to Alexandria and to Kenya (not Anglo-Egypt Sudan) your threat to take Egypt is quite empty.

    Yes, if strafe is called off, then no point sacrificing them.  There is no longer a threat to Egypt on I2 .But the next turn they can move back closer.  The deal is that as long as the Italian Navy is there, Egypt must be manned … or else it can fall.  Also any UK units moving out of the Egypt Sea Zone will be vulnerable.

    If UK puts up a mIC and does not conduct Taranto, then the I1 goal will be to get the S.Fr-Greece-Gib bonus.  I2 goal will be to get N. African bonus.

    @MeinHerr:

    C) Combo of these and Withdraw 8 units from N Africa for defense!
    D)  After Tunisia,Kenya is taken, can take Morocco and Algeria to get bonus and Tanganiyika to deny UK it’s NO.

    By the time you get to Morocco, you will have lost Alexandria – your entire North Africa stack cannot stand against a properly executed UK1 MIC in Egypt, so exactly how is part of it going to keep Alexandria if the UK moves into that territory in force? No North Africa NO for you! Plus, the Americans will land and kill your forces in Morocco, allowing them to more rapidly move on to Normandy, Denmark, Norway, Rome, etc. rather than walking across North Africa to get to you…

    Again, if Strafe is called off, Tunisia , Gib and Greece fall I-1, Morocco and Algeria fall I-2

    Retreating the Italian forces from Africa is usually a good call if the US is doing KGF, as the US can put more pressure on Europe early than you can withstand without these forces. This would be especially true if a substantial amount of bid was placed in the Med.

    The UK NO was taken as soon as you took Kenya…

    No, if strafe called off, better for Italy to move toward central and west Africa to get as much money as possible.

    @MeinHerr:

    All these ties down UK resources.

    Totally disagree. You are giving the UK an amazing amount of freedom by not putting pressure on it. Plus, by taking French territories that you cannot hold, you are giving the US extra income. The Allied players should actually come over to shake your hand and thank you for this!

    Point is by the time US gets money and converts it to units and moves them back, it takes 4 turns.  Italy gets to use it 1-2 turns, use is is immediate.

    @MeinHerr:

    1. Make India easier to take for Japan.

    NOTHING the UK does can save India against a determined Japan. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something, and what they’re selling stinks.

    Although that is true, it always boils down to - How much Japan loses in Tempo, Men and Air in taking India.  The lesser the losses, the easier it is on Japan. The better Japan can fight US and ANZAC.  So, if Japan is fighting $8 less, and does not have to fight to get Sumatra, or the fighting is easier, then better for Japan

    @MeinHerr:

    German Naval build for a bogus SeaLion threat costs 30 IPC, that cannot be used against Moscow…

    Or

    SZ110 kill… which results in Taranto, screwing over the Italians permanently.

    At least we’re in agreement that a bogus Sea Lion build is not worth the IPCs…

    Every unit built G1 should help in Barabarossa. Depending on how many planes are lost or not lost, Germany can adjust for any navy build.  But in event UK secures Egypt… then with its Luftwaffe intact… and bolstered by 2 SBRS … Moscow on G6 should be the target.  India by G6 should be Japan’s target.  Both are now achievable as UK has too many things to do

    I fail to see how a G1 sea zone 110 kill results in Taranto being performed. Nothing in the G1 sea zone 110 attack forces the Allies to do anything at all. Anyone, please tell me how sea zone 110 forces the UK to do Taranto?

    No one can force or deter Taranto… its just that you give the UK a hard choice to make…

    @MeinHerr:

    So , just like Dark Skies involves a completely different thought-process, RamRod requires thinking unconventionally.

    If by unconventionally you mean not thinking things through and making questionable strategic decisions, I would agree with your statement.

    I agree that with early German help Italy can actually be a meaningful contributor to the Axis war effort. The only issue with this is that you have to have some plan to hold off a well-executed KGF while still killing Russia quickly and effectively. I’m actually ok with your strafing plan, but as I think has been shown it is basically a die roll for the Axis.

    Yes, it does come down to that. But the three times I have played it, I have lost only 3 to 4 planes each time. Both the times have been victories for Axis

    You need more to it than what you have. Maybe put your G1 fleet build off Southern France on G2 so you have a two-punch for Egypt. That would get Germany an NO and give Italy a break into the Middle East or Africa. That might be worth a one or two turn delay in killing Moscow.

    I would not do that.  Better to load an Inf or Tank on Italian TR and transport. If not possible, then no.  I always leave 1 German Inf  in N. France from GSG on G1 for that purpose.

    Also, at the end of the day, Italy’s focus has to be defending Europe. Holding Egypt and the Middle East should be considered strategic objectives (i.e., Italy needs the money to build in Europe) and not tactical (Italy actively combats Russia and builds forces for that purpose). If you combined this with a fast Japanese kill of India, you might have a winning Axis strategy here.

    Agree . But should UK persist with Taranto, all its Egypt forces will get wiped out G2, and I2 should take it.  If Ethiopians are in Kenya I1, I2 they go to Tanganyrika on I2, then belgian Congo on I3… and will spread like cancer in heart of Africa.  UK will have a hard time trying to kill them, take Egypt, save India , help US invasion, or help USSR all at same time.

    Marsh

    Maybe its heresy to some that you lose 5-6 German planes. In my opinion its an acceptable risk. 
    A)You have not bought the $30 Navy.
    B)  India has relinquished $8…
    C) If you have gained Egypt…  what does that do:
        1)it gives $2 a turn to Italy, UK loses $2…
        2) If Gib is not secured, because UK1 got it… then on I2, Italy gets a $5 bonus a turn
        3) Italian units are off to the hunt in central Africa… UK has to build in SA to hunt them down… or bleed IPCs each turn
        4) UK will not get its $5 bonus a turn
        5) UK will have to spend to get Egypt back… and that is less FTRs in Moscow
        6) Rome has a Naval defense that has to be broken before getting in. It will take a turn longer…

    Ultimately, its a race against time.  If Moscow falls on G6, India on J6 and US is still not in a position to take Rome or W. Germany….  with entire Luftwaffe alive… hmmm Axis should be in a better position

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @MeinHerr:

    Exactly what else do Italy’s navy and air force have to do that is worth sacrificing a German air unit to French ships in sea zone 93?

    **It will help Italy kill off UK blockers in Malta and Greece Seazones.  Removing French Navy in Med frees up the Italians.  **

    Italy doesn’t need that help.

    @MeinHerr:

    You still have done NOTHING to deter Taranto. The UK can do it, or not, as it pleases – the choice is not up to you. Please explain how anything you have done deters the UK from making the Taranto attack?

    This depends on your definition of “deter”.  Given a choice between Taranto and Keeping Egypt , which would you choose?!  If it is Egypt, then you cannot do Taranto.  That is what I mean as “deter”  .

    When you force the UK to actually make that choice, let me know. Nothing you have here is deterrance.

    @MeinHerr:

    You wrote this earlier…." UK can have in Egypt at the end of UK1: 1 AA gun, 7 infantry, 2 artillery, one tank, one mech, one fighter, and one tactical bomber."

    So, on UK1, if the FTR and TB are on Egypt, it is not possible to do Taranto, correct?  Especially, if UK-CRU off Gib is sunk on G1

    That is true. Still the UK’s choice and not yours.

    @MeinHerr:

    **If 3 German planes are lost, please remember, you did not flush down $30 in Navy… you built 2 SBRs…    **

    You are trading on average 50 IPCs worth of German planes for about 24 IPCs worth of UK and ANZAC troops.

    I got a $10 bill here. You can give me a $20 bill for it anytime!

    @MeinHerr:

    Yes, if strafe is called off, then no point sacrificing them.  There is no longer a threat to Egypt on I2 .But the next turn they can move back closer.  The deal is that as long as the Italian Navy is there, Egypt must be manned … or else it can fall.  Also any UK units moving out of the Egypt Sea Zone will be vulnerable.

    Under my plan, the Italian navy is dwarfed by the UK navy. And if you are going to keep bouncing your Italian army and your German air force back and forth between territories, the Allies have already won because of your wasted impeti (is impeti the plural of impetus? or would it be impetuses?)

    @MeinHerr:

    Point is by the time US gets money and converts it to units and moves them back, it takes 4 turns.  Italy gets to use it 1-2 turns, use is is immediate.

    So you are going to take a six IPC gain over about two turns, and after that you are going to give the US 3 IPCs per turn til the end of the game six or eight turns later? I just found a $5 bill. I will gladly take your $10 bill for it…

    And you STILL haven’t told me how you are going to take North Africa and hold Alexandria, when we already showed you can’t hold Alexandria without the German air force staying put there. You won’t get the North Africa NO for more than one round, if that much.

    @MeinHerr:

    Yes, it does come down to that. But the three times I have played it, I have lost only 3 to 4 planes each time. Both the times have been victories for Axis

    Well heck, as long as it worked twice it must be flawless! Does “both” include that third time it didn’t work?

    @MeinHerr:

    Agree . But should UK persist with Taranto, all its Egypt forces will get wiped out G2, and I2 should take it.  If Ethiopians are in Kenya I1, I2 they go to Tanganyrika on I2, then belgian Congo on I3… and will spread like cancer in heart of Africa.  UK will have a hard time trying to kill them, take Egypt, save India , help US invasion, or help USSR all at same time.

    Since I don’t think Taranto is the best play in the Med for the UK, that certainly won’t happen. But I have never seen the UK played my way have any trouble stopping the “cancer” Italians in sub-Saharan Africa. Usually the UK has its NO back by turn six (sometimes turn five) and the Italians are wrapped up. And loading German troops on an Italian transport just makes it that much sweeter to kill that Italian transport with the UK navy/air force.

    @MeinHerr:

    Maybe its heresy to some that you lose 5-6 German planes. In my opinion its an acceptable risk.  
    A)You have not bought the $30 Navy.
    B)  India has relinquished $8…
    C) If you have gained Egypt…  what does that do:
       1)it gives $2 a turn to Italy, UK loses $2…
       2) If Gib is not secured, because UK1 got it… then on I2, Italy gets a $5 bonus a turn
       3) Italian units are off to the hunt in central Africa… UK has to build in SA to hunt them down… or bleed IPCs each turn
       4) UK will not get its $5 bonus a turn
       5) UK will have to spend to get Egypt back… and that is less FTRs in Moscow
       6) Rome has a Naval defense that has to be broken before getting in. It will take a turn longer…

    Ultimately, its a race against time.  If Moscow falls on G6, India on J6 and US is still not in a position to take Rome or W. Germany….   with entire Luftwaffe alive… hmmm Axis should be in a better position

    I don’t see you taking Moscow by turn six if you lose five German planes strafing Egypt. Of course, you could be counting on Russia doing dumb builds…

    Not spending 30 IPCs on navy is your call. Gibraltar is easily recaptured, and Italy has a limited number of transports. If by “Italian units are off to the hunt” that the UK is slaughtering them handly in like two turns, I agree. And the UK still has Egypt, the Italian navy is dead, UK owns the Med and Africa and the Middle East and is now shipping reinforcements to Moscow and/or India if it likes.

    Marsh

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    Let’s look at what happens if the UK does Taranto on UK1, after you have landed all but one German plane within range of Egypt, and after the UK has built the MIC in Egypt on UK1. (This assumes no bid or bid not placed in Egypt/Anglo-Egypt Sudan/Alexandria.)

    You stack Alexandria with 5 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 mech, and 2 tanks. Add to this three fighters and a bomber that will participate in your attack.

    The UK has amassed in Egypt at the end of UK1 1 AA gun, 6 infantry, 1 mech, 2 artillery, and 1 tank. As you pointed out, if the UK does Taranto no aircraft are here yet. There is aircraft on the carrier in sea zone 97 and the Gibraltar fighter has made it to Malta.

    Since your plan is a G2 strafe of Egypt to allow an Italian ground attack, I assume that you do not kill the fleet in sea zone 97 on G2. You go ahead with your strafe. Whether or not the AA gun misses, your strafe kills 7 units on average. The smart UK player loses all six infantry and an artillery and keeps the AA gun, since the AA gun makes a big difference with the Italian air force coming. You lose, on average, six air units.

    UK2 happens: since you did not kill the fleet in sea zone 97, the aircraft from that carrier, as well as the fighter from Malta, fly back to Egypt. Your lone transport dies in sea zone 98 to a UK plane. The rest of your navy dies to UK fleet elements from sea zone 92 (that battleship and cruiser you did not kill on G1). The fighter and tactical bomber from India arrive. The destroyer and cruiser from India arrive in sea zone 98. Your fleet is dead (but your new fleet will be able to see it through fancy glass bottoms) so you can rule out any amphibious support for your attack on Egypt. UK places two tanks and a fighter in Egypt on its turn after bringing in two infantry from Persia. The force in Egypt now consists of:

    1 AA gun
    2 infantry
    1 mech
    2 artillery
    3 tanks
    5 fighters
    1 tactical bombers

    Your attacking force with Italy is still 5 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 mech, 2 tank, 3 fighters, and a bomber. Your chances of a successful attack on Egypt on I2 following a G2 strafe is 39% (rounded up) assuming the AA gun does not get a hit. (This can only get worse if you split the German air force to try to take out that UK fleet to keep the aircraft from getting to Egypt.) Furthermore, any UK fleet still in sea zone 97 is still convoy disrupting Italy.

    You have now sacrificed half the Luftwaffe (on average) to get Italy a 39% chance to successfully invade Egypt.

    If my numbers are wrong, please explain where and how. Otherwise, please explain to me how your 39% likely to win battle for Italy counts as deterrance.

    Marsh


  • How many UK players would use the TT to bring the AA gun and inf from Malta rather than crush Ethiopia? I’m assuming the Tobruk crush is out due to the Luftwaffe.

    If there is no Taranto, why wouldn’t the Italians proceed as they did before we discovered Taranto? i.e. land on Trans-Jordan to block the fleet in the Red Sea, land on Alexandria and move the Ethiopian force to Sudan, if they’re still alive. I guess the answer to that would be the fleet in SZ92, if it moves there as it should.

    Like Marsh, I also don’t see the merit of the no SZ110 crush and Luftwaffe strafe of Egypt. Why not go more mainstream and block the Tobruk crush with the Luftwaffe G1, although a significant bid can still overcome one fighter flown to Tobruk. Perhaps use a 2nd or even a 3rd plane and still hit SZ110? You could do that with a more acceptable risk than leaving the SZ110 like this:
    SZ111 - 2subs, 1ftr, 1tac, BB
    SZ110 - 2subs, 2ftr, 2tacs, 2SBs.
    SZ106 - 1sub

    Perhaps they will scramble into 110 with that but I’d still rather that than leaving the fleet alive. A bid tends to telegraph the intention to crush Tobruk.

    That leaves 2ftrs and a tac which can fly to Tobruk. With an bid of an artillery in Alexandria and a ftr and a tac, that attack is 54% to take the territory. But is it worth it for the UK? You’ve passed up Taranto or stripped some planes out of it. You have to do a stripped Taranto or put down a blocker to keep Egypt then most likely.


  • Simon 33

    I do not play bids given to UK.  UK does not need any more money to crush Italy and unbalance the Med.

    Bids are given to balance out strengths or for time constaints for Allies having more powers to play.

    The bids I play with are solely to Soviets as IPC only. Maybe to China, 1 Art.

    That is it.  Anything else ruins the fun of playing as thing get too lop-sided.

    But again, it’s upto different players and iam just giving you mY read on it.

    MOW:

    Did a comparative chart to see if losing 5 planes is wOrth it for Germany to help get Egypt for Italy. This is if Taranto is done by UK.

    Took into account convoying.

    Over 4 turns, the Axis net gain and Allies net loss is 60 IPC

    It also makes UK pay about $40 -$ 48 to get back it’s territories.

    All this with Original Italian units in Africa alone.

    Do not wanT to go into details… every one can figure it out themselves…besides writing from work on cell phone.

    So Axis gain twice for each IPC lost initially.

    At same time over first 4 turns Italy makes 44 IPC… enough to defend itself

    In scenario, where UK plays as you say, No Taranto, and Egypt holds and gets a mIC…

    Then it takes UK the second turn to build, and third turn to deploy.

    The T2 build is vulnerable to Luftwaffe… that can hit it and land in Greece.

    So dunno if you plan to do it in Med. Red Sea is safer.

    Which means, I2 could theoretically take TJ with a suicide TR…or… just focus on N. Africa.

    All in all, Italy makes 56 IPC in first 3 turns. Not counting 8 IPC loss for India.

    Now, if RamRod were NOT played, and Taranto done, Italy would make less than half this money, if G2 were to kill the Med UK fleet.

    What this does is help Rome hold out one more turn than before.

    Builds can be a CV on T2, if bonus is achieved. Combining with original Italian Navy and Airbase… US will probably have to let UK kill Italian fleet in T4… but now it means, that Italy can build one more turn, redeploy forces, and Germans can send help if this is the case before US hits on US5…

    Remember the entire Luftwaffe is alive and kicking…since they did not strafe!

    Also remember, at least 2, if not 4 units should have been “rescued”…aka Dunkirk. …from N.Africa. This provides even better defense.

    My opinion is that this is still better than conventional opening.


  • You wrote all that on your phone? True dedication.

    If the UK aren’t allowed a bid then Tobruk can be more or less stopped by the moves I mentioned. Perhaps Ethiopia crush will still happen though, at 79% to the attacker IIRC. I can’t imagine how I wouldn’t do Taranto to moves like this.


  • Last word on this,

    **If UK puts a mIC on Egypt, UK1, and also lands the planes there, I think with a 2 SBR buy, Germany can still take out ALL UK forces in 1 sweep.  **

    You see, for Axis with mIC, it’s  a Strategic Objective. It’s worth burning the planes if need be. Once that force is gone, and all Italian forces are alive, you can forget Middle East and maybe India

    It takes UK, way too long to rebuild and get back in time.

    UK2 mIC in Persia, Produces units in SA
    Italk has 12 units, and a Navy remember??! With 2 TRs…!!

    Oh… yeah… Moscow may take 11 rounds to fall. But with Egypt falling on I2, and all UK land and some air going with it, Axis should win the game.

    Try it.

    My last word on it.

    • Ramdas Vaidyanathan  aka Mein Herr

  • Luftwaffe hits it, till everything is dead, or it dies first.

    With Skelly Calculator,  it’s still a kill…although 8 planes may go.

    So , not in 1 sweep…  correction.

  • '18 '17 '16

    MeinHerr,

    The bid system is solidly in place at tournaments, on TripleA, and for friendly face to face games. Everyone is welcome to have house rules, we do with the Mongolian rule. But when discussing strategy, there are few seasoned players that wouldn’t drop a sub or destroyer in the med following a bid for the allies. It makes one of the largest pro allies impacts on the game. The allies are clearly disadvantaged in G40. Based on your rule I doubt many seasoned players would agree to take the allies without a very high bid for Russia.

    I have to agree with Simon and Marsh regarding the exchange of German fighters for Egypt. The cost of those units just aren’t worth it.

    I’d be happy to play test the theory on TripleA. I could be wrong. Maybe it is a crippling blow for the allies. If it is a crippling blow, then it goes back to my previous argument regarding the bid placement of a UK naval unit in the med.

    Healthy debate is great for this game. Thank you for your contribution.


  • I’ve been watching this thread from the side lines.

    I’m not a fan of placing bid units in the Med either, although I do feel the allies need some help. I think that the Med is one of the theaters that plays out pretty well for the allies, and Italy generally starts off at a disadvantage anyway by time their turn rolls around. Much depends on how much help the Germans want to give to Italy. Either by allowing them to grab more territory to prop up their income, or loaning them some air for a couple turns.

    With that said, I’m probably not going to use the Luftwaffe to strafe Egypt. Then in addition you would also forgo the sz110 attack, and probably not hit the UK Med fleet if they did Taranto I’m defiantly not going to sacrifice 1/2 the German air force. On top of that there is the sack of Moscow that will surly be delayed w/o the extra punch of those lost planes.

    Leaving the sz110 fleet alive gives the allies a pretty good starting navy in the Atlantic. Add to that the Luftwaffe can’t project the same threat because it was cut in half means the allies don’t need as much navy as normal to come across either. The US will need less warships, so they build more transports, or maybe just spend more in the Pac. Either way I think this “Ram Rod” would help the allies in the long run, and the axis are toast if the Italians don’t win that battle for Egypt which sounds like a close one.

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @simon33:

    How many UK players would use the TT to bring the AA gun and inf from Malta rather than crush Ethiopia? I’m assuming the Tobruk crush is out due to the Luftwaffe.

    If there is no Taranto, why wouldn’t the Italians proceed as they did before we discovered Taranto? i.e. land on Trans-Jordan to block the fleet in the Red Sea, land on Alexandria and move the Ethiopian force to Sudan, if they’re still alive. I guess the answer to that would be the fleet in SZ92, if it moves there as it should.

    Like Marsh, I also don’t see the merit of the no SZ110 crush and Luftwaffe strafe of Egypt. Why not go more mainstream and block the Tobruk crush with the Luftwaffe G1, although a significant bid can still overcome one fighter flown to Tobruk. Perhaps use a 2nd or even a 3rd plane and still hit SZ110? You could do that with a more acceptable risk than leaving the SZ110 like this:
    SZ111 - 2subs, 1ftr, 1tac, BB
    SZ110 - 2subs, 2ftr, 2tacs, 2SBs.
    SZ106 - 1sub

    Perhaps they will scramble into 110 with that but I’d still rather that than leaving the fleet alive. A bid tends to telegraph the intention to crush Tobruk.

    That leaves 2ftrs and a tac which can fly to Tobruk. With an bid of an artillery in Alexandria and a ftr and a tac, that attack is 54% to take the territory. But is it worth it for the UK? You’ve passed up Taranto or stripped some planes out of it. You have to do a stripped Taranto or put down a blocker to keep Egypt then most likely.

    There is no need to do Tobruk or Taranto, but that is a different thread. The Italians can’t land on Trans-Jordan, even with no Tobruk, if the UK deploys blockers on UK1 and moves back into the Med on UK2.

    I’m not sure I’m ok with taking all that force to Tobruk and hitting sea zone 110 light. The UK player would be right to scramble then, and it would be disastrous for the Luftwaffe.

    Any UK player who wants to secure Egypt as fast as possible should bring the infantry and the AA gun from Malta to Egypt on UK1.

    Marsh

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @MeinHerr:

    Did a comparative chart to see if losing 5 planes is wOrth it for Germany to help get Egypt for Italy. This is if Taranto is done by UK.

    Took into account convoying.

    Over 4 turns, the Axis net gain and Allies net loss is 60 IPC

    It also makes UK pay about $40 -$ 48 to get back it’s territories.

    All this with Original Italian units in Africa alone.

    Do not wanT to go into details… every one can figure it out themselves…besides writing from work on cell phone.

    So Axis gain twice for each IPC lost initially.

    At same time over first 4 turns Italy makes 44 IPC… enough to defend itself

    You make bold statements and do not present any detailed arguments to support them. You then ignore refutations of your bold statements that are backed up by detailed analysis.

    I’ve presented battle calculator results for Egypt strafes followed by an Italian overland attack with and without Taranto. Each way shows that Italy has a poor chance of taking Egypt if UK defends properly. You are counting on your opponent making a mistake, and if they do you do well. However, if you are counting on your opponent shooting themselves in the foot before the battle, what do you do when they don’t?

    As Siparo says healthy debate is good. But debate is a discussion, and you are not discussing. You should show your calculations and tell me where mine are wrong.

    Marsh

3 / 6

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

49

Online

17.6k

Users

40.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts