UK Strategy -"Middle Earth"

@GeneralHandGrenade:

Let’s hope we do get a chance to play someday Arthur so I can prove to you that Europe falls every time if you concentrate all of your attacks there. You shift units from one side to the other and it doesn’t matter because you are getting it simultaneously from 3 sides. 117 IPC’s to start the game with for the Allies vs. 40 IPC’s for the axis. Yes that will adjust slightly over the first few turns but it’s only a matter of time before they’re toast. I’ve already tried the kinds of things that you’re proposing, it isn’t enough. If all you had to do was take Moscow and that was the end of it then what you’re saying would work. However, before you get there you are at war in France or Italy or both and then it’s too late. You keep suggesting I couldn’t do what I want to anything but novice players but I would suggest that you couldn’t do what you’re planning to me as an Allied player.

Again I say this. Put the pieces down on the board and try my strategy and see if Europe survives long enough to get 6 VC’s in the Pacific.

You should register online and try to prove this. I started on this forum like you, posting strategies and playing once in a while IRL. The software makes for better play very quickly.

Playing face-to-face certainly is a very different experience than playing on-line.  There is so much more fun and adrenaline when playing on a board.  Still, playing through TripleA allows more time to study all of the possible moves and calculate all of the battle outcomes.  I completely understand your desire to only do live games.

I have played many games where the UK essentially does your Middle Earth plan.  In the no-bid games, I have never lost as Axis.  Japan starts to get out of control and the Allies have to start slowing down their expansion into Western Europe to push back on Japan.  Once Japan conquers India and starts earning 80 PUs a round, it is tough for the US to get them back down if there already was a big gap in the Pacific naval race.  Yes, India is a pain to destroy, but they will eventually collapse once China is totally knocked out of the game and the Allies haven’t invested heavily in Pacific fleets.

In games with a bid, I usually beat weaker opponents using a Middle Earth-esque plan, and lose to stronger opponents.  I often have a huge stack of bombers as Germany, able to project power into many different zones.  With perfect play the Allies can overcome the threats, but any mistake could cost them the match.

@Arthur:

It also allows you to blitz two thirds of your stack if an opening arises.

With the italian canopener from hell, you will blitz 100 % of your stack :D

The terr has to be empty, so all you have to do is to take it with Italy.

I prefer to have my heavy hitters in the luftwaffe and the art from the first round, instead of buying tanks.

Kreuzfeld, you miss that there is little downside to mixing in some tanks along with some mechs.  Here are two scenarios:

Option 1: 24 mechs (24 offense and 48 defense, 24 HPs, 96 PUs)
Option 2: 12 mechs and 8 tanks (36 offense and 48 defense, 20 HPs, 96 PUs)

You usually have these units mixed in with a bunch of extra infantry cannon-fodder units anyway so the four extra HPs rarely makes much of a difference when doing battle calculations.  Meanwhile you kill an extra 2  units a round on offense.  You will find that Germany will have a couple extra units left after a major battle like the siege of Moscow or a push down into the heart of the Middle East.

Furthermore you can now blitz 16 units which can give you some options when Italian planes take out a crucial blocking unit, opening out an avenue to attack a juicy stack of Allied forces. That blitz ability tips the scales in otherwise close decision.  Maybe you will end up with 25% tanks vs mechs, or maybe the number ends up at 60% if you don’t value defense as highly for your particular game situation.  Regardless consider building more tanks.

Hey GHG! Why not save your UK infantry money on UK1 and place them on UK2 if Germany is preparing for Sealion? There is no risk of invasion on G2 and that way you have the option to spend that money on something else if it doesn’t look like a Sealion attack is coming.

@Deiganator:

Hey GHG! Why not save your UK infantry money on UK1 and place them on UK2 if Germany is preparing for Sealion? There is no risk of invasion on G2 and that way you have the option to spend that money on something else if it doesn’t look like a Sealion attack is coming.

Because you will hit the 10 unit maximum that a major factory can mobilise in London. Indeed, even if you save 0IPC you will still hit this limit.

Thanks… forgot about that  :lol:

All right, I’m a little late to this party, because it took me a long time before I was able to block off a solid hour to watch GHG’s videos. But General Hand Grenade’s Middle Earth strategy is such a crazy mix of good advice and bad advice that I just have to put my two cents in.

SUMMARIZING GHG’s VIDEO:

1. On turn 1, buy 6 inf, 1 ftr for London. Do a full Taranto attack, send your Med transport to Iraq, and support the attack on Iraq with the Indian air force. Activate Persia on noncombat. Leave a couple of units in Alexandria and Sudan to tempt the Italians into attacking you there. Land the planes from Iraq in Jordan. Move the entire Indian Ocean fleet west, and if any Atlantic transports survived, start sailing them southeast toward South Africa to join your Indian Ocean fleet.
2. On turn 2, assuming you’re not in trouble from Sea Lion, buy a factory and a naval base for Persia, and a fighter in South Africa. Kill any remaining Italian boats in the Med as your top priority, and maybe attack one group of Italians near Ethiopia.
3. Starting on turn 3, buy 3 ground units (including some mechs) in South Africa, shuck them to Persia, and use any remaining money to buy a mix of units in Persia (including some fighters). Repeat this pattern for the next several turns, stockpiling a mobile force in Persia that can reinforce Egypt, the Caucasus, or India as needed.
4. Russia is supposed to aggressively counter-attack Germany in order to fight Germany to a standstill all on its own. Meanwhile, the Americans are supposed to simultaneously contain Japan and wreck Italy by sending first submarines (for convoy damage) and then infantry from New York through Gibraltar to Rome.

THE GOOD:

• As other commenters have pointed out, an early factory in Persia is really useful. It slows down your Atlantic game somewhat, but it eventually pays for itself by securing Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Persia, and West India. The mere fact that you have a factory in Persia can shut down some Axis strategies even when you don’t build much there.

• A full attack on Taranto is a standard play, but it’s standard for a reason: it’s a strong opening move.

• GHG correctly identifies the fact that attacking Ethiopia on turn 1 is optional. Many non-Middle-Earth players radically overestimate how important it is to hold Alexandria or attack Ethiopia on turn 1 – it’s nice to collect your NO on turn 2, but it’s not essential and you shouldn’t be designing your entire opening around picking up an extra 5 IPC for UK Europe.

• Preserving your Indian Ocean fleet and keeping it close to the coast of Africa can give you some extra mobility while denying Japan the chance to pick off British boats for cheap. The West Indian Ocean is too far away for Japan to bother sending significant forces there in most types of games.

THE BAD:

• Trying to claim both Persia and Iraq on turn 1 is a good way to set yourself up for senseless casualties. At most you can bring 3 land units and 2 planes to attack 3 defending Iraqis. This weakens your position in Egypt and has a 45% chance of killing off your mech infantry without providing you with any important benefits. It’s better to save Iraq for turn 2 or even turn 3 – there’s no rush to take Iraq. It’s pro-Axis neutral; it can’t go anywhere. As long as you get there before the Axis do, you’re fine. By pulling your entire air force away from India, you remove your ability to counter-attack weak Japanese positions in Burma, Shan, Hong Kong, or Yunnan after a J1 or J2 attack.

• Landing planes in Jordan doesn’t guarantee the ability to eliminate the Italian fleet on UK2, because Jordan is 3 spaces away from SZ 97. By the end of G2, the Axis can easily sink your UK Med carrier, conquer Yugoslavia, and conquer Greece. That leaves you without a valid spot to land fighters or tac bombers if you try to launch from Jordan and hit SZ 97. Italy has no particular need to reinforce north Africa on I1 if you pull Egyptian troops east to attack Iraq. They can just stack up in Alexandria, build a second transport in SZ 97, and get ready to hit Egypt hard on I2.

• Italy is under no obligation to attack the bait you leave out in Sudan. Instead, they can combine all 4 of their east African units in Kenya, where they deprive you of your NO and are hard to kill on turn 2. You will need to send both planes from Jordan, plus both transports from the Persian Gulf. That will put you seriously out of position – your planes will have to land in Sudan, where they’re not in range of India or SZ 97, and your boats will be stuck in SZ 72, where they will lose a full turn of deliveries to Persia.

THE UGLY:

• The expensive naval base you build on Persia only gets used when you send ships from Persia to South Africa. You don’t need to buy that naval base to move from South Africa to Egypt, or from Persia to Egypt, or from Egypt to India, or from Persia to India. It’s really doing very little to enhance your strategic mobility, especially since you’re already building at least one mech inf. per turn, every turn. Instead of paying $15 to set up a shuck from South Africa to Persia, you can run your shuck from South Africa to Egypt and back, and pay $7 for one extra transport. That extra transport can shuck your 2 slow units from Egypt/Jordan to Persia every turn, and your fast units can reach India all by themselves from Jordan, without any further naval assistance. You start off with a reservoir of infantry in Egypt, so this won’t even slow your strategy down. This analysis should be obvious. You already start with 2 naval bases on the east coast of Africa, plus a naval base in Gibraltar and a naval base in India. How could it possibly be an optimal strategy to purchase yet another naval base? Naval mobility is not Britain’s bottleneck on this map.

• America is not going to be able to quickly shut Italy down cold while also quickly building a large enough Pacific fleet to keep Japan totally engaged near the money islands. Japan starts with a big advantage in the form of its surplus air force. Japan can build a carrier and have it be automatically loaded; the US has to load its own carriers. Japan also has a bigger starting fleet and the ability to make kamikaze attacks. So, if you split the US income in half so you can take down Italy, then Japan will have enough spare boats in the opening to sail about a third of its fleet over to the west Indian Ocean, sink the British fleet, and occupy the Persian factory. The naval base you build actually makes this easier for Japan, since it helps them return home in a hurry if America pivots to a 100% KJF strategy. Normally it’s not worth it to sail that far west just to harass Britain, but if Britain is staking 80%+ of its strategy and economy on being able to ship reinforcements north from South Africa, then even just moving a carrier group in range of that shipping traffic shuts down the British shuck-shuck and cripples the British momentum. If Japan can also sink 3 transports and capture a factory and naval base, then it’s totally worth it to go all the way west to persia.

• If Russia is able to stalemate Germany all on its own, with no support from the western Allies beyond a couple British fighters in Moscow and some American pressure on Rome, then Russia would be able to do that using any British strategy. Like, I’m not going to sit here and argue with GHG about whether Moscow will fall by turn 7 or not against a group of Allies using the pure Middle Earth strategy (spoiler alert: I think it will probably fall) because that’s a complicated and controversial question that depends on tactics, strategy, dice, and circumstances. But if Moscow does hold, then that has almost nothing to do with Britain. If Moscow can hold using Middle Earth, then Moscow can hold if Britain uses a totally conventional strategy like attacking France and Norway. The credit here, if any, would go entirely to Russia. Britain’s not doing anything special to help Russia with Middle Earth. Middle Earth has some modestly helpful effect on Moscow by weakening the Italian ability to build extra can openers. That’s about it. So if you think Russia will hold under those circumstances, why worry about the Middle East at all? Clearly Germany has its hands full and then some trying to stalemate Russia. Better to have Britain and America and Russia all attack Germany all-out so they can overwhelm the weak little German pushover state and quickly end the game.

• Another way of framing this point about “Why worry about the Middle East?” is to point out that the Axis don’t reach the Middle East from Eurasia until around turn 7 anyway. The Axis typically don’t attack Russia on turn 1. On turns 2 and 3 they’re fighting their way through the Ukraine. On turns 4 and 5 they’re fighting their way towards Moscow. Only on turns 6 and 7 do they have a chance to pivot south past Stalingrad, through the Caucasus, and maybe into northwest Persia. If you’re worried about Iraq or Egypt, now we’re talking about a turn 8 or 9 Axis capture. Why invest your whole economy starting on turn 1 to prepare for a turn 8 attack that might never come? If Russia can hold off the Nazis singlehandedly, then the Middle East is never going to come into play at all. If Russia can’t hold off the Nazis singlehandedly, then you as the Western Allies need to be doing something to generate counterplay in Rome, France, Norway, or Western Germany. Efficiently shipping troops from South Africa to Persia does not generate counterplay.

MY ALTERNATIVE:

I like to build 2 inf, 1 fighter for London on UK1, activate Persia by pulling 1 unit from Egypt, and use my Indian transport to either take Ethiopia with Indian troops, or occupy Sumatra (if I’m facing a conservative Japanese player). I use the remaining money to buy a transport and an artillery for South Africa. I leave 1 infantry behind in South Africa to fill up the transport, and now that transport can hit Kenya, Sudan, Egypt, or Iraq on turn 2, as needed. Depending on what Italy does, I have the option of buying a factory in Persia or Egypt on UK2, or neither. You don’t always need a second factory in the colonies. A full Taranto raid with a follow-up attack on the remaining Italian ships is often enough to permanently eliminate the Italian navy, which means that even shucking 1 inf, 1 art from South Africa to Egypt each turn will be more than enough to hold Egypt and start pushing Italy back toward Tunis. Starting on turn 2, I build at least one sub every turn to either sink newly built Italian boats or start convoying the Italians down to zero income. GHG gets it right that the primary goal has to be gaining ironclad control of the Mediterranean Sea – it just turns out that you get there by building your first three subs in the region, not by buying your sixth naval base.

Buying only 2 inf, 1 ftr for London while doing a full Taranto does leave London vulnerable to a Sea Lion, but not that vulnerable. You can build 10 infantry in London on UK2. That leaves you with over 25 units defending London. By buying a transport + artillery in Africa instead of a factory, I ensure that Britain can keep fighting for a few turns in Africa even if London gets temporarily shut down. If you can keep Italy stalemated near Alexandria, kill off 40+ IPCs’ worth of the German tank corps, and force Germany to invest 70+ IPCs in naval units, then it’s perfectly fine to let Germany take London for a couple of turns. Russia will be a monster, America can liberate London, and Germany won’t make a profit on the transaction.

@Argothair:

Buying only 2 inf, 1 ftr for London while doing a full Taranto does leave London vulnerable to a Sea Lion, but not that vulnerable. You can build 10 infantry in London on UK2. That leaves you with over 25 units defending London. By buying a transport + artillery in Africa instead of a factory, I ensure that Britain can keep fighting for a few turns in Africa even if London gets temporarily shut down. If you can keep Italy stalemated near Alexandria, kill off 40+ IPCs’ worth of the German tank corps, and force Germany to invest 70+ IPCs in naval units, then it’s perfectly fine to let Germany take London for a couple of turns. Russia will be a monster, America can liberate London, and Germany won’t make a profit on the transaction.

Your German opponent doesn’t bomb London before UK2?  If 2 German bombers hit it, that should be about 10 of damage, meaning London is defended by:
7 inf, 5 anti air, 1 mech, 1 tank, and 2 fighters, plus UK1 buy of 2 inf and 1 fighter, and a UK2 buy of maybe 7 inf?

SeaLion should be able to attack with 10 inf, a mix of 10 art/tanks, 2-3 bombers, and 4-5 fighters and 4-5 tacticals.

98% victory with 13 units left.

In most games Germany could do Sea Lion if they wanted.  I don’t see that the 2inf + 1 fighter is crazy weak for the UK1 purchase.  Yes, London can fall on G3 but there won’t be many German ground units left over.  If dice are bad then the Germans lose too much of their air force and the game is over.  If the dice are good, the Allies have a hole to dig out of, but it can be manageable.

Most experienced players would choose to continue a standard Axis strat after seeing that UK1 purchase.

Rather than spewing more BS about me not knowing what I’m talking about simply because I don’t play Triplea, come to Prince George and I’ll show you how Middle Earth is done properly. I would look forward to finally seeing it defeated.

Throw down!

Taking Iraq UK1 is interesting.

I usually go for securing Egypt UK1.

The only thing I can say is I lost a series of games as Allies against Adam514 where as UK, I “secured” the middle east easily early in the game, but Adam ignored this and stacked Gibraltar prevent an Allied western threat. Germany was then able to slowly but surely take out Russia.

Obviously there are more details there, such as that Japan played a very defensive “keep away” etc, but point is, my belief that control of the middle east alone would ensure victory was proven false to me.

Russia is just so weak, that in the end, if Germany otherwise is unthreatened, it will fall.   :oops:

EDIT: I see that there have been some new responses since I started typing this, but I’ve got to run to a capella practice. I’ll return to the new comments late tonight or tomorrow!

Also, to honor GHG’s challenge to spell out exactly how I would defeat a pure Middle Earth strategy, here’s an outline of the first four turns for the Axis.

G1: Attack Paris, strafe Yugoslavia, and retreat into Romania. Attack British fleets in SZ 110 and 111. Send 2 subs to attack British cruiser in SZ 91. Activate Bulgaria and Finland. Ship 2 infantry to reinforce Norway. Build 1 transport and 1 destroyer in SZ 112; build 1 inf, 1 art in Berlin.

J1: Attack Yunnan and Hunnan; seize undefended Chinese territories. Build a factory in Shanghai and two transports near Tokyo. Stack most of the Japanese fleet near Hainan, with one loaded carrier, 1 DD, and 1 SS in Caroline Islands and 1 DD in Tokyo. March troops counter-clockwise from Korea through Manchuria and Shanghai toward Hong Kong.

I1: Don’t scramble against Taranto. Use planes and remaining fleet to sink any British ships in the Adriatic Sea that are left over from Taranto. Attack Yugoslavia with all slow units from North Italy and Albania. Send fast units east toward Romania to act as can-openers. Stack all east African units in Kenya. Stack all north African troops that can reach in Alexandria, and move Libya units to Tobruk. Build 1 transport in the Adriatic Sea, save $3.

G2: Reinforce Alexandria with about 5 planes, depending on strength of British forces in Egypt. Attack Normandy and Southern France. Attack and take Greece; sink French fleet with air power and any surviving subs. Declare war on Russia, take Baltic States, East Poland, and Bessarabia, start marching virtually all troops east – leave about 5 ground units near Paris to help defend western front. Use Baltic fleet to reinforce Baltic States stack. March Finnish army to Vyborg. Build 2 inf, 8 art in Berlin and about 3 inf, 1 art, 3 mech, 1 tnk in West Germany. Land any air not otherwise accounted for in West Germany.

J2: Declare war on UK & US. Seize Hong Kong with ground units, re-take Yunnan, and send 1 inf from Siam to claim French Indo-China. Use transports to claim Borneo, Malaya (2 transports), and Philippines (2 transports). If Malaya has been evacuated, can redirect 1 transport from Malaya to Sumatra. Use air power to support amphibious assaults and clear out any Allied boats in range of Hainan. Build 1 inf, 1 art, 1 mech in Shanghai, naval base in Hainan, and use remaining cash to build 1 destroyer and then more transports in Tokyo.

I2: Declare war on Russia. If Russia left a thin defense in Ukraine or Western Ukraine, can-open there. Attack and conquer Egypt with the Alexandria stack, two loaded transports, and the entire Italian air force. Move all remaining European units northeast toward Russian front. Move Tobruk units to Alexandria. If Kenyan stack still exists, either occupy Congo or attack a convenient British stack of two infantry. Land planes in Alexandria, build two new transports in Adriatic Sea.

G3: Continue pressing east toward Kiev and Bryansk. Use Baltic fleet to bring 3 inf, 1 art from West Germany to Leningrad; support attack on Leningrad with stacks from Vyborg and Baltic States. If Britain is still trying to stack 3 planes in Jordan with only 1 artillery defending them, as shown in the YouTube video, then use 5 planes from Alexandria plus 2 strategic bombers from West Germany to air-blitz and destroy the British planes. Land survivors in Cairo if appropriate. Stack up any mechs and tanks that survived the battle of Paris in East Poland. Build 9 mechs, 1 tank in Berlin.

J3: Because of naval base at Hainan, the majority of the Japanese fleet is in range of India. If India is weak, take India. Otherwise, deliver 5 loaded transports to Burma with bombardments and air support, wiping out any British that might have been left to guard it. Make conservative attacks as needed in China, slowly pressing China westward. Retreat Caroline islands fleet toward Hainan, and bring Tokyo transports loaded with remaining Tokyo infantry, possibly some Manchurian / Okinawan infantry to French Indochina (you are merging the Tokyo transports with the Caroline warships at the Hainan naval base). Use Tokyo destroyer to screen attacks from Hawaii if necessary. Land all planes on either carriers near Burma or on French Indo-China so all planes are in range of India for J4. Build 1 inf, 1 art, 1 mech in Shanghai, 1 or 2 destroyers in Tokyo, and use remaining cash for infantry in Tokyo.

I3: Retake or reinforce Egypt using 1 inf, 1 art from Alexandria, your two new loaded transports carrying troops from North Italy / Yugoslavia, and your air force. Use can-openers to take Kiev or Bryansk if appropriate. If Kenya/Congo force is still alive, attack Sudan. Build will vary depending on your income and whether British has multiple ground units remaining in Africa – if Britain is doing well, build 2 new transports and enough infantry to load them. If the position is balanced, build fighters. If Italy is doing well, build a minor factory in Egypt.

G4: Retake or reinforce Leningrad and Kiev with enough units to permanently hold them. Clear out any units in Archangel, Belarus, Smolensk, Bryansk, and Rostov other than Russia’s main stack. Stack majority of German army no more than 2 spaces away from Moscow, e.g., in Belarus. If appropriate, use air force in Alexandria/Egypt to pick off under-defended British boats near Suez Canal. Build as many defensive infantry as needed in Paris / West Germany, and then build fighters in West Germany or Germany for flexible use as either defenders of western front or attackers in Moscow. Expected income is 30 base + 9 from France + 6 from Finland/Greece/Bulgaria + 15 from conquered Russian territories + 5 for Norwegian NO + 5 for Leningrad NO = 70 IPCs.

J4: Attack and conquer India with Burmese troops, loaded transports at Hainan, fleet bombardments, and entire Japanese air force. Send destroyers and subs east to harass ANZAC, or, if American Pacific fleet is concentrated near Australia, send destroyers and subs north to screen off the Chinese sea zones. If British stack retreated to West India, attack that stack too using available forces. Continue making conservative attacks on Chinese troops (1 or 2 attacks per turn), with a focus on destroying vulnerable concentrations of Chinese infantry rather than on taking territory. Build 1 inf, 1 art, 1 tank in Shanghai (the tank will eventually catch up with your earlier mech. inf. builds and help them blitz through west China). If Americans are attacking Japan in earnest, build one destroyer and 9 infantry in Tokyo. Otherwise, build loaded transports with destroyer escorts as needed to prepare for capture of Java, Sumatra, and Dutch New Guinea. Expected income is 26 base + 2 from France + 8 from new Chinese territories + 16 from UK Pacific + 2 from USA + 5 from India NO = 59 IPCs.

I4: Expand base of power from Egypt to Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Sudan. If facing major American threat from Gibraltar, build infantry and/or destroyers to defend Rome. Otherwise, build minor factory in Egypt if not yet present. Once Egypt is controlled with a minor factory, shuck two transports from Rome to Jordan every turn (total of four transports needed in fleet), so you are delivering 2 + 2 + 3 = 7 ground units a turn to the Suez region, outnumbering the 5 to 6 ground units produced by Britain in South Africa + Persia. Expected income is 10 base + 2 from Yugoslavia + 6 from Middle East + 2 from sub-Saharan Africa + 5 from Mare Nostrum NO + 5 from New Roman Empire NO + 2 from Iraqi oil = 32 IPCs.

Middlegame Strategy vs. KJF: At this point, all of your powers have a healthy income, you will have taken either India or Egypt and possibly both, and you have some momentum toward taking either Moscow or Persia or both. If America is coming hard against Japan, you’ll need to return the bulk of the Japanese fleet and air force to the Pacific immediately after taking India. You’re only two turns away – India’s naval base means a one-turn move to Hainan (J5), and Hainan’s naval base means a one-turn move to Shanghai or Tokyo (J6). You can build a couple of carriers off the coast of Shanghai to strengthen the fleet as it returns, and land some extra planes on the new carriers. America can seize some moderately important Japanese territories before your fleet returns, but not enough to knock Japan out of the game. You still have your transports, the bulk of your air force, and the bulk of your fleet, and you’re not over-extended anywhere. Meanwhile, German forces can swing clockwise through Rostov, Caucasus, and northwest Persia. The British Persian factory will be nearly overwhelmed from Italian pressure alone, so as soon as Germany arrives, Persia will fall. At that point the Axis will own Europe, Leningrad, Archangel, Stalingrad, the Middle East, India, southeast Asia, and the Chinese coast – more than enough to ensure a permanent economic edge.

Middlegame Strategy vs. KIF: If, instead, America goes hard against Italy, the Japanese will be free to press onward to Persia and occupy the Persian factory using the remains of the Japanese ground, sea, and air forces after the Indian campaign. Japan can build 2 inf, 1 art in India on J5 that can replace the casualties from the Indian campaign and ride on otherwise empty transports to support the J6 attack on Persia. If appropriate, Japan can build a minor factory in West India so as to funnel up to 9 units a turn (India + West India + Persia) north toward Stalingrad and Kazakh to help overwhelm Russia. At about this time, Japanese armies in China should be breaking through the last of the western Chinese defenses, linking up with the Indian forces in central Asia. Italy will need to build nothing but infantry and try to sit and hold Rome and Milan, but Japan has the Middle East under control, so that’s fine. Germany can build a few infantry in France / Western Germany while spending most of its economy on strategic bombers on G5 and G6 to set up for a G7 Moscow kill. Deprived of income and with no remaining fighter routes from New York / London, Moscow will not be able to accumulate enough of a defensive reserve to withstand the G7 attack. If desired, the Japanese warships can sail through the Suez Canal to help defend Rome – you don’t need the transports, so the warships can sail to the Red Sea on J6 and reach Rome on J7. America may eventually be able to take Rome anyway, but Britain’s economy will be anemic – they’ve invested (and lost) most of their money in the southern hemisphere, and so they won’t have a large enough Atlantic fleet to seriously threaten France, Denmark, or Norway. After taking Moscow, the Axis can shift all of their production to the western front, building mostly defensive infantry until the German tank survivors return around G10, allowing the Germans to push the Allies back out of Rome.

Hey GHG,

I watched your video.  Very interesting.  I have a question and a comment.

The question is: you playing this as a no-bid, regular G40 2nd game?  Or a BM game?

The comment is: I think you’re missing the possibility of the intervention of the German air force.  It could fly down G2 to Alex and thus wipeout any UK ships that dared to come into the red sea or there about on G3.

Also, if Italy took out the cruiser off Malta then it could land its transport in Alex directly, not Tobruk.  Maybe a minor point, but that would put more uumf in the Italian front line forces.

Keep it up!

KILL KILL KILL!    :mrgreen:

Weddingsinger, I don’t usually see Germany bombing London on G1, because Germany is hitting both UK fleets and also France. That doesn’t leave too many extra planes! The strat bombers are needed for the naval battles. Also, Britain can scramble 3 fighters to defend against the 2 incoming strat bombers. We play that fighters defend @ 2 when scrambling against bombing raids, so that’s really bad odds for the Germans. If Germany did bomb London successfully, I suppose I would build 6 inf instead of 2 inf, 1 ftr. That still leaves enough for a transport and an artillery in South Africa, and it offers slightly better protection.

ABH, as usual, has summed things up the way I see it about Sea Lion. I agree with him.

General Hand Grenade, your explanation of why you’re going to Iraq doesn’t make any sense to me. You say:

If you don’t take Iraq then you run the risk of having Italy drop their transport load of units in Syria and then stepping on Iraq I2.

That’s really not a threatening risk at all – Italy only has one surviving transport after Taranto, and sending it to Syria is a very poor use of resources, especially if the UK has already activated Persia. The UK can just take Iraq on UK2 using the 3 Persian units (2 neutral + the 1 you used to activate it), the mech, the tank, and a couple of planes.  You’ll have more than enough units left over to prevent the Syrian forces from claiming Iraq on I2.

If you never build the naval base there you will never know how quickly you can build up Calcutta. You don’t drop the units on Persia, you drop them on Eastern Persia. Then you go back to SA.

I dunno; I think you’re just wrong that we can’t see how great your strategy is until we try it. You like your strategy, and you beat your usual opponents in northern British Columbia, and you have fun with it, and that’s all fine, but the reasons you give to support your strategy don’t make any sense.

You capture Persia on UK1. You build the naval base on UK2. You use the naval base to return units to South Africa on UK3. You then send that transport back to Eastern Persia on UK4. That means the earliest possible turn the naval base could help you deliver land units to India is on UK5 – and I think India will often before UK5. India certainly is not going to last long enough for you to make two extra round trips with your transports. And once India falls, what good is your naval base?

So you’re paying 15 IPCs to ‘recycle’ one extra transport that can be sent to India, but you could accomplish that same feat by paying 7 IPCs to just buy an extra transport. That’s not spewing BS; that’s just taking a look at the relevant math.

Note: This was written before Argothair’s post and makes some of the same points.
@GeneralHandGrenade:

A lot of people have tried to poke holes in my strategy but to this point I haven’t been defeated when I use it. Most point to the naval base as being a waste of money.

Rather than trying the strategy as demonstrated or taking the time to come to the War Room and challenge me to a game, they speculate that it is a lousy strategy. I’ve seen other people try it but it doesn’t work for them because they don’t buy the naval base or they put their complex on Cairo (big mistake). Honestly, just try it the way it was drawn up and then criticize it for not working. That’s the only way you will be able to see why things are done in a particular way. If you never build the naval base there you will never know how quickly you can build up Calcutta. You don’t drop the units on Persia, you drop them on Eastern Persia. Then you go back to SA. You can also reach SZ 98 from there if you have to.

Why Iraq on UK1?
Step 1 is to secure the Middle East. If you don’t take Iraq then you run the risk of having Italy drop their transport load of units in Syria and then stepping on Iraq I2. You want to drop your complex on Persia UK 2 and move onto the next phase of the strategy, not worry about leaving troops in the Middle East to fight for control of your complex. UK 2 you are moving out of the ME and into Africa with the units that you no longer need there because you were smart enough to take Iraq on UK 1 and there’s no chance whatsoever you could lose that complex. It’s all about timing. You have to move fast to before Russia or Calcutta are overrun. I don’t care if it takes me 5 turns to chase down the Italians from Ethiopia, Middle Earth is about dropping the complex and spitting out units from Persia and South Africa.

This has been so successful for me that I had to develop a whole new strategy to destroy Germany if they attempted Sealion against me. London Calling guarantees that you will either be able to build the complex in Persia on UK2 or sink the German fleet to the bottom of the English Channel if they go Sealion.

Rather than spewing more BS about me not knowing what I’m talking about simply because I don’t play Triplea, come to Prince George and I’ll show you how Middle Earth is done properly. I would look forward to finally seeing it defeated.

With all due respect, this challenge is somewhat ridiculous. Why not say that if you came to Sydney, I could defeat this strategy (if you’re talking about a no bid game, I’m pretty sure of that). If you only play against people in northern British Columbia, that’s a pretty small pool.

As others have pointed out, I cannot see the merit in the naval base. You could just buy another transport for 7IPCs instead of 15. Only downside is losing a production slot. That also has the advantage that the shuck can go direct to West India as well as Persia.

I also cannot see why Iraq UK1 is needed. UK2 is before the Italians can conceivably get there. I normally take an artillery from Egypt/Alex to activate Persia UK1. This allows a reasonable attack on the Iraqis, although it still needs arm/air to support it.

You clearly like this strategy but the advantages aren’t entirely clear as you’ve explained it. I don’t quite follow the end game of this strategy. Is it to shuck more units into India or Moscow? Something else?

When do the axis normally declare war in your games? When do they control the money islands? How long does Moscow hold? Calcutta?

Having said that, I totally support your enthusiasm and the fun you have in the game. Kill!  8-)

@Argothair:

Weddingsinger, I don’t usually see Germany bombing London on G1, because Germany is hitting both UK fleets and also France. That doesn’t leave too many extra planes!

No, I was referring to G2 bombing London since that is when they’ve will have decided whether to go for Sea Lion or not, meaning UK2’s purchase is hampered by 1-3 bombers hitting.  Or possibly even some convoying.

The point being that UK1 is the only time you’re guaranteed to have all your income available to buy as much as you can for London.

Ah, my mistake, weddingsinger. The G2 bombing raid makes more sense, and that does increase the risk of a successful sea lion. I guess I’ll have to keep an eye out for surviving German subs! If I can’t knock most of them out with surviving British destroyers on UK1, or if Germany buys a thirf strat bomber on g1, then I may need a more defensive uk1 buy.

Note that if on uk1 you activate Persia and take Ethiopia, you collect 37 ipcs (29 + 1 + 2 + 5)…so there is some room to pay for some bombing damage and still buy lots of infantry. 2 bombers deal an average of (2d6 + 4) * (5/6) = just under 10 damage. With 37 Ipcs and 10 damage I can pay to heal 9 damage and then buy 8 inf, 1 art on uk2. Still almost a full buy.