The Bright Skies

The timing of what you are saying doesn’t jibe.  How can America be attacking with 20 bombers (turn 8) at the same general time as Russia is taking scandanavia?  On most turn 8s, Russia is down to 3-5 territories and is fighting for its life.  Russia does not usually own Leningrad, Archangel, Karelia at that juncture, if it does, Germany has utterly failed to preserve its advantage and is about to lose to Russia, not the US.

The ipcs gained from an aggressive ussr take a long time trio convert into troops. Moscow will normally fall in the meantime and then that income its lost.

Worse, its given directly to Germany.

@taamvan:

It’s great to see fresh new ideas, and to win, the Allies need a plan.

I agree, but bright skies is certainly not a good plan, I am sorry. And the reason is very simple.
With bright skies, Moscow will certainly fall by turn 6. And then Germany can easy compensate the loss of Scandinavia (which will leave red territories with no income).

Also it is not that easy to accumulate US 25 bombers against one power (you made a miscalculation in USA1 btw, 4 bombers + 2 inf is 54, but USA has only 52)

There is another problem: In case USA buys bombers only against Germany, Japan will easily achieve a victory, either by rushing India with transports or by taking Sydney and Hawaii.

Those simple all-in strategies on paper never work (assuming strong Axis play). Axis have too much power early to be easily overwhelmed by the Allies. If the Allies want to win, they need to overstretch the Axis while keeping Moscow safe, this requires a lot of small needle sticks here and there forcing the Axis to wear down slowly.

In case you would like to play a league game, I am happy to demonstrate how easily Axis will win against a strategy that offers Moscow more or less for free :)

@Afrikakorps:

China gets enough time to remain annoying for Japan by playing cat and mouse in the North

I don’t understand your obsession with keeping China alive “a few extra turns.” What will this accomplish? How can China alone put any sort of pressure on Japan that Japan cannot handle even if it is occupied with Russia/India. If Japan is operating effectively in Indo-China, then chances are the silk road is closed and China has no offensive punch whatsoever. Effectively if one wished, they could win the game by ignoring China completely and letting them survive the length of the game. As long as there is infantry on the coast and the swinging Japanese airforce, as well as the coastal bombards, China is pond scum. Prolonging China has no bearing on keeping Japan at bay. One can make nearly the same amount of extra income by taking Russia’s Eastern territories as one can by taking out China.

As for the bombers, I have one thing to say to this: Bombers cannot take territory. Even if the USA has enough bombers to eliminate any stack on the board, it is all for not if the axis can double or triple team Russia. Once the two front war for Germany is gone the game is virtually over, since the USA has now invested everything into bombers and has nothing coming behind and it is now too late to start building.

I think the truth of the matter lies somewhere between the two sides you all have presented here.

The Russian stack is important and it works well when combined with the Chinese, but it won’t matter much in the end unless there is a strong American presence in the Pacific. All they will do is stall the Japanese for a couple of turns.

American bombers are powerful but the realities of the board need to be confronted and they won’t win the game all by themselves.

I do this often as the allies… Holding Russia from a G6 all in is the hard part.

If you do this strategy… I recommend not doing Africa. Russia giving Japan problems and a kjf is awesome on its own especially if UK pacific is left in tact, that is your second Russia, you pretty much have 6 rounds to choke Japans income.

You can bring lots of USA bombers in to hold Russia. It is actually really good. You can go bomber crazy and attack ground troops with USA bombers left and right. It is a fun strategy, most Japan players don’t know what to do.

So basically this kjf your fleet you start standard kjf buy 2 carrier and a transport . Then after that 1 dd a round, sub or two rest bombers. So you go land Siberia with bombers from there you attack Japan ground like a madman. USA fleet is primarily an attack fleet so from Queensland you take islands Japan has to take it back… See Japan problem here is getting more land units to take territories, if he builds units on an a minor ic… You attack it with bombers.

Then Russia goes and blitzes through. Yeah you lose Russia round 6 in all likelihood,but you pretty much have Japan down for the count.

Japans solution to this is an all in on UK pacific. Hold Shan state and blam all Japan air can hit UK pacific. Drop everything.  Bombards on top. Usually j3 or j4 all in. I mean it is pretty obvious what is coming and if the allies don’t have UK pacific… Japan can be healthy enough to keep cash islands and pressure a VC win so he can’t back out of the strategy to save Russia.

Japan fails to take UK pacific… Well you know 21 ipc UK pac is reinforcing the middle East with 7 INF round… Sucks for Germany to get Egypt vc win.

@Afrikakorps:

Actually it is KGF, so USA, UK and USSR will play extremely aggressive against Germany focusing to take Scandinavia as soon as possible.

In the pacific the Allies make sure they don’t lose by giving Japan headaches annoying and counter-attacking everywhere it does not expand to. Yes I will lose some places but it will not be enough for Japan to win the game on time.

Scandinavia is balancing point between Germany and Russia. As soon Russia gets it (because massive USA bombers + UK aid and combine this with Iraq and Africa profits they well be able take on Germany.

Main point is not to see Russia as the big victim but as the big potential that can get USA like incomes without even taking German countries (besides Scandinavia). Of all places, Scandinavia is most difficult to defend for Germany, especially whem USA bombers take out the baltic fleet.

Every action has a reaction. In your plan you have not mentioned Italy. The reaction, or consequence, of a massive allied effort in Scandinavia, which is a long shot in my opinion, is a more powerful than usual Italy who will take the Med+Africa+ME virtually unopposed since Britain has sunk its production into the European theatre. America having produced bombers exclusively will not be able to pressure Italy nor will Britain. Once Italy has taken the ME, eliminating the extra income you claim will equal the Russian odds with Germany, it will be making a lot of money, money which does not need to be spent on naval units since US built only bombers, and the Southern flank is now extremely vulnerable. Do you leave your units in Scandinavia? Or do you pull back to Moscow? If you pull back to Moscow, then your plan was a waste because you are no further ahead and very exposed with no one coming to your aide any time soon. If Britain looses ME/Africa, it is not capable of conducting relevant warfare and the US bombers can only do so much without land units.

As the old saying goes never put all your eggs in one basket. I’m not saying that individual powers should not go all in against a select opponent, I’m simply saying that each power needs to be checked by an opposing power. Italy, contrary to popular belief, is a power. Especially if you let it become one.

Usually when I read bright skies I think USA bombers… Maybe that is green skies lol

@Afrikakorps:

Russian attack force Finkand R2 will be:

1 tactical
2 fighters
3 tanks
1 artillery
11 infantry

Yes Germany can counter reinforcing Finland with airforce, but my experience is Germany luftwaffe is active around the med in G2.

The other option is a R3 attack of finland, building 3 art in R1. Then its
16 infantry, 1 mech, 4 artillery, 4 tanks, 2 fighters, 1 tactical

Actually R3 is wiser I think, do you agree?

I am short on time and will come back to this more in-depth later. By the way I am not trying to be a DB, I simply love playing devil’s advocate.

You state in your original strategy that it will most likely be a GDOW on Russia T2. You have just stated that you plan to eliminate Italy first. How do you intend to do this while still blocking a potential Sea Lion, while also building fast movers in South Africa to dominate Africa, and while also defending Scandinavia with fighters?

You have just shown that Britain is spread way too thin. Also, Axis can simply bomb the harbour of Gibraltar and you are now unable to operate deep in the Med like you stated above for another turn. So it is more likely that the US Pacific fleet will not be a threat until at least T3/T4 by which time you have either been Sea Lioned, Egypt has fallen, or Scandinavia has been slaughtered and Russia is wide open. In the event that You were Sea Lioned, Scandinavia is lost as well no question and, therefore, so is Russia. In the event that Egypt has fallen, Italy is now able to breath while Germany kills Scandinavia because Britain is now hurting for cash. In the event that Scandinavia falls before any of the above Russia is essentially lost, and the Axis can now meet the US landing head on.

All the while Japan has not even been scratched.

You just cannot choke Germany fast enough for this strategy to work.

Fastest I have won with Japan is turn 6. Round 8 is typical if USA ignores the Pacific.