Game Report 164; The USSRush

Thank you. Good to learn a bit about ideas for the Allies.

Thank you for the game, I think Iraq is always a great deal, but a lone mech. infantry + tank might be sufficient for the extra Italian bonuses. I think it is a mistake to leave Italy in Ethiopia, so kill them with UK. Same for Tobruk. However Libya + Somaliland might be empty anyway so bonus. Then when USA is in med, use their transports to take Sardinia amd Sicily.

R3 = +5 IPC bonus per turn
R6 = +12 IPC bonus per turn
R8 = +18 IPC bonus per turn

For an allocation of 10 IPC USSR troops it is indeed just a sideshow, it should not dictate the UK besides leaving empty Italian zones. However it is a profitable sideshow so worth doing.

Here is the theory I am testing now:

If the U.S. sends fleet groups hurtling towards the money islands supported by ANZAC air, the pressure is removed from Calcutta. If Russia sends a large force (larger even than you propose) to lock down Africa for the Allies, the pressure is removed from there as well. This allows Britain to focus the majority of its resources on defending Moscow (assuming standard Barbarossa play). They can send mech infantry in addition to fighters to replace what the Russians have given up.

Although the Russian expeditionary force does begin the game as a sideshow, it is powerful in the long game. It’s a deep play that looks 10+ turns ahead, anticipating the tipping point when the Axis can no longer continue to match greater Allied production.

To this strategy I would like to add another proposal for a deep play: the Canadian island hop. The purpose of this strategy is to increase Calcutta’s production along the same time frame that the Russian expeditionary force increases Russia’s.

The following timeline assumes Germany has destroyed the transport in seazone 106.

A1:

• Build 4 bombers for deployment in Europe to hedge against Sealion and annoy Axis operations
  B1:
• Move 1 bomber and 1 destroyer to clear subs in seazone 106 (the remaining air and navy is still enough to execute the Taranto raid)
• Move 1 transport to seazone 106
• Move 1 infantry 1 artillery to Central United States

A2+

• The Americans will build fleet and 1-2 transports each turn to send to the Southeast Asia / money island area.
  B2:
• Transport 1 infantry 1 tank to seazone 64
• Move 1 infantry 1 artillery to Western United States

B3:

• Transport 1 infantry 1 tank to seazone 50
• Load 1 infantry 1 artillery onto American transport, seazone 10

B4+
The Canadians continue their foray into the Pacific protected by American fleet. They will be the ones to retake the money islands from Japan. The first wave can reach the islands on turn 5, and the second (loaded on the American transport) can reach on turn 6.

As soon as Calcutta no longer faces an existential threat, they begin to support the European U.K. forces in Russia. If they have all starting territories + 3 money islands, they are making 33 IPC’s per turn. I assume Russia has lost 21 IPC’s of production, but they can replace this with 19 IPC’s from Africa for a production of 35 per turn. UK Europe should also be making 35 per turn. Using this combination of strategies, the Allies can begin to match the Axis with 103 IPC’s / turn in the European theater from around the 8th round. This is of course the same time frame when Germany is looking for Moscow to fall, so early support of Moscow is critical for this to work.

The endgame is for the massive American fleet to begin to slip into the Mediterranean and open up a front in Italy and the Balkans. We are hoping to put the Axis into a defensive posture on both sides of the board from around the 12th round: this is the tipping point.

I think you’ve got the right idea.

You might remember my “11 conclusions” thread from a few weeks back, where I explained I thought we should develop a “strategic framework”. My thought is essentially that we should push the meta-game to a final state of maturity by determining what the best Allied response is to the rapid Axis push, and use our conclusions to help support a theory of the board.

The strategy I described earlier (combining the Russians in Africa, the Canadian / U.S. push for the money islands and concentrated British support of Moscow) is the best I can come up with for an Allied response. I am interested to see if you agree or would be willing to test it in your games as well, or if you have any objections that I should consider.

I am buying the following units as part of this strategy:

Russia:
7 artillery, 4 mech on turn 1 followed by straight infantry unless special circumstances demand a fighter or some artillery. I am sending 6 mech, 2 tanks to Africa. Remember the idea is that these forces will be replaced by the British in short order.

America:
4 bombers turn 1 (for Europe) followed by fleet for the foreseeable future (carrier, loaded transports, assorted warships but very few aircraft as ANZAC will provide these).

UK Europe:
6 infantry, 1 fighter turn 1; minor IC’s in Persia and Egypt turn 2; mech infantry turn 3 followed by fighters and mechs 4+

UK Pacific:
3 infantry, 2 artillery turn 1; continue building infantry and artillery until Japan is thrown back, then switch to mechs and fighters to support the defense of Moscow.

ANZAC:
Straight fighters unless Japan is doing some crazy kill Australia first move. These fighters will land on American carriers and/or journey to Moscow.

The general strategy begins by coordinating Russian, Chinese, British and American stacks so they are all hurtling towards China and the money islands at once. Japan can annihilate one or maybe two of them, but then they’re stuck just trying to hold on to their gains. At that point Second Russia is born and the tan blob can begin to move on the Germans. America sends fleet to blockade Italy and/or provide cover for a Grecian beachhead using Egyptians and Brazilian-American forces, who have been marching across Sub-Saharan Africa this whole time.