We need an allied playbook.

@Argothair I agree that puts Italy in a good spot but it also would make me as USA put a heavy focus on them. If Italy can hold off USA, push past Egypt and still can open for Germany then things are going extremely well for them.

Otherwise Germany will have to assist with defense and then all this has done is force Germany to spend money away from Russia.

The biggest problem this creates for the allies in my mind is how it gives Japan a lot of space. Which can lead to very bad things for the Allies.

@simon33 Yes Germany buying transports round 1 significantly changes your options as UK. It’s very risky sending your fighters away if Germany can bring 6-10 units plus the Luftwaffe on G2.

@AldoRaine said in We need an allied playbook.:

The biggest problem this creates for the allies in my mind is how it gives Japan a lot of space. Which can lead to very bad things for the Allies.

I hear you, comrade! I agree that if USA puts 80%+ into killing Italy, then Italy is not going anywhere useful from this opening, and Moscow will either fall late or not fall at all, so Europe looks pretty good for the Allies – but then you have to turn around and pivot and scramble to save Sydney or whatever. Which works great for a lot of players; some people are more comfortable than I am with that kind of emergency pivot. My personal preference (so far) is to look for Allied strategies that give you a reasonable chance of more-or-less containing the Axis all over the map – halt Italy near Sudan and Jordan, halt Germany near Norway and Bryansk, halt Japan near Burma and Borneo and the Carolines. If the Axis break out a little bit somewhere, fine, figure out how to deal with that – but don’t write off a whole theater as part of your opening strategy.

@M36 said in We need an allied playbook.:

@simon33 Yes Germany buying transports round 1 significantly changes your options as UK. It’s very risky sending your fighters away if Germany can bring 6-10 units plus the Luftwaffe on G2.

Germany doesn’t need to buy transports G1 for a successful Sea Lion if UK doesn’t buy 6 inf/1 fighter for London on UK1 AND have the ability to have 4+ fighters on London before G3.

Germany can easily buy 8 or 9 transports on G2 and bring 9 inf, 5 art, 4 tanks, 4 tacticals, and 4 fighters (leaving the sea zone for their cruiser and bombers). That’s a winning Sea Lion even if the UK buys the 6 inf and 1 fighter if Germany successfully max bombs London’s factory and sinks just 1 of the UK transports so that UK2 you can’t buy much again. It takes 5 fighters on UK to turn that away for sure, and the extra 8 inf you buy and bring home on transports.

@weddingsinger Indeed, I never had any luck personally with with max Sea Lion strategy though because the Russians roll on in when London falls.

@M36 try to buy 10 Inf in the very turn you attack.
You have to build up solidly.
Be prepared.

@Argothair One of the reasons I say the sz92 stack eliminates sea lion is that now the Germans have to fight through the Royal Navy to get to London. It seems it is most poplular for the Germans to place their major transport buy in the baltic. If they do this they only sz they can reach is sz110. UK sees this and moves the entire navy there to defend. Now Germany is forced to divert critical fighters to the air battle.

Since that is all ready turn 3, if Germany waits until next the US can start to reinforce London as well.

Things change if the transports are place in sz112. UK will have to defend both spots which helps considerably but the transports are also a much easier target for the US.

@AldoRaine How about a destroyer block in 112 as well? Edit: Provided the Germans have stacked in the baltic like you said.

@M36 Take a look at my thread about an efficient Sea Lion. Its key to use cede territory on the Baltic to Russia and move any non-Sea Lion troops to Romania, etc. to block the Russians there because you want the Russians to stay in the North. G5 you can use the Sea Lion transports to hit Norway, Finland, karaelia, Novgorod, Baltic States, and Poland.

Russia will be stronger, of course, but they should only get an extra 15-30 ipcs while Germany grabs the 30 ipcs from UK and has a shorter supply line to keep counter attacking… Its important not to telegraph Sea Lion on G1 so Russia is still buying slow infantry and trying to stack safely away from Germany. Then, if UK does Taranto and anything less than max London defense…

G1 buy 2 bombers (more details in the other thread)
G2 buy transports, maybe 1 destroyer if you can afford it (part of why I save 6 from G1)
G3 buy is navy to defend German transports, if needed, and more inf/art in case you don’t take London. These will get used on G5 anyway
G4 transports move to 112 and/or 113, buy fast movers with your 80ipcs
G5 transports used to counter attack Russians on coast of Baltics. Fast movers in Germany, W. Germany can work on Poland, etc.

A mechanized Russia strategy would be the best Allied counter after Sea Lion since it would allow Russia to get large numbers into German Europe quickly.

For me, usually a strong Taranto, UK max defending London with U.S. being prepared to help with a few bombers, UK moving into M.E. to support Russia is enough to shield Africa with existing troops and new planes if needed. If Italy doesn’t really help Germany and goes hard to Africa, then UK doesn’t drop 3 fighters a turn onto Moscow but hopefully that means Italy won’t be can opening for Germany over in Russia (or, not more than once).

@M36 So that is interesting. Yes Egypt can fall early R2 if Italy goes for it as you said but I have found that this is not an overall good idea (at least from my perspective). If Uk sets up a factory in Persia and kills Iraq in R2, both of which are easily doable, I see Italy going after Egypt as using good money to chase bad. The US is going to have to make its presence felt in the Europe and if Italy is busy moving troops to Egypt it means just that much less for it to defend itself with.
.

Yeah, Italy should only have 1 transport and very few or zero ships to defend it after the 1st round. My UK movements mean they could take Cairo I2 (depending on various scenarios) but not keep it.

Usually I shift UK troops to Persia, Anglo-Egypt Sudan to take care of Italy in Ethiopia. If Italy goes Cairo I2, UK still has 1-2 transports to bring more guys back quickly. Usually a bomber and at least 1 fighter and 1 tactical to use, too.

@weddingsinger That’s interesting. I wrote off Sea Lion as bunk a long time ago and focused on Barbarossa. Perhaps I was just doing it wrong. Won’t everyone be surprised when I try it again 🤣. We almost never see it in my group, just different variations of Barbarossa.

@M36 said in We need an allied playbook.:

@weddingsinger That’s interesting. I wrote off Sea Lion as bunk a long time ago and focused on Barbarossa. Perhaps I was just doing it wrong. Won’t everyone be surprised when I try it again 🤣. We almost never see it in my group, just different variations of Barbarossa.

Yeah, take a look. My version doesn’t commit you to Sea Lion on G1 so you can wait and see UK’s action. If they do anything like buy ships for S. Africa, etc (Aldo’s navy stack off Gibraltor also looks legit as a block) then go ahead and punish them for their hubris and cackle maniacally as you do it.

/in an in person game 3 weeks ago my buddy took London from me on G3 WAAAYYYY too easily but only bought slow movers (Inf/art) for Germany so Allies still won because Japan was… ineffective would be a polite way to put it

@M36 said in We need an allied playbook.:

@AldoRaine How about a destroyer block in 112 as well? Edit: Provided the Germans have stacked in the baltic like you said.

Italian fighters and/or bomber can easily sink a destroyer on its turn, opening it back up.

German player can (should?) also place their cruiser in sz 112 that will have 3 fighters available to scramble to prevent UK from putting a ship there at all.

@weddingsinger Yes but then those Italian planes aren’t available for fighting in the Med. I guess there’s pros and cons for literally every move that can be made haha.

@M36 that is what makes this game so great.

And we still haven’t come up with an Allies playbook, although we have some very worthwhile strategies here. I’ve been working on one for some time, but so much of it is dependent on the axis.

@AldoRaine said in We need an allied playbook.:

One of the reasons I say the sz92 stack eliminates sea lion is that now the Germans have to fight through the Royal Navy to get to London. It seems it is most poplular for the Germans to place their major transport buy in the baltic.

Yeah, but I’m buying my transports on G2, after I’ve seen your Gibraltar stack on UK1. So even if usually I would put my transports in the Baltic, I can make sure to put them in the North Sea to evade the UK navy. Also, what is the US going to hit the transports with in SZ 112 on US2? The only units I can count that can reach are the Central US bomber and the Eastern US fighter (assuming it moved to Iceland on US1). I don’t see that any bombers US purchased on US1 can reach the Western German / North Sea zone on US2.

But, yes, I love the pros and cons and trade-offs. They’re fun. :)

@Argothair So lets say you place your transports on sz112. As the allies I would now know sea lion is going to happen. This leaves me with a couple of options. I can either stack sz110 or sz109 with Royal Navy and invite the assault in the empty sz or I can split my forces and make you use air to win the navy battle. Both options have their perks but my personal choice is usually to stack sz 110 and invite the landing in sz109 on turn 3. With out a navy build by the Germans, whatever navy I have left in sz110 kills your transports and then you stranded a bunch of units lost a lot of unit value.

The most effective sea lions i have faced involve a carrier buy and landing in Scotland a turn prior. but this then requires an assault of sz 110.

I’m confused. If I buy 8 transports on G2, don’t you know Sea Lion is going to happen no matter where I put them?

Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying a big 'ol stack of British boats in the Western Med is useless for responding to a Sea Lion attack. I’m just saying I would be too afraid to have zero boats, 2 planes, and only 1 extra infantry in the United Kingdom at the end of UK1.

Maybe I get into the historical/roleplaying aspect of things too much, or maybe you’ve worked out all the permutations and you can definitely confirm that there’s no viable attack on London after your Gibraltar stack. I have not worked out all the permutations, and to me it looks extremely risky.

@AldoRaine said in We need an allied playbook.:

@Argothair So lets say you place your transports on sz112. As the allies I would now know sea lion is going to happen. This leaves me with a couple of options. I can either stack sz110 or sz109 with Royal Navy and invite the assault in the empty sz or I can split my forces and make you use air to win the navy battle. Both options have their perks but my personal choice is usually to stack sz 110 and invite the landing in sz109 on turn 3. With out a navy build by the Germans, whatever navy I have left in sz110 kills your transports and then you stranded a bunch of units lost a lot of unit value.

The most effective sea lions i have faced involve a carrier buy and landing in Scotland a turn prior. but this then requires an assault of sz 110.

Are you presuming UK ships left in either SZ110 or 111?

Looks like a UK stack in sz92 is sinkable by Italy alone. If it failed you’d maybe have 1-3 fighters left, or choose to save the carrier, I suppose, but… if there is a ship left Germany can still hit it with bombers (why my G1 buy of 2 bombers is so useful). Leaving UK with no blockers for sz112

The other end of my concern is that it leaves Italy with 2 transports, not 1, and the bulk of its own navy. So even if Italy doesn’t attack I1, UK can’t sink Italy’s ships on UK2. Don’t games with this move end up with a strong italy?