We need an allied playbook.

@crockett36
Hi there!

Only one question: how much seazones you will (or you think you’ll be able to) cover with those 4 carriers?

Cheers

That’s for the English Channel. Depending on what can hit me and what can hit 91. I try to make the 91 attack a 30 percent chance of victory for them because I want to kill those bombers if they take the shot. Assuming bombers are coming from the capitals, if you conquer Africa to Tun, have Normandy and Holland every turn, bombers have no safe landing zones except S France which they must garrison. If they garrison it, it can be invaded by the boats in 91 in conjunction with the fighters in the English Channel and bombers from Eng. Check out the thread “allied playbook game”.

In case you weren’t aware, I have been involved in a game through triplea under the heading the allied playbook game. I wanted to begin to analyze the game and make adjustments accordingly.

In looking at my strategic objectives, one might see that the order of their importance has dictated my implementation. I did save the Atlantic, London, Moscow, Egypt in that order. Moscow is in danger, but it has not fallen despite it being turn 8. It also must be noted that I was the one to bring up the term argumentum ad absurdum. I discussed abandoning one, Bombay, in order to strengthen the others. It was absurd and I implemented that as well. Another absurd thing I did was to stack Hawaii with a boat load of planes–get it! So I did not abandon the Pacific as much as I chose to make Hawaii and Sidney fortresses. It has been effective thus far. Neither has fallen permanently yet. Eventually Sidney will fall irretrievably and I will lose. My opponent thinks a bid would help. A more elegant solution would be to ignore the victory city win or offer one for the Allies… Grasshopper has reduced the six vc win to a victory point. Now, don’t think I’ve given up on OOB. More to come

@crockett36

I don’t like “abandon” Bombay but if one can use UKPac/China to cost Japan a lot of planes, I’m for it!

Its my favorite Yunnan stack move, if you can lure Japan into winning a big battle, but it costs them 6+ planes, that’s a victory, even if you end up losing India.

My only remaining concern is if Japan gets India, the threat it has on the Middle East. I don’t have a good handle on that yet.

In my Mechanized Russia thread, I mention my current strategy which appears to be similar to yours. I’m spending 100% U.S. on the Atlantic for the first few turns and simply trying to stall or annoy Japan, cost them valuable planes or transports when possible.

Everything else is designed to 1) slap Italy back away from Africa/ME; 2) get Norway; 3) get Normandy; 4) fill Iraq/Iran with UK infantry stacks

So, more or less I’m hoping to stall Germany long enough on Moscow for the U.S. to take Norway/Finland and cause other threats so that there are no more Germany reinforcements to Russia, and the UK blocks Germany from the ME and then picks a spot (Greece, Normandy) to chip in on Europe.

@crockett36 Thanks - fun to hear how all the discussions in this thread are playing out. Did you open with Taranto, or stack in sz 92?

@crockett36 We add Johannesburg as the extra VC.

Your game sounds fun; you’re implying a KGF with a turtled sydney and hono. Ive found that when Japan runs wild, you have to turtle both all game in order to avoid a 1 board VC loss.

You should really look at Mark Movel’s VC Card. He has a full set of house rules, but his VC card stands on its own. Its a list of “Do 10 of the following X things by turn 10 and you win, otherwise, you lose”

If you PM your email I can send you the card. Its even better than YG rules in order to create 1) rational VC for allies 2) remove irrational and too easy VC for axis 3) make cadgy and fun new targets for aggression that are more or less meaningless in the base game like Cyprus/Crete. Its simpler than BM and its a set-length game.

Sounds interesting. I especially like the idea that the axis has/have? to prove they are winning as the aggressors. You mentioned the base game. I have been thinking a lot about this game as an onion. I had a discussion with black elk about it. So Larry would strip away all of the complicated rules of global (national objectives, national advantages, sub warfare, scrambling, air bases, naval ports, victory cities) and give us a base game. Then he would release the additional elements as mods. Even release maps that are unique to the mod releases. I for one do not like the spending so much money garrisoning hono or sidney. It’s gamey. It’s meant to shorten the game, but it distorts it. If it was a mod, you could drop it in or take it out.

I know this fractures the community even further. I don’t like that. It would make it easier to teach since the base game would be …basic.

@weddingsinger I will look at that thread. Trulpen held the US out of the game to the max. This made for a DDay invasion of Spain. I classically blundered in adding two different experiments into one game: Spanish beachhead/neutral crush and 3 Brit factories in the Middle East. So if I fail, it is hard to tell which one had more of an effect. Fun game. He is pressuring Moscow, Bombay and Hono at the same time in the 9th round.

My point in mentioning the game is that he has quite a robust defense of Norway despite being crushed in every other coastal territory. And right now I need to break through to help in Moscow instead of meat grind on the Western front.

https://youtu.be/BvEXvTYk0Zc This video explains my AnA life right now as I tinker my way toward an allied path to victory.

So in my argumentum ad absurdum methodology, I was considering attempting to squash the economy of the enemy more directly AND raise the income of the Allies. In the case of a Bombay crush or even a slow burn attack on India, the middle earth strategy will only maintain the status quo. This doesn’t expand the economy of England unless one attacks the neutrals. It doesn’t hurt the Japanese unless one succeeds at defeating the Japs in a climactic battle and pushes into SE Asia. Even then his loss is minimal. If Japan is doing a Moscow crush or is invading Hono and Sidney for a Pac VC strategy, you could also push in and perhaps encourage the Chinese. It is a 0 to 10 ipcs gain with all of Africa, plus five for a British bonus.

Perhaps the most significant damper on Axis income would be the denial of Italian bonuses. My strategic efforts thus far have failed to do this consistently. This must be corrected.

The Russians could stage a Nordic push that puts cash directly back into Moscow’s coffers. It also steals money from Berlin. It is in the kitchen, so to speak, and it will get hot. It will demand allied support, but looks to be the most lucrative. 5 to 8 in IPCs plus 6 in bonuses. It takes away 5 ipcs from the Huns. In conjunction with this effort one might gather troops in Ukraine. Ger will be tempted to bypass the force for the capital, but most likely will not because of the danger to his backfield. Those 18 or so troops can chew at the infantry fodder and delay the approach to the capital.

Another possibility is to combine with the British in a neutral crush by an armoured thrust through Turkey into the Balkans. Obviously, the Russians are wildly thrashing about, trying to split the Ger forces and relying on British and American fighters to make up the difference in the defence of the homeland.

The Americans could build tanks staged in Central America, ready to swipe 8 dollars from the neutrals. It is unsustainable for the Americans and the Japanese to be making the same income. America needs cash and my method of raiding the Western coast of Europe doesn’t seem to be “cutting the mustard” economically.

Hono is too costly to defend I’m concluding. I would suggest every American fighter in the set up be sent there and then onto garrison Sidney via Queensland. This leaves open the American holdings in the Pac to being captured and a loss of 5 ipcs of our funds. It also delays American offensives, but we sticking these killers in an island castle.

America can recoup that five by capturing Spain, Portugal and Normandy. An additional 3 could be got from Holland. Liberating France has its disadvantages, but staging a ground unit there earns a bonus of 5, gives at least four to the French and takes 4 from the Axis. I will try to come up with a dream map of mid game allied gains and more certain numbers.

ignore the units, look at the colors. I still have to run the numbers.

@crockett36

Sometimes its not about the ipcs but the opportunity. So, UK in the middle east is a modest +4 ipcs, but also allows them to block Germany from entering the very ipc rich middle east. Or allows them to compete with Japan over India which I care more about keeping Japan busy than the ipcs.

I’m not a fan of Russia invading Finland/Norway because I’m big on KGF and the U.S. spending 100% on the Atlantic with the goal of hitting Norway US4. Russia’s job is to keep together and try to delay Germany 1 extra round from Moscow. Also, getting the U.S. to norway may mean sacrificing a UK transport to take Normandy UK3. (US buys navy/transports 1+2, then bombers and transports or anything else they need on US3 so that on US5 they’re bombing Berlin)

Everything on the Pacific side is about just harassing or slowing down Japan’s take over of China/India as long as possible, then US4 I may begin purchasing units for the Pacific.

I am with you about Italy. I often use the US 2 or 3 to help make sure to quash any Italian expansion in Morroco/Algeria, etc

Once round 4 or 5 hits, sometimes I’ll use a UK transport to take Greece, trying to give Germany as many fronts as possible (US in Norway, sometimes also taking Normandy, then Greece and Russia). Hopefully mechanized Russia bought an extra turn of German delay, the US invasion force got Germany to buy non-Russian front gear, and UK in the middle east blocks those IPCs, while UK also supports the U.S. in Europe.

@Guam-Solo I opened with 92. I am going to try and do an Americans in the Med strategy. The income boost is better than going north. And you can keep the territories without the seesaw trading I’m experiencing in the north. I will try both 92 stack and Taranto.

still looking good economically.

@crockett36 Ambitious! I would like to see how both Taranto and a sz 92 stack is orchestrated (because I’d like to use it!). I read your comment and began looking at the start up map on Trip. A to see how that could work. It seems like a “bridge too far” if you know what I mean…

@Guam-Solo Sorry G, I meant in succession. I would try a Med strategy employing 1st the sz92 stack and then the Taranto raid.

@crockett36 in successive games playing against the bots.