We need an allied playbook.

@squirecam

you can dm me but I dont mess with triple AAA its just too tedious for me. Thanks though and I love the discussion.

@taamvan

Perhaps at Gencon then. Hope there is one.

@taamvan said in We need an allied playbook.:

@squirecam

Out of position to do what? They are not needed on UK1-3 to defend UKP, and Japan is usually so tough that 2 planes and a few ships don’t project much threat.

Those planes ARE in position to defend the SB, TB and any other fighters that survive Taranto. One of the worst things that can happen to UK is to win taranto and then land the planes where the Italians can and should wipe them all out because there is only 1 or 0 infantry to protect the planes.

i’ve gone away from Taranto because of losing the planes even if you win, but this is a very interesting scenario utilizing UKP for territory and protection!

@aaron_the_warmonger

You could lose India though. Japan could have attacked J1 and moved south to attack India J3. Moving those units and fighters out could be the difference.

I advise caution if Japan declared war J1.

@squirecam

Its just the planes, after they take iraq they could all fly east if you wanted them to.

The JDOWJ1 takes UKP money down as quickly as possible. If Japan builds both bases, brings most of his planes, and shuts off the money quickly, it can take India by suffocating its factory and it can do it without needing much luck.

But, that does leave it vulnerable and it has awakened the sleeping giant of USA with extra income so Japan may have less money and position killing india first than otherwise.

@taamvan

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the middle earth version you talked about had UK taking Iraq and Persia on round 1. The Iraq attack uses the Egypt units but to get Persia you need to transport an infantry as well.

Sure, you could simply transport that unit back. But then you are simply even. When instead you could have brought 4 units into India with those transports and have a better chance on India J3.

The planes that attacked Iraq uk1 land in trans Jordan. Those cannot reach India until uk3. After Japan has already attacked.

If japan declares war j1 and moves to the coast with all transports and air…do not take a single unit out of india. You are just asking Japan to crush it and helping them do so.

@squirecam

They land in Syria–you have a free french infantry there. I don’t think you can reach TJ i dont remember

If japan wants india, it can take it. You may want to make that difficult–but eventually, all those units are trapped there.

The hopeful result is a) you have a roving army of planes that can protect persia/iraq from tha axis and eventually fly to moscow b) that if Japan “steps around the corner” SZ37? its out of position and the USA takes advantage of that by stepping up on the home islands.

You really can’t stop Japan from taking India. You can make it costly in terms of units, time and position though.

@taamvan

You are correct that they can land in Syria. And there is a french infantry there. But Syria is still to far to get back to India on turn 2. They can only make it to West India.

Japan may or may not be able to take India. That depends upon alot of factors. However, they WILL get India if you remove planes from it and Japan attacks India J3. You have guaranteed a loss of your capital before USA/Anzac/Russia even has the chance to save it.

I dont think it is a winning strategy to intentionally lose your capital on turn 3. But thats just me…

@squirecam

Lets go back around the corner again so I can reiterate that I personally dont think the Middle Earth Plan as shown by GHG is a great plan. You will lose another capital (London) if you follow his instructions because you need to start putting infantry and fighters into that theatre starting on turn 1 or Germany will note this, bomb you into submission, and take your more important capital before you can fortify it.

India isn’t a lost cause but the most direct Kill India First can’t be stopped barring really great luck. JDOWJ1 takes the income (borneo, hk, turn 1), you can go on to build and use the airbase to stratbomb them, they’re done-zo. That’s just not the best plan for Japan because it happens at the expense of China, Spice and USA.

I believe in a flexible plan–but the OOB version is so tilted to the Axis with so many planes that something is going to have to give.

And you don’t mean intentionally–even if I leave it r underprotected that’s not intent to lose it its simply asking or begging to lose it. I cant create intent for the other player, either. Imprudently is what I think you mean–or haplessly (luckless, though in this case “without requiring them to be lucky”, the reverse).

@taamvan

Obviously if I declare war j1 and do those moves I’m looking to wipe out India. But I can still do those moves and not declare war j1. But moving those troops out causes me to attack india j3 instead of later.

In any case you make it easier on your opponent, something I dont agree with. I would much rather kill the italian fleet, abandon Cairo for a bit and lose that rather than India. If I am going middle earth I can at least have a base of operations in Iraq or persia to swing down to india or swing back to egypt.

Yes I agree you need troops in London uk1. But depending on what is going on you can afford a factory in persia or Iraq uk2. But you need to be aware of sea lion still.

I think he also buys for the south African factory which is probably too early. That does risk a sea lion. But if you can protect london and you can shuck units, the middle east troops can get to Russia or india or egypt. So it can be flexible.

My point though is that you cant have India falling J3. Are you saying that there is no way to prevent losing India J3 no matter what it builds or does or moves into India?

@squirecam

I can’t say that as a certainty, but if you suppress the income to the max, set up the Air base, and stack what 14 planes there…yes it seems pretty certain he can destroy you. I’m not saying its a guaranteed J3-India but that doesnt matter much…

If Japan concentrates all those planes, they can also take ceylon, which gives them a 2 space landing zone without the carriers. They can smash all the units and even if they dont take it that turn (J3-4) they can do so over time using all those resources and by shuttling in round after round of guys and stratbombings, if necessary.

At least as my opponents play, its an “when not if” situation. Its just not a great Japan plan because USA will topple SZ6 and Japan has limited money. Its much better to 1) just take all his UKP money 2) take all the other money 3) blow india away at your leisure with streams of tanks and planes.

Japan can also use diplomacy and just pass straight through any blockers. You can infiltrate a uk unit in there “sneaky karl” style but that’s easily defeated by leaving the units on the transports on the interturn.

So, no, its not a India falls J3 no matter what…its a India falls no matter what…then what (did the allies do with that time and space)

@taamvan

Then there is no when…if japan cannot take India j3 or J4 and usa moves have made it a bad move to take it later as you say, then india is either safe or usa wins the game by punishing japan for the bad move.

My concern is japan taking it early, when uk fighters and men aren’t there and japan isnt punished for taking a capital.

@squirecam

No, its J4.

On J3 Japan takes Ceylon.
On J4 all the planes from the Airbase you built in Kwangsi hit india and land either on the CV or Ceylon

It’s been a while since I’ve faced that plan but that’s how it works. And there are so many planes, its unstoppable barring great luck.

@taamvan

Yes and Japan will lose alot of aircraft taking it. Which, if you have been playing defensively, will punish them as opposed to the j3 attack.

Ok, for those who aren’t fans of the Middle Earth strategy, what is your alternative play for the British?
Middle Earth (especially a mIC on Persia) provides
a) aircraft to reinforce Russia to stop a Crusshia plan.
b) Added units to Egypt for late game defense
c) Units to reinforce India.

a) is critical for me. Without a means of rapidly placing 4-6 ftrs in Russia by turn 5, Russia can fall to an all out German offensive. Keeping Russia in the game as long as possible is a key feature of my Allied defense. If/when Russia does fall, the airforce can quickly regroup in Persia and begin the defense down there.
b) 3 mICs in Middle Earth (Egypt, Persia/Iraq, & SA) pumping 9 units a round into the region are necessary for the defense of the region. Especially if c) is in play–defending India is usually not a long term play, but making the Japanese really commit to the assault allows the US and ANZAC forces to move throughout the Pacific

I like Persia vs. Iraq because of the rapid ftr movement to Russia. If G moves south to attack the Middle east before conquering Russia, I generally find that a win for the Allies. Russia will build up, and the German army will bog down in a chase for the British units. Sure, Persia may fall but so would Iraq to a concentrated German assault. Both are only one space from the N. Persia entry into the Middle East.

Once Russia falls, the remaining Russian units retreat to the Middle East and Germany usually cannot defend Persia and keep moving towards Egypt while engaging both British and Russian armies.

Now maybe the nay-sayers are only against the timing of the Middle Earth plan as opposed to it entirely.

My build paradigm is:
Turn 1 is mostly a reinforcement of UK to avoid a cheap sea lion + airbase (Gibraltar) or mIC in Egypt. Turn 2 mIC in Persia + units in region. Turn 3 ftrs as necessary + mIC in Egypt if not built yet. Turn 4+ 9 units (ftrs as necessary)

BTW, my comments are colored by my preference to play BM3/4 vs. OOB, although I would expect them to be applicable to both.

I never said I wasnt a fan. I actually like the thought process.

What I did say was that you cannot remove India units to do so if Japan declared war J1 and moved everything south to take India J3. I dont think its a good move when India is facing that attack but is moving out aircraft and infantry.

But I do think that is way too many complexes. You have the complex in South Africa, yet are building two more. Why arent you using the one you already have?

And I think buying an airbase + two complexes leaves London a bit undefended. Arent your opponents taking it?

@squirecam Yes, that’s what i’ve been saying this entire time.

@surfer

UK doesn’t have the money to power 3 factories. “Middle Earth” is an actual video and plan, we are calling any early entry into the middle east and pump through there Middle Earth though that’s not exactly what GHG meant.

You need the one in Persia because those fighters can fly direct to Moscow. Moscow can still fall so a Wilburforce (UK junkteam) can try to make German plans difficult by coming in from the south.

If you haven’t watched Japan, they’ll just come in, smash India, and then with nothing else to do with that fleet, smash your Iraq and persia factories, which paralyzes the whole idea because UK has to then stay back and protect those.

And if you build any of this early, once Germany gets 70 money and/or takes the russian money, they can just ramp and face west in 1-2 turns, putting UK home under gigantic pressure when it has like $30-35 income under best case scenario? Then they drop 10 transports under their existing fleet and UK is often totally helpless even with 30 units there.

Another reason OOB is pretty biased…

3 mICs = 9 units = 27 IPCs for defense. Or 1 ftr + 7 guys + 1 mech = 35. Easily in reach of UK money.

Turn 1 is still devoted to London with the exception of either airbase or mIC (not both!)
So Germany is probably not going to spend G2 buying transports. After that, it is difficult for Germany in turns 3-6 to build a fleet of transports to invade with considering the other fights it has in Russia and the US fleet in Med and Atlantic. If the Eastern front goes well for Germany, then sure invade UK, but the whole point was to prop up Russia so that war at least moves along for several turns

If Japan goes for the Middle East, the US should have a field day in the Pacific. The UK units should pull back from the coast, allow the Japanese few land forces to take Persia or whatever, and then roll over with their superior numbers of land units. Sure the Japanese could re-engage, but it will take time to build land forces again. All the while the US and ANZACs are taking SZ6, Korea, and probably the DEI.

Regardless, I still haven’t heard what the alternative to this strategy is…

Build up for massive invasion via Normandy? That always seems like a slow loser, as Germany will kill Russia and be able to focus turns 6+ on building an Atlantic wall. Assuming Germany built several aircraft, and can build 23 units/round that requires a significant investment from the Allies just to break even.

Invade Norway? Good plan until you get to Novgorod, then all those mobile German units get to converge on you. Without a credible southern threat, those units will just roll over you.

@surfer

London is toast is this scenario. The allies are toast too, because after the Germans do drop transports the Japanese will take the mic you built for them. The USA will have to try to save London which is great for the Japanese.

I’m not saying a middle earth strategy cant work but this is far too aggressive. And you are not utilizing the infrastructure you already have in SA which you can transport up to the middle east.

I’m not a fan of sea lion but I would happily do so if I saw you making those purchases.