Congratulations to both of you for engaging in the most epic battle I have ever witnessed in a top-tier competition encounter.
Congratz to Adam for pulling it through as long as it took the Axis to slowly but steadily climb the mountain until reaching the summit. Very well played!
It was truly a roller coaster ride in terms of determining who was in the lead.
Initially, I thought the Allies were doomed after the incredible dice rolls in G1 and G2. Although there was a hiccup in Yunnan, everything else seemed to be going smoothly for the Axis.
Then, I was astonished by how quickly the Allies managed to establish a foothold in Europe, and I found myself favoring their position.
But the tide turned again, and once Moscow fell, it was clear that the Axis had the upper hand (following the rule of thumb: when both India and Moscow fall without significant concessions, the Axis typically emerges victorious). Although the Germans had to make concessions to capture Moscow, the possibility of retaking France made it evident that the Axis were pulling ahead.
Yet, the momentum shifted once more, and it became apparent that Japan couldn’t swiftly secure a VC victory. At this point, I found myself favoring the Allied position again.
However, the situation took a turn for the worse for the Allies, and the Axis gained complete control once more, rapidly deteriorating the Allied position. I was not really sure what happened here.
The situation became so dire for the Axis that not even a +263 battle at WGR (discounting some negative TUX exchanges before the UK battle) could turn the tide. Despite the Germans losing around 28 planes, the Axis were still prevailing.
One aspect I believe the Allies could have handled differently was adopting a more aggressive stance in the Pacific. They focused solely on fortifying Hawaii and Sydney, neglecting to contest the islands or send planes to support China. While I understand this is easier said than done, I think the Allies became too complacent and should have taken more risks while preventing a Japanese VC rush, thereby allowing US to build more transports, recapture islands, and wreck havoc in China with US air strikes. Additionally, the Allies retained UK planes in China for too long, where they failed to have the desired impact and were disconnected from their ground units.
It appears that there was a critical juncture in the game where the Allies had to decide whether to permit Japan risky battles at Hawaii or Sydney, potentially leading to either victory or defeat depending on the outcome, or to endure a slow death, as they ultimately opted for in this particular game.
Furthermore, the Japanese expedition to Africa was foreseeable, and I believe the Allies could have taken more precautions. This excursion proved to be highly beneficial for the Axis, completely disrupting any momentum the Allies had in Europe.
Also I believe Allies MUST attack South America before allowing Japan to land there, regardless of whether the units will be missed elsewhere.
A few questions to @Adam514
-
I was intrigued by the maneuvering of your primary German force following the initial capture of Moscow. There seemed to be some oscillation, allowing the Russians to regain control temporarily before mounting a strong offensive to retake Moscow. Was this part of your strategic plan, or did you adapt your tactics midway, perhaps accepting a less-than-ideal outcome in the short term?
-
It appears to me that you could have mitigated even more damage in WGR by mobilizing all Italian forces before the +263 battle took place. Was there a deliberate decision to spare the Italians?
-
Hypothetically, if the Allies had achieved a top 10-20% dice outcome, with the US preserving a significant number of fighters and the UK minimizing losses during subsequent attacks, do you believe this could have tipped the balance in favor of the Axis? Considering that the Allies would have had two full turns to fortify Berlin against ~75 mech and 23 tanks rushing to recapture it. How apprehensive were you before that crucial battle?
