Hi ltparrot73
In the customizations forum are heaps of community made files.
For instance see https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39696.0
We need an allied playbook.
-
Remember to suspend disbelief for the sake of the discussion. It is my firm belief that we must consider the crazy, the dream or the absurd and then dial it back one notch at a time until we find that we’re on the other side of a problem.
-
So the problem I’m having with this “pick x of 5 cities to save” discussion is that it matters a lot when the cities fall. London falls on turn 3? Not a problem if you’ve done the Taranto raid and killed some German planes; Russia can just swoop in and occupy eastern Europe, America can liberate London at its leisure, and you’re looking at an Allied win.
London falls on turn 7? You’re pretty much screwed in most cases.
Flipping that around, if Calcutta falls on turn 3? That’s pretty bad; the Japanese have enough time to pivot over to Australia or Honolulu and force America to ignore the Atlantic, or they might even be able to build a factory in West India and crank out 6 fast movers a turn (9 if they get Persia, 12 if they get Iraq, etc.) to seize the middle east and mess up moscow’s southern front.
On the other hand, if Calcutta falls on turn 7? That’s totally fine; in most cases, if Japan is only reaching Calcutta by turn 7 that means Japan is more-or-less contained, and by the time Japan can use the Indian bases to seriously threaten Cairo or Moscow, the game will be over.
So, taking the question as seriously as I can:
In the opening, hold Moscow and Calcutta.
From the middlegame on, hold Moscow and London. -
@Argothair A very good point, so we should put time tables on victory cities. London can fall before turn three but not after, Moscow after turn 7 but not before etc. etc.
-
Of course this is a WAR game so objectives and scenarios are constantly evolving. It would have been silly for the Russians to reinforce Stalingrad in November of 41 when Moscow was the clear objective.
-
BTW, I choose Egypt. (based on timetables) That doesn’t kick us back to pages of debate, does it?
-
Russian playbook illustrated. pretty good German one too. allied playbook turn 1r.tsvg not a sealion guy.
-
@crockett36 So you would reinforce Egypt from the start then?
-
If only two cities of the five cities could be saved, I would save Moscow and Cairo. Yes, from the beginning.
-
Pacific win for the Axis, yeah.
We should play a game crocket. 🤣
-
That would be great start it up please. In the car. I go really slow BTW.
-
@aequitas-et-veritas so you didn’t answer my question, which two cities would you save of the five? I’m inferring Bombay and Moscow is that correct?
-
Japan needs what, six victory cities? Even if they get Calcutta they still need Sydney or Honolulu. With enough focus poured into taking Calcutta the Aussies probably have Sydney well defended, and Honolulu gets harder and harder to take if you don’t strike it early.
-
My point being that axis victory is easier to achieve in the European theatre, at least in my experience. It’s easier for the Allies to stagnate Japan once America is involved.
-
We should play. Thanks for offering. I’m slow. I’m going to regret this because your a top tier player, but can we war college the game?
-
@crockett36 said in We need an allied playbook.:
We should play. Thanks for offering. I’m slow. I’m going to regret this because your a top tier player, but can we war college the game?
War college?
What is that? -
@crockett36 A little late in my reply here to Crockett’s question about cities of most importance, but I believe Larry Harris said that Egypt was the key for Allies. Didn’t he say this to you @crockett36 when you met him at YG’s tournament?
-
@Guam-Solo I try to refer to LH in oblique terms like creator, oh wise one, maker, I have it on good authority, etc. you are not inaccurate, though the location was not Canada.
-
@aequitas-et-veritas to war college a game would be to lay out our plans ahead of time, in secret. play the game, posting it here.
We would then let the community examine how the plans were executed and where the principles that guided our strategies were either misapplied or misguided. On the other hand, it would be an opportunity for an affirmation of guile, tactical and strategic success, along with a recognition of the roll of luck in determining outcomes.
Hopefully this would help train players for the times when they are drawing cards and pull out USA. No pressure. I know it’s asking a lot. That’s why I’m playing against myself and posting my allied playbook.
-
Allied playbook, America t1allied playbook turn 1a.tsvg
-
@crockett36 Interesting Pearl Harbor attack! I don’t think I’ve seen that exact opening before. By parking the Japanese carriers outside an American-controlled Wake Island, you leave that carrier group vulnerable to an combined US-ANZAC attack.
US can hit with 3 ftr, 1 tac, 1 bmr against Japan’s 1 DD, 2 CV, 2 ftr, 2 tac – most common result is 3 hits for America, so Japan loses the DD and the 2 tacs (if the Japanese carriers get hit the planes cannot land). You can probably score one more hit if you stick around, so that’s a 3rd Japanese plane down, leaving only 2 CV, 1 ftr.
Then ANZAC can hit with 1 CA and 3 ftr – 2 more expected hits in the first round of combat means that either you tip both carriers and the fighter sinks (in which case ANZAC can retreat), or you lose the fighter and tip a carrier (in which case ANZAC should win the battle).
Meanwhile, the US fleet at San Diego comes out to Hawaii to kill the lone Japanese DD there and to threaten Tokyo. You can rebuild your lost aircraft on US1 and have them ready to strike the sea zones outside Iwo Jima or the Carolines on US 2. The Japanese fleet in the Philippines is out of position to counter; they either have to sail right back to Tokyo, or Japan has to build carriers on J2 and send the air force back from China to land on them.
It’s not a foolproof counter, but if you’re willing to come out swinging as the Allies then this could lead to a rapid win for America on the Pacific front. I’d probably prefer that to running back to Mexico with my tail between my legs.
Your Russian setup is interesting – I like the aggressive stack in Karelia, but I think you concede a little too much in eastern Europe. With no blockers in the Baltics or East Poland and no artillery in Novgorod, I think the Germans can blitz one tank into Belarus and then stack the Baltic States on G2, forcing you to recall your troops from Karelia to guard Novgorod. Of course, that would require that on G1 Germany put more troops into Poland instead of into Slovakia – but if you’re not building transports or destroyers for Sea Lion anyway, then why put all those German troops into Slovakia in the first place?
Anyway, thanks for the illustration. It’s thought-provoking. :-)
Suggested Topics
