You might not need to attack the combined US/UK forces in Normandy. If you leave it French you can just pile up infantry in France and let them attack you. They are much weaker on the attack than they are on defense because they are 2 powers.
Overall, we’re looking at a situation where the US and the UK are attacking Western Europe in force, and Germany tries to defend it. I haven’t played the game very often, so I lack the experience to estimate how many units Germany can dedicate to that defense while still making progress in Russia. I guess that would also depend on how the campaign in the East went so far, both in terms of additional income for Germany and remaining Russian resistance that needs to be overcome. But if anybody could enlighten me there, that would be great.
I’m assuming that Italy would be in decent shape in this scenario, with the US and the UK focusing on D-Day and not committing heavily to the Mediterranean theater.
In that situation, there are basically six possibilities, based on two decisions: Germany has either initially captured or not captured Normandy-Bordeaux, and the German force in Paris will either stand its ground, or attempt to strafe the invasion force in Normandy-Bordeaux, or attempt to defeat that force and (re-)capture Normandy-Bordeaux. The first decision, whether or not to initially capture Normandy-Bordeaux, comes early; the second decision needs to be made once D-Day arrives.
Let’s say that at the time of the invasion, there are 4 US and 4 UK planes in the UK, the Allies have assembled a strong enough fleet in SZ 110 to be safe from German planes, and there are 4 US and 4 UK transports in SZ 110, plus units available in the UK to fill those boats. More US units are underway, being transported from America. And let’s say that the invasion starts on the US turn. I’m not sure whether this is realistic – again, maybe someone could comment on it.
There are two scenario’s:
Scenario 2 seems more attractive initially, but in scenario 1, Germany has more options. Depending on German strength, a strafe may be possible. In scenario 2, that same strafe would have more chances of success, but after that, the invasion force would then be strengthened by three new US tanks every new round. And if Germany captures Normandy-Bordeaux to avoid that, the US will probably retake it next round.
At present, I remain undecided as to whether or not this is a good idea.
On a side note: is Normandy-Bordeaux indeed a good place to build subs for Germany? I’d rather spend my money on land units. Why try an arms race where the Allies can easily outproduce you? Germany buys a sub, America buys a destroyer, Russia is happy – or am I missing something there?
I think wheatbeer is using this strategy against me in a league game.
Very frustrating combined with his air stack in Novograd and 7 inf 3 art in Finland keeping me out of Norway.
FYI it’s easy for the allies to ensure you almost NEVER recieve the $2 for this territory.
As Russia, I almost always convoy block this territory with my “free” sub.
Also, the trick to defeating this is simple.
Land what you know your opponent will not counter. IE 2 or 3 units, he doesn’t want to take this territory back from you.
The following turn you can strike at belgium with your trans + whatever you landed, OR southern france - which is a PAIN for the axis to lose.
And in terms of “his big finland force” Just land in Norway anyway, and FORCE him to attack you, mix in an AA gun or two to make him think twice.
Better that Germans die ATTACKING British and American units, than attacking Russian ones, that’s exactly where you want him to be.
Best part is… he has to attack, or he loses the NO.
In addition to the obvious, but very useful, denial of Allied income and mIC:
1. The Allies cannot build an airbase there (which can open up a lot of options or surprise if the UK has many planes based there).
2. Germany can keep it’s planes further east.
3. If your Western front forces are positioned to counterattack France rather than counterattack Normandy, then they are closer the Germany and Italy’s capitols and major ICs.
4. Every time you retake Normandy, (depending on Allied fleet composition) you might be exposing survivors to bombardment.
@Herr:
On a side note: is Normandy-Bordeaux indeed a good place to build subs for Germany? I’d rather spend my money on land units. Why try an arms race where the Allies can easily outproduce you? Germany buys a sub, America buys a destroyer, Russia is happy � or am I missing something there?
Every DD the Allies build to counter an Axis sub is 2 IPC they lose in the economic game. The tradeoff is 2 Inf or 1 Armor against Moscow. However, if you can effectively force the UK to spend IPC on DD to prevent convoys, they aren’t building units to invade Europe.
So with that said, a few subs sprinkled in wins an economic cost/benefit analysis early for the Axis as DD purchased by the Allies are harmless in the grand scheme of protecting Europe and equates to less units initially landing for an inevitable invasion.
The only real question is, can Germany afford to not have a half dozen infantry or 3 armor to take Moscow. That depends on the dice.
This is an interesting out of the box strat, so for that reason alone I like it (would most likely confuse the allies having not seen it before). With that said I think your giving up more then you benefit in the long run. The obvious is the 8-10 IPCs you won’t get for owning it G1 or G2. The other (as mentioned) is the ability to drop boats in the Atlantic. I also like to produce a couple German subs from the French coast early in the game to combined with the Luftwaffe to threaten the US fleet at Gibraltar forcing them to over build their fleet (may delay them a turn which is what you want to achieve). Those subs may just end up retreating to the Baltic or the Med, but could still be useful later even if they don’t engage the enemy in the Atlantic (making the allies over build their fleet could delay them).
I (as you) would normally not stack the Normandy coast (bombardment and allied air power too effective), I find it better to allow the landing then counter attack from Paris where I can use my own air power (it depends on what they have on the table though). Allowing them to also land the US ftrs and maybe the French ftr are more def 4’s in the battle (my counter attack) that I wouldn’t want to face.
You say you would be denying the use of the minor IC to the US so they can’t build 3 tanks there on their next turn (which is true), but I say I can deny that by taking it back before their turn comes up with the counter attack. If you leave it French you will be facing many more units in your counter attack (maybe even the French inf/art that starts there if you didn’t strafe it).
I would be interested in hearing how things went though if you do it.
How could US use that factory? If they’re taking the territory wouldn’t it become French again?
How could US use that factory? If they’re taking the territory wouldn’t it become French again?
Only if (and when) Paris is free. It would then revert to French control. You can see this happening in Africa. If the Italian’s take the french spaces, and the allies liberate them, they keep control of the land and can take it’s IPCs until the French capitol is freed.
If US saw this, what’s stopping them from shipping nothing but fighters to London, while UK builds transports/land? US could land fighters in Normandy, UK sends its troops there… Am I missing something?
Ya, american fighters in normandy is brutal.
