Help Needed For Allied Strategy - Updated thoughts on Bid?

[Black_Elk]

OK you mentioned Allies at 9, so here are a couple bids I like at 9 ipcs

All Russia:
2 artillery, in Karelia and Caucasus, save 1 ipc.

For 25 ipcs Buy
Defensive
5 inf and 1 artillery and 1 tank

Offensive
Buy 3 inf 1 art and 2 tanks

Attack Ukraine heavy with 3 inf 3 tanks 2 art and 2 fighters
to strafe or take depending on the opening roll

Attack W. Russia with 9 inf 3 art 1 tank

Non com: AA guns forward to W Russia, or W. Russia and Ukraine depending on the results of the attack (strafe/or take, how many inf remaining etc.) Option move 1 Kazakh inf to szech for fighter defense.  Option 5 stack to Bury. Or full western focus depending on the results of the attack.

Place: drop 3 inf 1 art in Caucasus, with tank(s) in Moscow. Additional infantry (if bought) option either Moscow or Karelia, depending on whether you want to draw a counter attack possibility or just let the germans walk in to escape bombardment.

I think that should set up a decent Russian opening. Another approach is 2 tanks to W. Russia, 2 to Ukraine, depending if you want to go lighter on Ukraine in case of the round 1 sweep.

All UK:
1 inf in Egypt, and 1 sub in sz 35

buys 3 tanks in India 1 fighter in UK. Option 1 inf in UK or save 3 ipcs
or
buys 3 tanks in India 1 bomber in UK saves 1 ipc

The extra infantry unit should be enough fodder to keep your Egypt fighter alive into the second round. The sub can join an attack “all in” on sz 37, or if you forego 37 it can peel off with a fighter to kill the Japanese transport in sz 61 landing either in Bury or Szech.

To set up full KJF, or Japan Stall, or tank support to Russia post India withdrawal

Split bid at 9:
6 to Russia, 3 to UK for

1 tank Russia, 1 inf in Egypt
The tank can be used to reinforce the attack on W. Russia, or brought in for the hit on Ukraine. I think it might be advantageous to have 1 tank over 2 infantry here, just to secure the counter attack options. But you could also try 2 inf for fodder in these attacks instead of 1 tank for the hammer.

The infantry for Egypt is, again, to keep the fighter alive into the second round. I think this fighter has the best chance of swinging the game, for early attack options or long term defense.

USA destroyer bid:
8 to USA, save 1 ipc for Russia to convert an inf to artillery in the first round buy.
The only bid that stands to make much difference for the Americans is the second destroyer in sz 11. Or possibly in sz 19 (by the cruiser off panama) if you prefer to kill subs on the counter attack, or push Germany to consider sz 10 instead of 11, for fear of this counter attack

Just some thoughts, nothing is full proof. I think the first round is a bit dicier for everyone on this board. There is probably no full proof conservative winning strategy for the Allies even with a bid at 9. Something has to give somewhere, but these are some options on a bid. Hopefully it helps

Perhaps some others here have opening bids they like?

[MarineIguana]

As a very experienced revised player, playing 1942 second edition is a refreshing change. The India factory, change to make Pearl Harbor attack unfavorable, and favorable germany attack of US east coast on round 1 combine to make the Pacific more attractive. After playing 30+ games, some at a high level, I believe a bid of 8-12 to the allies is appropriate.

Compared to revised, Germany is much stronger because UK and US can’t exert much less pressure early. The Karelia factory also raises the likely prospect that Germany will be able to stack Karelia and solidify the position with unit production from that factory.

7-8 bid: inf in cauc, art in karelia. 4 inf attacking into ukraine means you have a very good chance of taking ukr with only 2 tanks. art into Wrussia allows you to take the battle in 2 rounds, reducing losses.

9 bid: inf in cauc, sub in sz15. Inf for the reason described above. The sub gives a huge headache for germany’s naval fleet. Thinking about the possible scenarios with optimal play on both sides, I don’t believe there’s any way to keep Germany’s Med fleet alive past round 3 without a carrier AND destroyer buy. Losing the Med fleet is a huge blow to the Axis achieving income parity.

10+ bid: you can start considering a ukr, belo, wrus triple attack.
e.g. with 2 art and 1 inf bid.  4 inf, 1 art, 2 tanks, 2 fig Ukr ; 3 inf, 2 art, 6 inf, 2 art, 2 tank to Wrus. These are all favorable battles and will force germany to buy all infantry for many rounds.

–-
I don’t think an egypt inf bid is necessary. A germany R1 attack to egypt practically guarantees losing the battleship and transport to a 2 fighter, 1 bomber attack.

The SZ37 bid, even with a sub isn’t worth it in my opinion unless US plans to commit everything to the Pacific. By attacking, UK loses all opportunity to swing around and form an atlantic fleet in rounds 5+. Japan loses ~1/3rd of the naval and air fleet but the remaining fleet remains unopposed without US building a fleet. My point is that attacking SZ37 weakens UK more than weakens Japan.

[Black_Elk]

Do you usually play with sz 16 open?

If open I think there is a lot more pressure on both sides to handle the med early. This would prompt me to consider a med sub bid as UK, either in sz 14 or 17, or as G to consider the carrier. Sz 16 gives me headaches hehe :)

Open or closed seems to change the dynamic quite a lot

[Zombie69]

I don’t see how that’s the case. The way I see it, with all the air power at Germany’s disposal, the UK can’t get anywhere near the Med fleet with anything other than subs (which can be kept away with a single destroyer) or planes (which will require a big investment and many turns to set up). I can see the one sub on the bid making quite a difference early on, but I wouldn’t consider the Med fleet threatened, just paralyzed early on (which is already a big plus for the UK, mind you).

[Black_Elk]

Well the bomber in UK can reach any space in the med during the first round. If G buys nothing, or fails to destroy both the cruiser in 14, or the destroyer in 17, then its fairly easy for Allies to set up on the med. If UK buys a second bomber they can pretty much clear the med battleship just with those alone, unless G drops more ships in the water. Another sub from the outset could be decisive. If nothing else, just to peel off lone destroyers, or prevent the building of an unescorted med carrier. If Britain fails to clear it, but forces G into a naval race, then USA can pick up the slack I would think.

[Zombie69]

I’m sorry, I thought the German reply to a sub bid would be to stay near Italy, but I looked again at the map and that would spell certain doom, even if the two UK boats get sunk by planes. So yeah, that sub is a real pain. Now I see only 3 ways to reply to it:
1. Lose the med fleet, lose Africa and concentrate on Russia.
2. Buy a destroyer and a carrier.
3. Attack Gibraltar and buy a destroyer to block the sub and destroyer.

None of them is very appealing, so yeah, the sub bid is pretty annoying.

[MarineIguana]

Zombie, forcing Germany into those 3 options are essentially my assessment of the impact with a UK sub bid. The UK sub either destroys or diverts significantly more than its 6IPC cost.

[Black_Elk]

Do you think 14 or 17 is better for the sub?

In either location there is the potential to draw down 22 ipcs from Germany on purchase to try and save their med transport, which fees up russia for a cost of only 6. And this is before running any attacks with UK. Just forcing G to spend that much on a med navy might be counted a victory, depending on your goal. If they camp on 15 there is a decent chance of peeling off a fighter or bomber as well on defense, if G attacks the brit ships with air. It might even draw subs off sz10/11, depending on how cautious G wants to be.

The alternative drawing down 8 ipcs for a German destroyer block. The destroyer could be sunk relatively simply. And forces G into 14, or else at risk in 16 or 17 from air.

If abandoning Africa and the med altogether, the sub puts 27 ipcs worth of German  units at risk immediately, again for only a cost of 6.

This seems like a pretty effective use of the bid. Unlike a sz37 attack, a med sub doesn’t even have to run an attack before it starts influencing the situation on G1, because of the turn order.

[Zombie69]

I looked at it again and Germany can actually defend everything with just a carrier. Here’s how. Attack SZ17 with 2 fighters (landed on the carrier), attack SZ 14 with 1 fighter and 1 bomber, use your subs as you normally would, use the other 2 fighters to attack SZ 7 as usual. Transport 2 ground units to Libya. This leaves you with 1 battleship, 1 carrier, 2 fighters and 1 transport defending against 1 sub, 2 fighters and 1 bomber. You’ll win that battle 86% of the time. You’ll probably lose one fighter in one of the two battles to clear out the Med but everything else stays intact, while spending only 14 IPCs. I’m still not sure that’s the best option for Germany and it’s still not great, but it’s out there at least.

Consider that if there’s no sub bid, Germany still has tough choices for its Med fleet:
1. Attack Egypt at low odds, if no bid placed on it and no Russian fighter landed there, but at low odds and if it fails, the fleet gets destroyed.
2. Take Gibraltar, attack the destroyer with the bomber (with a 3 in 7 chance to lose the bomber).
3. Take Gibraltar, leave the destroyer alone, risk losing your med fleet to a bomber and a destroyer.
4. Take Gibraltar and buy a destroyer to block the opposing destroyer, lose your new destroyer to a destroyer, a bomber and a fighter (or two if Indian carrier coming to the Med).
5. Buy a carrier and do as described above.

None of these options is very appealing. Better for Germany than with the sub present, but not so much better that the sub bid seems warranted over say, 2 infantry units.

[Black_Elk]

This is the way I was handling 17, fighter attack vs the destroyer and land on the newly purchased deck to camp on 15 and push Libya. The problem I’ve run into is losing a fighter on cruiser/destroyer defense. It always seems to happen to me :) Sometimes 2 fighters die, which drops G to just 3 fighters, or 4 and no bomber (if Ukraine was taken). And then the Med fleet in later rounds becomes harder to defend against a sweep by British or American air, it always seems to get stuck with nowhere to go, esp. if sz 16 is closed. And its harder to threaten a counter against sz 7 builds when one of your fighters is dead, and the rest are tied down in the med. Pretty tough to back down after you invest in ships initially, but major headaches in the med no matter what you do.

I feel like any time I buy a carrier without dd cover, I am just asking for trouble, but if you drop another 8 ipcs, for only 2 units to transport it starts to seem like a pointless enterprise. Probably just call it a wash, send the battleship on some kind of suicide mission, and stack German infantry, 11 and 2 art, just leave the canal up to Japan? hehe

Also, if G builds like this, on the water, what is you favored response as Allies? I’m not sure after the carrier build from G, where I’d rather have had my sub, if a sub bid was the play.

[Epicurus_13]

@OutlawUnForgiven:

[…]

• All of this cemented my thinking around 3 Key Points:

(1) Any KGF strategy must involve Allied landings in multiple locations. In prior games when I consolidated USA and UK navies, he simply put 20+ infantry stacks on either Western Europe or Northwestern Europe, supported with 7 fighters or so, with tanks in reserve, and dared me to land on one of the two obvious choices, knowing he’d throw me back into the ocean immediately. So, to do it right, requires separate Navies, both able to fully defend themselves, and further, there is no hope of affording a reasonable UK Navy that can do so anytime within the first 4-5 rounds. To save up for such a Navy requires essentially a wholesale abandonment of India and virtually zero spending on anything for multiple rounds, which is not viable.

(2) Bombing Germany with 5+ bombers total a round, provided the dice hold up, takes a big toll. The economic value becomes obvious - 6 bombers against a die roll of 1 mean you’ll statistically lose 1 bomber per round. But the remaining 5 should hit for an average of 3 IPC each, which is 15 IPC damage. At a loss of 12 IPC to the Allies (the cost of the bomber). That’s +3 IPC impact to Allies, -3 to the Axis. Hmmm……

(3) Failure to apply any meaningful economic pressure to Germany prior to Round 4 or 5 will result almost certainly in Russia being overrun. There are only three ways to apply economic pressure - take German territory in big chunks (impossible for first 4+ rounds), win decisive battles that cost Germany more than the allies (impossible against a player like him that will never engage a battle that he does not have a large advantage in, and who cannot be attacked on your terms for quite some time), or deprive her of IPC’s through heavy bombing.

I think points 2 and 3 are very interesting as a possible route to victory for the allies. I think that applying the US’ economic power as quickly and efficiently as possible is essential, so US bombers conducting SBRs on Germany seems like a good way to essentially turn US income into a tax on German income - a net win for the wealthy allied powers.

If on my turn as US I could spend IPCs to just directly destroy an equal amount of IPCs for Germany, I think I would do so. On average die rolls, this is basically what sending bombers does (in fact, excepting for 1 turn travel time, bombers are better than 1-to-1 efficiency). I’m going to pursue a bomber-based purchase plan for the US for my first allied game for sure.

[theROCmonster]

I like the bomber idea with US. Here is a thought. Keep 6 US bombers in UK at all time bombing Germany. You will loose 1 a turn, so build one a turn after round 3.

Round 1 buy is 3 bombers=36.  save 6
Round 2 you will have 46-48, so buy 2 bombers 3 transports=45. Save 1-3.
Round 3 you will have 39-41, so buy 2 bombers 1 transport and all the rest infantry.
Rounds 4 on you build 1 bomber, ground, and transports.

In low luck mathematically you will do 17-18 damage a turn with 6 bombers attacking industrial. You will loose 1 a turn, so that means you loose 12 for his 17-18. You build a transport fleet now just like you would normally. You use your pacific fleet as your defense, which is why you don’t need transports till round 2, since your pacific fleet cant stage off Morocco till round 3.

What do you think?

[Cow]

Bomber strategy is viable.

If you do a bid. I like 1 inf on egypt and an arty on caucasus.
~

UK 1 sink the 1 japan transport it will make things easier for you.

[Cow]

Everything in the pacific as usa, just bring it over to europe. There is little reason to go pacific sadly.

R1 I just hit Ukraine and west Russia with everything I have. Everything else is risky.
~
Kill the Japan transport with either cruiser carrier or cruiser fighter. Run the carrier home, takes awhile but it will get there.

Same with australia fleet. Also just leave the inf on it , dont pack anything up.

Everyone gangs up on Germany. Typical game.

[Oddbjoern]

1 Bomber destroys (1+2+3+4+5+6)/6 = 3.5 IPC
IPC loss with Bomber = 12/6 = 2 IPC

SO with 6 Bombers you destroy 21 IPC (not 17-18) and lose 12 IPC.

[Zombie69]

Wrong. The bomber on average gets only 5 shots in before getting destroyed (on the 6th pass, it gets shot down before it can release its bombs), so on average it will do 5 * 3.5 = 17.5 damage before going down.

[Oddbjoern]

Right, dead Bombers have a hard time to bomb =)

[theROCmonster]

So I played out a game with America doing that strategy, and it was pretty damn effective. Kind of hard for Germany to do anything when his two main factories are constantly bombed for their maximum.

There is also another nice thing about having so many bombers. You might only have a small amount of transports, lets say 4, but with 8 land, 6 bombers, 4 fighters, and 2 bombards that is a lot to have to defend against as Germany.

[Cow]

Yes it is an effective tactic.

[guni-kid]

Mornin’

new to the forum, not to the game :) It’s an interesting read how you deploy your forces in the opening. What I’m wondering is, why no one is mentioning the two Russian Fighters, which in my opinion are the most valuable units that the Russians have. My opening would be attacking Baltic States with 3 Inf / 1 Art / 1 Fighter AND attacking West Russia with literally everything thats left and available. This way you should take both areas in an instant. I draw back the Fighters to Russia then, leave the AA-gun in Caucasus alone and build 1 Inf in Karelia. All the other 7 purchased Inf go to Russia. So what’s the outcome of that? You collect 4 more IPCs (shouldn’t forget that, I mean a good strafe on Ukraine is nice, but doesn’t necessarily bring you its 2 IPCs in this round!), threw 2 of his Tanks off the board, kept all your 4 Tanks as the basis for your own stack now, and gained some bumper area to the West. Now the interesting thing starts: What’s the opponent doing? He can take both Caucasus and Karelia now! Plus Baltic States back, because it’s weakly defended. But if he does all this, he has to split forces (especially when most of his fighters are busy over the Atlantic in the first round) and at least one of these little stacks remaining in one of those territories has to deal with the West Russian Stack next round. He can also stack his tanks deep and get only one of those countries (probably Caucasus I guess?), Karelia with his Inf and Fighters might be… but with only Inf he wouldn’t hold it for too, too long… Anyway, whatever he does, you have to react to it! That means: Play cat and mouse with him. If you only stack West Russia, your troops are worthless because he will eventually outnumber you big time with his regular IPC collections. So 2nd round I buy 1 tank (with my at this time for Russian circumstances comfortable 28 IPCs), 1 Art and the rest goes to Inf again. So now attack with your stack out of West Russia depending on what he did before… Unite your forces and run with your slowly growing stack over the board there and back: cut his lines, make him split forces, force him to move and not only stack relaxed wherever he likes, threaten his hinterlands… and always use the fighters with enough Inf. to gain bumper territory which you don’t want to hold anyway… Collect the IPCs and force him to react to your area gaining (with usually only 1-3 Inf left there, because the fighters of course draw back). In that slowly growing stack of yours always put in enough Inf fodder, so that your tanks are not seriously in danger and then use them in attack! Each attack they are performing they payback their invaluable investment costs… This way you force your game upon him! He is the one who has to react to your actions. He might be stronger, but you can keep Russia alive for quite a while this way because each single round he faces a new situation and has to decide what to do next (not just easily stacking as usual) and he will make mistakes when you play him right. Of course you will have to be acting careful with your decisions as well… Never forget: don’t even try to keep an area… everything but Russia itself can be subject to be given away and taken back later. Never leave him your factories for too long and never split forces… Use your fighters as second attack-force… some fodder Inf on his weaker territories (at best with only tanks on his side) and then go for it or strafe him well as long as your Inf lasts :)

Well, that should give UK and US enough time to get to it and I always go north: stacking a little transport fleet on SZ 10 and then in one move over to Norway. Now it’s time to get Karelia back (if it’s occupied by the Germans at this time) and secure it with a never ending stream of troops through Norway, so that the Russian can finally consolidate and think of either heading East to get rid of that now pressing Japanese or to head a bit deaper into Europe to get Caucasus secure for good and some more bumper territory…

UK always buys 2 Tanks, 2 Art and 1 Fighter in the first round, the Tanks and one Art go to India, the rest to UK. UK should work as a static carrier the first few rounds and never fear losses of fighters, you’ll get them back but they are invaluably distracting German movements: clean the Atlantic as much as you can, strafe German forces heading east direction Russia etc. If you show your commitment to actually use your forces, the German player can never be sure and secure… take some risks at times, bury units to distract him… and again: you force your game on to him and he is the one never being too sure about what you’ll do next, because you are very active and hurt him in small doses… On India I always proceed with 1 Inf, 1 Tank and 1 Art each round, that leaves enough money for at least 1 Fighter for UK until the Indian and Australian fleets are meeting in the Atlantic and start bringing troops to Norway… I try to keep the Japanese occupied out of India a while so that he can’t apply too much pressure on Russia from the East.

US purchase depends on his opening: If he takes your Destroyer and the Transports with his Subs I always try to hunt them down with the remaining British Destroyer… doesn’t matter if it works, cause with US I purchase 1 Carrier (Fighters to put on your having ready on the main land, so no need to purchase them as well), 2 Destroyers, 1Transport. Next round 1 more Carrier, 1 Fighter, 2 more Transports and bring them to SZ 10 (having quite some cover with the Destroyers and 2 Carriers I’d say). Now the US concentrates on building land units to start bringing them to Europe, in the meantime the other Transport and the lone Cruiser from the Pacific should have arrived and the British fleet is also just about to come up…

But back to my initial point: Yes, start stacking with Russia slowly but surely, but most important: Use your troops actively, keep them moving, distract him, play cats and mouse with him, force your game on him… trust me, sooner or later he’s wearing out and makes mistakes (breaking apart his stack or concentrating on areas, where you won’t be standing next round anymore etc.) and safe your Fighters for attacks, never desperate defendings… then you’ll lose them and they are the most valuable units for the Russian…

All this taken into account and I never needed a bit to win… just saying  :mrgreen: