My Allied Plan

@DarthMaximus:

But I don’t know if that battle is all that relevant.  The bom placement may be overrated.  So what if you slow down Japan.  Sub bid of six kills 1 J trn and there is no risk of not hitting and you could still place 2 inf elsewhere.
Germany is the main early threat.  Assuming no Russian ground units bid.  Ger takes the 3 Russian territories on G1.  G2 have a shot at holding Kar.  Even if they only trade, they can still stack Bel on G3.  Russia now has to defend Mos.  G4 you move to Euk.  Now Cauc and Mos have to be defended.  G5 you take cauc.
Obviously this is a bit simplistic but I don’t think the loss of 2 trns and a J dd is that big of a deal if the Russian front is collapsing.

I don’t know Darth. Slowing Japan’s expansion to a crawl and allowing Russia to focus entirely on Germany for the first 5 rounds or so goes a long way.

I’m assuming an aggressive G1.  Taking out Sz 2 and Sz 9.  If we are playing the odds game, the odds for these G1 attacks will go further in deciding the game then the 56% odds the Russian bom has.

I don’t know about that either. taking out 2 TP’s and a DD before Japan even gets a chance to use them is pretty crippling. Even sinking just the sz62 TP limits japan a bit.

I’d much rather have 4 units on the Russian front, then the bom.

That’s a matter of personal preference, though. The bomber bid gives Russia multiple options while the infantry bid only has 1 option(defending against Germany). The bomber is essentially an opportunistic unit. It can provide support for Allied interdiction of Japan’s navy as well as supporting it’s ground troops in the area if you see an opening to be aggressive on the ground. And the bomber will start saving Russia units in trades against Germany once it returns from the Pacific.

@CdnRanger:

Russia would have to send a couple of Inf (needed desperately at the front without a Russian ground unit bid) by Rus2 to India to protect it, and perhaps Uk lands the Egypt Fighter there (if it has survived the attack from Germany)

The US can also provide air support to India on US2 if they landed aircraft in Australia on US1.

The India crush by Japan is nasty but it gives China an extra round or two of survival, as Japan needs to go light on Phi, and the 3 Inf in Fic that took Burma are needed to attack and hold India turn 2.

The India crush also draws away a lot of Japan’s navy which the US and Russia can sometimes exploit in the North(threatening sz62 with air and navy, Russian ground attacks into China from Bury, etc)

Hi, all!

Thanks to BigDog for great thinking outside of the box.

I had what was propably the best game so far yesterday. I wanted to apply this strategy, and did so with the US. Unfortunately, my co-player (UK & Russia) wanted to go a little more extreme into India, buying a factory and later 2 Battleships and 1Carrier. Ferrying the 2Fighters from London via Moscow to land on the Carrier. The Japanese player did not se this coming… He did manage the usual and occupy the entire Pacific, but being too spread out caught between the UK and US fleet he had  to retreat towards the mainland for naval reinforcements. Japan did not contribute towards capturing Moscow. The UK fleet was destroyed, with India being captured. But this allowed the US to retake all of the Islands and capture all Jap islands as well. Japan mainland was taken, and the fleet utterly destroyed when racing back to liberate Japan. The best naval battle ever!!  :mrgreen:
Unfortunately this led to Italy and Germany sharing Africa and the Russian territories after Italy had an income of 44 on its peak (34+2 nat obj) and Germany scoring around 60 - objectives included.
This led to a combined effort on London, I believe we held out 4 assaults before Germany finally succeded in occupying London.

So in retrospect i believe that this was a bit too much of an “all out” in the Pacific. Containing Japan led to Italy reaching new heights, and I believe that it is much better for the Allies to secure Africa and contain Italy. Also leaving a strong fleet in the Atlantic to be able to support Russia if need be. Either directly on Russian soil, or maintaining a possibillity to invade France/Italy. The US was not able to liberate Australia, Borneo and East Indies before Africa was totally occupied, leaving UK with a few rounds of very little income. Holding Africa with the intent of liberating India later on seems to me like a stronger option.

Finding the right moment to strike at Japan still eludes me, and I am very much looking forward to the next game where I will certainly try something else than a KGF.

Doesn’t matter, the G1 purchase of 9inf/1 art, or 7inf/2 arm will reach moscow on G5, along with the 18ish armor purchased G2/3.  If UK isn’t playing in the atlantic, and russia is sending troops at japan, that means moscow falls G5.  G6 at the absolute latest.  And to make it even worse, the can opener threat is insane.  Russia was made too weak in 41, and she is the only ally that can effect Japan before japan goes nutso income.

I believe the Allies must invest time and money into Africa in order to win.  IMO the British need Africa.  Not so much for it’s income (since much of the income gained from Africa goes toward maintaining the IC there anyways).  But rather to deny the Italians from becoming an effective threat.

The IC in South Africa allows the British to have an immediate presence there, even with the Italian navy controlling the Mediterranean Sea.

I’m on your side in LL now, I took the Axis the last 3 times and it’s been a total romp LL.  The way the game is designed, where the dice are rolled, you’re probably going to have a dual-win% in Kar/Egy around 30%, whereas in LL they’re afterthoughts, almost 100%.  I’d say these are two different games entirely.

On turn 1 UK can easily drop an AC-destroyer-trannie or 2 plus whatever survived, which is plenty, then US can add a destroyer a turn if needed.  I"m not advocating ignoring japan, that would be bad idea.

One of the benefits of the south african IC is that you do not need to care about the italian fleet. Let the bad boys with their 10 IPCs bombard egypt or caucasus - so what? As long as the United Kingdom can occupy the italians in egypt all is well. If you sink the italian fleet you still have no additional fleet that helps in the mediteranean. The bombardment doesnt kill you and the U.S. world bombing tour can start in asia, where it can wear down the japs. Remenber, the seazone japan lies in is 4 seazones away from western united states and has 3 adjacent russian airfields. That means that the lone presence of bombers in WUS can tie down a whole fleet in front of japan. By the way, how many ICs does Japan build in J1 and J2 in your games?

I think I would have made China its own just to eliminate confusion with any nearby US forces sizing up an upcoming battle if nothing else.

LT