Alpha +3 = UK1 Factory in EGY breaks the game?


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Has anyone seen this?

    With the advent of the split up Italian Navy, and the 4 extra “Hit points” the UK recieves, and the lack of an NO for the capture of London, some German players don’t read sea-lion however, even if they do, what happens with the UK move below.

    Option 1
    UK 1,  Attack Sz97, with everything,  attack the Malta seazone with atleast a fighter / or a cruiser from Gibraltar.

    Stack EGY, and build a complex there - Italies game is done.

    Get your transport on the OTHER side of the canal, consider attacking some of the Italians in E africa, and use this transport later to liberate any territories like IRAQ if they get taken, or attack Iraq in conjunction with Persia troops on later turns.

    OR

    Option 2

    Waste Axis troops in Libya, AND Tobruk,  leave ENOUGH in Egypt to withstand attack of 4 ground units and a bomber, (May have to leave a dst at sea to avoid bombards)  Add complex to the territory.

    FAIL SAFE

    In the event you fail Taranto, or the Libya/Tobruk attack, build the complex is West India, it will give you MASSIVE leverage in the middle east - post failed UK 1. It could also help against the Japs.

    FAIL SAFE 2

    Say you build the complex in Egypt, and Germany goes HARD for sea-lion.  Just build your home defense as planned, and you’ll still be at PAR or better to defeat them.  Even if you brave it out, and just build 1, or 2 infantry in Egypt, they’ll go a long way for you early.

    The Final Result
    If you can hold the Italians out of Egypt until UK 4, The game on the europe board is basically over.  That’s when you start putting British Ships in the med, and effectively, have eliminated ALL Italian No’s

    • There will be allied ships in the med
    • You will have Alexandria
    • The US can and will take Gibraltar
    • The Italian’s barring a pathetic gasp into syria, won’t be getting any middle eastern NO’s EVER.

    Unless Italy has an Eastern front campaign,  They’ll barely be making 13 (With Southern France, AND Greece)  both of which can be convoy raided.

    How long is Rome going to hold?  US 6?  7?


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Interesting analysis.

    Holding Egypt shouldnt be too hard if you bring the fighters from the Med there instead of flying up to England with them.  Since you can pretty much destroy England with 3 submarines now, no German player should really be trying for Sea Lion.  If you play against me, you’ll probably even have a battleship left to sail down to the Med as well. (The other one is usually destroyed on Germany 2.)


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Oh, with 1 submarine at SZ 91, you will probably have that cruiser to use.  It’s essentially 50/50 but I don’t think that’s really accurate.  Of course, I have not rolled the battle 10,000 times.  So maybe I’m just very unlucky in SZ 91?



  • well its pretty simple
    2/6 (1/3) of time the sub sinks the cruiser
    3/6 of the 4/6 the cruiser sinks the sub (multiplies out to 12/36 which reuces to 1/3)
    so basicly each round you have 1/3 sub sinks cruiser 1/3 cruiser sinks sub and 1/3 roll again.

    I hate 50/50 battles, somehow i lose them 75% of the time!



  • @Gargantua:

    FAIL SAFE

    In the event you fail Taranto, or the Libya/Tobruk attack, build the complex is West India, it will give you MASSIVE leverage in the middle east - post failed UK 1. It could also help against the Japs.

    Mmm, but isn’t West-India part of the pacific economy?

    Even if it is allowed to put it there, only India could put units in it, right? Which would make this kinda pointless.
    And there isn’t really a good other 2IPC zone left for UK (scotland would insane, Ontario useless and Persia not taken yet)

    Except for that it is an interesting thought, but it would be UK putting extra pressure on itself.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I agree, Italy should have had a destroyer and transport ADDED to the board, not moved from other sea zones.

    The complex in Egypt probably wouldn’t go up until England 2 when they can see if Germany blows 70 IPC on Transports or ground units, I would think.



  • It would be funny if Germany spends their 70IPCs on ground units G2, so UK feels safe to buy the Persia/Egypt IC on UK2.  Then on G3 Germany turns around and buys a bunch of transports and strategically bombs London (again) so they can’t even mobilize much defense.  Those ground forces and transports could invade either London OR Leningrad, whichever looks easier at the time.



  • As the Axis, I would love for the UK to build a complex in Egypt on UK1.  Then, Germany can build a complex in Yugoslavia on G2 and use the combined Italy/Germany assault on it to take it.  Also, seeing this, as Japan I would do an India Crush strategy so as to sow up the Middle East for the Euro-Axis along with all of Africa.

    I love the idea as the Axis if the UK did this for me.



  • @mantlefan:

    I guess you could still go Persia with the IC, Not W india.

    True, but that is not british in turn 1, so if you would buy an IC then, you can’t place it there either. In a later turn, this is of course a valid alternative, and maybe a good one, even to help out India abit. But if Japan takes India out: bye bye Persian IC…



  • @gsh34:

    As the Axis, I would love for the UK to build a complex in Egypt on UK1.  Then, Germany can build a complex in Yugoslavia on G2 and use the combined Italy/Germany assault on it to take it.  Also, seeing this, as Japan I would do an India Crush strategy so as to sow up the Middle East for the Euro-Axis along with all of Africa.

    I love the idea as the Axis if the UK did this for me.

    I’m pretty sure you’d get smoked giving that much attention to the Med with Germany. I pulled this off one game in Alpha+2 and ended up smaking down everything thrown at Egypt, then the US mopped up the battered remains of Europe.



  • I actually thought of doing this before, I had filed it as Mid-East command option A.K.A. “Case Montgomery”  😄

    I really like it, as trying to truck things all the way up from south Africa can be time and IPC consuming. I usually play very defensively as the UK so I would have a large number of units in Egypt by the time I would put the IC down around UK2. Really by UK3 (provided there is no sealion, but lets not get into that again :roll: ) the Uk can really start to throw down more offensive units and by UK4 or 5 at the latest the Italians are sunk, metaphorically speaking  :lol:


  • 2017 '16 '13 '12

    My first naval builds with Germany are all sea units, no transports.

    If I see UK go all out in the Med with the fleets / fighters and spend 12 IPC to build an IC, not only I will prepare to interdict the UK with subs and work wiping out all the UK fleet (the usual way), but I will also save a portion of my money on G2 to force UK to buy infantry on UK2 or buy transports straight…

    If the UK spends 12 IPC, that’s only 6 additional infantry in London. Taking London becomes more attractive because you get to knock out Africa with a complex on it… Without the additional planes, London will fall (and will definitely fall if IPCs are spent in Africa on UK 2 or UK 3.



  • @Kobu:

    @gsh34:

    As the Axis, I would love for the UK to build a complex in Egypt on UK1.  Then, Germany can build a complex in Yugoslavia on G2 and use the combined Italy/Germany assault on it to take it.  Also, seeing this, as Japan I would do an India Crush strategy so as to sow up the Middle East for the Euro-Axis along with all of Africa.

    I love the idea as the Axis if the UK did this for me.

    I’m pretty sure you’d get smoked giving that much attention to the Med with Germany. I pulled this off one game in Alpha+2 and ended up smaking down everything thrown at Egypt, then the US mopped up the battered remains of Europe.

    Fair enough.  I was thinking about this some more after posting and thought……do Sealion!!!  If the UK builds the complex on UK1, and then Germany buys the requisite transports on G2, the UK has a choice:  defend the UK and don’t build in Egypt, or build in Egypt and allow Sealion.  If Germany takes the UK on G3 or G4, the UK will only get a max of two builds out of the complex.  Of course, on a G3 Sealion Russia goes to war immediately, but Germany won’t be pulling as many units off of Europe as in a G4 Sealion either.  Anyways, this is a way that Germany could help out Italy, by simply taking out the UK Europe.

    Is this perfect?  Who knows, but it is probably better then having the UK alone annihilate Italy.

    I will say again, I would couple this with an India Crush strategy by Japan so that Egypt can’t be reenforced for long.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    So why get the complex on UK1?  Why not wait til UK2 when the threat of a surprise sea lion is over?



  • @Cmdr:

    So why get the complex on UK1?  Why not wait til UK2 when the threat of a surprise sea lion is over?

    Because the premise of Gargantua’s post was that the UK purchase the complex for Egypt on UK 1.



  • I wouldnt be comfortable placing the IC on UK1, I would want to have a turn to build in London


  • '12

    @Clyde85:

    I wouldnt be comfortable placing the IC on UK1, I would want to have a turn to build in London

    Me too…  despite the G1 build, I would feel better about doing a defensive build in the UK first round to take Sea Lion off the table.  I think that the factory build in Egypt is a viable move, but it should come in UK 2.



  • Building it on UK2 seems to be a better option to me because at that point the UK will know if Germany is going to attempt Sea Lion (for the next few turns, at least).


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @gsh34:

    @Cmdr:

    So why get the complex on UK1?  Why not wait til UK2 when the threat of a surprise sea lion is over?

    Because the premise of Gargantua’s post was that the UK purchase the complex for Egypt on UK 1.

    I understand that.  I was offering round 2 as an alternative.



  • On the other hand, building it UK1 might essentially invite Germany to do Sea Lion, which could be beneficial for the Allies (the USA and USSR enter the war earlier, troops are committed to London, etc.).



  • @Ruanek:

    On the other hand, building it UK1 might essentially invite Germany to do Sea Lion, which could be beneficial for the Allies (the USA and USSR enter the war earlier, troops are committed to London, etc.).

    I think this has been the first time I have actually seen a reason to bait Germany into doing sealion. If the Uk builds the IC in Egypt on UK1 and spends the rest of its income in England, then on UK2 builds 2 infantry and a tank in Egypt with the rest spent in England, Germany might just be tempted enough to try sealion. Even if the Germans take London, the extra forces in Egypt will tip the balance against Italy and bring the US and the Soviets into the war, which means London would only be occupied for 2 turns at most. Now there is something to think about  8-)


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Ruanek:

    On the other hand, building it UK1 might essentially invite Germany to do Sea Lion, which could be beneficial for the Allies (the USA and USSR enter the war earlier, troops are committed to London, etc.).

    Yes, that was one of the reasons to bait Germany in Alpha 2.  If one saw Japan pull out far from home (SZ 36 with no naval base for instance) one might invite Germany to attack England (by pulling out all your planes and landing them in Africa for instance) and have America jump into SZ 6 smashing what Japan built + taking Korea and/or Tokyo.

    Now Russia can attack too.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Ok so UK builds the complex UK 2,  Then what?  Italy is NEVER going to get in there??? Is that not the end of the game?

    Hell, you could build a transport in south Africa UK1, and use your 2 SAF infantry to reinforce Egypt, or otherwise.

    Or a transport and artillery for 12…

    My point is, with the 4 hits you get from your AA guns, that’s 4 infantry you don’t HAVE to build UK1.

    That’s 12 IPC’s the UK can SAFELY spend elsewhere….



  • Gargantua Im with you on this one its a great stratgey though I stop short at saying it breaks the game. There are two things to consider I think:

    1. is it really 4 less infantry you can afford to buy? Some might argue that you’re still better off buying the 4 extra infantry the AA “replace” just to have a bit more on the defense to make sealion even more costly to the Germans and thus less likely, the “Might as well just end ll threats to my capitol” argument if you will.
    2. If the UK places an IC in Egypt on UK1 then they are showing their intention to move their main effort in Europe away from London and in Africa. While this is a perfectly logical move to me (most of the UKs economy is based in Africa/mid-east) wouldnt a German player then be justified in spending more of its resources in the Med. against Africa?

    Im not saying the IC in Egypt is a bad idea, on the contrary, I think its one of the best I’ve heard I just dont think it breaks the game.



  • The only reasonable counter I can think is letting Italy get Paris and the other French Territories. Those 19 pludered IPCs plus the 4IPC from France, 3 IPC from SFR (I don’t remember if it was 3 or 2) Plus the starting 10 would get them 38 IPCs plus objectives if any. This could give Italy enough points to get all their NOs and become a big force. Even if Germany will be slightly weaker, at least you will have two major powers in Europe.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

35
Online

14.0k
Users

34.4k
Topics

1.4m
Posts