The British don’t even need to put much in India- they start with significant forces in India and Egypt- not to mention they can activate Arabia.
Why you should take France first
Quick question to see if anyone else has done this before: When taking France, have you ever tried using a solid supply chain from Berlin along the coast, purchasing plenty of artillery with a couple planes?
The Gamebook Rules states in Land Combat - Assault, “… Immediately before the combat is resolved, any defending artillery present in the attacked territory can make a pre-emptive strike against all of your offloading land units and fighters as they come ashore.” (page 22, lower half) If the chain is attacked from sea, defending artillery is given a bonus like that of the battleship bombarding.
This strategy defends the North/West coastline, and can reinforce itself with the next army from Germany’s capital. Germany can also direct new troops to Russia after Paris is taken, thus using the same strategy to help in the Eastern Front.
This strategy has been tried successfully once. (Paris was conquered in 5 turns.)
(Disclaimer: The overall strategy asks for Austria/Hungary to defend Germany’s eastern and southern borders at all costs (especially Poland), anticipating that Germany can help east in Russia after it has finished in France. Thus, Germany needs to send all troops (initial and purchased) West to quickly capture Paris and guard the coastline.)
legion3 last edited by
I assume you have instituted some sort of Railway rule allowing for greater movement? What does the UK do during this march to Paris and Italy?
Charles de Gaulle last edited by
Using artillery as coastal defense/reinforcements en route is a good strategy. Going for Paris first isn’t. Why? You cannot stop the Russians and the British will be destroying Ottomans. Austria Hungary will get hit badly as well by combined Italian and Russian forces. Alternatively, the Allies can divert Italian and British units to France to stop you from taking it.