Thoughts on a G1 DOW in BM3

  • 2019 2017 '16

    Axis I think after a fair bit of experimentation, execute thus:

    • Buy sub + 2bombers
    • Attack Baltic States and Bessarabia with a few inf and planes. Attack Eastern Poland strongly.
    • Attack Normandy with at least inf+art+ftr from Holland. Ftr can reach Rome assuming it survives.
    • Use 1 tank from Greater Southern Germany for France, two for Eastern Poland.
    • Go hard for SZ111 with at least sub+3ftr+3tac. Perhaps harder to discourage a scramble.
    • Fight Normandy before France so that you know if you can consider Italy strong; although I think this strategy is incredibly unlikely in BM.
    • NCM Baltic fleet to SZ114 and mobilise the sub there. The sub is needed to absorb a hit, otherwise the USSR can sink the fleet. Losing the Baltic Fleet is a major setback and you don’t want to allow a naval blocker to be put down. I guess an alternative to this would be to move to SZ112 at the end of G1 and don’t buy the sub. I’m in two minds about this one.

    Japan should keep peace J1 & J2. J3 too if the USA builds a lot in the Atlantic. I’ve been going back to building an IC J1 although if there is a UK2 DOW this idea is somewhat debatable. Ignore Chahar to save an inf but still take Anwhe, Hunan and Yunnan (don’t send the art there - redirect to Hunnan IMO). DOW on USSR and take Siberia but leave Amur for J2 to delay the activation of the Mongolian rule. Probably take Kweichow and Szechwan later if possible although I’m a bit dubious about this.

    USA should go nearly full Pacific. UK have to take the burden of stopping Germany from reaching Moscow. USA won’t reach in time.

    UK should still do Taranto, Axis should scramble more frequently than normal because the Luftwaffe have a huge amount to do G2 normally.

    G2, Germany consolidates their main force in Eastern Poland although if Novgorod can be hit well, do so. You need to end turn here with at least one warship, preferably a DD to sink the SZ125 sub and block the Arctic Lend Lease 4IPC USSR3.

    More generally, Japan can’t be ignored in this scenario. Calcutta as a few planes which can fly up to defend Moscow and can buy more. If they’re given a free hand and don’t need to defend, they can provide too much help to USSR.

  • What’s BM3?  Is your goal here simply an effective G1 dow?
    Why is your Baltic fleet so important to maintain that you’re willing to sacrifice some planes in 111 by not sending in your BB?
    Why is it important to take Normandy instead of sending everything to France?  If you’re already sending 2 tanks east, France will start cutting into your more expensive pieces.
    Why do you assume US will go full pacific?  If Japan isn’t declaring war until J3, and making that obvious by sending transports into Siberia, as America I’d let the Pacific wait and instead stockpile an invasion force headed for Gibraltar ready to go round 4.  It won’t get there in time to save Moscow, but if you’re hoping to take Moscow by turn 5, you’re throwing everything at it and keeping nothing behind to defend Paris.  Or Rome.  Or Cairo.

  • 2019 2017 '16

    BM3 - Balanced Mod 3. Mainly played in league.

    Normandy is important because it threatens the Vichy rule.

    You risk a plane or two in SZ111. Without the BB, it’s hard to threaten an amphibious assault on Leningrad. The sub can get lucky and hit the cruiser, which is curtains.

    Re: USA. You might send a small force to the med; Why would you stockpile there though? If I was playing a G1 DOW and you did that I’d keep you out of the war so you couldn’t reach Rome until US6 even if I didn’t put down a blocker, which I would.

  • 2019 2018 2017 '16

    BM = Balanced Mod., a more balanced version of a G40 2nd edition.  Game.

    Here is a link to the rule set:

    Hey Simon33,
    I recommend hitting sz 110 with 2x SS, 3xFtr plus 3xTacB and the BB to have a 97% chance of winning even when the UK Player decides to scramble.

    Up’s: neutralizing one Part of the UK fleet with good chances and the option to retreat if the battle is not going as planned. UK will deal with the remainings and will be delayed for one round sending planes to the Med…
    I think sinking the UK fleet is still a must, b/c US don’t have to spend much on ships for the Atl the first turns and can focus more on the Pac side with a BB or two, two CV’S and DD allready on the board.

    Down’s: BB is gone and we have to think about a way to establish a German Navy wich can at least fend off one turn.
    Either an AB in Norway when German income is reaching 80 plus or SS Bull paired with Luftwaffe.

    Bypassing Vyborg:
    Hitting sz115 with a CR plus 1x TacB and 2xBmbr will also do the job; BUT instead of attacking Vyborg we may only reinforce Finnland via Norway and sending the TT w. 1x Inf plus 1x AA .

    We leave sz 111 alone.
    In most cases they will either flee or helping to sink the Bismarck.
    The 2nd opt. gives us the opportunity to anihilate the rest of UK fleet.

  • I had a feeling the answer to my first question (what’s BM3?) would answer all the rest of my questions.

    You’ve just opened up an entirely new world for me.  I like the idea of compartmentalizing some of the NO’s.  It looks like they’ll make for much more nuanced Pac and Med play.  Is the only way to prevent the Vichy Rule to take Normandy back on UK’s turn with his 109 transport?

    The additional NO’s also look to be slightly in favor of Allies (especially Russia’s lend lease).  That combined with Marines and Chinese guerrillas add up to a real advantage.  Is it enough to balance gameplay though, by most players’ accounts, so that a bid isn’t needed?

    Simon, I’m not familiar with the different mechanics and patterns of BM, but with 3 pairs of planes in 111 and a fig in Normandy, you only have 5 planes for Baltic States and Bessarabia.  Is this enough?  When I G1 dow, I like to send in only 2 inf to Baltic and 1 to Bessarabia.  (One inf from Romania to Yugoslavia to hop my Austrian troops over on the retreat.)  I don’t like to send less than 3 inf to E. Poland because if they take 2 hits taking it, all my tanks are exposed to a counter attack.  Do you have any problem clearing out Baltic and Bessarabia stretched that thin without losing planes?

  • 2019 2017 '16

    I did but then I thickened the attack a little! Perhaps not enough, I’m not sure to be honest. I think in my last attack I used 1ftr 1tac 1sb 1inf for Bessarabia. It’s a gamble because if they roll two hits you lose a plane first round and you could only kill one inf.

    I don’t think you should leave 111. 110 has about the same naval strength but with a 3 plane scramble rather than 1. Also, it’s hard to hit the SZ91 cruiser if you hit 110. I think 91, 106 and 111 with 2,2,1 subs are about optimal. The downside obviously is that you can lose a plane or two in 111. Also, if the battle goes really bad, the BB isn’t repaired straight away.

  • I agree 111 needs to be taken out, but that’s why I suggest your BB.  You won’t be able to attack Novgorod on G2 anyways; Russian cruiser might block you and your eastern stack won’t be there yet.  So buy a destroyer or two on G2.  Russia can still clear out your modest navy after you kill its fleet if he’s determined to do so, but at the cost of a plane or more likely two.  The downside (other than that trade-off just mentioned, if you consider that a downside) is that you’ll need to buy a destroyer on G1 to protect your transport, which is two extra mech not protecting your early advance from a counterattack.  The upside is you save a plane or two in 111, which is much more valuable for a Crussia than a BB or being able to ferry a couple troops to Novgorod on G3.  Also you can take 111 with only 2 pairs of planes, allowing you to beef up your eastern attacks.  If your raid on 111 only takes two hits, I suggest destroying your BB and keeping your sub.  127 sub or RAF could kill your BB, but royal navy only has one destroyer and three destinations.  Keeping the sub allows you to take 3 IPC from Russia for a few turns.

    In BM3 G1 dows, does Japan usually attack Amur and allow Russia to collect 4 IPC from Persian lend lease, or does he often just keep a sub in SZ 5 to keep the NO bonus down to 2?  It seems as though that NO is pretty well designed to offset Siberian losses since Japan isn’t likely to take but a couple of territories for the first few rounds.  I guess what I’m really asking what sense is there in attacking Siberia at all if it won’t really help Germany?  Why not use those troops towards your Burmese hammer?

  • 2019 2017 '16


    In BM3 G1 dows, does Japan usually attack Amur and allow Russia to collect 4 IPC from Persian lend lease, or does he often just keep a sub in SZ 5 to keep the NO bonus down to 2?  It seems as though that NO is pretty well designed to offset Siberian losses since Japan isn’t likely to take but a couple of territories for the first few rounds.  I guess what I’m really asking what sense is there in attacking Siberia at all if it won’t really help Germany?  Why not use those troops towards your Burmese hammer?

    Amur is typically attacked J2 if I’m Axis. What do you mean attacking Siberia doesn’t help Germany? It reduces USSR income and therefore infantry.

    If the Allies stay out of the war in the Pacific, you can normally block the Burma Rd soonish anyway.

    Thinking some more about preserving the BB, another reason to do that is to help defending SZ112 once USA are in the game. Even if Moscow is down, USA will be hitting France and/or Italy.

  • The battle ship can help defend 112, but so can the 1-3 planes you’d lose in 111, Baltic and Bessarabia.  (I’m included those Russian territories as potential losses for planes because without a BB in 111, your eastern attacks are thin.  You could retreat when only air is left, but then Russia might have enough to attack E. Poland.)

    I haven’t played BM yet, so I’m not familiar with how the new NO’s affect gameplay.  It looks like Russia gets an extra 2 IPC starting his second turn for his lendlease in Persia after a Japanese attack.  This is assuming Germany has a warship in 125 and Japan also put something in 5 other than transports, else the bonus is more.  This extra income from a Japanese attack offsets the losses of Siberia and the Soviet Far East.  And he’s likely to take Siberia back since you only have 2 guys there and you haven’t put anything in Amur, in which case his IPC balance regarding the far east is actually in the black.  You can put pressure on him to back him up on R3 after you take Amur, but at that point, how much of a difference does it really make?  I assume with a G1 dow you’re trying to crush Russia ideally by turn 5 but hopefully by turn 6.

    Difference in Russian IPC net with Japan attacking.
    R1 moot
    R2 +2 Persian lendlease      -1 Soviet Far East (regained Siberia)
    R3 +2 "                            -3 “, Siberia, Amur
    R4 +2 "                            -5 “,”,”, Sakha, Buryatia
    Germany attacks moscow before R5
    The total difference is 3 IPC, 6 if Germany’s push on Moscow comes G6, so one or two inf.  In the meantime the far east is sucking up a lot of Japanese resources (i.e. planes) if Japan wants to keep pressure on to make Russia’s +6 stronger stack take a step back.  Taking Siberia makes sense in the long run, but with a Crussia strategy in which those losses don’t have the time to significantly affect Russia’s income, is it worth it?

    I am of course assuming that Russia’s leaving a token of force of about 4 in Sakha in order to respond to a potential Siberian landing, but even if he doesn’t, or if his attack fails, he only loses 2 more IPC.

    Am I missing something in the understanding of these NO’s?

  • 2019 2017 '16

    The extra NO starts in round 3. “After round 2” I think the wording is.

  • 2019 2017 '16

    One additional comment - landing a bomber G1 on Romania allows bombing Stalingrad G2, which is something desirable if Italy can’t do it or if they get shot down in the process. You can’t let them build there unmolested.

  • I overlooked the starting in round 3 contingency.  So Russia is down an extra 2.  Down 5 IPC on a G5 attack and 7 on a G6.  One more in either case if Russia doesn’t retake any of the provinces.  I can see how that adds up a little.  2 or 3 inf can make a big difference when you’re attacking early with small stacks.  Still, the new NO’s certainly dampen the effectiveness of a Siberian attack by giving Russia an extra 2-4 IPC (depending on G5 or G6) than with OOB NO’s.  And much more than that if Germany and Japan don’t deny the lendleases in 125 and 5.

  • 2019 2017 '16

    Germany has to deny the NO SZ125 but Japan can deny it by taking out Amur.

    Ran some numbers last night. If the USSR buys an additional fighter, with 4 bombers Germany still has a positive expected value from bombing G3. To make it negative, USSR needs to buy two fighters. USSR doesn’t want to spend money on fighters so I guess it is still worthwhile for Germany to threaten it. Could conceivably be worthwhile to attack even with a negative expected value because USSR’s money is worth more than Germany’s. The problem is that if you lose a bomber or two, do you have enough to hit it next turn?

Log in to reply

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 11
  • 11
  • 21
  • 16
  • 16
  • 80
  • 12
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys