We need an allied playbook.

@crockett36 either you think outside of the box or you follow up on the red guide line.
You do or you don’t do.
There is no inbetween!

😉

@crockett36 said in We need an allied playbook.:

Let me say it again, our logistical system of transferring units over water must be mostly complete by turn 4 or 5 at the latest so that we may match the industrial output of the Axis with our own.

That is a very good point to give new players when they read up on an allied strategy.

I’m thinking of ways to summarize, or outline the overall allied playbook. @crockett36 would you say something like this is a fair representation what you have laid out?

1. Realize Strategic Objectives that will allow you to both nibble at the axis powers and build a shucking system. This can be deciding to station the Pacific fleet in Australia to threaten the money islands or Philippines as opposed to sea zone six. I draw this from your post earlier in this thread:
   "The four most plausible targets are, in no particular order:

Queensland / Indonesia / Philippines
Sea Zone 6 / Korea / Manchuria
Southern Italy / Northern Italy
Norway / Denmark / Western Germany / Berlin"

The US can’t go all in with units to achieve these objectives at the expense of building a shucking system. It must do both.

2. Engage in economic warfare by taking away territories or national objectives that fuel the economy of the axis war machine.
   This must also be guided by the principles you (Crockett) laid out regarding preserving allied units and sometimes allowing the axis to win with a goal of counter attacking. These principles stated were:
   "Therefore the principles that guide this Allied US strategy playbook are:

to preserve the Allied starting units
to give ground where it is hopeless or prudent
to determine the place of the battle when possible"

3. Finish purchasing units needed to shuck troops into the European theater by turn 4 or 5. That guides the U.S. a lot. This also comes from your last point:

“Let me say it again, our logistical system of transferring units over water must be mostly complete by turn 4 or 5 at the latest so that we may match the industrial output of the Axis with our own.”

These are three of the best things said in the thread IMHO. As the thread gets longer I like to summarize the thread this way so that if I am teaching a new player they can see the main points altogether.

@crockett36 my goal as the axis is to stick to one objective and that is if you go east plan for an invasion of Russia if you want to go west do sea lion and stick to it I find it easier to take out Britain than Russia sometimes unless you place factories with Germany right on the borders of Russia one in Poland or one in Romania

@Kingme This thread is about an allied strategy to beat the axis.

@Guam-Solo I think if England is about to be conquered defend it with infantry and fighters and start attacking German ships if your America go for Germany first always japan is too far away while putting something in the pacific for awhile

@aequitas-et-veritas outside the box, please.

@Guam-Solo great summary. I’m trying to be comprehensive. Still more to get to including true neutrals, fade and strike in detail, the disadvantages and advantages of being dispersed and more on how economic factors drive our strategy. I’m playing today and I’ll try to do a video on what my playbook is before the game.

@Kingme It is easier to take London. However, not a fan. Don’t tell anyone, but I like to take a panzer and sip lemonade in the Persian Gulf.

@crockett36 said in We need an allied playbook.:

@aequitas-et-veritas outside the box, please.

Then try out what DizzKnee suggested🤔😉😉

@aequitas-et-veritas i like bombers. I think flying 4 rounds worth to Moscow can save it against a t6 assault.

I have a game to post.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7wtCQPM8k&t=15s&list=PLjUekJ1aTPN_61m4Tqai4ssgz0U0TesID&index=2

This is my game plan for the Allies, economics driving strategy.

One of the factors that I’ve skirted around in discussing nibbling the edges is the problem of dispersion. Unless you are on a flotilla crossing the channel with a ton of other guys, the Allies generally will suffer from being too few in number to face any serious segment of the enemy’s ground machine.

On the one hand, it is Russia’s job to do that. On the other hand, the call for the second front is real and urgent. Factories give you a hope of producing troops right there where they are needed. Scandinavia or Greece for instance. This is often disappointing. However, a minor factory can produce enough units to nibble the edges. Doing so can keep our adversaries from earning more than the red zone 64 ipcs mentioned previously. These, though, cannot be relied upon to produce a death blow.

@crockett36 wow that was interesting I think if Germany is to survive in axis and allies global a fleet is definitely a must to have and they can do it too who was overall victor

@Kingme 12 hour game. It looked good for the allies. We certainly rescued Moscow, dominated the Atlantic, North Africa and the Middle East. Neither Sidney nor Bombay was threatened. Barbarossa was frustrated. The Japanese ballooned in Asia, but were being contained to China and Eastern Russia.

Ok, I’ve got a few points, first Europe:

• If Germany attacks both fleets (SZ110/111) you have to scramble something. I cannot emphasise this enough. If the BB goes to SZ111, you can probably scramble to there for free because a retreat is likely (not certain). Scrambling SZ110 when the BB isn’t there normally kills more Luftwaffe than RAF on average.
• You can still do Taranto even if you lose all the planes on London to a scramble - use the Scottish fighter. Without either it’s a big gamble.
• Don’t attack Ethiopia with only one transport. It can go bad and you normally have better use for a transport.
• Building a Persia factory UK2 is normally advised - which means you need to take it UK1.
• Taranto and SZ92 stack are stronger moves than Tobruk crush.

Against a J1 DOW:

• Don’t fear Strategic bombing. If they bomb you when they get Calcutta, they then need to repair it. This doesn’t apply in a J3/US3 DOW scenario.
• Moving to Burma UK1 with your whole force and a SZ37 DD blocker can stand against nearly the entire Japanese air force. Putting the Cruiser in SZ38 denies a landing spot too, or at least makes it much more difficult.
• Mechs allow flexibility for UK but it may not be useful UK1 if you stack Burma.
• Every extra turn Calcutta lives helps the allies a little. A US landing on Korea, reinforced by USSR, helps the allies a lot. Also keeps the Mongolian rule active.
• Midway naval base requires 3 ships to block. If there’s only one DD in range of SZ16 you should really capitalise on this.
• Entire Chinese coast can be hit from the Caroline Islands.
• Killing Japanese ICs on China is a major setback for Japan.
• Chinese troops often die easily so don’t fear doing moderately unfavourable trades with Japan especially if they cause Japan to take away from other attacks such as on India.

Thank you @simon33 for this very well layed out UK plan!

@crockett36 Let me say it again for clarity, the US needs to be putting 8 units or more in Eurasia every turn, without interruption after turn 7. They need to be a cohesive fighting force that will achieve victory, defend with its British allies and cause the enemy to bleed. This cannot be accomplished by several minor US factories sprinkled around the periphery. That strategy is good for sandbagging, but is a bandage and cannot achieve the critical mass needed for victory. It merely staves off defeat.

The Death Blow

Victory in Europe requires a naval shuck.