This thread was about Alternative Allied strategies.
I think IF I had enough navy (which I said in my post) that two allied fleets are possible.
I must have overlooked that.Â Of course, if you have LOTS of transports, two Allied fleets are possible.
With enough dorky transport fodder in the Med, I would LOVE to trade these $8 ships for the German airforce.
Well, yes, if you have ENOUGH transports.Â But you did say you would have lots.Â And really, I agree that the Allies really would probably have a whole load of transports.Â That’s what the Allies do.
Based on this line of thinking, I do not necessarily think the northerly route is better.
I will attempt to convince you otherwise.Â Soon.
Couldn’t it bet BETTER to be able to put US units right into the Japanese fray in caucasus?Â In this case,Â Â Â the southerly route is FASTER than the northernly route.Â I also believe it’s important to continuously threaten Southern europe to tie up German units in sub-optimal buy placements.
YODA: Run! Yes. A Jedi’s strength flows from the Force. But beware of the dark side. Anger…fear…aggression. The dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice. . . . Yes, quick is the southern route.Â But consume you it will.
Remember, we are talking about alternative Allied strategies, and my point was mid game situations where the allies could certainly have a fleets of BB, a/c, dd(s) and tpts north AND south.
I’ve seen this used against me, effectively, BTW.
I myself have used two Allied Atlantic fleets; even when I start from a dominant position in the North Atlantic, I often try to hit the Mediterranean to threaten Southern Europe as well.Â Your points are quite valid.Â But I think that if the game is close, it is far more logical to combine the Allies at Archangel.Â
1.Â From Archangel, the Allies can retreat/advance to a strongpoint at Karelia, Norway, or even go as far as Northern Europe.Â Also, the Allied fleet off London can dump units at Karelia INSTEAD of Archangel, or Norway even.Â In contrast, from the Mediterranean, there is no easy way to link up forces.Â If your transports at Archangel are blown, they can swiftly be replaced with transports from London.Â If the transports at the Mediterranean are blown, the closest transports are the transports at Algeria, which will need TWO turns to reach the Caucasus and Ukraine.
2.Â To run transports from London to Archangel/Karelia only requires ONE transport per transport load.Â Each transport load from London to Caucasus, though, requires TWO transports.
3.Â If the Japs and the Germans threaten Caucasus, it is extremely difficult for the Allies to bulk up there.Â In contrast, usually Japan cannot threaten Archangel - just Moscow itselfÂ If Germany attacks the Archangel stack, it weakens Germany’s attack on Moscow, so Russia can face off against the Japanese.Â In contrast, bulking at Caucasus allows the Axis to CHOOSE which power attacks Caucasus - if any.Â If the Allies are bulked at Caucasus, Germany can simply bulk up at Archangel and/or West Russia, while Japan goes for Novosibirsk, forcing the Allies to retreat from Caucasus anyways - and if the Allies are forced to retreat from Caucasus to Moscow, that hinders the Allied offensive.Â On the other hand, the Allies have considerably better movement choices in the north, as the Allies can reinforce their attack while consolidating their forces.
Absolute Allied control of the Mediterranean is a great idea when Germany is already effectively contained and the real threat to Moscow ended.Â From there, the Allies can control Africa, take control of the Suez, start moving that big navy towards India (where the Allies can build an industrial complex), while the US builds a Pacific fleet to unite with the Atlantic fleet to smash the Japanese juggernaut.
I do not see that allowing the Germans to blow up most of the Allied transports midgame will necessarily help the Allied cause.Â What I see as a consequence is stranded UK and US units in Africa, while Germany and Japan gain the time needed to press on Moscow.Â I don’t see that holding the Caucasus with UK and US and USSR forces will necessarily improve Moscow’s situation, if Moscow has Germany and Japan pressing in at West Russia and Novosibirsk, and Germany can cut off the UK and US ground reinforcements for two turns.Â I do think that using Archangel as an offloading point offers the UK and US the chance to contain German aggression and at the very least reinforce Moscow, regardless of the number of Axis units in the Caucasus.