Allied "Star" Strategy
It occurs to me that, in a typical game, the Allies need only attack from 5 points (2 primary, 3 secondary) in order to defeat the Axis.
Point 1 (Primary): Norway
Allies take $3 from Germany, and then proceed to secure the Karelia VC for Russia. German advances on Russia are seriously weakend due to Allied strikes in Eastern using a combination of Norway/Karelia troops and troops amphibed in from UK directly to Eastern. Preserves USSR income and frees up Russia troops for other duties
Point 2 (primary): Algeria
A US initial landing in Algeria, combined with destruction of the German Med Fleet keeps UK income up during the critical early stages of the game. Subsequent small landings into Algeria can position enough troops into Africa to where Japan will not be able to fully secure it for many turns without a MAJOR effort into Africa (at the cost of other advances). Ancillary threat to Western by risk of combined UK/US strike using USA/UK forces in UK, Africa, Norway, and Karelia as well as threat to Southern Germany helps pull forces off the German Moscow advance in the mid-game, further strengthening the effectiveness of the Norway insertion forces.
Point 3 (secondary): Persia
Initially a UK responsibility, then becoming Russian as initial UK forces are destroyed Russia maintains control of Persia for the Brits, breaking up the Japan offensive along the Southern Prong, and drawing forces off the African Offesnive to increase the ability of the US forces to keep it liberated for UK. Initially trading India, then giving ground as Japan forces increase, finally trading Persia if Japan puts their major effort south. Additionally, if Japan foregoes African advances to crack Persia, the US can advance forces from Africa to create a 1-2 punch with the USSR to secure Persia.
Point 4 (secondary): Novo
The drop-dead line for Russia in Asia. Russia maintains INF presence in Novo for defense, and to counter advances in Sinkiang and Yakut. Using primarilly FIGs to add punch to counter-attacks, Russia keeps Japan from massing for a joint Yakut/Sinkiang strike on Novo, instead destroying one spearhead in either the central or northern avenue of attack, then trading Novo usign USSR forces after the other Japan prong advances to Novo.
Point 5 (secondary): South Pacific
A moderate push by the US into the South Pacific starting around Turn 4 can be a serious detriment to Japan, forcing them to spend cash on naval units instead of funding their Asian campaign. This makes Russia’s job easier in Novo and Persia, as well as allowing the US to use a bare minimum of forces for Africa, freeing up some US forces to assist with the Norway insertion.
The result of these 5 points of attack is to keep the Axis income down. Japan gains in the far east are offset by German losses in Africa and Europe. Germany is prohibited from being able to stage for a 1-2 punch with Japan on Moscow because UK maintains the ability to land a full 8 units into Europe (combined with previously landed units in Central Europe), tying up German forces, plus a small number of US units into Northern Europe to support the Brits for 1-2 punches as well as “breach and blitz” moves. Japan production in FIC, and later in India and FIC, is split between trying to break Persia, and trying to secure Africa (one or the other has to give or both fail). And valuable Japan IPC’s are spent on naval units to counter a slow, methodical advance by the US in the pacific which preserves remote UK IPC’s, and threatens both Japan and their remote high-value IPC’s.
Remember, all the Allies nees to do early on (barring dice or errors) is contain Axis income growth, and the economic might of the Allies will overpower the Axis.
You ever try it the way you’re saying?
Truth be told… no.
The games I have attempted this in I have either been A. thwarted by some bad dice early or B. been so successful that I have changed strats to capitalize on Axis weaknesses in other areas.
Most of the games I have played have been as the Axis. So I post this from the perspective of things that have given me grief as an Axis player.
There are of course easy counters to this strat, but each of them creates their own counters and cross-counters. For example, Japan can foroego the Southern route and go hot and heavy using TRNs and a Manch IC to drive relentlessly through Yakut on to Moscow. This largely foregoes the need to send troops to Persia and requires the Allies to get additional AF for defense to Moscow. But with each change in focus by the Axis (from their “normal” areas of advancement) it frees up Allied units from their assigned tasks to be used elsewhere… a lesser push in the South frees up USSR units for novo; a lesser push on Novo frees up units for Persia; a stronger push in Africa frees up Novo and Persia forces; a strong German push into Africa stengthens the Norway forces; etc.
My current game with Frood:
Same basic concept.
It does of course assume that Russia is able to thwart any attempted German moves on Caucuses (which you have done). But that kind of goes without saying
Remains to be seen if it’s an “effective” strategy
There are a few differences in your game to what i posted above.
It appears from the map that Germany still has a Med Fleet. The effect of that is:
1. It requires increased Allied forces to Africa, with the increases risk of a 1-2 Axis counter]
2. It reduces/elliminates the threat to Southern (which I notice is vacant in your current game, which is not a viable Axis move if there is no Med Fleet and Allied forces in SZ12)
Also, there is NO USA Pacific threat based on the JPG posted above (to the contrary, Hawaii and New Zealand have already fallen to Japan and there are zero USA forces in the Pacific)
Yeah, about the US Pac strat - I’m not sure it’s necessary early in the game. Particularly in this game where the only jap ship in the bottom of the ocean was the sz59 trn (big Whiff on Pearl defense!). The mighty Imperial Navy is difficult to go up against when they are untouched after Round 1…
Med fleet - true, but wasn’t necessary in this game to keep Africa…
Southern - rarely a real threat early-mid game, more of a gambit. If US moves to Southern, it is usually easily retaken by Germany, with no threat of further landings there because supply lines are too long for the US.
newpaintbrush last edited by
My strat with Allies is to get the Allied supply chain into Moscow. Japan can expand as much as they want.
I mean, okay, if Japan pulls its pants down and bends over, I’ll go into the South Pacific, but otherwise - north Atlantic and/or Africa.
I like this strat.Â While I’m not sure I follow it to the tee, I would consider what I do with the Allies very close to this.
I go Alg with UK and US in Rd 2 and 3.Â If possible UK will hit Nor in Rd 3 instead (depends on G navy situation).
By rd 4 I have US constantly shucking to Alg While UK focuses on the Nor/Kar connection.
The benfits here is the US already has 2 trns in the Atlantic and 4 inf (or 3 inf, 1 arm) per turn is more than enough to keep Afr clean, esp after a heavy landing in Rd 2 and 3.
And this frees up tons of income to go after Japan since your inital setup on US1-3 should provid you enough troops to supply Afr for up to 5-7 rds.Â You can even buy a third or 4th trn to really threaten SE.Â And I find this much more efficient then setting up a 3x3 or 4x4 to get US to Nor/Kar and that doesn’t even threaten SE or protect Afr if Japan lands a few token troops.
Once you control the Med and your initial US troops are dwidling down in Ecan from your Afr landings, you can position your US fleet in Sz 14 which really causes some problems for the Axis since you should have a large number of US troops in Egy/Trj and you are one move from having Allied ships in Sz 34.
I’ve found Presia tradeable for several rds with the initial UK/US units in the ME and Asia that you start with, and yep, just as they run out the UK and US have troops in Egy to deter Japan for the rest of the time.
Novo is certainly nice to defend esp if you have a lot of Russian armor to shift between the East and Western fronts.Â Although you can pull out of Novo as long as the Allies made good gains in Afr and Germany isn’t an offensive threat sitting in Ukr.Â By this I mean you don’t want both Japan and Germnay to be strong and on your boarders.Â You can deal with one or the other but both is trouble.
I really like the US Pacific push.Â As you pointed out Switch, just as Japan wants to put the final units on the board to finish off Moscow, they have to deal with the US.Â An added bonus to this is, provided you do a good job with the US setup, is that even if Moscow falls to Japan, the US is still a major threat to Tokyo.
(comparing an Atlantic push to a Pacific push)
Once the US sets up it’s shuck in either case, after placement it takes 3 moves to get units form EUS to Kar.Â (1 ecan, 1 uk, 1 kar)
But it only takes 2 moves to get units to EI from Wus or even 3 to Egy/Trj/Ind area.
The hard part is just setting it up, but once you have it going in the Pac it can really neutralize a lot of what Japan can do, regardless of how close they are to taking Mos.
axis_roll last edited by
The only difficulty would be deciding if the Pacific strategy is the right one.
This would be based on how strong Germany is:
Does she threaten Cau/Moscow? If so, you might want to ensure some good Western Allied pressure (western, southern, even SZ14 pressure all over the med as Darth indicated)
If Japan plays it close to home fleet wise (to keep US honest), then again, a US pacific fleet may be sub optimal.
I think if Germanys a huge inf ball in their big 4/5 territories, then it might be best to be happy having them contained and go after Japan with the Pacific fleet… you have the time to do so (and the axis have proven it might be their soft spot)