Best Axis strategy again ;)

[Norse]

Alright, been playing the demo some couple thousand times by now (lol), and tried out some different stuff. I know Im not alone bout this so I'd like to hear more about what your best strategies are, and what you think of this.

Yesterday I tried something, think this is my best axis strategy so far.

Subwarfare is awesome! I did the standard thing, defeating the Low Countries and France. Placed 3 research units on "advanced subs" and got the subs up to level 3. By the end of the demo I had 6 sub packs in the atlantic, and they wreacked havoc on the UK mpp's. You can easily knock out 20~30 UK mpp's each turn without loosing a single sub this way, maybe more if I didnt keep sending some subs back for repairs and resupply each turn. UK was almost defeated before I invaded by mis-spending the *few* UK MPP's left.

With all the subs in the atlantic Im both hurting UK, and protecting myself against any hostile actions from the USA, if they should declare war. That the european defence is as far out as in the atlantic also means that all remaining land units are shipped to the Russian border, and there is enough troops to make an adequate early defence against the ruskis. In the meantime, 3 corps, 3 armies, and 3 tank divisions backed by 2 HQ's and 4 airfleet's are knocking UK out of the war.

Subwarfare is definately a way to go!

Italy in all of this: I did not bother to get the HQ and the armies and the airfleet to go after Egypt. Because, UK falls anyway, why waste Italian MPP's on brawling with the UK troops then?? Instead I placed a research chit in Industrial Tech, and got an extra sub to wreack havoc on the UK convoys in the med. When UK falls, Italy can send the Italian fleet into the atlantic. Now *THAT* should definately keep the US at bay, the Italians could just whoop up the remaining non-axis minors in Europe. Greece, Irak, and send everything against Russia perhaps in Caucasus.

Summary: Axis owns the Atlantic, imagine, 6 german subs at level 3, 2 italian subs, 3 battleships and 1 cruiser. Heh, USA stays out of Europe for a very long time. All other units go against Russia for a maximum preassure, and UK is already out of the war. I think this is the way to go. Good luck allies! Only a miracle can save you now, and no, the winter won't save you this time!!

~Norse~

[Titan]

Sounds good.One thing about your Sub Strategy it would be intersting to no if the AI also does research,as the war progresses a human Allied player would be sure to counter it.1940-1941 were high points for the german subs,i doubt weather an Axis player could maintain that for long against a human allied player over the course of the war.

However i guess it does the job for a time which means you would have to make hay while the sun shines

[Lars]

I have done the same thing but I never bothered with the Sub tech as Germany already starts out with one. I use the points for long range fighter and more subs and air fleets. Operating under air cover based by Brest your subs are about invulnerable to attack in the demo.

Allied counters would be their own long range fighters and bombers. It does leave England rather open for a late Sealion as all their points are going to deal with the sub scourge. The Brits are going to have a rough time of it until the US comes in.

Try taking Greece with the Italians if you're not going to bother with Egypt.

[Straha]

I haven't played the demo for a long time now and can't remember: if we conquer the British homeland, but leave Egypt alone, does the UK then fall and give you Egypt for free? If so, it shouldn't be like this because it makes Sealion simply too tempting.

Straha

[ July 09, 2002, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: Straha ]

[Desert Dave]

I would agree, Norse, that this is a viable Axis strategy -- it is one I have used myself, and it reflects the actual doctrine of the Germans... but, there is an antidote.

The AI may or may not invest in SONAR research, but an Allied PBEM player likely would, and if they are playing someone who seems to favor the sub-pack swarm-strategy, then they SURELY would.

Also, instead of investing in the Bomber, they might also invest in another Cruiser? Or long-range air? Or form hunter-killer task-forces right from the outset, to counter the scourge BEFORE it gets out of control?

And this is where Hubert's tweaking of the Naval War will really help. Thanks Hubert!!!

Now there is the opportunity -- since less damage is done at each encounter, for hit & run and hide and seek and ploy, counter-ploy.

Each Admiral will have to decide for themselves when to patrol, when to steam back to port for re-supply or when to repair (before it becomes too late, ie, the smaller the unit the more vulnerable it is). There is tremendous opportunity now for an exciting and meaningful Battle of the Atlantic (Med as well).

All of this takes time -- months and months, so it is unlikely, against a good Allied player, that anyone could simply dominate the convoy lanes -- to the tune of 30 to 40 MPPs (... remember, another tweak was to add Liverpool's 10 MPP to the convoy route).

Of course, everything will depend on who gets what research Tech, and when. And, whether Industrial Tech will allow such a great expenditure on these kinds of Naval games.

Not to forget, that roughly 2000 or so MPPs that Norse is spending in the Atlantic, is NOT being used to parry the Red Menace.

You may blithely say that I will put JUST enough into Eastern Front to hold the Russians, but they are rapidly gearing up, and if you do not capture and deny them resources, that Red escalation may make your vaunt UnterSee fleet... superfluous.

[Norse]

If you are going to build alot of subs (I built 5 sub packs, one sunken), then why not put atleast 2 chits to research better sub technology? The subs are the best naval unit on attack with some tech, but they have 0 in defence, and don't dive too much, so you loose them rather quickly. That is what the sub tech does, it makes the subs dive more often so they stay alive much longer+gives them better attack. Subs can own the seas with fog of war on!

I belive someone said that when UK falls, then Gibraltar Malta and Egypt falls as well. Can someone confirm this?

Regardless, once Spain declares war on the allies then Gibraltar must fall. That way Italy can ship the fleet out. OOoohh Im going to love the atlantic naval battles! Can't wait for the full game!!

~Norse~

[MrWinterbottom]

Yep... once England falls, Gibraltar and Egypt falls into the grubby little axis hands.

Actually... I was going to invade Egypt with Italy just as England fell and I failed to notice that Egypt was mine.. So I invaded my own land you could say... And the funny part is that I didn't even notice until I realized there was no 8th Army waiting for me in Egypt... heh.

At any rate... the demo ended there so boho like.

[Lars]

Originally posted by Norse:

If you are going to build alot of subs (I built 5 sub packs, one sunken), then why not put atleast 2 chits to research better sub technology?

Because it's the demo and not the full game

[Desert Dave]

Another thing about Egypt -- I have conquered it a couple times, but apparently there is no plunder for doing so? If that's the case, then I'm not sure the Axis strategy should include Egypt at all?

I thought maybe you had to "capture or control" EVERY hex in Egypt to receive any bonus, and now that I think of it... I never succeeded in testing this theory before the Demo-time ran out.

Does anyone know if Egypt provides a plunder bonus? :confused:

[Norse]

You are right Immer Etwas, the defensive line vs the Russians won't hold too long once they get going. This strategy will haveto be tweaked once the full game is out, to find the perfect mix.

But I think this is the "guidelines" that the Axis will haveto play by.

Trying to own, or atleast put up a heafty resistance in the atlantic will force the UK player to decide wheter to counter the Axis navies, or defend the homelands. Like you said, that is a most likely human response (countering the Axis navies). But that is good!! All is good If the UK player does that, then the German player can still launch Operation Sea Lion with 3 corps (to draw attention from the main units of course), 3 armies, 3 tank divisions, 2 HQ's and 4 airfleets. What will UK have against this, if UK research on Sonar and builds a cruiser? Germany does *not* haveto own the atlantic to be able to successfully invade Britain. So anyway, this will definately put alot of pressure on UK (and USA). More importantly, the fight will be on allied territory, meaning the defensive units in France etc can just be shipped towards Russia. Who will invade France if Britain is about to fall?

We will haveto see how this works out in the full game, but in the demo, I sure found investing in alot of subs much more valuable than only going for airfleets. Too many airfleets will mean that a couple airfleets are left behind, because the range isnt long enough. You can research in long range aircrafts of course, but it is still a gamble. There will always be a need for more subs, so if you invest in subs then it won't be a waste.

Well, I think this is the proper guidelines for the Axis atleast. It'll just haveto be tweaked. Atleast this is what I'll swear to until I find a better strategy.

~Norse~

[Norse]

Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

Actually... I was going to invade Egypt with Italy just as England fell and I failed to notice that Egypt was mine.. So I invaded my own land you could say... And the funny part is that I didn't even notice until I realized there was no 8th Army waiting for me in Egypt... heh.

LOL! That is hillarious m8 Goes down as one of thoose classic moments

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Immer Etwas:

Does anyone know if Egypt provides a plunder bonus? :confused:

I'm just guessing.. but I think it's because Egypt is already considered under Allied(That is under british rule) control and thus you will not get a plunder bonus for conquering Egypt. It's kinda like you are just plucking some more land from the Allies without actually conquering a nation.

Uuuh.. does that make any sense?

At any rate.. I think for the plunder bonus for Egypt you have to take England instead.

I'm just guessing anyways.

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Norse:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

Actually... I was going to invade Egypt with Italy just as England fell and I failed to notice that Egypt was mine.. So I invaded my own land you could say... And the funny part is that I didn't even notice until I realized there was no 8th Army waiting for me in Egypt... heh.

LOL! That is hillarious m8 Goes down as one of thoose classic moments </font>

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Mr Winterbottom:

I'm just guessing.. but I think it's because Egypt is already considered under Allied(That is under british rule) control and thus you will not get a plunder bonus for conquering Egypt. It's kinda like you are just plucking some more land from the Allies without actually conquering a nation

Considered part of the greater Commonwealth, eh? That makes sense I guess, but now there is less reason to invest time and effort into Afrikan Korps campaign.

Maybe some other incentive... Suez port, with ability to circumnavigate the Horn? If all you receive (... getting awful greedy already, and the full game is not even out!) is Alexandria's MPPs, then I wonder if there is enough to justify the transport effort and expense and the bleeding of units away from the Eastern Front? :eek:

[Norse]

Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

Yep.. when it dawned on me I was like.. "Oooooh yeeaaaa......... Hope nobody saw me."

But then again, it was the ITALIANS that did the invasion and I wouldn't put it beyond them to pull a stunt like that.. Yea.. that's it... cough.[/QB]

LOL, so here is the proof, Italians couldn't fight due to very horrible leadership (I think there was a thread about this before)

Still laughing, got any others? :cool: <--- got the tan in Egypt hehehe

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

OOOOO Sollllle' mio la la, la what the- :eek:

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Immer Etwas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> As originally posted by Mr Winterbottom:

I'm just guessing.. blah blah

Considered part of the greater Commonwealth, eh? That makes sense I guess, but now there is less reason to invest time and effort into Afrikan Korps campaign.

Maybe some other incentive... Suez port, with ability to circumnavigate the Horn? If all you receive (... getting awful greedy already, and the full game is not even out!) is Alexandria's MPPs, then I wonder if there is enough to justify the transport effort and expense and the bleeding of units away from the Eastern Front? :eek: </font>

[Norse]

Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

Well... it might be worth it depending on the big picture... Let's say you are invading or preparing to invade Britain.. Then I think it would be worth it to put some extra pressure on them. You know, forcing a sea battle in the mediterranean while putting some pressure on 8th Army in Egypt to make the British use some of their precious MPP over there rather than on Englands defense.

Depends on your playing style I guess.[/QB]

The Italian fleet can always open a can o whoop ass on the Royal Navy in the med. A human UK player will send some reinforcements Im sure, like the battleship in Gibraltar and one from Britain. But still, as the Italians there is no reason to wait, just go in and smack the Royal Navy there, the Italian navy can do it (unless u point in the wrong direction again lol! )

Actually invading Egypt takes alot of time and effort. You need atleast a HQ, and you haveto ship in an unsupported army behind the Royal corps as well. Hell, this alone isn't even a guarenteed success, and it already cost too much IMO. Better just prepare for the real thing, the naval war.

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Norse:

Curse your wit!

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Norse:

Not to be Mr.Picky or anything, but I didn't say you actually had to conquer it.. All you really need is to put pressure on the British gangsters..

But let's say that you don't invade England.. but you are preparing for the coming conflict with the Soviets.. Kicking the Brits out of Egypt and taking Iraq so you can put some real heat under the Soviets from the south would make sense to.

It all depends on the big picture.

[Norse]

Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

Not to be Mr.Picky or anything, but I didn't say you actually had to conquer it.. All you really need is to put pressure on the British gangsters..

But let's say that you don't invade England.. but you are preparing for the coming conflict with the Soviets.. Kicking the Brits out of Egypt and taking Iraq so you can put some real heat under the Soviets from the south would make sense to.

It all depends on the big picture.[/QB]

Yeah, you are right. Taking Egypt for Italy will put alot of preassure on the allies, and ussr, as you mentioned.

But, a human allied player will most likely send in naval reinforcements for the UK there, before Italy joins the war. Or even worse, France may declare war on Italy and send the French battleships to knock out a couple Italian naval units (before France falls, may well be worth it).

As Italy, it will be very difficult to send in the required units to Egypt if Axis naval supremacy cannot be obtained, and the MPP's are spent on getting the HQ and maybe an airfleet in support. To make matters worse, USA will join the war soon and can send even more battleships to the med.

I can see how Italy's lifeline will stand and fall with Gibraltar, not Egypt. If Gibraltar can be taken, then the allies can't send in more naval units to the med. Then Italy can take Egypt, Vichy-France, Irak, etc and become a huge force to be reckoned with. Imagine, when this is accomplished, and Italy sends out her fleet to the atlantic, then the allies will be in big trouble

What do you think?

[ July 09, 2002, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Norse ]

[Canuck_para]

The main advantage of taking Egypt, as I see it, is to open the way to Iraq and the points you can gather there. This also gives you an attack point on southern Russia.

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

Some one here on another post mention Sun Tzu....

one of his main teachings was: Never attack from the front so that you are pushing you r enemy back onto his reserves and supplies, this is what hitler did with the USSR, had iraq been cleared, a giant armor picer couldve deprived russia of its oil at the onset of barbarossa.

[Straha]

I propose that, for gameplay reasons, even if the British homeland is Axis occupied, the UK should not surrender as long as Egypt is not also gone.

Straha

[MrWinterbottom]

Originally posted by Norse:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MrWinterbottom:

(snip)

But let's say that you don't invade England.. but you are preparing for the coming conflict with the Soviets.. Kicking the Brits out of Egypt and taking Iraq so you can put some real heat under the Soviets from the south would make sense to.

It all depends on the big picture.

Yeah, you are right. Taking Egypt for Italy will put alot of preassure on the allies, and ussr, as you mentioned.

But, a human allied player will most likely send in naval reinforcements for the UK there, before Italy joins the war. Or even worse, France may declare war on Italy and send the French battleships to knock out a couple Italian naval units (before France falls, may well be worth it).

What do you think?[/QB]</font>