attacking norway with allies

[arado234]

I tried 4 times attacking norway with the british right away.3 times it snowed for 3turns & my invasion supply level went way down & one time i made it no problem.Is it better to wait untill 1940 for better weather?

[The K Man]

I'm not crazy about an early attack. If you fail, it gives Germany 2 free infantry, and they save money not having to do an amphib attack. It also leaves the Uk island quite vulnerable to the sealion attack later in 1940. I could see doing it later (when Uk has more forces) if Germany hasn't attacked Norway and he's occupied elsewhere.

[Night]

I wouldn't do it. Atleast from my prospective it is too expensive an operation that early in the game. Germany is too close with its navy and airforce plus even if you take it there is nothing really stoping him from just taking it from you after any excess forces have been withdrawn. Only thing you would be gaining and denying him would be loot.

[TaoJah]

You need an army (you get the BEF at turn one) and a corpse (you got one at the start) to take Oslo. Put them both in Amfiby and move the French fleet ahead of them to Oslo. First land the corpse next to Oslo, then land the army, attack the 3-corps with your army, move in with your corps.

Now, Germany can not defend with it's fleet, because your French fleet will attack it. You'll loose the French fleet, but that's okay, you'll lose it anyway when France falls, so...

Move your UK fleet towards Norway just in case, if the Germans decide to be foolish and defend Norway, you can attack them with the French and finish them off with the UK fleet.

It's true that Norway is in striking distance of his airfleet, but only if you move too slow. If you do it on turn one and two you'll get a free pass : he won't move his planes to Denmark THAT fast.

[Terif]

Norway is standard move for Allies in the meantime and it works 100% of the time if you do it right:

- put your corps from London into amphibs in turn 1, place your army at Edinbourg and amphib it turn 2.

- this way your 2 amphibs will reach Oslo at turn 4 and in turn 4 it never snows (P.S.: never invade anywhere during snow since your attack values are halved...).

- when you land, do it with your corps first so it will take the landing losses and your army lands at str 10. This way your army has expected damage of 4 which means the defending corps is dead with 100% certainty (P.S.: don´t make the mistake to first move your army another hex accross land because then it would loose its 25% attack bonus and has only an expected damage of 3)

And as TaoJah already said:

Use your french navy to clear the path - if the Axis player is so crazy to sacrifice his fleet for nothing, be happy and help him with his kamikaze mission .

P.S.: attacking allied ships with airfleets is a pretty bad idea and very expensive mistake many unexperienced players make (especially if they come from SC1 where it was a good idea ). But in SC2 this is one of the main reasons the game gets lost for Axis as among other things combat values of AFs vs ships have been halved from SC1 to SC2.

[ December 20, 2006, 04:14 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[Retributar]

GOOD ADVICE "Terif!" for those who are in a position to use it!, i,...however will not be using it just quite yet!, 'Even-so',...your advice is welcome by myself 'at-least', and i will now imprint your seasoned learning experiences into my thought-process!.

[arado234]

I must have waited one turn to long to do it.Thats why it snowed on my turn.The one time i did make it i took norway with no problem and the ai did attack with its ships and subs and i did wipe them out.

[ev]

Attacking Norway takes away at leaast two units from France and England. Is it worth the risk?

When I play Axis I pass on Denmark and Norway and put all may resources against France... and inmediately turn on England (Sea Lion late summer '40). I sacrifice everything, even some reseach, to maximize my chances of a successful Sea Lion. And a successful Sea Lion is an early Sea Lion. As time goes on, it becomes more and more dificult.

...if the Allied player opens another front, I ignore it, or send Italians to delay and tie more more Allied resources. But I keep the German Army and Air Force focused on the primary goal: London's Big Ben.

I am reading von Manstein's Memoirs: Lost Victories. It is a great book. I recommend it to any one interested on this subject.

[Terif]

Sealion is a totally different question...

Against the AI or an unexperienced player it is surely a game winner - but against a good and prepared allied player it only means a short game and certain defeat for Axis .

Surely, Axis will usually win the battle for Britain sooner or later if they throw everything against the isle, but at the time they get it, they will already have lost the war (e.g. see AAR here ).

In any case - if Axis goes for Sealion, then Norway is more than ever the best choice for Allies since they can bring those units back to Britain any time within 1-2 turns and improve their income situation with the conquest.

[TaoJah]

Originally posted by ev:

Attacking Norway takes away at leaast two units from France and England. Is it worth the risk?

There is no risk involved AT ALL... It's a garanteed win. The only question is : do you win Norway or do you win Norway plus the German fleet

And you can safely move both units back to the UK on turn 5 and 6, plenty of time for them to use as defence against a Sealion.

Against the AI, however, you could use different tactic even at the highest difficulty level.

Instead of taking Norway, move EACH AND EVER UK unit to France and defend France. If you use all UK MPPs and all your UK troops (including the ones in Malta, Gibraltar and Egypt) you can keep France until Russia joins.

When the Russian troops start pooring into Germany while he is still fighting in France, it's game over VERY fast !

[Lars]

Originally posted by Terif:

Norway is standard move for Allies in the meantime and it works 100% of the time if you do it right:

- put your corps from London into amphibs in turn 1, place your army at Edinbourg and amphib it turn 2.

- this way your 2 amphibs will reach Oslo at turn 4 and in turn 4 it never snows (P.S.: never invade anywhere during snow since your attack values are halved...).

- when you land, do it with your corps first so it will take the landing losses and your army lands at str 10. This way your army has expected damage of 4 which means the defending corps is dead with 100% certainty (P.S.: don´t make the mistake to first move your army another hex accross land because then it would loose its 25% attack bonus and has only an expected damage of 3)

And as TaoJah already said:

Use your french navy to clear the path - if the Axis player is so crazy to sacrifice his fleet for nothing, be happy and help him with his kamikaze mission .

P.S.: attacking allied ships with airfleets is a pretty bad idea and very expensive mistake many unexperienced players make (especially if they come from SC1 where it was a good idea ). But in SC2 this is one of the main reasons the game gets lost for Axis as among other things combat values of AFs vs ships have been halved from SC1 to SC2.

And the counter?

Properly spaced sub screen followed up by fleet and air strikes to make the UK pay the blood price or just a later Axis invasion of Norway?

[Terif]

In 1.04 it was standard as Axis to conquer Sweden and liberate Norway right after France cause this increased their (italian-) mpps significantly.

Now in 1.05a Axis economically have only disadvantages if they conquer Scandinavia, so this makes no sense any more and Norway usually simply belongs to the allied hemisphere .

Nevertheless it can make strategically sense if the axis player chooses to leave Spain and/or Africa neutral so he has the units and time to secure his northern flank - it´s the choice of the axis player which way he wants to go.

[TaoJah]

Originally posted by Terif:

in 1.05a Axis economically have only disadvantages if they conquer Scandinavia

How is that ? I mean, how do you LOOSE MPP if you take Norway and Sweden ?

And if so, is that also the case after you take Leningrad making all the cities, ports and resources jump to 8 ?

[Terif]

In 1.04 Italy got 30 additional mpps/turn from Sweden while cut off and with connection via Finland even 48 mpp/turn.

Now in 1.05a only Germany can get mpps from Scandinavia via convois. As long as Scandinavia is neutral convois can´t be intercepted. But if Axis conquer it they don´t get a single mpp more than when it is neutral, it only gives Allies the opportunity to eliminate the convois by either bombing the ports out of order or occupying the start or destination port.

But much more important:

- A DoW increases US and russian readiness a lot, i.e. much more mpps for Allies

- to conquer it Axis have to amphib several heavy units which is very expensive

- and when Axis have conquered Scandinavia, they need to garrison it with at least 3 units (better 4 if they want to keep Oslo..).

So in the end Axis only have to invest a lot of mpps to get Scandinavia, have high costs to hold it and get nothing in return mpp wise .

So there is only the strategical advantage that they can´t be attacked any more from Scandinavia in their back yard the baltic and eastern Germany. If this is worth the costs and disadvantages, is something the axis player has to decide and highly depends on the overall strategy.

[ev]

Originally posted by Terif:

But much more important:

- A DoW increases US and russian readiness a lot, i.e. much more mpps for Allies

- to conquer it Axis have to amphib several heavy units which is very expensive

- and when Axis have conquered Scandinavia, they need to garrison it with at least 3 units (better 4 if they want to keep Oslo..).

I agree...

The Axis player wins by capturing London and Moscow.

The clock is the Axis player's worse enemy. The Allies overproduce the Axis by a long shot. Since half the year is either Winter or Mud, the Axis has roughly 15 months of spring and summer time to take London, Moscow, Paris, and, Warsaw...

If you are not there by winter 42-43, you can kiss good bye.

The Axis player cannot afford to play around with secondary diversions. Even North Africa is a questionable enterprise for the Axis.

As I see it, the axis strategy is FOCUS, SMASH, FOCUS, SMASH. And, the allied strategy is DELAY, DELAY, OUTPRODUCE, OVERWHELM.

[Lars]

I don't know, seems just wrong for Norway to be, in essence, a freebie for the UK. You're going to deprive the Axis of a heck of a lot of mpps, plus as Terif noted, open up the whole northern flank of Germany.

Perhaps something needs to be done playbalancewise to discourage it. Increased readiness hit on US and USSR?

[arado234]

It seems to me you guys are saying if you take norway with the british right away you shouldnt attempt to hold it from germany.I would then think the reason for taking it would be to deny germany the spoils for the initial take over & the mpps from norway as long as possible.If germany wants to take it back she can but it would be risky with the french & british navy still around.Correct?

[Bromley]

The French navy won't be around. The British could defend Norway with the navy, but they then forgo the turkey shoot as the Axis approach Brest and run the risk of not spotting a Sealion.

Still, worth a corps in Oslo to slow the Axis down (you may be able to rebuild it). I like leaving a corps in ?Trondheim? (northern town), as it takes a concerted effort to kill it and in the meantime you block access to the convoy.

[SeaMonkey]

Do I need remind you guys what a training ground for the Luftwaffe Norway makes when the UK comes calling?

[arado234]

I kind of thought that to SeaMonkey.What if germany took denmark right away and used denmark to base aircraft to attack wounded allied ships.

[Bromley]

SeaMonkey. Won't the LW be training somewhere anyway? At least that stops them training on Malta or, worse, Egypt. Plus, if they're used vs Trondheim I'd have thought that the Axis have to transport an HQ or risk losses. If you can survive the initial landing, there's always a chance that you can operate the corps out of Oslo, further wasting LW time as they reposition again.

If you're referring to anti-ship missions, Terif has said that that costs the Axis more than they gain.

[hellraiser]

"The Axis player wins by capturing London and Moscow." - this was back in the v 1.0. Now you need also Stalingrad The old win conditions made it far too easy for Axis to win. Even an average player vs Yoda himself could do it.

With Stalingrad now a condition for the war win, games are longer so side theatres like Skandinavia may become important.

Regarding LW training - if Axis player decides to train his air on Oslo (without going for Sweden first) and liberate Norway - this may prove very costly because Axis need to place its airforce in Denmark thus the RN can hit axis air at leisure. Unless Axis has a sick long range tech, training in Norway is not a good ideea.

Ref freebies - indeed too many in the game at least for my taste. Moreover I feel that the game now forces Axis to play the 'good guys', passive, build up style game, more reacting than acting at least to a certain moment in the game.

Terif said that a very aggro Axis approach is feasible but I haven't seen that since my 1.05 MP experience is nyll

[hellraiser]

"If you're referring to anti-ship missions, Terif has said that that costs the Axis more than they gain."

Well, usually Terif states his point of view having a so called optimal strategy in mind.

His concepts are easy to grasp yet quite difficult to implement:

1. SC2 is a land warfare game - so air and ships are just support.

2. Apply overwhelming pressure at the spot of your picking thus negating the MPP advantage the other side may be having.

3. His strategy is more or less optimized for improving Axis' middle game position so as to be able to crush Russia at a fast pace while keeping enough forces in west to slow the allies down to a crawl.

Judging his multiplayer game records, it appears he is applying the most effective strategy.

OTOH, other players may choose different paths. Possibly sub optimal or even game losers. But occassionaly game winners.

The sub wars, Axis bomber strategy, etc. Under those strategies, killing ships is important.

Whilst Terif in his 'land warfare focus strategy' does not reinforce any axis damaged ships and rarely pursues aggro actions against the superior Royal Navy / US navy unless the allied player falls in a trap, those pursuing a naval war (lots of high tech subs, bombers etc) will kill any allied ship which each opportunity, fighting to rule the sea and hamper or interdict the western arm of the allies.

I wrote this because those words of Terif regarding attacking allied ships with air being a bad ideea, were said because indeed it doesn't fit at all in his strategy, so he has a lot of sense. But if you ask Rambo for example who is a well known sub addict, you may find a different answer, which again would make sense because Rambo plays differently.

One thing said by Terif holds true irrespective of your Axis' strategy - concentrated firepower. This is the most delicate aspect of the Axis' gameplay and Terif had applied it first, constantly improving on it. I guess he was the first to notice that the mpp differential is not so important in this game if you focus your efforts with maximum efficiency in a spot of your choosing. To me, at least until now, this is THE greatest contribution so far to the development of the strategic aspect of SC2 MP games.

[Epaulard]

Overall, i'd say that any amphibious transport shouldn't be made without a very important reason.

Sealion is almost suicide against a good ally player.

Norway and Sweden doesn't look a good idea for me, as you get convoys for nothing. Why should you invest MPP in amphib, maybe a fight against the RN and leave units in norway while you need them elsewhere?

Maybe go for it when you have Leningrad, diplo Sweden (i love Swedish air units ) and Finland. Cities and mines will be at 8 instead this losy 5

[Liam]

Norway is worth MPPs to deprave the Germans and give the Convoys and possible strategic route to the Allies.

The Region is easy for the Allies to defend for a bit. Eventually the Axis get it, but they will have to capture Sweden first, costing lots of Readiness. Worse, they must relocate the Luftwaffe there and relocate it back that or quite a few Armies & Tanks. All this is expensive with HQ support. Considering the Axis only need to take Scandanavia now for one thing alone, strategic position!

Otherwise, There are more juicy Targets, i.e. MiddleEast Strategy, outright Sea Lion or Hyper Powerful Barbarossa... Any one of these is a bigger payday... By the time you do all the MPP expense of Taking Norway, you could buy Manny and an Army or 2... Worth it? Doubtful...

As far as the Land Focus of the game and focusing Firepower, it is a definite improvement in SC2. However, refining exactly how to do this, takes quite a few games. I still haven't succesfully been able to focus my FirePower completely to Maximum. You do this, with Supply and Support from Ships and Air to Crush the Enemy or take a very important tactical-strategic position. In the end Winning both in MPPs and more units and Kill Ratio. The Allies even though 2xs richer than the Axis cannot afford to repair ships, and replace dozens of units. If you know what you're doing as Axis it is possible to win with a lot less... I haven't yet been able to achieve this. And SC2 doesn't show much for defense, a little more with the enhancements to Entrenchments on Forts-Fortifications. Really would improve if AntiAir worked against Fighters, would change the dynamics a bit.

At the rate the game is going, 4 or 5 fighters, 5-10 corps, 3 or 4 armies ro tanks can steamroll a front.