Terif vs Liam

[Liam]

Axis on my Side:

Poland-France-Benelux taken early and relatively fast. A few more losses than normal but objectives were on time.

Germany was aggressive and invaded Vichy and then Spain. The Battle of the Rock was fast along with Brest and England was expelled from the European Continent entirely. North Africa was basically abandoned to the Allies.

Meanwhile Germans researched and built up for an early attack in the East. Paying not much mind to anything else.

All German Corps were built, with some Armies.. Techs were so so but we persisted. AirPower was brought in From Italy, with their famous Aces we started off crushing the Russians.

In August of '41 Op Barbarossa was unleashed by the High Command:

Germans poured across the Northern Flank no Resistance. Reaching Leningrad and destroying very little there only holding. In the Center German forces pressed onward stopping at Smolensk, not even protected by the Russians due to civilian fear of German reprisals for such firm resistance!

In the South, extensive Fortifications and Advanced Soviet infantry weapons make it impossible to penetrate where would like with the forces available, the line is held at the River Dnieper by a determined foe.

7 Axis Fighter Units sit over Russia on mixed fronts, delivering a hail of bullets and bombs, destroying a lot but not achieving a grand objective. Finally the Order is given in 1942, "ATTACK!" after the Russians launched an offensive in the MiddleEast with the aide of Great Britian capturing and securing the entirety of it. Finland was too assaulted but at great costs on both sides:

In The End Germany pushed through the Center toward Moscow tasting the objective, obviously like a Pitbull Jaw Locks, the Russians countered and from both North and South Crush the Offensive with overwhelming Force! Of course on both sides losses were horrorific but the Russians still had plenty of bite!

Onward: In the West, The Rock was liberated by the British and the Battle for Spain took place. Seeing his grim fate Chancellor Liam surrendered

the Losses were in the ballpark after France of around couple of corps losses to England. Roughly 10 Russian units... 20 or so German ones, mostly replaceable but not in time to destroy Russia

We delayed Barbarossa with our High Command's decisions buried in WW1 Doctrine.

[TaoJah]

Out of curiosity : how does someone take Gibrlatar left ? I suppose he took control of the two western African cities and used alot of air power there ?

Coupled with a amphiby landing on the west ?

[jon_j_rambo]

@TaoJah --- You referring to the Axis or Allies taking it?

[Terif]

Taking Gibraltar back as Allies is not the problem - holding it is .

Allies have a good invasion point in Western Africa from where they can take Gibraltar easily with the help of some air + carriers. They can also take it directly with 3-5 amphibs and carrier support. Alternatively they can invade Portugal first and then move to Gibraltar...

But Axis can as easily crush the invasion force while it is still unloading at the beaches, sitting there pretty much helpless if Axis send strong forces from Madrid/Valencia to throw them back into the ocean.

Pretty historical - the first days/turns are critical for the success of D-day (be it in France or Spain or anywhere else) since at the beaches they are very vulnerable and need to secure the beachhead first. This is also why a simultaneous russian counterattack is so important to bind Axis there, cause otherwise Axis can operate the necessary forces west to eliminate the invaders before they can fight their way inland into safe positions.

[TaoJah]

@ Rambo : I meant for the ALies to retake it.

@ Terif : is it doable for the Axis to take Casablanca too ? Without Casablanca, Gibraltar should be alot safer and perhaps that is worth the cost.

And Portugal... Is that easy re-takeable for the Allies ? You only have one single good amphy place, the other two adjecent hexes are across a river.

My main problem is that Axis don't have enough corps. There hsould be an option to split armies into corps. Or (my pet topic) the limit of corps should be raised when you control certain countries (France, Spain, Egypt come to mind)

[Terif]

It all depends on how and with which forces Axis defend those areas - so reconnaissance is key if you want to invade anywhere outside the spotting range of your air in England.

With enough forces you can conquer everything, it is only a matter of if you are willing to spend the necessary mpps for such a task. Against a standard defence you need to be sure around 4-6 amphibs (half of them should be armies) and a HQ amphib. In the first turn you remove the entrenchment, in the second one it will fall. Depending on the actual defence, more or less forces are necessary - best case scenario is of course if one of the coastal cities is empty so you can take it for free and establish a bridgehead there.

P.S.: Axis have more than enough units to cover everything necessary, you only need to learn how to use them efficiently. Of course you can´t expect to hold every spot against a prepared assault and everyhting else would be pretty bad for gameplay - otherwise Allies would have no chance to invade anywhere if Axis really could split their armies or raise the corps limit so they were able to block all landing spots .

[Liam]

What Terif states is correct, if Axis are willing to attack, you can pretty much take the territory early. You will however pay the premium. Main problem with Axis is that most players use the wrong terrain, weather and arrangement of forces. Mostly shortchange their attacks in places like Africa... You really need to bring A LOT of units and have exit points if the RN wishes to corner them in... Also to have good recon to prevent being intercepted by the RN.. Good move by the Axis is Bomber West Africa

Then after that, Move in from East to West slowly picking off the Allies and LR1 or 2 would really be effective... Of course this is if you're lucky, biggest factor is doing it early and with firepower... I will tell you, when you're done it'll cost 750 MPPs and you could've bought Manny with a tank and army, that could've steamrolled across Russia a few months earlier... So is it worth it? Hanging onto those Vital Areas might be it's a juggling game and I'm not sure what to say. I'd honestly let the Allies take North Africa if determined you'll never stop the RN in the hands of a determined and able opponent.

[SeaMonkey]

All that has been referred to is correct, IMO. Africa is the Allies if they want it. But as the Axis you can cut the Med in half and provide for some nice recon and diversions in force.

Sometimes these will lead to a full scale offensive and if the Allies are not diligent Axis can rest the momentum. Since Tunis is not effected by Malta, that is your stronghold(base of ops), supported by Axis air and seapower there is good supply close by.

You can also take out Malta during one of the winter doldrums with a little planning.

It can be a very interesting test of wills(and fun) with the idea being to make your opponent invest more than you while achieving stalemate.

[TaoJah]

I am beginning to agree on the theory that you can't hold Africa as Axis against a determined HvH Allied player. I looked at both my HvH games and even though I made mistakes, I believe that you can't hold it against a determined HvH player anyway. The RN, is very, very strong : if he brings in the three carriers (with flank support) any units in any city is toast. And with the airplanes he can make sure you can't operate or transport anything out anyway.

And that Malta effect is pure dicey : if you're out of luck, the supply goes from 5 to 0 and you're dead (that happened in my game against Rambo, one turn I'm happily attacking him, next turn he gets two Malta-effects on the city and I am dead). Another luck-makes-or-break-your-game thing

Perhaps I should totally forget about Africa in HvH all together and focus 100% on Russia. Let the Allies have Africa and D-Day from there, if I can knock Russia more or less out, I can perhaps fight back the D-Day.

[Liam]

Originally posted by TaoJah:

RN, is very, very strong : if he brings in the three carriers (with flank support) any units in any city is toast. And with the airplanes he can make sure you can't operate or transport anything out anyway.

And that Malta effect is pure dicey : if you're out of luck, the supply goes from 5 to 0 and you're dead (that happened in my game against Rambo, one turn I'm happily attacking him, next turn he gets two Malta-effects on the city and I am dead). Another luck-makes-or-break-your-game thing

Perhaps I should totally forget about Africa in HvH all together and focus 100% on Russia. Let the Allies have Africa and D-Day from there, if I can knock Russia more or less out, I can perhaps fight back the D-Day.

This is correct, Malta Effect is a timey factor for the Axis. You never know when or if you'll be locked up in Africa if you go there. How far you can advance and what you'll be able to actually do. Plus Since North Africa isn't very deep, it's very vulnerable place to be bombarded by sea.

It's not really worth the trade off. What do you get for Algeria-Casablanca?

Plus is Iraq, 1 oil field really worth all the dedication of units. an entire Army Group or more that could capture Stalingrad in 1942!

[TaoJah]

Perhaps it's possible to take Syria without going into Egypt... And go east from Syria ?

[Edwin P.]

Its possible, as long as the Royal Navy does not stand in the way.

[Terif]

To go for Africa or not is one of many decisions both sides have to take .

If Axis really want Africa, then they will get it before Russia is in the war no matter what Allies will send - but on the other side this will weaken the main front in Russia.

Same for Allies: if they really want Africa, then they will get it after Russia and USA are in the war - but this most likely means no real D-day and lots of forces bound down there.

In the end it depends on both players skills in desert warfare as well as the planed strategy if it is wise to fight for Africa and with how many forces. Africa is nice to have, but not a must have for both sides - so loosing it means never defeat...always better to give up some territories if necessary - both sides have more than enough expendable land - than to loose too many troops in a desperate try to keep it .