Kragdob educates Gog on 2.2.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Such a mistake can seriously delay the Allied operations. Losing 1 CV + 3 BB's will hurt. It's not like he can quickly rebuild them.

If I were you I would send some tactical bombers to Iraq to finish off the UK land forces and bombing the BB's into oblivion. They can't be repaired or escape.

[Cybvep]

Yeah, losing 1 CV and 3 BBs is not pretty, but if the Allies manage to achieve air supremacy in the West, this shouldn't hurt that much. However, the UK suffered heavy losses and you are going for Fortress Europe, so you should be safe in 1942. It will be interesting to see what will happen in 1943.

[Kragdob]

Heh I though Basra will hold for this turn This is OK. I like this game and I want it to be as non-standard as it can be.

[Morris]

Heh I though Basra will hold for this turn This is OK. I like this game and I want it to be as non-standard as it can be.

Losing Basra & the CV did hurt ,but the maincourse is USA & USSR . UK has accomplished its mission . The Axis happy hours just finished , It is allies turn .

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The main problem for the Allies is that by losing Gibraltar, Port Said and Basra they can't engage the Axis many places.

E. g. once the UK units in Persia are destroyed the Kragdob will need Russian units to open up the Persian Gulf again.

Gog only needs to keep a healthy force of units in Spain / Portugal and France to deal with any Allied invasions prior to 1944. Having some units near Casablanca is good to deal with the Free French units arriving near Agadir.

With the loss of 4 UK naval units I think Gog can hunt convoys for quite some time. Using a fortress Europe strategy means he can probably afford to have 8+ submarines lurking. Having a strong sub force means Kragdob will have to build quite a few naval escorts for his transports.

Kragdob can still win the game if the Russians are capable of doing damage on the Germans soon after they join the Allies. An alternative for Kragdob can be to build lots of strategic bombers and get them to Britain to bomb the German resources. Draining the German economy is a way to prepare for future offensives. Being passive will only lead to Axis victory.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I just looked at the code and it seems that the Allies can always move to/from the Persian Gulf to the Atlantic while the Axis player needs to control Basra to do it.

Maybe this is good enough? It seems Kragdob should be able to evacuate his surviving ships in the Persian Gulf.

Can you verify, Kragdob, that the transport loop in the Persian Gulf is still open to you?

[GogTheMild]

If I were you I would send some tactical bombers to Iraq to finish off the UK land forces and bombing the BB's into oblivion. They can't be repaired or escape.

It's not that simple. I have 5 TACs packed into the Euphrates Valley, but Kragdob has 2 FTRs in range. I would burn a lot of oil and take a fair few steps worth of damage. So I reckon that a couple of Subs would be more economical.

Heh I though Basra will hold for this turn .

So did I. Even when the opportunity came up I nearly missed it.

This is OK. I like this game and I want it to be as non-standard as it can be.

I am deliberately trying to play a non-standard game (hence, amongst other things, my targeting your DDs). I reckoned that your superior experience would soon tell if I played a more 'normal' strategy, whilst if I could come up with things which you had rarely or never faced before it might at least partially level the playing field.

UK has accomplished its mission . The Axis happy hours just finished , It is allies turn .

Nah. Ten more months of fun I reckon before the tide turns.

Once the UK units in Persia are destroyed the Kragdob will need Russian units to open up the Persian Gulf again.

Much easier said than done. The UK has a very substantial force in Persia. I will be more than happy if I can contain them, and at that it will drain resources from the Russian front.

The main problem for the Allies is that by losing Gibraltar, Port Said and Basra they can't engage the Axis many places. Gog only needs to keep a healthy force of units in Spain / Portugal and France to deal with any Allied invasions prior to 1944.

Having some units near Casablanca is good to deal with the Free French units arriving near Agadir.

I thought that that wouldn't happen as I control Agadir .

With the loss of 4 UK naval units I think Gog can hunt convoys for quite some time. Using a fortress Europe strategy means he can probably afford to have 8+ submarines lurking. Having a strong sub force means Kragdob will have to build quite a few naval escorts for his transports.

I don't see how Kragdob losing his BBs makes my convoy hunting any easier. "8+ Subs" . Counting Italians, who have free access to the Atlantic, I have double that already, and more building. Kragdob seems to have about 12 UK DDs, but, so far, relatively few US ones. I am relying on him needing to put a lot of resources into anti-sub units and Labs, and so not be able to commit so much and/or so early to any direct attack on Europe, and so enable me to concentrate more resources against Russia. We shall see.

[Cybvep]

The main advantage of conquering as much territory as Gog did in this game is time. The Allied timetable will be very packed. Also, the Axis will save many PPs and oil points by sticking to defensive Barbarossa (excluding the first 2-3 turns or so). If Gog controlled GB, he would have a big advantage. He doesn't control GB, though, so it's too early to tell who has an advantage. The Allies can definitely recover from losing NA and Iraq.

[GogTheMild]

I see the big advantage as PP income. Add it up.

• Vichy France and FrNA = 13
  Malta and Gibraltar = 2
  Egypt, Syria and Iraq = 14
  Portugal = 6

35. Divide by 2 = 17.5.

Spain = 14.

Total = 31.5

Apply Industry factor of 120% and that's 37.8. Or more than an INF every single turn. Or 7 TACs a year.

Not to mention the 14 PP ( x 120% = 17 ) a turn which the UK isn't getting. The UK is actually subsidising Russia at the moment, bless them. They are donating 15 PP per turn in lend lease, but only getting 11 from Persia.

And +4 PP for Italy .

[Cybvep]

Yes, but that's always the case with FE. Remember - no Barbarossa in 1941. That changes things. I can usually deal with the Allies in 1942 and 1943 just fine, but 1944 and 1945 can be tricky. Also, in 2.1 I usually conquer GB, so no major strategic bombing campaign until at least 1944, but in the ME I go no further than Egypt. It's easy to believe that you are invincible in 1942...

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Having some units near Casablanca is good to deal with the Free French units arriving near Agadir.

I thought that that wouldn't happen as I control Agadir

The changes that were made was about Free French units arriving while USA is still neutral. Then they show up in the US force pool so they can be placed and move. This was done to prevent the situation where the Free French units were sitting ducks until USA spawned. These units are US controlled.

If the Free French units have already appeared (a message should have been shown) then they are in the US force pool and can't spawn at Agadir. It happens if the French armistice offer is rejected and no Vichy France was created.

In your situation I think you rejected the armistice offer and then these forces won't appear in Agadir. But that doesn't mean they can't land there as a regular naval invasion.

[Kragdob]

In your situation I think you rejected the armistice offer and then these forces won't appear in Agadir. But that doesn't mean they can't land there as a regular naval invasion.

This is easy. We just jump from one SUB to another till we reach NA

If I were you I would send some tactical bombers to Iraq to finish off the UK land forces and bombing the BB's into oblivion. They can't be repaired or escape.

It's not that simple. I have 5 TACs packed into the Euphrates Valley, but Kragdob has 2 FTRs in range. I would burn a lot of oil and take a fair few steps worth of damage. So I reckon that a couple of Subs would be more economical.

You just broke my cunning plan to econimically ruin you!

[GogTheMild]

Race to Basra.

April 1941 and German panzers rudely violate Iraqi neutrality. The Iraqi people rise in support of their liberators. Sadly Kragdob has taken strong and sensible precautions against this and the boot of the oppressor is rapidly reapplied to the neck of the colonial serfs. Can Guderian arrive in time to save them? The Italians peel off to free up the rail network.



Additional units are committed to the race:



But this time we are not going to lose our ARM. It pauses whilst the brave Iraqi rebels storm Fallujah:



And again whilst mechanised units scout for danger. Sadly we seem to have arrived a little late to prevent the colonial fetters being forcibly reapplied to the down trodden Iraqi people. Ah well.



Kragdob abandons that perfectly good looking defensive line and we liberate Baghdad. I also decide to risk losing a third ARM by moving it up to Najaf and attacking:



Faced with this threat Kragdob ran away:



The Italians head north towards the oilfields whilst the Germans move south along the Euphrates valley:



A battle develops for Kirkuk – given the Axis air support that was only ever going to end one way – whilst Panzer Armee Iraq can smell the salt of the Persian Gulf:



PAI cautiously probes forward. It looks as if the Commonwealth forces are going to make a real stand here:



Retaliation is swift as we tear away the screen of GARs from in front of Basra:



This was to have some interesting and unforeseen consequences. The northern oilfields were also secured.

Kragdob then unleashed everything at Guderian’s slightly tired MECH on the coast. Oh dear, I seem to have over extended myself yet again!



Not a lot that I can do about it. I reorganise a bit, move up on the north of Basra and book Guderian into a nice sanatorium for some R&R.



Sure enough:


I confess that I did see this as a potential mistake initially, but Kragdob had left the MECH in Basra on 7 steps! The first real mistake I have seen him make. I assume that he 'did a Gog' and over-focused on killing my damaged MECH. I hit Basra with a couple of TACs to work at the entrenchment level. I was then planning to attach Rommel to my MECH to replace Guderian, reinforce my ARM, upgrade a TAC and do a couple of other things which I don’t want to disclose here. I had actually clicked the reinforcement box and was about to attach Rommel to the surviving MECH when I realised that the Basra garrison was down to 5 steps and 1 entrenchment level. Bang – and that was it. I didn’t even need to move my ARM in to take out the last step. Sorry, but I got that excited that I forgot to take any screen shots. Here is one immediately after Kragdob’s move:



Happily this meant that the anti-Axis Iraqi partisans – some people have no sense of gratitude - immediately disappeared.

[Morris]

Race to Basra.

I confess that I did see this as a potential mistake initially, but Kragdob had left the MECH in Basra on 7 steps! The first real mistake I have seen him make. I assume that he 'did a Gog' and over-focused on killing my damaged MECH. .

Actually , this is not really a big mistake . Since it is only summer of 1941 , it almost impossible to hold Basra until US reinforcement will arrive . So even if Kragdob supply the Mech , it will only hold one or two more turn ,it will cost more than 20 pp to supply to exchange for 2 turns of Basra's income . It must be a bad business . So to kill a Mech is something worthy ! Anyway to lose the CV was a price , but when 1942 or 1943 's Normandy's comes , a wounded CV almost means nothing ! So at this ponit , I would do the same move as Kragdob did .

[GogTheMild]

Further sub plottery.

Turn 25. A convoy with escorts shows up and subs move into position to do something about it:



Convoy remnants kamikaze against a sub:



Turn 26. The convoy moves on but a more interesting target appears:



Having the subs necessary in range I decide to pick off the exposed DD:



Note that contrary to what I said earlier you can follow up after destroying a naval unit (as well as after forcing a retreat). I choose not to and send in another sub to attack the transport. The sixth sub takes up an intercept position for when Kragdob attempts to get round me:



Turn 27. Drat, I should have attacked the transport whilst I could. Kragdob chooses to live to fight another day:



I decide to head south to investigate Casablanca and the jump off points, spreading out into a hunting line as I go:



Turn 28. Three subs blockading Casablanca and one heading south. A juicy convoy is sighted:



Turn 29. The BB leaves port and runs into a sub. In my turn my three subs work it over. It proves quite resilient and in spite of a couple of retreats survives on a single step:



So I leave the convoy and finish it off:



Turn 30. Two convoys spotted by the northern flotilla:



Turns 31 and 32. Although my attacks do limited damage. Low tech subs make convoy attacks barely worthwhile:




Turn 33. The northern flotilla is spread out in a hunting line:



Whilst the southern subs have spotted at interesting Allied concentration:



Turn 34. A convoy sails up to a sub to say hello and then stops:


Note that they have been joined by some Italians coming round from Suez.

Turn 35. I attack the convoy and move the Italians into blocking positions:



Turn 36. Something has run into the Italian sub, apparently without causing it any damage. I have no idea what that was about. And three DDs loitering in exposed positions. Again I have no idea why Kragdob might have left them like that.



I pick a DD and go for it. It takes five sub attacks, but two are Italian:



Turn 38. A weakly escorted convoy is spotted:



I decide to attack the low efficiency DD. It retreats from the first attack, but continues to defend itself valiantly:



Another retreat:



Before I send in a fourth sub to put it out of its misery. Kragdob you will not be surprised to hear opines that it is dashed unsporting of me to be targeting his DDs instead of convoy hunting as a decent sub commander should.

[Cybvep]

This shows the problem with inefficient sub attacks against convoys in the early game - three subs reduce a convoy from 56 to 32 steps. That's just lame. With such "efficiency", even 6 subs wouldn't be able to sink that convoy O_o. I'm glad that it was changed in the latest version.

[GogTheMild]

And those are tech level 3 subs! Supposedly much improved on the original level 0 version. No wonder players - well, me anyway - prefer attacking DDs.

[Kragdob]

Before I send in a fourth sub to put it out of its misery. Kragdob you will not be surprised to hear opines that it is dashed unsporting of me to be targeting his DDs instead of convoy hunting as a decent sub commander should.

We discussed that in beta testers group and I was outvoted that it is wrong that SUBs are able to kill a DD like that. Although it is a bit unrealistic I accept it. Since I think Axis is an underdog in every game any help counts as of now. So it may be a good Axis strategy to build several SUBs and kill Allied DDs. A DDs that is even on equal level with enemy SUB will hav 2:2 or 2:3 scores when SUB attacks (opposite to 4:1 or 3:1 when DD attacks) which comes from naval battle mechanics.

I need to readjust and this is OK - this game is perfect for testing a few concepts that have long been on my mind. Let's see how it evolves.

[GogTheMild]

My comment about Kragdob was made, as I hope was clear, tongue in cheek. He has been fine with my tactics, and seems to have enjoyed those aspects of my play which he has not come across much previously. His comments in the beta testers' forum have been quite legitimate queries as to whether these tactics are realistic and whether we should be encouraging them via the rule changes. I am not sure that I disagree with him - but so long as they are there I am going to use them.

I should point out that in my two previous games as the Axis - in 2.1 - where I have employed similar sub tactics, the Allies have taken considerably higher naval losses. Ie, this is not a new tactic for 2.2 or something which has arisen because of the rule changes. In this game, sadly for me, the Allied naval units are being both cautious and canny.

A change has been made, as Cybvep points out, to the 3.0 version which will make low tech subs deadlier when attacking convoys. So the Axis may be less inclined to attack DDs instead. This change will not, again sadly, take effect in this game.

[richardsd]

I think peopel forget why SUB's didn't attack DD's in real life - it wasn't because they couldn't sink them, they could easily, its just thats not a priority target for a torpedo - which should be sending more valuable targets to the bottom