Any ideas on how to start U Boat production early?

[John D.]

This is a question that has come up before. Starting U Boat production early almost forces the Brits on the defensive. We have all seen what damage a good U Boat campaign can do. Any ideas?

John

[Mark]

Well, instead of building 2 factories out of the gates, you could build 6 U-boats: That should put a lot of pressure on the British very early.  If, you can get away with that and still knock France out effectively, of course.

[derdiktator]

I don't think you are getting it - building German factories early does not affect the size of total German ground forces (by about the time of Barbarossa / late '41).  Instead the choice is whether or not to build subs in a big way. 

If you build no subs and no factories you wind up with as many ground troops as if you built no subs but did build two factories. 

If you build subs and no factories you wind up with as many ground troops as if you built subs and also two factories. 

Do the math... 

dd

[derdiktator]

At the moment as I see it, the Germans need to do three things to "win": Build subs early, take out Cairo and have a credible Barbarossa.  Unfortunately it seems that they can really only do any two of the three, not all three. 

If Germans don't build the subs then Britain gets a free hand and which is a disaster for the Germans.  Cairo is important because it is a much cheaper way to get two victory points than taking any of the Russian victory point cities (i.e., Leningrad, Moscow, etc.).  As for Barbarossa, we've seen too often that insufficient early Easern front troops are a leading cause of an early German Gotterdammerung.

Not going after Cairo is an option, but it's just so damn attractive... and such nice triggers too!

The only solution I can come up with at the moment is one of two possibilities: Rely on poor Allied play or take minimal casualties in France while getting at least one or two triggers.  Unfortunately, history seems to indicate that German successes seem to derive more often from the first possibility than the second.

dd

[Mark]

"I don't think you are getting it - building German factories early does not affect the size of total German ground forces (by about the time of Barbarossa / late '41)."

I DO get it - I said "If, you can get away with that and still knock France out effectively. . .  I agree your break even with troops by Barbarossa.

The question is can you build subs and factories and still take France out. . . I think that could be risky with good Allied play - or else the Axis throw Italy into a precarious position from the get go.

[Mark]

We played three games at Origins - the Axis won only the last one.

They did not build many subs.

They took Cairo (for only one turn via amphibious assault) and triggered Turkey.

And then they launched the most overwhelming barbarossa I have seen in a while - drove the Russians back to the Urals. 

The Western Allies did well, knocking Italy out in Winter 1942 and landing in France in the Summer of 43 - but by then the Russian front was over. . .

This might be a good Axis strategy to win.

[Yoper]

From what I saw of that game, it didn't hurt that the Japanese were in great shape!

Sometimes it takes having new players running the various countries for new views on how things can be done to pop up.

Like we discussed at Origins (concerning rules), if you are too close to what is going on (i.e.- you are the designers, playtesters, etc.), you can get too caught up in certain patterns and thoughts.

A fresh perspective from new players can bring out new strategies.

I hope to get in the beginnings of a game tonight.

Craig 

[derdiktator]

We played three games at Origins - the Axis won only the last one.

They did not build many subs.

They took Cairo... and triggered Turkey.

And then they launched the most overwhelming barbarossa I have seen in a while...

When it comes to the German view of Barbarossa, no bad thing can come of triggering Turkey!

Assuming Britain didn't get particularly beat up (what with few subs being built), I have to doubt the effectiveness of Allied play, one way or another.  I still stand by my claim that, absent weak Allied play (Germans in the Urals, eh?) or other undue randomness, the European Axis cannot succeed if they leave Britain unmolested. I'll be happy to play an unharrassed Britain anytime to demonstrate.   

Also, I tend to doubt that popping out just one sub per turn will do anything to keep a decent Brit busy or do over much to their production.  Brit ASW warfare mostly just means keeping destroyers & carriers guarding the convoys with at least a couple of covering cruisers near by as protection against a Kriegsmarine sortie. Destroying one sub a turn is usually no big deal with decent ASW coverage (absent my bad ASW dice, anyway).

dd

[John D.]

James,
    Since you have recently had the experience of playing the Western Allies with no U-Boat builds, do you think that the Axis could react to the Western Allies on the continent with enough force (assuming they have crippled Russia enough where they could rail good German units back) and kick the Allies off the continent - even if it took a few turns to do it? In other words, can Germany win the race and make the Allies start over by kicking them off the continent?

John

[derdiktator]

Since you have recently had the experience of playing the Western Allies ...can Germany win the race and make the Allies start over by kicking them off the continent?

Interesting question, and probably not surprisingly, I have thoughts on the matter.  

See the post I started under "D-Day invasions".


dd

[derdiktator]

"I don't think you are getting it - building German factories early does not affect the size of total German ground forces (by about the time of Barbarossa / late '41)."

I DO get it - I said "If, you can get away with that and still knock France out effectively. . .  I agree your break even with troops by Barbarossa.

The question is can you build subs and factories and still take France out. . . I think that could be risky with good Allied play - or else the Axis throw Italy into a precarious position from the get go.

It is a good point about being able to take France out, pressure England, and still have a Barbarossa.  My thought at the moment is that it's doable, but you have to rely on France failing it's die roll.  Don't, but don't attack Paris as the casualties are too high for a factory & sub building program and still have a credible Barbarossa.

For those interested, I attached a pdf showing the effects of various build strategies on German production (build or don't build two factories, sub war versus no sub war against England) contrated with the game's 1941 Barbarossa scenario.  I will admit that, even having done the analysis, it takes guts to build those factories no matter what the numbers may say.

dd

[attachment deleted by admin]

[RandR]

The answer to the "HOW"  question is very simple, just start applying some funds to their production. The German U-boat operation can be just as annoying to the Brits in the Atlantic as the US submarine operation in the Pacific can be to the Japanese if started early enough. Take a few dollars now & then and tag a ship or two when the wolf pack gets hungry!

[Uncle Joe]

I believe U-boat warfare against the UK is really important if the Germans are to win.  British production left alone just allows the Allies to get back onto the continent all the faster.

The Germans have to be smart about deploying their u-boats.  Sending them out piecemeal into heavily defended sea zones does not work.  The German surface fleet can be used to draw off convoy defenses as well - especially if the British have deployed part of their fleet to the Mediterranean.  It has to be a delicate dance. . . and a battle of attrition - sink production points faster than you lose u-boats.