D-DAY April 1943

[William049]

I finally managed to get Russia on the ropes, after so many failed attempts.
Then the Allies launch a cross channel invasion more than a year before the historical date.
What gives? Is this game designed to make it impossible to achieve an Axis win?

[crispy131313]

I think it's great that the AI will counter non-historical gains in USSR with non-historical early D-Day.

[Titan]

I think its great....War is about the unexpected, That caught me out as well resulting in my defeat as axis. Didnt like it but respected it i didnt mind the loose

[DeriKuk]

War is about the unexpected . . .

Except that, in this game, D-Day '43 is not unexpected. It is a solid, predictable "feature", and the human Axis player can never be expected to have the resources to deal with it.

Ultimately, this is a shallow, boring script-game with no replayability. [For the record: I have been a wargamer since the 1970s, and I am thoroughly familiar with the history of WW2.]

[Rasputitsa]

What is almost guaranteed to make the Allies launch an early D-Day, is if Russia is in the ropes. If the Western Allies do nothing, then with the Soviets gone, the whole power of the Axis will be waiting for the '44 D-Day.

[William049]

Exactly. It can't be "expected" for the Allies to have these resources to launch an invasion in 1943.
The most that ought to be expected is on in North Africa.
Why not expect an invasion from outer space also?

[sPzAbt653]

In the game, if the Allies don't do Torch in 1942 and follow up with landings at Italy in 1943, then it is reasonable to expect a D-Day in 1943, don't you think ?
Agree that the Allies did not have the resources to launch ten corps at once, but a three corps invasion is easily defeated and then there is no game. So the size of the force is a compromise.
See also - tm.asp?m=4207744

[William049]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

In the game, if the Allies don't do Torch in 1942 and follow up with landings at Italy in 1943, then it is reasonable to expect a D-Day in 1943, don't you think ?
Agree that the Allies did not have the resources to launch ten corps at once, but a three corps invasion is easily defeated and then there is no game. So the size of the force is a compromise.

Thanks for the link. It was helpful
Glad to see that there are others that have a problem with a '43 full scale invasion cross channel.
Now that I know about it, I can prepare for it.
I still think this is a grand game but needs some tweaking.

[Beruldsen]

I've noticed if you create a sub/surface ship screen in the Atlantic ... you can significantly lesson the impact of an invasion. I pulled all Axis ships into the Atlantic ... you can sink a LOT of transports.

[DeriKuk]

Another D-Day '43 quirk is the result of throwing the Allies out of the Middle East. All of the Commonwealth units are rapidly rebuilt in Britain, and become available for the early D-Day invasion. It behooves the Axis player to pull his punches in North Africa . . . simply to keep the British units around, so that they do not show up in France.

This game needs separate manpower (military and industrial), raw materials, fuel and training variables - not the simplistic MMPs - to make it interesting and rich. There should be a loss in the quality of manpower as losses mount, as well as increases for gaining experience without catastrophic losses. Another parameter could be the variable placement of resource locations - within reasonable limits - on the map. That could make the strategic air war more interesting. A return - or not - air trip to Ploesti . . . anyone?

[William049]

ORIGINAL: Arne Beruldsen

I've noticed if you create a sub/surface ship screen in the Atlantic ... you can significantly lesson the impact of an invasion. I pulled all Axis ships into the Atlantic ... you can sink a LOT of transports.

Yes indeed!
After being caught by surprise I am ready this time.
The transports are coming unescorted and I have a tremendous fleet of advanced level subs lying in silent mode ambush. It will be turkey shot next turn.

[Flaviusx]

Scripted early D-Day is necessary imo and should be left as is to force the Axis to garrison the West. Otherwise they can strip that to the bone.

Honestly, the Axis is perfectly capable of winning even with this feature. I've done it, at least on normal and probably could do it on +1 although not +2.

I've even clinched a major AFTER a big 1943 landing in one game -- with the help of a fully upgraded Spanish military, backed up by some beefy units rushed in from the East Front. The Allies have no counter in 1943 for Axis heavy armor. 5-6 fighters in France will keep Allied airpower down to a dull roar.

Game would be much too easy for the Axis without the real threat of an early invasion.

[sPzAbt653]

I have a tremendous fleet of advanced level subs lying in silent mode ambush.

The Allied ships will pass right over them unimpeded. You need to put them in Hunt mode to be effective. Hope I'm no too late !

[William049]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I have a tremendous fleet of advanced level subs lying in silent mode ambush.

The Allied ships will pass right over them unimpeded. You need to put them in Hunt mode to be effective. Hope I'm no too late !

OH I didn't wait for that to happen. I was only waiting for them to come into range. They were wiped out.
Which brings up another question......why does the U.S continue to send transports to be slaughtered?
Next turn I will take Stalingrad, April ,1944 and win the game.
Things were so intense up until mid 1943 after which the AI falls apart and the game becomes disappointingly easy.

[sPzAbt653]

why does the U.S continue to send transports to be slaughtered?

I see the same thing - if Sealion is successful the computer US transports keep running into my German sub line west of Plymouth, England. Seems like there should be some sort of script to change areas if the first one fails. I don't know enough about Invasion Scripts to know if this is possible. From a couple previous games I am learning this and now I am getting better at defending one area that the computer concentrates on instead of worrying about all of Norway to Northwest Africa.

[MemoryLeak]

I just experienced the April 1943 Allied invasion of France. I was just starting to turn the tide in Russia and
now I have my back against the wall and the Allies are almost into Germany and it is November 1943.

Very unrealistic and, unless all you have to do in life is keep playing this game over and over again
until you find a gamey way to stop this ridiculously early invasion, very disappointing scripting.

The Allies are three units deep on the front all across France. Impossible to stop so why even bother playing a
game that can't be won?

That invasion should not be allowed to occur until June 1944.

. Plus the Allies have had jet fighters for several months and my air force has been decimated.

[Christolos]

It is December 1942 and I am slowly starting to turn the tide in Russia, but I am worried about a 43 invasion in the West. I can start preparing for it by transferring units from the east but this will bring my offensive to a grind again in the east...[:(]

I don't think that a 43 invasion of France by the Allies is necessarily a problem since it was always a possibility, but it should be relatively scaled down in terms of comparison to what would be possible in 44, especially if the Allies show up with jets!!!

The other issue I have is with the hard time the Axis player has to contend with in terms of dealing with pockets of trapped Russian units. It just seems like it takes way too long for the effects of 0 supply to render trapped units easier to shatter (see: tm.asp?m=4203401 ) which in turn ties up a large number of Axis units for too long which makes an early success against Russia that much more difficult to accomplish...

I am only in my second game as the Axis and have made some mistakes re not always being able to maximize supply and perhaps even having spent too much on upgrades (I gave all my units in the east, including infantry units, mobility 1 thinking it would help, but I now think I should have only done this for the HQs and the mechanized units only so I could have produced more units instead...[&:])

C

[The Land]

Well, it's early October 42 and in the last couple of weeks the US lost 7 Corps and 2 Armies while moving troops across the Atlantic, in a battle which has also cost the Allies 4 carriers, 3 battleships, a cruiser and a destroyer - against 2 battleships, a cruiser and a destroyer for the Axis.

If they try to perform a D-Day in April '43 they will do it without half the troops, and might find that it never reaches land at all.

I'm feeling confident enough to move the reserves I was keeping in the West to the Eastern Front over the winter....

[Patrat]

In real life a 43 invasion was more than a possibility if there was no major allied commitment to Africa. It was Torch and the prolonged Tunisian campaign that put the stop to a 43 D day. In other words, if there was no major commitment in Africa in 43, its pretty much certain that the allies would of invaded France in 43.

I really don't understand how people have such a hard time fending off a 43 invasion. Just garrison France like Hitler had to in real life and move reinforcements from Russia.

[ParadogsGamer]

A Solid tactic is to take out Britain before you go deep into Russia. No allied landing.