Matrix Games Forums

I have a new player who wishes to play China as part of an Allied Tag Team. Tag team games usually are slower as we must sent the turn to each member in turn. I can manage the overall team and proxy for any member who is unable to process at a given time. The player in question wishes to do the detail moves but under strategic guidence. I want players who represent countries to also negotiate coalition policy for their nation(s).

Possible players would include the USSR, UK/Commonwealth with or separate from ANZACs, Netherlands, USA, and Canada can be part of the Commonwealth or US or a separate command (in which case Canada will run the Alaska Command, as has often been the case since WWII - Alaska command alwsays has either a Canadian general in command or as deputy commander).

We also need some sort of Japanese player or team.

The mod system is RHS. The contemplated scenario is EBO - but that is probably negotiable in a training situation.

Since I am a NATO era coalition warrior, I will focus on how the Allies can wage effective coalition warfare. Instead of Sir Robin
style general withdrawall, we will focus on delaying actions and damaging infrastructures and causing as much attrition as possible.
On top of that we will seek to create opportunities for battles which might cost Japan critical strategic assets (e.g. carriers or other capital
ships, or expend its skilled pilot pools too soon for too little gain). We will do this in the form of principles and answers to specific
topical questions that may arise when attempting to implement then in a given situation. Almost everything I do is doctrinal - and this pays off - more often sooner than later.

In Test 9, we have an explicit Sir Robin defense, and this game - which got suspended for a while until internet service got connected to a different location in Germany - is about to restart. However - we see it is not the ideal way to limit Japanese advances or cause attrition to critical Japanese forces. Test 9 was an EBO test.

In Tests 6A, 6B and 8 we have more active defenses - although tese are in RAO = CVO with active Russians. In these games the Japanese are having a rougher time - more due to the active resistence than to having less to fight with than they do in EBO. But while all these players have the will to fight - and occasionally win tactical victories - they are not fighting WHERE they need to fight.

The key for the Allies is to fight over locations rich in supplies, resources, and infrastructures - in particular ports of Level 3 and above, airfields of Level 3 and above (and even more so Level 4 and above airfields), and to some extent - for rail lines and rail junctions. Such locations always need to be defended - and not just with static units - which in most cases are not strong enough to insure adequate destruction occurs - nor to delay long enough. It is a legitimate military purpose to delay - and the delay that matters is the turnover of valuable points. So ground combat units need to be expended to insure such delay occurs. The art comes in the form of choosing what unit to use for each such location.

A second principle is to support the ground units in such locations to the extent immediate local resources permit at the time they are under enemy attack. By support I mean mainly the judicious use of air power - both offensive and defenive. IF air units of HIGH morale are available, then provide CAP or LRCAP of such a location. Similarly, and even more critically, IF bomber units of HIGH moreale are available, attack enemy ground units en route to such a location as well as any actually in it. Similarly, IF a surface action group is available, and if the location is coastal (in any sense, including on a river system) - support the location with naval bombardment. Finally - IF small ground units are available - use them to delay advance down critical LOC - and to cut such LOC even after it has been taken. All these are froms of support that complicate enemy planning and delay enemy effective takeover of such a hex.