 |
| |
|
|
Dr. Nick
|
 |
Mola mazo!
Oct 2000
time: 01:34
|
|
So far, we've been doing alright with a loose idea on Grand Strategy, mostly because we hadn't had to deal with Arabs in large numbers. However, the British are gone, and we have to take care of fronts that extend all around us, and even consider the Mediterranean a hostile front until we can crank out a few ships.
Basically, I feel that while each commander has a rough idea of what they want to do, and with what resources they could do it, we need to coordinate grand strategy, and also study each individual front's strategy. Decide what is priority and what is not, where we need to hunker down and defend, and where we need to make big pushes, and when.
Firstly, I will be drafting a report tomorrow on what I think needs to be covered here. I want commanders to think about the terrain of their front. The units they have NOW (not the units they might count on if they beg  ). And I want to hear plans for each front. How to defend, possible places to strike, trouble spots. Undefended spots. A general assessment of the situation.
Meanwhile, I want to come before the Knesset to discuss grand strategy. I want our politicos to tell me what our priorities should be, how they feel about the situation, and I want the economic minister to give me a rough idea of how many units could be rushed per turn on average. I want to hear from defense about the possibility of future infrastructure needs of our country. And I want to know whether immigration will be bringing in immigrants, Zion workers, both, where they will land, et cetera.
Additionally, we have the problem of commanders being AWOL. I will be assuming temporary command of the HOME and JUDEAN fronts if POTUS is overwhelmed with work. I hope he will soon be able to rejoin our ranks.
Additionally, I ask all commanders to share ideas and brainstorm other fronts too, as well as offering tactical suggestions. As the PM said, please be wary of stacking units outside of cities and fortresses as the enemy prowls with aircraft.
I have also kindly asked the ministers to halt the turn until we have ironed out strategy. I thank them for this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PinkyGen
|
 |
Number Cruncher
Nov 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
My overall view.
Military Situation:
I see five basic avenues of attack.
1. The coastal road from Lebanon
2. The Golan
3. The cities south of Galilee
4. The coastal road from Egypt
5. Eilat
All areas are under attack. The most threatening, in order, are the Egyptian road, Golan, the Lebanon road, the South Galilee road, and Eilat.
Eilat can't really be used as a way to get into Israel proper. But it has trade bonuses, and would be useful port for immigrants. I think it is likely Eilat will fall.
Production and Costs:
I think we need a more mobile defense. I would slow down construction of the artillery (which we have a lot of), and instead construct more of the Palmach units.
The idea of destroyers attacking the coast is quite interesting. How economically feasible is it, and will the AI air attack them?
I think Zion workers should be used for railroads to link Tel-Aviv and Haifa, and eventually are Egyptian fronts with the fronts of Lebanon and Golan.
Econ also needs to decide if we are going for IDF infantry or Mossad spies.
Special Unit ideas:
T-34's should be used for two purposes.
1. To strike out from a city on well defended enemy troops, and then retreat in the city to avoid air attack.
2. To support an assault a city.
Immigration: We really need a full time immigration minister, but no one is stepping up. The boat to Cyprus needs an escort, and we possibly need a second transport as well. We should focus on the immigrants more than the Zion workers at this point, but still take both back.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr. Nick
|
|
Mola mazo!
Oct 2000
time: 01:34
|
|
Northern Front
Points of Interest: 2
- Golan Heights
- Lebanon Road
The Golan is a hard nut to crack of course, and at the moment, defences look acceptable. Tiberias looks snug, only vulnerable to occasionaly incursions, and I will be dispatched a T-34 as soon as we get one to the North Front to be used, preferably in the Golan. Basically, I'm thinking elastic defence. The ability to take whatever attacks the Syrians throw our way, while maintaining the ability to counterattack anything that moves within range of our units. Preserving our units is the key in this front, I believe, which means operations remain within the range of quick shelter by the end of the turn. When attacking enemy units please consider the terrain the unit is sitting on, and where the enemy stacks are. When attacking enemy units, prioritise their offensive units for destruction. Beware the T-34s. They're not easily killed even with artillery.
The Lebanon Road has not been given the priority it should have been given. The lack of enemy presence for the moment is encouraging, and while I think we may be constrained in time and resources, we have maximum flexibility in designing the strategy in this area. For one, we have two things to consider: (a) where we make our stand, (b) how we repel the enemy.
Answers to (a) there are two. We can either sit in Nahariyyah, which saves units, and resources from the risk of being wasted, or we can seize the hill fortresses north of Nahariyyah. The benefit to the second is obvious: the +100% defensive bonus from the hills, since the city is on grasslands. However, I do not feel like we have enough resources in the area to make a bit at the hills which I would not call bold. We could draw resources towards this, and possibly relieve a headache, but we'd need quite a few dedicated rushbuys in the area, possibly at the expense of leaving Nahariyyah less than adequately defended. If we can hold at the hills, I think it would be a definite roadblock against the Lebanese. However, if we fail to hold them back they'll just pour in. All in all, Nahariyyah is not a nicely defensible position. It's flat, and also allows the Lebanese to attack Yehi'am. It's upto the commander. I'm willing to work towards seizing the hills if the commanders have confidence in the plan, that is, allocating the resources necessary or twisting the arms necessary to get them allocated. But even I am not too confident in its success, though I do feel it would give us the upper hand in the area if we took them.
As to (b), well, there's three options. The ground option, having artillery on hand to pound enemy that comes into range of the artillery. It's a cheap option, but it allows the enemy to draw up close to us in a matter I do not like much, especially if we decide to make our stand at Nahariyyah rather than the hills. The second option is air, which is costly. Firstly, because planes are expensive. Secondly, because enemy fighters roam the area, and losing planes is even more expensive, to the point of being economic tragedy. However, a well placed bomber raid can effectivelly halt all Lebanese operations in the area, and it gives us the great benefit of range, and keeping the war away from our cities. Last, is the naval answer. I think this offers the greatest answer. It'll be cheaper than air, though more expensive than ground. The road is used almost exclusively, and it can be bombed in all its length from the sea. And it affords us range too. However, our ships aren't that great (attacking hills would be nigh on pointless, even with destroyers) and if they move away from the sea then we're pretty much, well, doomed.
That as to the northern front. Please, discuss.
Home Front
Points of Interest: 2
The Jordan Line is woefully weak, IMHO. Degania in particular is a city which is a key to defend, as it is the only defence that stands between Tiberias and the Palestinian masses. Tiberias must be defended at all costs, either to reinforce the Golan or evacuate it. However, the enemy has not appeared 'in strength' here yet, and the river fortresses could be used to great effect I think if we had a few mobile units. We aren't being assailed by more than some artillery and cavalry, I think that the answer to our problem here is palmachs, don't know how you all feel. (And don't say that T-34s are the answer to all our problems, because as much as I know you're right, we don't have enough money to have them in that kind of strength  ). Palmachs are decent overall, and have plenty of movement, making hit and run operations against the enemy feasible.
The interior is quiet, and I think is where we should act most aggressively at the moment. Consolidating the interior will not only bring in resources in the form of trade, cash and production, we'll expand our production base, as well as expand our territory, all which are crucial. It also happens to be the least defended area, IMHO. However, I fear that after the defensive preparations that we will have to make, there won't be nearly as many resources to be aggressive enough in this area as I would like to.
Judean Front
Points of Interest: 1
Jerusalem should, IMHO, be our first target to conquer, and it's not for any other reason than it's the Tiberias of the Judean Front. Sedom and Kfar Etzion are isolated, and the only road to them is through Jerusalem. However, there are *many* enemy units in Jerusalem ready to defend the city. However, I think that the conquest of Jerusalem is crucial to the security of our southern flank. Against this argument, yes, well, the area is pretty quiet. But who knows what may lurk there.
Sinai Front
Points of Interest: 3
- Mediterranean Road
- Sinai Deserts
- Eilat
The Sinai Deserts are quiet so far. At the moment I'll pray to God for units and hope for a miracle, as the cities in the area in themselves are of little worth to the country in strictly military and economic terms. I do want to know, however, what to do about undefended Gevaram.
Eilat: with one more AA and some artillery I am confident that the position could be nigh on impregnable. The enemy doesn't seem to have much to throw at us here, from what I've seen so far.
The Mediterranean Road (:scared . This is where the Egyptians will win or lose the war: and so shall we. I expect the brunt of the attack to fall upon us here, and what makes it more serious than the Golan (IMHO) is the badly defensible terrain, and the fact that one city will have to bear the brunt of the attacks. We will have to break the Egyptians here or lose the war. I will be assigning tanks here, and the first aircraft will go here for reconaissance. I think that, again, we could make good use of ships here because the terrain is so bad for defence, dunno how Cmmder Rasputin feels about it. But I feel that Ashdod will be a meat grinder. And the fact that the threat from the air is as serious as the one from the ground only adds to our woes.
General Notes of Importance
On the issue of aircraft, we currently have no way of gathering any valuable intelligence on enemy activity farther than we can watch through binoculars. I want five planes to serve as recon, and I'd like them fast. The areas I want to keep watch on, and in order, are the Mediterranean Road, the Lebanese Road, the Jordan Line, Jerusalem and the Golan. We need to know what the enemy is doing well behind the lines if we are to defeat them, and for that I need eyes.
On the issue of railroads, we must be careful. Railroads are great, but they can be our destruction. At the moment, I think that we should limit railroad lines to a Mediterranean line from Jaffa to Akko that will serve as the backbone of our defence and expansion. I am wary of joining any cities on the front, since if they fall the enemy will be just as happy with railroads as we were. I think that a line from Yehi'am to Tiberias would be useful.
In any case, discuss. Please discuss in an organised manner, and separate regions in your posts like I have, for the sake of cold bureaucratic efficiency.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PinkyGen
|
|
Number Cruncher
Nov 2002
time: 05:34
|
|
A well thought out anlysis, I think the Chief of Staff. I'll basically state my view on some of the points.
1. Northern Front: Not much to disagree with the Golan Heights
As for the Lebanon road, I think a destroyer, and perhaps an artillery piece in naharriya. I'm not sure if we really have anything we can send to that fortress, especially since some of your other plans are very costly.
2. Home Front: Jordan Valley: I agree, it needs more units, and Palmach sounds best. The Jordanians have planes too, so those need to end their turn in cities as well.
Interior: I think this would be a good place to counter-attack, but I'm not sure if we have the units for it. It would require some Palmach or Hagganah and probably at least one T-34.
3. Judean Front: I think the capture of Jerusalem is imperative, as risky as the operation is. With artillery and the Irgun, it can be done, though it'll take two turns unless a T-34 is sent there. (And we already sending those to the Golan and I presume the Egyptian coastal road, so we would need to buy more). Once Jerusalem is secure, we can redeploy the units for defense, or to attack the exposed Palestinian cities.
4. Sinai:
Sinai Deserts: Pay little attention, and don't rush anything in Gevaram, it will just be wasted production if the Egyptians take it. I don't like abandoning the place, but the settlements are isolated, and are far away from our main armies.
B. Eilat: The city needs walls, and the roads cut!!
C. Coastal Road: Our main defensive area. AA, the plane, and at least one T-34 are a must. Pillaging should also be considered.
If we can blunt the Egyptian attack, we can perhaps advance down this road, and this would remove large threats to Tel Aviv from the air, and help secure the Sinai Deserts as well. I would consider it the second best place to attack after the Palestinian cities.
General Notes:
1. Five planes is a lot of money. If you want them just for scouting, then perhaps we should build some of the cheap fighters. (I forget the term, but neither messerchsmit nor Spitfire). I'm not sure if Econ can even affoard five planes from abroad, they cost more than T-34's, and T-34's are a lot more useful.
2. The Railroads: I agree, we should railroad the interior first. Only then should we possibly consider railroading the frontier, and this issue should be discussed only if we get our base area railroaded as well.
Other notes:
1. We can use those immigrants, and I'd like to hear plans on what to do with the immigrants from Saudi Arabia. (aka, the southern ones). What to do about them?
(cheap answer: If a zion worker is down there, use it to build a city, and disband immigrants for a massive T-34 factory.  )
2. What will econ research next? Spies or IDF infantry? Spies can be useful for scouting cities, and perhaps bribes (though we can't afford it). IDF infantry is a good infantry unit, though not spectacular.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-02-2004 08:27
|