• '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Given all other variables are equal, what nation do you feel is the strongest? (ie, same skill level of player, same unit values, normal game setup, normal turn rotation, etc.)

    Assume 2 or 3 rounds of game play.


  • i’m going with Japan on this one.
    They may not have the same income or ipc level as the US, however they have the greatest potential to take these things - even after 2-3 turns. In the hands of a competant general, i think that Japan can rule the game most of the time - even if the axis lose (ultimately).


  • I’d have to say the US. While the US will lose 4 ipcs in Asia and perhaps Hawaii (1 ipc) I can’t think of any other territory that can be taken by an Axis player that can’t be easily countered. The US starts with the greatest income and while Japan may acquire more, most of the US income is very secure which enables the US to use most of its forces in offense rather than defense (with the exception of the infantry pipeline through W. Canada). All other players must devote their forces at least somewhat to defense in Europe, Asia, or Africa.


  • that’s fair 221b.
    i guess i was biased by the fact that “Pearl” is usually very successful, and Japan has the option to land Alaska and Mexico, forcing the US to divert its attention elsewhere. (if Japan is willing to risk the 3 ipcs, they also may take Brazil)
    So while the US may find it’s income drop to 31 (and even 28 or 25 if Japan is feeling so inclined), Japan’s may easily increase to 31 in the first round, and 35-36 in the second - depending on its will.
    But otherwise is was in the mood to go with Japan despite the fact that the US (if the Axis win) is the last nation to fall, and the US is the country to sink Germany if any nation does.
    This would be the thing to make the US most powerful IMO.


  • Well you all know what I think I’d say either Germany or Russia.


  • Agent Smith,

    Germany would certainly be a fair choice. I did give serious thought to Germany considering its head start of forces over the other players and the fact that Germany usually gains Africa quickly. However, after that (in a no bid game) Germany is usually pretty much boxed in with the Allies retaking Africa. Not the hallmark of the most powerful nation.

    Russia, I think is the most critical nation as usually the main focus of the game is fought on Russian territory. But needing the help of its allies to even survive also doesn’t make it the most powerful, just the most important IMHO.


  • For most powerful between Russia/Germany, even if you didn’t take into account who else is surrounding each one, it is true that Germany should be considered the strongest starting since they have the most units - HOWEVER - you also have to consider who goes first! On any given turn, Russia is always one turn worth of building ahead of Germany. Why? Because they go first, and always build right before Germany goes. So when Germany goes on turn 1, they’re dealing with one turn of Russian builds, and then after they’ve made up for it by building, Russia has already built again by their next turn! That said, my vote went to Germany, but only because when I play against myself or others, they’re usually the ones to take capitals for the Axis and because they have the best combination of standing force at the game’s beginning and production for the first 2-3 turns, whereas with the Allies it’s rarely the same country even two games in a row and they’re generally lagging behind economically until the fourth or so turn (if they ever stop).

    A more interesting question might be: in a free-for-all (everyone beats everyone) game, who would win? My guess is the US - but NOT due to their strong economic power! I pick them because of the three countries whose capitals are tougher to take because they’re on islands, they’re the only country with really easy, usually unadulterated access to Africa and from there into Asia. Germany and Russia would most likely in my opinion just beat the piss out of each other, while Japan would try to take southern Asia (if they went head-to-head against Germany after teaming against Russia without the UK or US fighting Germany, they would definitely get crushed). UK would probably try to build ships most of the game and fail miserably because Germany and Russia would keep killing them, so they might try an IC instead. It would most likely be taken easily with the US as a foe instead of an ally on Asia and in Africa. My guess is it would go like this: Russia defends like a b**** until eventually they get taken by Germany (with Japan maybe taking away some of their production). Japan in southern Asia would kick the crap out of everybody since only they can really get troops there quickly without an IC that would get taken by either a former ally or themselves VERY quickly. Maybe they would try to take Russia from Germany; if so, both would take heavy losses and it would just kill both their chances of winning. UK wouldn’t really be able to do anything until later turns when they could build a big navy, at which point the US would probably be able to take their capital anyway (unless they just kept building infantry, but since any country building nothing but infantry on their island capital could just stick out the game for 25+ rounds but never make any progress towards winning, I don’t think of games in those terms). US would take Africa (with some tanks preferably) and maybe try spreading into Asia, or maybe THEY would build an IC in South Africa (taking it before anyone else can get there would be my reason for the tanks). They would probably cut down the British income, and with Japan taking most of the Asian territories, Britain would fall to such a weak production that they’d just get taken - maybe by Germany, but more likely by the US. The US would then most likely use their Africa/UK ass-kicking income against Germany and Germany would try hard to defend their capital. While Germany was pulling troops back to Berlin, Japan or the US would probably take Moscow since they had to give it up, and then it would just be Japan & US taking Germany. Whoever took that capital would most likely win, but I have difficulty believing Japan would ever build up a combined naval/land force strong enough to take the US even after all the rounds it would take them just to get there. So my winner in the free-for-all would probably be US.


  • However, after that (in a no bid game) Germany is usually pretty much boxed in with the Allies retaking Africa. Not the hallmark of the most powerful nation.

    But that merely indicates the weaknesses of playing w/o a bid and not in Germany itself. Germany and Russia are strongest because they need to rely on naval units for troops the least. As it were the US is the most dependant upon them and Japan a close second. In theory if you could eliminate either the US or Jap navy then they would be irrelevent as a fighting force in the game. On the otherhand Germany is very difficult to box in past the EE/WE border in that it takes time and skill to do so.

    Russia, I think is the most critical nation as usually the main focus of the game is fought on Russian territory. But needing the help of its allies to even survive also doesn’t make it the most powerful, just the most important IMHO.

    But again Russia is only weak because they are the only country to have to might a two front war. Even Germany can more easily defend on of its fronts by virtue of being protected by the sea(WEuro). Just because the Russians have the most to deal with does not make them the weakest only the most pressed. Again what would happen should the Jap navy be destroyed, or if Germany were nuked each turn with HBs. The two front war would very quickly become a one front war which Russia can win very easily.

  • '19 Moderator

    I’ll throw a kink in.

    At first I thought it would have to be one of the Axis powers. They both start the game in a position to expand rapidly and for this reason they are by default militarily powerful. They are also able to expand while outnumbered two to three. This reminded me of an adage that goes something like: You can judge a man’s (woman’s) strength by the strength of his enemies. If you apply this idea then clearly the strongest nation has to be Russia. Sandwiched between the two most aggressive powers Russia has to hold out, and quite often does.

    So… Russia gets my vote.


  • Smith,

    But that merely indicates the weaknesses of playing w/o a bid

    Of course, a bid changes everything. But then the question becomes, with a 15 ipc bid to Germany, which is the strongest? What about a 10 ipc bid to Germany, 10ipc bid to Japan?… Bidding does radically change the game in ways that can be difficult (at least for me) to assess.

    In theory if you could eliminate either the US or Jap navy then they would be irrelevent as a fighting force in the game.

    We disagree here. Either would only be set back about 2-3 turns as they would simply build a navy as required. Still, a 2 turn setback would hurt.

    On the otherhand Germany is very difficult to box in past the EE/WE border in that it takes time and skill to do so.

    We agree. But with only these territories, Germany has about 25 ipcs of income with no opportunity for growth. Thats not enough to be considered the most powerful IMO as other nations will have more income and therefore will (eventually have more forces and be able to do what they want). The same is true, I believe for Russia as there is almost no potential for economic growth unless either Germany or Japan gives way (which shouldn’t happen without Allied help), but Russia can sustain economic shrinkage from both.

    However, the real power in the game is the teamwork that is played between players. Thats why the US should never go after Japan alone but should instead focus its resources on Germany first.


  • Of course, a bid changes everything. But then the question becomes, with a 15 ipc bid to Germany, which is the strongest? What about a 10 ipc bid to Germany, 10ipc bid to Japan?… Bidding does radically change the game in ways that can be difficult (at least for me) to assess.

    Not really though DF makes a good argument you can’t analyze strength b/c the game as such is not balanced. Assume if you will that rather than playing with a bid one of the Allies was assumed to be neutral. The Allies would be at their strongest if they were to play with the Uk and Russia, and at their weakest if it was the Uk and USA. This indicates that they are weaker than Russia. The same methodology can be reasonably applied to the Axis as well. If Japan had to face off against Russia one on one Russia would still possess a great advantage. Were Japan to go one on one versus America Japan would probably win. So by this reasoning it can be determined that the US is the weakest power, followed by Japan and Britain, then Germany and Russia.

    We disagree here. Either would only be set back about 2-3 turns as they would simply build a navy as required. Still, a 2 turn setback would hurt.

    And yet as either you cannot afford to rebuild your navy can you as it takes guys off the board. What if you could continuously kill naval units ie HBombers. This is a predictable outcome of HBs and in fact Allied HBs IMO should always be used to kill the Jap navy. Once Japan has no navy and cannot build one they must build ICS. Since the brits can build more bombers they can then SBR both Japan and Russia to nothing, and it becomes cake for the Allies to win. The same methods can be used with Jap HBs however in that case the Axis can and should quickly gain M84 b/c of the limits of US production at that point.

    We agree. But with only these territories, Germany has about 25 ipcs of income with no opportunity for growth. Thats not enough to be considered the most powerful IMO as other nations will have more income and therefore will (eventually have more forces and be able to do what they want). The same is true, I believe for Russia as there is almost no potential for economic growth unless either Germany or Japan gives way (which shouldn’t happen without Allied help), but Russia can sustain economic shrinkage from both.

    No Germany with 25-28ipcs is still quite a threat b/c they don’t have to worry about anything at that point. They push up new troops and keep their fronts secure. Then for the Allies to win they must be able to defeat Japan, and the Japs should’ve been able to secure Novo at this point unless the game is a blowout which is irrelevent to this discussion. At this point with the Japs in Novo, and the Allies ‘boxed’ in to Karelia/Russia the Allies becomes very vulnreable to M84 if timed right. However, to actually kill the German stack is very hard as their supply lines are very short.

    However, the real power in the game is the teamwork that is played between players. Thats why the US should never go after Japan alone but should instead focus its resources on Germany first.

    No it shouldn’t go after Japan alone b/c the game as such is imbalanced. The US versus Japan forces 2 Allies which are weaker than Germany individually. Again in my scenario above if the game started in 1940 and the US and Japan were not included, or if the game was Germany versus the UK and US the Germans would win every time. If the game was Germany versus Russia the Germans would win. This means Germany is strongest followed by Russia and America and Japan are the weakest. Since America is weaker than Japan how would this ever help the Allies win.


  • Agent Smith,

    Ok, I better see your reasoning behind why you think Germany is the strongest. I’m not sure if I agree or not, but I will think about some more.

    Regarding the HB threat to building a Navy, its not really a problem for the US as I can build off Texas, out of range of any Axis aircraft (unless they also get LR). But that assumes the Axis will try to tech and will get HB (and LR) and also will quickly build sufficient bombers. I bet I’ll have my Navy built before they can do this.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Personally, I was working on the assumption that Japan or the United Kingdom would be the strongest as they are the least likely to be destroyed in a reasonable amount of time but still close enough to the real fighting to contribute enough that they can decide the game.

    That’s probably a bit confusing, since it’s confusing in my own head. Basically, Japan and Britian are islands and thus are very difficult to invade, unlike Germany and Russia.

    Japan and Britian both start with powerful navies.

    Japan and Britian can both land-bridge quite effectively to invade their closest enemies. (Whereas Germany and Russia really cannot until either Germany or Russia is destroyed.)

    The United States really does not come into it’s own in this game (standard edition, no bids, etc) until after the 3rd round. A) they need to rebuild a navy. 1 BB and 2 Transports arn’t going to cut it, especially given that the BB and 1 Transport need 2 turns to get to E USA and 1 turn to bring combat to the enemy there-after. (Panama being two sea zones, not one.)


  • Regarding the HB threat to building a Navy, its not really a problem for the US as I can build off Texas, out of range of any Axis aircraft (unless they also get LR). But that assumes the Axis will try to tech and will get HB (and LR) and also will quickly build sufficient bombers. I bet I’ll have my Navy built before they can do this.

    Except that in order for your navies to be useful they have to move out of Texas. This throws them into the lions den so to speak, and Hbombers are far more powerful than any defensive naval unit you could add including loaded Carriers which are actually weak as they risk not just the navy but also a nations defensive airforce as well. 4-5 HBs can destroy just about any navy from my experience. It may cost a lot in terms of lost bombers, but these can be rebuilt lost bbs, Carriers, ftrs cannot.

    Japan and Britian can both land-bridge quite effectively to invade their closest enemies. (Whereas Germany and Russia really cannot until either Germany or Russia is destroyed.)

    But this expresses why both Germany and Russia are so important and strong as they both have a necessary function to pin down each others forces. In fact when Russia gets sufficient help from the Anglo Americans so that they can send all or virtually all of its army eastward against Japan this usually spells the death nell of the Axis powers. Japan cannot match a full power Russia becuase Russia starts off so much stronger than they do, and produces at a comparable amount.

    So who would win if the game was….

    Germany versus Britain?
    Germany versus Russia?
    Japan versus the US?

    My answers are Germany, Germany and Japan, and this tells you of the relative strength of each.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Russia isn’t going to be putting the full economic force of it’s country against Japan before round 4 though. As you said, they’ll have to wait for the US and UK to start really helping them against Germany, and the US won’t be much help until T3.


  • Russia, they are they only country really fighting both axis powers at the central fronts!


  • Hbombers are far more powerful than any defensive naval unit you could add including loaded Carriers which are actually weak as they risk not just the navy but also a nations defensive airforce as well. 4-5 HBs can destroy just about any navy from my experience. It may cost a lot in terms of lost bombers, but these can be rebuilt lost bbs, Carriers, ftrs cannot.

    I agree that the HB would severely restrict the movement of this Allied Navy, my only point being that it could be built without being sunk.

    But how did the issue of HB come up? I guess you are assuming thats how the Allied (or Japanese) Navy is eliminated. HB (along with IT IMO) is almost always a sure win in the game for whichever nation has it.

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 46
  • 9
  • 83
  • 54
  • 14
  • 10
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

33

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts