Axis and Allies Revised: Eight Victory City Goals versus Nine Victory City Plus


  • Axis and Allies Revised:  Eight Victory City Goals versus Nine Victory City Plus Goals:

    There are twelve victory cities.  The Allied victory cities are located in the territories of the United Kingdom, India, Eastern US, Western US, Russia, and Karelia.  The Axis victory cities are located in the territories of Germany, Western Europe, Southern Europe, Japan, the Phillipines, and Kwangtung.

    In an 8 victory city or less game, the Axis goal should be to quickly secure Karelia and India, while not losing control of the relatively easily attacked territories of Western Europe, Phillipines, or Kwangtung.  If the Axis can accomplish this goal, they will control 8 victory cities, and thus win the game.  The Allied goal is, of course, to prevent the Axis from getting those eight victory cities.

    In a 9 victory city or more game, the Allied plan should be to prevent the Axis from taking over any of the Allied capitals, while using their economic and positional advantage to secure the game.  The Axis plan should be to use their superior initial numbers concentrated in one area to take one of the Allied capitals, effectively eliminating the Allied positional advantage.  This is because although the Axis can secure India and Karelia quickly (getting 8 victory cities), securing the 9th victory city is very problematic for the Axis, requiring either the capture of one of the Allied capitals, or Western US (which is equally difficult).

    The Eight Victory City Game:

    A few tanks give Germany solid control of Karelia early in the game, and prevent any Allied recapture of the territory until the Allies can get their fleet going in the Atlantic.  A few infantry give Germany a solid hold on Western Europe.  A careless Germany player can lose Western Europe, but if the Germany player is a bit careful, it will be almost  impossible for the Allies to crack any of those German controlled territories early.  So unless the Germans make some really glaring errors or gets amazingly bad dice rolls on Germany’s first turn, the Allies should concentrate on a KJF plan.

    Japan is hard to crack, but the Phillipines and Kwangtung are not, cut off as they are from any easy reinforcement.  More importantly, it is difficult for Japan to attack India in force early.  If the Allies make a determined defense of India early, the US can have time to build up a naval fleet to take control of either Kwangtung, or more likely the Phillipines, if and when India falls.

    A strong Japanese attack on India can occur early, particularly if Japan does not do Pearl Harbor, and instead sends its air west towards India.  Even so, if Russia moves units towards India on the first turn, by the time Japan is set to attack India, a strong Allied defense can be created (in conjunction with UK fighters flown in from the United Kingdom, an industrial complex built in India producing units, and another industrial complex in Ssinkiang producing even more units to pull Japanese reinforcements away from India, plus possible fighters flown from either London or from a Pacific based US fleet).

    The Nine Victory City Plus Game:

    This sort of game is really more about total world domination than victory cities.  The fact that Karelia and India contain victory cities hardly comes into play.  What the Axis really want to do is capture one of either Western US, Eastern US, Great  Britain, or Russia, and hold that territory for at least one round.

    If Japan manages to capture and hold Western US for at least one round, Japan should have a production of around 40 plus, and will be able to produce 10 units a turn in Western US.  This effectively neutralizes the US, but does NOT neutralize Japan.  In a nine victory city game, the Axis can go on to take Karelia and India quite easily, winning right away.  In a ten victory city game, the Axis can take control of Africa (without the US to reinforce); if UK diverts lots of resources to retaking Africa, Germany can press on Russia; if the UK does not diver resources to Africa, Germany and Japan will have the economic advantage and should be able to crush Russia anyways.

    If Japan or Germany manage to capture Eastern US (almost impossible) and hold for at least one round, the gigantic financial boost plus the newly produced units will mean that the US will probably be neutralized for the rest of the game – and more, that the Axis powers will have the IPCs from the United States’ American territories, which should seal the game for the Axis.

    If Germany manages to capture Great Britain (unlikely but possible) and hold for at least one round, Germany will be forced to fight a two front battle against Russia and the United States for a while.  However, with London to use as a transport base against Eastern Canada and Eastern US, and as a fighter base for the Atlantic, and with Japan pressing on the Allies from the east, even though Germany may be pressed upon, the Axis should eventually win.

    If Germany and Japan manage to capture and hold Russia for at least one round, the economic gain will likely be small, as the Allies will probably have made a fighting retreat to Moscow.  However, with the Allies cleared out of central Europe, the Axis can divert all their units and resources to fighting off the Allies from the coast.  This neutralizes the Allied positional advantage of being able to force both Axis powers to fight two-front wars.  With the Axis powers both fighting one-front wars, IF neither of the Axis powers falls almost immediately after Russia, the Axis will have an economic advantage that should allow them to win the game.

  • Founder TripleA Admin

    Posted to website.

  • Customizer

    I’m working on a system for my map in which Victory Cities work in reverse.

    That is each of the six powers (included Italy) starts with 4 VCs, but the object is not to accumulate a set total, but to reduce each enemy power to whatever number you agree on (0, 1 or 2) should force a surrender.  Their are no “capture-the -capital” rules, which in the original game render VCs all but irrelevant in a more than 8 VC game, as the article above points out.
    If a power is forced to surrender it is permanently out of the game with no chance to come back even if it’s VCs are “Liberated”.

  • 2007 AAR League

    @Bunnies:

    The Nine Victory City Plus Game:

    This sort of game is really more about total world domination than victory cities.  The fact that Karelia and India contain victory cities hardly comes into play.  What the Axis really want to do is capture one of either Western US, Eastern US, Great  Britain, or Russia, and hold that territory for at least one round.

    About the 9VC game, my input is the following:

    Axis
    Basically, 9VCs means that Axis has only one likely combinations of winning VCs (except for taking capitals, which I have left out altogether from this discussion - if you take a capital, you generally have won the game regardless of current VC tally):

    Winning combo:
    1 HOME+IND+LEN, then sneak into WUS.

    However, the problem with taking IND+LEN+WUS is that it doesn’t end the game right away. US has a chance to counter, and then it might be bye-bye anyway, for any forces that made it into WUS.

    And if the Allies has taken 1 or more of the Axis HOME VCs… then the Axis will need IND+LEN+MOS+another Allied capital…That is highly unlikely, and the game will rather end in the recapture of the Axis HOME VC, or Allied concession.

    Basically, the Axis have small chances of winning a 9 VC game, without claiming a Capital.

    Allies
    Let’s regard the Allied possibilities for winning a 9VC game.

    The first option is of course to claim an Axis capital.
    But other option is to claim a combo of other VCs. What’s interesting with the Allies 9 VC condition, is that there exist many more likely combinations, than it does for the Axis.

    The Allies has many more likely sets of Victory cities, that does not include the capture of an enemy capital. Let’s look at the options, if Axis took either IND or LEN from the Allies. Then we get only one viable options:

    1. 5HOMEVCs+SEU+WEU+KWA+PHI

    However, what options exist, if Allies has been able to keep ALL their own VCs:

    1. HOME+SEU+WEU+KWA
    2. HOME+SEU+WEU+PHI
    3. HOME+SEU+KWA+PHI
    4. HOME+WEU+KWA+PHI

    All of a sudden we have four different options to win game, without touching a capital…

    Conclusion
    The 9VC  rule (rather than a 10 VC rule, for example), favors the Allies, since the Axis has to defend more positions.
    In addition to covering their capitals, they need to make sure to cover VC’s IF the Allies are able to get up to 9 VCs.
    In a game , where the the Axis is already at a disadvantage, maybe one should do away with the 9 VC rule altogether?

    Special conditions has to exist on the board, for such a win to be claimed. Specifically, a US fleet need to be present in the Pac, and LEN/IND/WEU needs all to be contested. Not necessarily heavily stacked though - it is enough that they are “traded”.

    Still, it is something that can quickly happen. Remember , the Allies does not have to HOLD their VC’s. They might capture empty VC’s with 1 inf, if they are left unguarded…Also , WEU & LEN are typical “trading territories” (even SEU is such a territory, to a somewhat lesser extent though). They might be captured , without the Axis detecting that a 9 VC victory attempt is being made.

    Then the issue is to grab PHI/KWA. Japan has lots of things to defend in the Pac: Japan + its IC-territories. Only seldomly are an IC built in KWA and there NEVER is a Jap built IC in PHI. Those areas can be taken in one move, with a US fleet containing two TRNs in any of five or six SZ’s in the Pac.

    The biggest issue might prove to be the IND VC. In most games, it is not contested, but rather in firm J hands. In order for this to fall, the Allies probably need to have played a North Africa Dominance strat, and have a train of units in LIB-EGY-TRJ-PER. These need , in either UK and/or US turn make a bid for IND rather than transferring up to CAU. It is the VC that could prove to be the trickiest in order to grab the 9th VC…

  • '16 '15 '10

    I like 8 VC games as a fun challenge as Allies.  I agree KJF is the best strat since the game revolves around India in the 1st turns, and Japan is easier to take down.

    That said you still need either Karelia or a German VC to win the game, unless you take Tokoyo itself, which is tough.

Suggested Topics

  • 13
  • 14
  • 10
  • 1
  • 1
  • 5
  • 12
  • 25
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

39

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts