• '16 '15 '10

    Lately the Axis is winning the vast majority of the games that I watch and participate in, even if the Allied player is highly skilled and the starting bid is 7-8.  It seems that either the bid needs to go up, or Allies are missing some essential strategic element.

    The reason is every Allied strat seems to run into an economic wall…Japan’s mainland expansion allows Axis to gain an economic advantage.  A USA Pacific offensive can, if successful, cut down Jap income and raise Allied income some, but this typically comes at the cost of IPCs, NOs, and offensive momentum in either Africa or Europe.

    The question I have regards Allied decision-making around Round 5-6 in a KGF game…  In this scenario, Allies are on the offensive and hope to stack Poland by R6 or R7, but the Japs are already finished with China and are starting to contest Kazach/Persia and threaten Cauc.  At this point, Russia is outgunned and will be outspent by Japan.  Now, if Russians turns its tanks back to face the menace, it can probably hold awhile with an income at 40+ from national objectives and Eastern Europe conquests.  But…without a major Russian assault, the Germans will still have a big army and could recover, especially if they start getting cash from the Cauc NO.

    What to do?  Keep pushing west?  Or pull the armor stack and send it at the Japs?

    My instinct has been to go for broke and attempt to crack Germany, but this fails often.  I’m tempted to switch tactics and play defensive with Russia (Persia stack, etc), but in that case, what is to stop the Japs from invading Africa?


  • @Zhukov44:

    Lately the Axis is winning the vast majority of the games that I watch and participate in, even if the Allied player is highly skilled and the starting bid is 7-8.  It seems that either the bid needs to go up, or Allies are missing some essential strategic element.

    The reason is every Allied strat seems to run into an economic wall…

    As I knew it would happen …

    Seriously, I only lost one 1941 scenario game with axis due a superior strat of allies, and it was a very agressive USSR. I did some big errors with axis and I was playing a league game with a -25 bid anyway (-17 for japs, -4 for germans, -4 for italians) … I survived more than 10 rounds by the way …

    1941 has monster advantage for axis, and IJS (also called KGF) only makes things worst

  • '16 '15 '10

    It’s clear enough that KGF has its flaws.  But in my experience, KGF is the only Allied strategy in 41 that has a decent percentage of working, both for my Allies and against my Axis.  Germany with NOs is too much of a monster…it needs to be beat down with 3 clubs.  Now, I don’t rule out the possibility that the ideal Allied strat would include some Pacific action, if for no other reason then to distract Jap air power.  But the key component in Allied victories seems to be winning on the Eastern front (ie an offensive Russia), and this doesn’t seem possible without some American support in the European theater, or at least an American effort to help out in Africa so UK can do stuff in Europe.

    But again what I’d like to discuss is options for winning the long game with a KGF start against an Axis that knows what its doing.  Some of the issues might be…

    1. Can a Persia stack be done in AA50 against a competent Japan?
    2. Is it better for Allies to stack Poland or France late game?
    3. How to keep Africa in the Allied column while continuing to pile on pressure on Germany/Italy?
    4. Kill Italy or Germany first?

  • If allies can hold Italy, then either Germany or Japan must take Moscow, b/c in this situation allies are so strong in Europe that Germany will also be pressured, and allies will most probably have an economic advantage.


  • @Zhukov44:

    It’s clear enough that KGF has its flaws.  But in my experience, KGF is the only Allied strategy in 41 that has a decent percentage of working, both for my Allies and against my Axis.  Germany with NOs is too much of a monster…it needs to be beat down with 3 clubs.  Now, I don’t rule out the possibility that the ideal Allied strat would include some Pacific action, if for no other reason then to distract Jap air power.  But the key component in Allied victories seems to be winning on the Eastern front (ie an offensive Russia), and this doesn’t seem possible without some American support in the European theater, or at least an American effort to help out in Africa so UK can do stuff in Europe.

    But again what I’d like to discuss is options for winning the long game with a KGF start against an Axis that knows what its doing.  Some of the issues might be…

    1. Can a Persia stack be done in AA50 against a competent Japan?
    2. Is it better for Allies to stack Poland or France late game?
    3. How to keep Africa in the Allied column while continuing to pile on pressure on Germany/Italy?
    4. Kill Italy or Germany first?

    You are exactly correct, an agressive Russia is needed in 1941.
    Also, I feel that the little brother must be knocked down as much as possible:
    Get after Italy with USA alone (optimally) or a combination of USA and UK.

    UK can hopefully help russia over the top by taking finland, norway or even flowing units through karelia or archangel.

    with this added income (africa should be in allied hands), make sure you are getting your share of ftrs.  Why?
    These are the key to holding any large Russian push against Germany:  land ftrs to support the Russian army thrust.

    also, getting after Italy opens another front the axis must be concerned about:  The fall of italy.

    USA units will march through africa to meet Japan in Persia.

    I also advocate SOME USA pacific naval purchases.  Keep Japan honest… you don’t have the resources to go toe-to-toe with Japan.

    To me, a gob of allied ftrs give the flexiblity the allies need to deal with axis mid game thrusts (and keep them worried about a dump of UK/UK ground units into NWE supported by 8 ftrs)

    After all, the Allies won the war through supperior air power.

    ALLIES_FLY!


  • A recent game was decided by a strong UK navy dropping units into the Baltic states allowing Russia to concerntrate on the south. Obviously this was after a few rounds where Russia had been aggressive enough that her and Germany were still swapping border territory.

    I’m not a die hard vet of the forums like some of you. So I don’t know if this strategy has been tested and found wanting - but it was well worth Russia losing the 5 IPCs as within a couple of rounds the UK (the US had won back Africa so the UK had about 25 IPCs) the UK had dropped 16 infantry onto Russian territory - which really strengthened the (russian) western front.

    Had the tactic been employed earlier - Russia may have been able to concentrate on dealing with Japan (who ate her up from the east). Also - had the tactic come earlier then possibly Russia would have got her 10 IPC bonus more often (she only got it once that game) which would have made up for the 5 IPC loss.

    So a question is - are people still holding out at all costs for the 5 Russian IPCs and maybe missing the boat when it comes to (desparately needed) UK/US reinforcement?

  • '16 '15 '10

    @axis_roll:

    make sure you are getting your share of ftrs.  Why?
    These are the key to holding any large Russian push against Germany:  land ftrs to support the Russian army thrust……To me, a gob of allied ftrs give the flexiblity the allies need to deal with axis mid game thrusts (and keep them worried about a dump of UK/UK ground units into NWE supported by 8 ftrs)

    Excellent point.  A heavy investment in fighters could be the key to winning the long game if Germany turtles successfully…as these fighters can move from Poland to Persia to Moscow to fleet ACs as needed.

    also, getting after Italy opens another front the axis must be concerned about:  The fall of italy.

    USA units will march through africa to meet Japan in Persia.

    These seem to be related points, as the shuck to 12 keeps the threat to Italy real.  However, my Africa shuck never seems to make to it Persia….Axis tends to kill off the units before then.  Maybe I need to buy more gear/transports and less bombers in the early going, but not having sufficient air means the Japs could get in close and dominate SZ 34.


  • @Zhukov44:

    also, getting after Italy opens another front the axis must be concerned about:  The fall of italy.

    USA units will march through africa to meet Japan in Persia.

    These seem to be related points, as the shuck to 12 keeps the threat to Italy real.  However, my Africa shuck never seems to make to it Persia….Axis tends to kill off the units before then.  Maybe I need to buy more gear/transports and less bombers in the early going, but not having sufficient air means the Japs could get in close and dominate SZ 34.

    Where are they getting killed and by whom?  If it’s Japan, at least those units are not going after Russia.
    The key here is to get enough allied units to hold at least Egypt.
    This would offer a late game UK IC if UK could afford it.  That’s huge if you can swing it.  That’s a strong late-mid game move I have used effectively if Germany is contained but Japan can’t break thru to take Russia.


  • This is what I find works well, now depending on optional rules, etc, this can change.  There are a few keys to this.

    1. never, ever ever, all G to take there 3rd NO.  Starting on R1 stack Kar with everything that can reach and on UK1 land 2 fighters.  To follow this, on UK1 you should purchase atleast 2 transports, at times 3, along with a carrier and/or a DD if needed.  Begining on UK2 start the shuck into Kar.  This will allow you to hold Kar the entire game without using too many of R’s resources.

    2. never, ever ever, allow Persia to fall to japan.  Starting with the UK stack from TJ/India, added to with Russian Inf on R2, followed up with US airpower (fighers and a bomber or 2 if possible, make Japan protect her transports and her factories).

    3. US vs Italy.  Shuck into africa, keep inf in morocco and send armor towards Persia.  If not playing with interceptors (which I despise) SBR the daylights out of G.  Be sure to start the shuck in LA.

    The biggest things though are to hold Persia and Karelia.  Without Kar G’s income never gets high enough and it is much easier to beat her down.  Defending a territory with 3 nations is easier than attacking it with 3 nations.  This is how you hold Persia.  Typically it will only cost you 2 russian inf on R2, on R3 usually nothing (if you feel like it UK can retake India on UK2 just to irritate Japan, it helps if you send your bomber to moscow if it lives on UK1), and on further turns can take anywhere from 0-3 Inf, and/or a US fighter or two (using algeria as a halfway point).  In most games a 40ish IPC russia can hold back a 70ish IPC japan if persia is held.  And G will be making little to no money with 5-6 bombers SBRing her every turn without the NOs.


    1. Unite the allied fleet in Africa, pump all UK troops to Persia, have the US build up pressure to take France/ Italy, pray you get some luck.  It is way easier to stack, pressure, and cordinate from africa.  Usually this makes the game last 12 turns until the allies are inevitably a lost cause instead of 7.

  • Get the 10ipc Russian No.
    I have yet to lose using Russia agressively, and without any bid.
    Russia need to push hard and real toward Berlin.

    Uk need to take/hold Baltic sea and cut down german supply routes so it cannot counter attack Russia effectively. Exemple, by trading Poland every turn. France is a great bonus if it can.

    USA need to take Norway by turn 2, place an IC there rnd 3 and pump out warships to bolster UK fleet round 4. I facepalm myself everytime I see a UK player take Norway…

    Thoses are basic moves. Once Russia reach 50 ipc, you got to get diced hard to lose.


  • @ Corbeau, even with regular dice, you will have a very hard time winning more than 50% of all games in a no bid, +NOs, no tech game, as allies.
    I will gladly play against anyone with this setting. I don’t think you will find TripleA players in the unstable lobby who will play allies w/o any bids, regardless of LL or regular dice. In a single game, ofc, anything can happen… :-)

  • '16 '15 '10

    @Corbeau:

    USA need to take Norway by turn 2, place an IC there rnd 3 and pump out warships to bolster UK fleet round 4. I facepalm myself everytime I see a UK player take Norway…

    Thoses are basic moves. Once Russia reach 50 ipc, you got to get diced hard to lose.

    How you do get Norway USA2 if the German bomber is on Norway after G1?  Against the G opening I face most often, best case scenario is having 2 DDs to protect the USA tranny against the bomber (assuming there isn’t a fighter on Algeria, which there might be), unless I was placing my UK1 naval purchase in SZ 8.  I suppose I could do that instead of 2…but the cost is giving up a UK threat to Finland and Karelia.

    Good point about the utility of Norway as a naval factory.


  • If german Bomber is in Norway:

    • I’m guessing UK Egypt is in good shape :)
    • German Infantry was not moved from Norway in Finland, if not it means that lone bomber is dead anyways to the RAF ( problem solved )
    • A weak Finland = Russia takes it round 1

    So, I’m not sure why you make Finland a priority on turn 2? For Karelia, If it’s not taken round 1, you can defend it round 2 with UK fighters or simply deadzoning it. A decent Russian player won’t have Germany holding Karelia firm by round 3 in any case.

    But yes, if that bomber is there in Norway and is defended: Use sz8. Consolidate in sz 6 the next turn with new builds. You should really be happy if that bomber is there, as I mentioned Finland will suffer, Egypt will survive so UK/Russia are not in a bad shape.


  • Depends G could have still hit Egypt R1 without the bomber, I still do personally unless there is a bid unit there.

    As far as the G bomber in finland, I typically don’t mind if it goes after the DD/Tranie, that is still a dicey fight for G and there are no units on the transport so you risk 15 IPCs of units against a 12 IPC unit, not that big of a deal to me.

  • '16 '15 '10

    With a bit more experience under my belt…time to resurrect this thread…

    From what I can tell, in 41 a KGF can be either a ‘long-game’ or a short-game’ strategy…

    While the ‘short game’ KGF (taking down Berlin/Rome before Moscow falls) is likely the best bet for an Allied win, a ‘long-game’ KGF is frequently called for against an elite player, and can work sometimes if everything falls into place.

    The long-game KGF seems to require holding Persia and Poland, in order to gain and maintain the long-term economic advantage.  Strats mentioned above like the Norway factory might help the long-game succeed (I’m undecided on this one myself).

    The ‘short-game’ KGF, by contrast, is characterized by 3 tactics in particular…

    1. KIF–moving US and UK transport fleets into 12 to put pressure on Italy asap…this either leads to the fall of Italy or forces Germany to divert significant forces from the Eastern front.
    2. Stacking France or NWE with Uk and USA…this can be either part of a KIF, or as part of an “ignore Italy” tactic that puts all the pressure on Germany.
    3. Soviets attack whenever they can, even occasionally against superior forces.

    The short-game KGF requires very aggressive Soviet play.  For the ‘long-game’, Soviets have to worry more about defense (holding Persia and perhaps Ching) but also must help the Allies capture and hold Poland.

  • Moderator

    @Zhukov44:

    The long-game KGF seems to require holding Persia and Poland, in order to gain and maintain the long-term economic advantage.  Strats mentioned above like the Norway factory might help the long-game succeed (I’m undecided on this one myself).

    I think a factory in Nor is needed by either UK or US.  It just really helps, particularly if you need to add a ship.

    Also, you definitely need Poland.  This cuts off Germany and frees up Russia since both UK and US can drop units directly into Pol.

    As for Persia, if you can hold it then that is great, but deadzoning it might be enough.  If you can get some US troops heading through Afr you might be able to hold, but at least with it deadzoned you can prevent Japan from linking up stacks in Kaz.

    I think you still should probably play Russia aggressive early, but come mid game you need to decide if you can get the ‘short-game’ KGF win or if a ‘long-game’ is likely.  A lot of this will depend on the German army in Fra/Berlin and how much of a threat is Japan.  If Germany has a monster stack, I start to pull back the Russians and gradually replace them with UK/US forces, while Russia defends against Japan.

    You can survive a long time (even if Japan is earning a ton) by not letting Japan merge its army into one super army and by cutting off Ger/Ita in the East.  While you are ‘surviving’ you need to find a away to eventually crack Fra/Ger or Blk/Ita before Japan can take Cauc/Kaz or Mos.  Sometimes this could lead to tedious build-ups or marching through all of Europe but can be done before a monster Japan can take Mos.

    I also agree that ftrs help, a lot!  Both UK and US should have a heavy supply, you’ll likely have a few ACs so having ftrs shouldn’t be too much of a problem.  I’ll routinely try to have 4-6 UK ftrs (or total planes) and at least 6-8 US ftrs (or total planes).  I’ll add in extra US ftrs continually if game circumstances allow it.  A couple Russian ftrs are also nice.  I start to add those in if I hit the big NO or if I ran into production problems due to SBRs earlier in the game.


  • Definitely hit Italy early and hard. She should be an axis liability by round 3 I reckon. Saves Africa and puts pressure on Germany.

    For Russia (in a long game scenario) artillery is also good I think. Allow the germans to come reasonably close - but make sure by the time they arrive everything is deadzoned with inf/art stacks.

    Also - once Italy is seriously out of the running - if you obliterate her navy that is enough, the USA can really turn to the Pacific. In the process of going after Italy she will have thrown a carrier, maybe a dd, ftrs, trannies into the Atlantic, so she will have the resources to start filing troops through Africa.

    I think from that point on definitely go for Japan’s tail. Japan will be through China - and consuming USSR, but at that stage her navy may well also have left the Pacific open in response to your KIF strat - so you can go Island hopping…


  • I don’t quite follow why Persia is so strategic…does no one build a facility in India for UK anymore?  just have the Russkies (with support) defend Persia??


  • Because any normal opening for Japan means an attack on Borneo and East Indies, killing indian fleet as well. This means that usually any India IC will be taken easily by Japan J2. Anyway, Japan starts with so much trannies that they can stomp India J3 as later if they really want

    Japan should not play before UK. I think that the right order would be: Germany, USSR, UK, Italy, China, Japan, USA

Suggested Topics

  • 59
  • 91
  • 29
  • 30
  • 19
  • 3
  • 1
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

41

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts