Need flawless strategies for Allies

http://donsessays.freeservers.com/

The Allies can almost always win with the strategies from this site. Learn them and you will soon be whipping your Unlce no problem.

Ha. You are right, this website does ROCK! Anyways, I posted a strategy for you under player help. So try looking through here.

No offense to this website, but I think he meant the site with the essays was “the best” and the strategies on this website don’t work.

Well, we’re set to update the strategies on this website very soon.

Word of warning about those essays - they are a double-edged sword:

Many would say that the infantry transport strategy is what ‘ruins’ Axis and Allies to a certain extent, because once you know it well the game is no longer balanced. You have to start introducing house rules to make it fair for the Axis again! It’s almost like a secret that you don’t want to learn…

It also makes for a long, less exciting game after the first few times you use it. All the other strategies you see on these forums and this website are either strategies from inexperienced players, or “fun” strategies from players who are bored with the standard infantry transport strategy - that’s why so many of them don’t work.

My friends who no longer play standard A&A have a saying: “I’ve already played that game” - in other words, it’s the same game every time.

All that having been said, I don’t want to sound too cynical - you will have a blast for a long time just developing the transport strategy, and the longevity comes from optional rules, playing A&AE or A&AP, or playing around with sub-par strategies trying to get them to work.

“I still think that a complex in Australia is a good idea!” - TM Moses VII

Haha brings back old memories.

But hat Ansbach is say is right. There was a time where as the Allies I would push the “Conveyor Belt” method to its limits. And as the Axis, I would hold to the last for Germany and push for the last as Japan. So even though a few of the outcomes of the battles might be different, it’s essentially the same game over and over again. That’s when I came up with the idea of “House Rules,” “Scenarios,” “New Units”, and “Total Conversations.” These provide for infinitely more fun. In fact I’m having such as good time with “Axis and Allies Diplomacy” and “Atlantis Attacks!,” that I haven’t played a “real” game of Axis and Allies for months now.

Well, once you begin playing Don-Style, you realise the game is unbalanced

The Strats on this site are undergoing a major overhall. In fact, Djensen is working on a Back-End overhall so he can edit the page easier.

Yeah, kinda suchs for the Axis. But at least they give a good fight and that’s what matters. “You’re never beaten until you admit it” - Patton.

If you think about it, the Axis did lose the war It makes sense to be a little unbalanced.

Yeah, but what do you expect from half-wits like Hitler? In all likehood, without Hitler, Germany could’ve very well won the war. Also, I feel there should’ve been the option to build an atomic bomb. The Germans came close with heavy water, but luckily, weren’t able to make the breakthrough. With V2 rockets with nuclear warheads, the war could be changed in an instant. Of course, this would draw far more complaints than Heavy Bombers, so I understand why it never happened.

Tell you the truth, I don’t believe that, even though most historians do. The Entire German Army was not well put together, once the Americans got bombing it almost couldn’t function. The Soviets had drawn back their factories to the other side of the Urals, and the Americans had no worries. And the Russians weren’t about to give up, Stalin was ready to fight to the last man.

The Axis needed to keep the US out of it. Dec. 7, 1941 was the end of it. All the big military planners knew it. If Hitler would have WAITED and took down England, THEN invaded Russia they may have had a chance. Most importantly, keep the US out of it! Again, England and Russia would have long, drawnout engagements, something Hitler had zero patience for…

Field Marshal is right. I would of concentrated on just one enemy at a time. What Hitler didn’t realize was how close he came to winning the Battle of Britain. He should of stuck with what his Air Marshals had to say and focused on bombing British airbases. Also never declare war on the US. My history teacher told me of no obligation the Germans had to make in joining Japan by declaring war under the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis. Of course even with all his blunders, the Germans could’ve succeeded in their offensive against Russia. Remember this game takes place in Spring 1942. And Midway could’ve never happened or might’ve been a disaster for the US. (We forget to mention how close US came to losing it).

We can’t forget the Japaneese side They should of never attacked Pearl Harbor. But again, the war could of been won in the first few years. India came pretty damn close to falling, a huge blow to the British.

The problem with Pearl Harbor, was if the Japanese didn’t do so, they would have to withdraw from China in dishonor after many long years of fighting. Due to the embargos, the only way to sustain the Japanese war machine was by taking the resource rich East Indies and this probably would’ve resulted in USA entering the war. With Pearl Harbor, the Japanese had to chance to deliver a few knockout blows to US and hopefully secure a favorable peace. It almost worked. Also India was on the edge of tottering. After the Japanese cut the Burma road, most of the supplies had to come from American airman having to fly over the “Hump.”

I don’t think America would of taken the Offesive against Japan, at the time the atmosphere was very anti-war. The US would of just stood there, the Sleeping Giant, while Germany mopped up Britain.

Out of the two recent most US Histroy books I read both of them seem to say the same thing.

“…This blow was followed in mid-1941 by a freezing of Japanese assets in the United States and a cessation of all shipments of gasoline and other sinews of war. As the oil gauge dropped, the squeeze on Japan grew more nerve racking. Japanese keaders were faced with two painful alternatives. They could either knuckle under to the Americans or break out of the embargo ring by a desperate attack on the oil supplies and other riches of Southeast Asia that would’ve resulted in war… Japanese imperialists, after waging a bitter war against the Chinese for more than four years, were unwilling to lose face by withdrawing at the behest of the United States…”

Of course our history books could be wrong, and how would really know? Well as Napoleon said, “History is a set of lies agreed upon.”

Well, Japan did need the oil, but they weren’t in a war against a huge power, they were up against China, and winning too. When they declared war on the US without the oil supplies, they doomed themselves.

The problem with Japan is that such a small nation (though populous) could not fight such a sustained war against that many Chinese! In my mind they should of just bargaining for territorial concessions instead of bogging themselves down in such a costly and exhausting war (since before 1937 I believe). Also Japan had a pretty good oil supply from the Dutch East Indies, but US submarines played a large role (about 50%) in dismantling Japan’s merchant fleet.

it hapends alot around here

YOU ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG (BOTH OF YOU) THE GERMANS INITIAL USE OF COMBINED ARMS TO THE DETRIMENT OF EUROPES ARMIES WAS TRUMPTED BY THE U.S.'S MUCH MORE EFFICIENT USE OF THE SAME TACTIC (IT’S WHY WE STILL RULE THE WORLD IN LARGE PART.). ADDITIONALLY THE U.S. ARMY GAVE MUCH MORE BATTLEFIELD DISCRETION TO THEIR SERGEANTS ALLOWING A MORE FLUID APPROACH TO COMBAT. THE GERMAN TACTICS MAY HAVE BEEN NEW BUT THEIR COMMAND STRUCTURE WAS THE SAME AS THE REST OF EUROPE ; ANTIQUATED AND OFFICER HEAVY. YOU COULDN’T SCRATCH YOUR ASS WITHOUT AN ORDER.