• First off, I’m a newbies–played only 4 times. Board game, 2nd ed rule with Russia Restricted and no other variants.

    I’d read many many comments that Allies always win. While I agree that the Allies have a strong advantage (eg USA, UK, & Rus IC are 1 turn away from Germany whereas Jap IC are lightyear away), I believe that advantage only translate to an Allies victory 60-65% of the time. I presume always win mean 99.9% of the time???

    This is the strategy I used to get an Axis victory by Turn 5 (which works about 40% of the time–I won 4 out 4 that I played, the 40% odd was roughly estimated by on odd of the individual battles).

    Germany Turn 1 (G1):
    Buy: 1 Tran 7 Inf (29 IPC) w/ 3 IPC in bank.
    Attacks:

    • BB Tran w/ 2 Inf attack Brit sub in Iraq sz and then invade Iraq with additional bomber.
    • Arm & Inf from Libya and Fighter (Ukraine) blitz and attack Egypt.
    • Sub (W Eur) & Fighter (E Eur) attack BB (Gibraltar)
    • 3 Fighter (Nor, W Eur, Ger), Sub & Tran (Baltic) attack North Sea Fleet, usually Brit BB & Tran and Rus Sub and Tran.
    • Blitz Spain (hence the 3 IPC saved) & capture Gibraltar – reason, if Ger capture Gib, Iraq, & Egypt, Brit can’t attack Ger fleet because there’s no place to land.

    Probability of winning all battle with min loss is 42%.

    Depending of what Rus does on R1, either min attack Caucasus or else curl up into a ball (eg if Rus put 7 Inf in Cau & 13 Inf 3 Arm 2 Fighter in Kar, withdraw from Ukraine and defend E Eur; if Rus put 1 Inf in Cau and 19 Inf 3 Arm 2 Fighter in Kar, attack Cau and withdraw from BOTH E Eur & Ukr–reason, that 19 Inf have 50% to 90% of killing off everything in E Eur even if Ger put 8 Inf 8 Arm 2-4 Fighter).

    Non-Combat: move the Egypt bomber & fighter into Libya (bomber is now in range of both India & S Africa). Land remaining fighter in W Eur and/or E Eur.

    J1:
    Buy: 2 Trans & 3 Inf (25 IPC, none left)
    Attack:

    • The REAL Pearl Harbor, 2 Fighter (Philippine & CV) 1 Bomber & 1 Sub vs US Sub CV & Fighter
      Prob of success 90+% (you’ll lose 1 fighter & sub in pearl harbor).
    • Depending on Rus & Brit moves, attack one or 2 ter. (eg if Brit move tran to red sea, attack that with fighter from IndoChina to clear path for G2 invasion of S Africa or India). If Brit build India Factory, attack south. Else attack the weaker of US or Rus.

    NonCombat: move both BB & the CV into invasion range of the attack route.

    So in any case, the idea between this strategy is to grab Africa & Asia & Pacific by Turn 3/4 to get to 84 IPC victory. The T1 move essentially knock the allies out of them. Ger will concede Europe and build up Inf to recapture in Turn 3 to 5. Ger fleet is now safe until Turn 3 with an extra tran to land some more inf into afr. Jap is safe from US and can concentrate on massing an attack and capturing asia/pacific. Since Allies have no IC in Asia/Africa, it’ll be hard for them to defend. If Rus try to defend both front, Ger (with its buy of all Inf) will be able to control E Eur/Ukr/Cau and possibly Kar. In fact, Axis does not have to capture Kar nor Russia to win. They can get to 84 IPC without them. The only chance the Allies have to is land armor in Africa or to do Normandy by Turn 4.

    With this strategy, Axis should win 40% of the time by Turn 5.

    Obviously, I have limited experience, so would like to hear the expert on how they can defeat this strategy.


  • Sort of replied to this message in a different thread…


  • Quoted from Moses in another thread

    Good job.
    A turn five EV is possible like you said. But make sure you can defend your positions in Africa! That is key. Now there’s the advantage of not having to spend large troops in order to hold the Russian Front. Use these extra inf to your advantage. Also with Germany, how many transports do you expect to buy?

    Number of Ger trans depend on if Allies base any bomber in Karelia/Russia–it can reach the S Eur sz–which will blow any Ger tran built without much trouble.

    How does the allies stop this if the Axis get its way on Turn 1 (eg 40% of the time)?

    I thought about Rus sending troop toward Jap. But then Ger can aggressively push E Eur->Ukr->Caucasus.

    If UK build IC in India, that’s 45 IPC in 3 turns that’s not being spent against Germany (eg 1 CV, 2 Trans, 3-4 Inf not in the North Sea). Thus Normandy is pushed back by 3 to 5 turns. That IC is only a nuisance to Jap conquest of Asia since she can put down 6-10 Inf a turn compared to UK 3 armors. Also, with Germany conquest of the Suez Canal, Axis can now do a one-two on India; eg. Japan invade India, whittle it down, then Germany invade India, usually capturing it.

    If UK build a S Africa complex, that’s even worse. Again, with Germany conquest of Suez, S Africa is in invasion range of Ger fleet. After Jap capture India, S Africa is also in invasion range of Jap (India). And there’s no help from US & Rus in defending S Africa.

    If US build pacific fleet, then there’s zero pressure on Germany, who will then aggressively attack Russia. The US Pac fleet will put little pressure on Jap (W US is 3 turns away from anything significant). So this have very little chance.

    If Allies try the strategic bombing, they won’t have enough time to recapture Africa.

    The only Allies strategy which have a chance is for the US/UK to pressure Africa and ignore Europe. This doesn’t seem to work very often as Germany can play delaying tactic, giving up 2 territories worth 2-3IPC per turn, buying time for Jap to capture 2-3 ter worth 4-8 IPC.

    So what’s the Allies strategy which can work 100% of the time against this Axis strategy???


  • As I said on the other string, u can’t blitz GIB on G1. the units must stop per the RULES in the GAME MANUAL.
    –--------------------------------------------------------------------
    “Try again.” - Xi


  • I think Xi is right for a change! (j/k)

    “All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies.” - Bokonon


  • You’re right, can’t blitz through neutral. Then take the fighter attacking Egypt and use that to attack the sub in the Iraq sz. Leave the BB in S Eur sz to protect the built tran. Invade Spain with an Inf instead of the armor.

    Capturing suez canal probability is 57% and being victorious in all battle with all fighters intact drop from 40% to 24%. Not great, but greater than 0%.

    EV is possible by Turn 5. So how does the Allies stop this?


  • The problem here is that in Egypt you only have 1 ARM, 1 inf going up against 1 inf, 1 ARM. This only translates to victory 48% of the time. Are you willing to take that chance? What you could do is hold of attacking Egypt for a turn. Or you can send the BB and transport to support the invasion (ftr can be used to help clear Canada transport).


  • In bidded games this scenario changes completely if 2 or 3 infantry are added to Libya at game start…

    Also with the amphibious attack from Southern Europe, the UK sub must be eliminated. This means if a defensive hit is scored you lose the transport support or the battleship. In both cases, the battleship support shot is lost due to the UK sub. A real gamble all around…

    [ This Message was edited by: field marshal on 2002-06-09 06:47 ]


  • Exactly, and I’d also like to add that eliminating the UK sub (and keeping your German fleet alive) is much easier when you play with 2-hit Battleships.

    Using the rules you are playing with, a turn 5 economic victory is NOT POSSIBLE AGAINST A GOOD ALLIED OPPONENT. Not to beat a dead horse, but for the Axis to have a fair chance of winning this game at all against a quality opponent you have to bid or give them something extra, and it usually comes in the form of extra infantry in Lybia to help secure Africa, as Field Marshall stated above.

    For the Axis to win an economic victory, Germany basically has to have EVERY country in Africa, and Japan has to have EVERY country in Asia except the three next to Russia, and they are still 5 IPCs short!

    In a regular game without bidding or extra troops, if Germany spends the extra effort needed to take Africa there will be no pressure on Russia, who can then send more troops to Asia, delaying Japan and preventing economic victory. Not to mention the fact that the US and the UK can dump large amounts of troops into Algeria any time they want to starting on turn 3, and will only miss one turn of the action in Europe in doing so.

    Without bidding, the only way a turn 5 economic victory by the Axis is possible is through poor play by the Allies!

    [ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-09 08:44 ]


  • I’d read many many comments that Allies always win. While I agree that the Allies have a strong advantage (eg USA, UK, & Rus IC are 1 turn away from Germany whereas Jap IC are lightyear away), I believe that advantage only translate to an Allies victory 60-65% of the time. I presume always win mean 99.9% of the time???

    BladeX:

    Using the rules you are playing with, the Allies can win about 90% of their games - but it is using one specific Allied strategy (with minor variants). If your opponents haven’t learned or don’t use that specific strategy, then the Axis probably have about a 40%-50% chance of winning instead of about a 10% chance, and many Axis strategies (such as going for an early IPC victory) are more viable, which is why your strategy is working well for you for now…

    [ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-09 22:34 ]


  • I’d also like to recommend a different Pearl Harbor attack on J1. The Japanese airforce are the most important units they have on the board - they are their only offensive units that can be used effectively for quite some time. They are extremely valuable, and losing them in the Pearl Harbor battle would really hurt. Look at it this way - you start with 6 aircraft, if you get slightly unlucky and Japan loses 2 in your Pearl Harbor attack, then you have just lost one-third of Japan’s offensive capability! And if you replace them, then you have just been slowed down by a turn, maybe twwo!

    If you bring in even 1 Battleship on the Pearl Harbor attack, you will have a much better chance of a first round wipeout (which will minimize your losses), and if they get two hits you can take the Battleship as a loss instead of the fighter.

    Being a newer player you might think taking a battleship as a loss instead of a fighter is crazy, but don’t let the cost of units fool you - the strategic situation on the board makes many specific “cheaper” units more valuable than other, higher cost pieces. In the long run, that Japanese fighter will be a much more productive and active unit in the war then the battleship. The infantry in Lybia are another perfect example - 2 extra German infantry in Lybia are more valuable to the Axis then two extra battleships for Japan!


  • hmmm, did anyone even consider not taking all available naval units for Pearl Harbor??


  • Totally agree. We can’t stress enough the importance of fighters for all players in the game. A limited Pearl II will save part of the Japanese fleet for transport security and most of your fighters for Asia…


  • 2-hit BB’s would be nice in the case of taking out that Suez Sub, but then Germany has to send extra fighters to knock out the 2 BBs Britain holds. Now the chances of keeping both ships intact is still 55,% but still much better than the 48% used to try and take Algeria.

    With a bid in Africa, you no longer have to make that gamble since 2 inf and 1 ARM have an 82% chance of taking Egypt. With another extra inf your percentage equals 94%. However you can shift another inf to Manchuria or Burma to speed up their advance.

    “2 Fighter (Philippine & CV) 1 Bomber & 1 Sub”

    I agree with Ansbach. You want to at least add 1 BB (probably 2) into the mix. Also, move your carrier into the battle. You get get to roll one extra die and have place to land. This force will enable you to track down the American trans and BB the following turn.


  • Here is my personal favorite Pearl Harbor attack:

    2 Battleships, 1 Sub, 1 Fighter, and 1 Bomber to Hawaii (if you are playing with 2 hit battleships you don’t need the bomber). The fighter and the bomber are the last casualties you remove, but in an ‘average’ battle you will wipe him out in Round 1 and only lose the sub.

    The reason I like this is one is because on the non-combat phase you can move the AC to the Japan SZ and land the fighter there, ready to go into action on turn 2 and protecting the transports immediately.


  • Well what would you know, I use the same attack too! 😄

    This attack is of great help if you have your eyes set on Asia and not risking some crazy operation to bring the war to USA’s doorstep. However sometimes I will throw in the CV and/or Trans depending on if I can guage what USA is going to do (like Japan first) or if I want to make my way in the Atlantic.


  • In an EV, it’s the IPC at the end of US turn that count. Turn 5 is if UK & US build IC in Asia. If they don’t, it’s an Axis EV by Turn 4.

    Since Russia move before both Germany & Japan, it’s very simple to counter any Russian inf move eastward. Remember, you don’t care about being able to defend next turn, so you attack enough to capture. Just how many inf do you propose Russia should move eastward?

    In regard to Pearl Harbor, since the battle only last 4-5 turns, don’t care too much about Jap Fighter. BB is more important because of the number of invasions that may be necessary (eg India, Australia, Alaska). Purpose of Pearl Harbor is not to kill off everything, it’s just to kill of the CV. The sub can be picked off later and the fighter is practically useless.

    If US UK land troops in Africa, first, there won’t be much time to recapture Africa (Allies may capture Algeria, Libya, W Africa,C Africa for 4 IPC). Even with that lost, Axis can capture 20 IPC (assuming lost of Finland and Ukraine). So the only need 7 more. So that can try to capture Ukraine, Caucasus, and one of the 3 ter east of Russia or they can try to capture Ukraine and 2 of the 3 east of Russia. There’s no way Russia can defend all 5 territories (Ukr, Cau, and the 3 east of Russia). US & UK may help with Ukr/Cau, but that’s doubtful on turn 4. US won’t have time to recapture Australia/Hawaii. And if they pump troop into W USA to maybe recapture Alaska, that’s all the less troop in Normandy.

    I presume the 90% Allies victory strategy is the “Conveyor Belt” method? The conveyor belt won’t stop this strategy (granted, it’s a do-or-die by Germany Turn 1. Capture Suez or die).


  • Some major problems with your strat here… it’s just not as easy as you think it is and there are moves the Allies can make to stop it easily… just africa for example… you left the canadian transport so you can send a tank to hit west africa and kill your lone inf on UK1 and the 2 inf from India can take back Egypt, or land in Congo or South Africa and combine with the other inf for a solid defense. On US1 the US lands 2 inf or 1 arm in West africa if they want… now all you have in Africa is 1 ftr and 1 bomber, with 2 inf in persia, and the allies have 4-5 inf, a tank and a ftr in Africa! Then if the US bought 2 transports they can land 2 inf and a tank in Algeria on US2, plus the UK can land another 2 inf or tank! Also on 2 or 3 the Allies can suicide their airforce so you can’t send anymore troops to Africa… the list goes on, trust me!


  • Yeah, the major problem here is Africa, which the whole game of EV is based upon. The problem is that I can land their as USA on the second turn and begin my push Eastward. As the German you have to commit a number of forces to hold it (ie transports and shift fighters). With this drain in resources and defense of WE against D-Day invasion, it becomes very hard to make any headway into the Eastern Front at all. That is why as Germany, you must find a way of taking Africa with the highest of probability and the quickest speed.


  • After Axis capture Gibraltar, Allies can’t suicide attack Germany fleet since there’s no place to land. Even if there is, there’s that much left attacking/defending Europe. So concentrate too much in Africa, you’ll lose Russia. Concentrate too much in Europe, you’ll lose Africa.

    If UK tran the 2 Inf from India on Turn 1, they gave up India without a fight. Japan will move her entire fleet south (1 Tran from Philippine to India, the other Tran from Japan to IndoChina). Turn 2, India->South Africa, IndoChina->Egypt/Iraq/E Africa. Also, Jap will now push Rus from the south via India->Siakang instead of Kakut->E Russia.

    If UK/US land in Algeria Turn 1, those 2 Trans are sitting duck. Grant, UK/US now have 2 Inf & 1 Arm in W Africa (probability is only 60% of Armor surviving against Ger Inf). If US buy 2 Trans to transport 4 Inf or 2 Inf & 1 Armor to Africa on Turn 2, those 2 Trans will then be sitting duck. Kiss Normandy good-bye for another 3-5 turns. Without Allies pressure on Europe, Germany, by Turn 3, will have enough Inf to push Russia.

    I’ll try Allies-heavy in Africa tonight and see how that pan out. Just have a lot of misgivings in abandonning India and sacrificing 2 Trans to land in W Africa on Turn 1.

    Germany best chance for victory had always been Africa. The only question is whether to use the optimal strategy and build up in Africa before attacking or to gamble and hit Egypt/Iraq first turn. Allies best strategy is delay Africa/Asia until the conveyor belt start going.


  • :lol:


  • On 2002-06-07 16:50, TG Moses VI wrote:
    I think Xi is right for a change! (j/k)

    Thanks T VI,
    It’s nice to be appreciated!

    Wait a cotton-pickin’ minute…

    “I’ll be Bach.” - Name that misquote


  • Ab and T VI,
    You stole my PH!

    I affirm BXR and W2’s analysis.

    Obviously, the Axis have a hard lane to row. They must make all the right moves and wait for Allied mistakes. Unless you alter the game somewhat. Most of us who have played the game for a while do make adjustments to the rules to ballance the playing field. However, IMCO, most people (playing someone of equal skills) do not alter the game enough to give the Axis an even(never mention a better chance). I enjoy playing someone new to the game and giving them a few advantges to get them interested in playing it again. It gives them a chance and me a challenge.
    –-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “Do you ever gamble? Let me give you some advice. Always bet on black!” - Name the movie and for 100,000 bonus point name the character who says the line.


  • Whny would Japan send the Philippines transport to take over India on turn 1? It’s much easier to take India by sending in the entire Indo-China force and the bomber from Japan against India. When India falls, Japan can simply move all its forces from Kwangtung to Indo-China and all the Manchuria infantry to Kwangtung and then land more troops onto Manchuria using the transport on the Sea of Japan. America can’t really react since attacking any Japanese area will weaken its forces and allow Japan to simply retake any lost territory next turn. If Japan is lucky and the UK put a complex on India, then it got one on mainland Asia without spending any IPCs. Even if Japan does use the Philippines transport, it would be a good idea for it to buy a transport or two on the first turn. I do that and then send those transports with infantry to knock out Pearl Harbor and midway so I can prevent America from trying to create a new navy. That’s also why an attack on Pearl Harbor on turn 1 is a good idea, in my opinion.


  • If UK vacate India, Jap attacks are

    1. China w/ 5 Inf 2 Fighter (2 Inf Kwatung 3 Inf Manchuria, Fighter from Manchuria & Japan)
    2. Siakiang w/ 2 Inf 1 Fighter from Burma
    3. India w/ 2 Inf from Phillipines.
    4. Pearl Harbor w/ air & sub only.
      Buy is standard 2 trans 3 inf.
      NonCombat 2Inf from Japan to Burma.
      This collapse Russia Southern Front and also dare Russia to go strong into Manchuria (sucker move for Rus since Japan can recapture and wipe out all force in Manchuria w/ min lost).

    But I agree w/ other that this strategy is risky for Axis. They risk losing 2 Inf & 1 Armor in Africa on turn 1, thus necessitating even more Inf investment on Turn 2 & 3 to capture Africa. This strategy can pretty much be summed up as: 24% of the time, Germany capture Egypt & Iraq with no loss. If they get that lucky, they should go on and win the game. If they don’t, they’ll go down in flame fast.

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 10
  • 14
  • 37
  • 10
  • 18
  • 1
  • 25
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

55
Online

16.3k
Users

38.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts