How to stop the US

with Russia invested in China (IC in Szechwan and raised territory value to 3) and getting the IPCs, pluss the turn order allowing to consolidate, made a KJF more viable. My friend tried it one game but made a couple mistakes with positioning

@domanmacgee said in Stopping the Allies?:

@thedesertfox Are you playing with NOs on or off? As @OLA mentioned, which side is favored in the 41 setup swings based on whether NOs are being used. Off = Allied-favored, On = Axis-favored. It boils down to the starting income gap being easier to mitigate when Axis have access to their NOs.

Not sure if German navy is the right way of going about things. In higher level games it’s usually Japan that ends up winning the game for the Axis while Germany/Italy hold the line.

I’ll add the following rule-of-thumb.

Assuming every other option is off,

no options on: slight Allies advantage interceptors on: balanced National Objectives on: marked Axis advantage

Using Low Luck (a popular house rule) possibly balances the game when played with no options on or else gives an additional slight advantage to the Axis.

@the-spaceman Seems like a good start. A few thoughts to throw into the mix:

I would say UK’s naval priorities should be first the Baltic fleet, then any stray transports, then any stray subs. The subs don’t do any convoy damage or anything like that, so they’re really just targets of opportunity; it’s not like you can safely leave British transports unattended anyway because of the German bomber, so the subs aren’t doing that much more harm. The Baltic fleet is top priority because it allows Germans to cheaply conquer Norway/Finland/Karelia, and because it’s too expensive for Germany to sanely replace.

The Australian transport can flee across Argentina to the Atlantic, but I would leave the destroyer behind to block a J2 attack on Australia – I think it does more good slowing down Japan and keeping some of the UK income than it does to get a destroyer added to your Atlantic fleet, like, 3 turns later. For similar reasons, I usually won’t move the starting US Pacific fleet to the Atlantic. If the Allies took unusually heavy naval losses, then maybe it’s worthwhile, but the Pacific fleet is earning you nothing the whole time it’s in transit through the Panama Canal. Having a few starting boats in the Pacific – even just CV, ftr, DD, tran – means that if you ever do need to upgrade the Pacific fleet into a formidable force because Japan is grabbing Alaska and Hawaii or whatever, then you can do so with one turn of purchases. If you can’t quickly reinforce the US Pacific fleet to the point where it can drive away the Japanese navy, then you might be forced to buy 10 infantry for the Western US instead or something similarly expensive and wasteful.

It doesn’t always make sense to build a huge Atlantic fleet at all as the Allies – sometimes you can sink the Italian fleet using primarily air power and subs, and/or build a pair of factories in Egypt, South Africa, India, or Australia. Some games you won’t have enough good safe factory sites, and some games you’ll need a big fleet because, e.g., Germany is heavy on air power (so you need protection for your transports) but short on infantry (so invading France is really attractive). On the other hand, if Germany trades its entire air force to wipe out your boats on G1, builds a factory in France on G1, and then drops 6 infantry there on G2, maybe just let the Atlantic navy go for several turns and rely on factories instead, or have the British build factories and let the Americans reinforce with a fleet into Morocco after they build up.

@thespaceman:

the trick is to keep the 2 tanks in poland in reserve so that when you break the baltic states, you can move the 2 tanks trough to Karelia as reinforcement in the non-combat phase. ) Not my idea, but awesome

pretty sure you can’t move into newly captured territory in non combat moves.

You can not move AIRCRAFT into a territory you have just taken.  You can, however, move any other units that have not been used in combat into a territory you have just taken.

it’s 2 moves from EUS to sz 9, thats how everyone i’ve ever seen play it including myself.

If Germany goes all armor, the Allies should be going for a very aggressive navy build in the Atlantic.  An Allies player that really pushes the pace can be making substantial threats on France and Germany by turn 3.  Even if Germany turtles on G3 and builds all defense, they will likely still lose France at the very least with such an aggressive build.  With Russia, you just need to play a little cautious.  I would recommend going defensive with your builds, and abandoning Karelia, pulling those units back to Archangel.  Even if you have to stack Moscow on R2 and leave Caucasus open, there’s no way that Germany can take Moscow on G3.  Once Germany starts having to play defense in France and Germany, Russia can start building tanks to push the unreinforced German line west.  It’s the beginning of the end for the Axis in Europe.

The only time I build an IC with the UK in India is in the '42 setup with huge Pacific support by the USA (as I always do). In '41 I am strongly against the India IC (as I’ve mentioned before in this forum). The difference is obvious: 1941 Japan has 5 transports and can easily take India J2, even with the US going all out in the Pacific, there’s just not enough starting power for the allies. 1942 however, it is much more difficult for Japan to get to India with enough to take and hold it. The US Pacific fleet in 42 is strong and when made stronger turn 1 can cause the Japanese to stay at home for a few turns; thus allowing the UK to protect the IC in India.

I hit SZ56 with 2 FGT and %3 with the DD and 2 FGT. In non combat I put the CVs and the surviving fighters in SZ51. I also withhold the CA from SZ50 using the BB only. I position the CA with the fleet in SZ51. I have had the US get cocky and attack this fleet. Yeah it cost me a CV I could replace and it cost the US a wad of units that were going to take several rounds to replace.