The Inherent Problem with Axis and Allies

The point I am trying to make is that if the allies are not pushing into capitals, it’s because those players are being too conservative when they don’t need to be. Even though if you have allies knocking on your door, I am pointing out the purpose of refusing to surrender is pointless and just stalls the game to prove a point which I make by making you force your hand to win. I do this in Axis and Allies, I do this in RTS games. OP is trying to point out a problem that simply doesn’t exist.

@Herr:

@Narvik:

….lack of supply was never an issue during WWII…

Oh yes, it was.

Yeah, the Allies paused their assault after D-Day I think shortly before reaching the Rhine because of a lack of supplies. Supplies were also an issue in the Solomons for the Allies IIRC.

:?

I don’t get this post.

If the Allies control all of Europe except Germany, the IPC swing would be so huge that the allies could make up any losses if their attack on Berlin failed….

Also, how could it fail if the allies are that far in?  They’ve got have tons of stuff already… if not, then how did they get there?

Turtling is not a viable strategy for the Axis under any circumstance.  Even for Japan.  You convoy the heck out of them, build up a bunch of bombers and knock them off.  The IPC swing in favor of the allies would be insane such that they could make up any losses in a blink of an eye.

OP seems to think that any player would chicken out at the last second when trying to capture the capital and either build or play very conservative. Which doesn’t make sense as if you’re knocking on your enemies capital, the best move is to attack as odds are, your enemy is very weak. It makes sense the side that lost the initiative would play defense as Germany exactly did, it never mounted a major offensive inside Germany when the allies were taking German cities. But I don’t get why he thinks the other side would cower out unless he plays against players who do that. I play as the USSR and usually when UK and US enters France, I begin my massive invasion.

@Herr:

@Narvik:

….lack of supply was never an issue during WWII…

Oh yes, it was.

Lack of supplies was the only issue in WWII

Dunno where’s the problem. I really like a “>50 TT / 90 Inf Finale” on the shores of Japan. Bought some extra dice though…
Honestly, it’s 4 vs. one. After an attack of 30 russian planes and the bombardment of some ANZAC BBs, the US can bring a huge invasion force built up in no time, and  the UK can easily walk in if necessary.

Win by time is no victory  8-)
Usually, we discuss tactical mistakes and crucial points after the match: the way how a match is won even more important than who won.  And usually, we never get that far because it’s already 6 am and we didn’t reach Korea yet…

@ShadowHAwk:

But i will generaly give up if there is no chance to win anymore, ofcourse if by delaying the inevitable on 1 side i gain time to maby win on the other side i will do that.

I was once losing badly as Axis in Europe to the point where the Allies had reactivated France. The saving grace was I could delay because Russia was weak on account of having a huge GE/RU battle that resulted in a mutual wipeout of two large stacks. The Allies were so focused on Europe they forgot to pay attention in the Pacific where I had built a little transport fleet, seized Hawaii and since the allies were short of transports in the Pacific there was no way they’d be able to get any of the VC’s back during the next full turn.

Won on a technicality despite certain defeat in Europe.

A lot of times what usually breaks the Allies is how poor US reacts to what side of the world to fight on.