3 Realities of 1940



  • Iam a new player to 1940 and have only played 2 games so far. I have wasted to much of my life force watching you tube videos of 1940 and all the strategy and helpful insight the community has provided me. In fact my wife would say if I dedicated as much time to watching 1940 videos and thinking about this game and put that to something useful, like how to make more money my family would be rich at this point.

    I have determined there are 3 harsh realities of 1940 based on the advice and tactical discussions on You Tube.

    #1 Italy is the key to success for Germany. IF Italy is contained early in the game by the Allies and can never gain any traction in terms of IPC production. Germany will be under serious strife as the game moves along.

    #2 ANZAC is the key to success for the Allies in the Pacific. If ANZAC can in the opening 5 turns of the game get their NO’s and build up IPC production, be a thorn in the side of Japan. That USA and UK on the Pacific map will have a much easier time to defeat Japan.

    #3 Japan is the key Axis nation if the Axis powers will win the game. If Japan is reduced to a role of total defense, low IPC levels and stuck in the “corner”, taking body blows left and right, it is over for German/Italy, in less they have had a serious success on their side of the map.

    All of the post battle reports on 1940 that have been posted have shown that the Axis win, big time, when Italy and Japan go hog wild. When the Allies win they have totally dominated Italy and Japan to the point of total defense and then the Axis just quit. I have yet scene a video or review that the Allies won by going all in on Germany and dominating them and ignoring Italy and Japan.  I think that is because in order to go all in on Germany and knock them out requires so much, time, IPC and some good luck. That by the time all three of those factors come together in turn 8-10 that Italy and Japan have gone so hog wild it is pointless at that point. Most likely Japan will have achieved its VC by then and the war is over.

    What do you guys think?

    Are my 3 Realities of 1940 good or just hog wash by some new player?



  • #2 is wrong based on my experience. I was ANZAC and they were completed captured and invaded by Japan and China, UK, and US was working Japan over on the mainland.


  • 2019 2017 '16

    I’m no expert, but I’d say #3 is only half true.

    It depends on how quickly Germany takes the USSR, at least in my view.  I’ve seen games where Japan is slowly shrinking every round after J3 but once Germany takes Moscow and begins to spill into the Middle East it’s over for the Allies, no matter how poorly Japan is doing, within reason.

    Some better players than me might disagree; I’m just basing that on my limited experience.

    By the way, if you ever think of a way to waste time on AAA as well as make money doing so, let me in on your secret.  😄  You’ll make my better-half a very happy lady.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @StuckTojo:

    By the way, if you ever think of a way to waste time on AAA as well as make money doing so, let me in on your secret.

    I once saw an interview with one of the special effects technicians who was inside the full-sized Jabba the Hutt puppet in Return of the Jedi.  He explained that his particular task was to sit (or lie) there, smoking a cigar and blowing the smoke into a tube, which would cause the smoke to emerge from Jabba’s hoohah pipe on the outside of the puppet.  The technician added, “If they allowed me to drink port, this would be the perfect job.”



  • @Caesar:

    #2 is wrong based on my experience. I was ANZAC and they were completed captured and invaded by Japan and China, UK, and US was working Japan over on the mainland.

    Wait, what? Japan knocked out ANZAC early? That just proves the point that ANZAC is very important to the allied war effort in the Pacific. In fact you could ask this question.

    Is it not important for Japan to focus all effort on killing off ANZAC or reducing them to the point of useless no later than turn 4-5?

    Let me clarify what I mean. If you can reduce ANZAC to the point of 10 ICP or less they are not contributing troops to the fight. They are only providing territorial support to the USA in the terms of ports/airbases and landing zones for ground troops. At that point only the USA is directly attacking Japan and ANZAC is just sitting there.



  • @PainState:

    In fact my wife would say if I dedicated as much time to watching 1940 videos and thinking about this game and put that to something useful, like how to make more money my family would be rich at this point.

    That’s not original, all of our wives have said something along those lines when criticizing our hobby… maybe she should turn her hobby of squawking on the phone all night into a multi million dollar enterprise.



  • @PainState:

    @Caesar:

    #2 is wrong based on my experience. I was ANZAC and they were completed captured and invaded by Japan and China, UK, and US was working Japan over on the mainland.

    Wait, what? Japan knocked out ANZAC early? That just proves the point that ANZAC is very important to the allied war effort in the Pacific. In fact you could ask this question.

    Is it not important for Japan to focus all effort on killing off ANZAC or reducing them to the point of useless no later than turn 4-5?

    Let me clarify what I mean. If you can reduce ANZAC to the point of 10 ICP or less they are not contributing troops to the fight. They are only providing territorial support to the USA in the terms of ports/airbases and landing zones for ground troops. At that point only the USA is directly attacking Japan and ANZAC is just sitting there.

    No, ANZAC in real life was critical for allied survival in the war but in G40, ANZAC is somewhat worthless. Japan was pressing an invasion into China and using its navy to jack loose allied territories. China who I was also playing was holding the Japanese army back while the Japanese navy was pressing an invasion into ANZAC, US had a massive fleet ready to liberate ANZAC but I told the US player to invade Japanese territories while I cover it with USSR and Chinese forces so in my game, ANZAC was captured and lost, yet Japan was weakened due to their fleets being out of position against the US fleet. So I have evidence that proves that ANZAC plays a little role in allied victory in Asia.


  • 2019 2017 '16

    @Young:

    @PainState:

    In fact my wife would say if I dedicated as much time to watching 1940 videos and thinking about this game and put that to something useful, like how to make more money my family would be rich at this point.

    That’s not original, all of our wives have said something along those lines when criticizing our hobby… maybe she should turn her hobby of squawking on the phone all night into a multi million dollar enterprise.

    Actually, I’m impressed that there’s more than two guys on here who actually have wives or girlfriends.  :lol:  Anyone have both?


  • 2020

    Italy is indeed the key to Germany’s success but not how you’re thinking, if i get what you’re saying. If Italy has a solid can-opening spree going, it can be making 7 IPCs but is still being a major factor. This is why even though many Allied bids go to stifling Italy, Germany can still succeed in USSR with lil bro’s help



  • Your other points are valid but the main reality that will determine the game is the push for Moscow in the middle of the map IMO.



  • @WILD:

    Your other points are valid but the main reality that will determine the game is the push for Moscow in the middle of the map IMO.

    I do agree with this. If Germany (after they have steam rolled Leningrad and Moscow) and Japan (after they steam roll India) meet in the middle east then the war is over for the Allies.

    That is why the game is so much fun and challenging. There is no one way to win. Plus, we can discuss, with no resolution in sight on various tactics.

    Example: I do not think Germany is steam rolling Russia with out Italy controlling all the Med, moving down in Africa and huge in the middle east. Then again some players could post match reports on You tube of Italy all over the world yet Germany and Japan are conquered, strange things happen in this game.

    😄



  • Except I also believe that Italy isn’t necessarily needed for Axis to beat USSR, while I agree Italy opening territories helps a lot, it should be noted that Germany CAN beat USSR on its own. Italy in my opinion should be used to distract the allies in Africa as much as possible and even more so if UK doesn’t destroy the Italian navy.



  • Anzac is pretty important in the pacific, since US can can open for them it makes sure japan always has to consider their attacks.
    And their IC is 1 step away from the money islands they can basicaly attack java every turn forcing japan to spend an equal amount of forces to retake it. Those forces are 2 turns away from there so japan needs 2x the forces.
    For a mere 14 ipc spend anzac ties up 28 ipcs thats over 1/3 of japans total income.



  • @ShadowHAwk:

    Anzac is pretty important in the pacific, since US can can open for them it makes sure japan always has to consider their attacks.
    And their IC is 1 step away from the money islands they can basicaly attack java every turn forcing japan to spend an equal amount of forces to retake it. Those forces are 2 turns away from there so japan needs 2x the forces.
    For a mere 14 ipc spend anzac ties up 28 ipcs thats over 1/3 of japans total income.

    Sure but ANZAC is strategically isolated in the Pacific and Japan can stop ANZAC without actually invading them by keeping Dutch and UK islands under its control since the only Pacific nation that can build an effective navy is the US. It’s not hard to contain ANZAC and I argue it’s a waste of time to even invade the nation.



  • @Caesar:

    @ShadowHAwk:

    Anzac is pretty important in the pacific, since US can can open for them it makes sure japan always has to consider their attacks.
    And their IC is 1 step away from the money islands they can basicaly attack java every turn forcing japan to spend an equal amount of forces to retake it. Those forces are 2 turns away from there so japan needs 2x the forces.
    For a mere 14 ipc spend anzac ties up 28 ipcs thats over 1/3 of japans total income.

    Sure but ANZAC is strategically isolated in the Pacific and Japan can stop ANZAC without actually invading them by keeping Dutch and UK islands under its control since the only Pacific nation that can build an effective navy is the US. It’s not hard to contain ANZAC and I argue it’s a waste of time to even invade the nation.

    Thing is, US can break that with ease so US at queensland can kill blockers.
    Anzac can just take Java every turn spend 14 get 14 each turn, they are actualy where the action is right there. Japan can either ignore them and dont get the No or constantly reinvade java.


  • 2020 2018 2017

    Some good observations, maybe they would be better stated more equivocally as below:

    “The Allies must contain Italy in the med and its income, or it makes a significant contribution to Germany’s push and defense”

    “Containing ANZAC and constraining them to their base income is important because prevents them from becoming a significant USA-follow on threat later in the game”

    “Japan cannot dither or delay in acquiring either the islands or India, or it will rapidly lose parity against the activated American income”



  • @ShadowHAwk:

    @Caesar:

    @ShadowHAwk:

    Anzac is pretty important in the pacific, since US can can open for them it makes sure japan always has to consider their attacks.
    And their IC is 1 step away from the money islands they can basicaly attack java every turn forcing japan to spend an equal amount of forces to retake it. Those forces are 2 turns away from there so japan needs 2x the forces.
    For a mere 14 ipc spend anzac ties up 28 ipcs thats over 1/3 of japans total income.

    Sure but ANZAC is strategically isolated in the Pacific and Japan can stop ANZAC without actually invading them by keeping Dutch and UK islands under its control since the only Pacific nation that can build an effective navy is the US. It’s not hard to contain ANZAC and I argue it’s a waste of time to even invade the nation.

    Thing is, US can break that with ease so US at queensland can kill blockers.
    Anzac can just take Java every turn spend 14 get 14 each turn, they are actualy where the action is right there. Japan can either ignore them and dont get the No or constantly reinvade java.

    My entire experience says that Japan going for ANZAC is pointless as the man who destroyed me as ANZAC had this fleets too far south to stop USA from landing on Korea and that lead to a situation in which he couldn’t retake the Chinese mainland.


  • 2017

    #1 Italy is the key to success for Germany. IF Italy is contained early in the game by the Allies and can never gain any traction in terms of IPC production. Germany will be under serious strife as the game moves along.

    Not sure I agree with this one. For me at least, I assume that at a certain point Italy will be contained. So usually I expect Italy’s role will be to fight of sub convoy raids and a large stack of can openers. I purposely give most of the extra territories to Germany like, S. France, Normandy, Yugo, Bulgaria, only sometimes Greece. I want Germany collecting lots of IPCs. I think 4-5 IPCs siphoned off to Italy instead of Germany doesn’t make Italy into more of a threat, but with Germany that could be the difference to afford the purchase of another bomber or not per turn. Also, I value s. Italy less than Germany holding Norway. Of course I don’t want to lose either. But, for instance, if I needed just one more turn to fully garrison Finland in order to fully counter a Norway invasion, I might make S. Italy look exposed to entice the Allies to hit it. Italians would then soak up hits over Germans, while hopefully killing lots of allies. It’s not too hard for Germany to liberate Italy if northern Europe is safe.

    #2 ANZAC is the key to success for the Allies in the Pacific. If ANZAC can in the opening 5 turns of the game get their NO’s and build up IPC production, be a thorn in the side of Japan. That USA and UK on the Pacific map will have a much easier time to defeat Japan.

    I really agree with this, but many other factors are also important to for an all out KJF to be successful. If ANZAC is dropping it’s first aircraft carrier on round 4. ANZAC is definitely a problem for Japan. Extra defensive power / attack power becomes huge. At a certain point the US followed by ANZAC could make a serious double punch attack threat against an important Japanese fleet. Once the sea dominance has changed, Japan has to slow it’s drive for India to protect their important money islands.

    #3 Japan is the key Axis nation if the Axis powers will win the game. If Japan is reduced to a role of total defense, low IPC levels and or stuck in the “corner”, taking body blows left and right, it is over for German/Italy, in less they have had a serious success on their side of the map.

    I agree. If Japan is at the point that China is lost is or the sea is foreseeably lost; as in ANZAC can continue to add to the US fleet’s hold of the islands, the US can start spending 100% against Europe Axis forces to win the game. Of course Moscow should not have already fallen or will fall, ect.



  • 1st post to the forum.  1st introduced to A&A shortly after it came out in mid 80’s.  This from someone else in the Navy I worked with when stationed in Wash DC at the time who had the game.  That along with Fortress America.  Introduced to wargaming from my dad back in the 70’s with the various Avalon Hill and SPI games: Battle of the Bulge and A Bridge Too Far are my favorites, which I still have with all the pieces to this day.  Midway (Japanese player won every time in my experience), Panzer Blitz and Squad Leader.  Got away from A&A after getting out of the service, and not meeting anybody willing to wargame, along of the reality of work and family which dominates my time.  Came across Revised at a hobby store while on a business trip in Toronto in mid 2000’s, and purchased my own.  At the time, did not know that it even existed.  Was able to find a couple of co-workers to play, but their skill level not as advanced, as they did not spend as much time studying the map and determining strategies when not playing.  That version definitely stacked for the Allies, but I was able to beat my opponents as Axis as well.  With each game I am teaching them strategies, and lessons learned, as I want them to get to the same skill level for a challenging match.  A few months back, one of my opponents asked if there were any other A&A versions, as the games were starting to get somewhat routine, typical KGF and U.S. land bridge to Europe.  I knew of 1940 and after researching, my one opponent agreed to get Eur and Pac.  He figure’d too with all of us learning at the same time, that I would have less of an advantage when we started playing.  But guess who has been doing their research on the forum sites and watching youtube videos, and who hasn’t?  Naturally the ones from GHG and YGH, along with several others.  Also reading some of the battle reports of some games, quite impressive play.

    We had our first run a couple months back, where I played Axis and they played Allies.  We each took our respective turns, but collectively helped the other side out to determine a logical counter.  We agreed to go with a G1/J1 DOW to get the action going, and Allies KGF strategy.  Only U.S. income in Pacific was 2 Inf stack per turn for Hawaii transport, thus leaving ANZAC and UKP to buy Inf and turtle.  The thing I already observed is that even then, Germany still was steamrolling Russia about to take Moscow even though they were the primary Allies focus.  I misplayed Germany/Italy, and realized what I needed to do next time to advance faster and with greater force, so the fall of Moscow was just short.  U.S. got a foothold in southern France and upgraded to a major, and UKE up through Greece as I had Italy stacked big time, no amphib landing there.  But Germany still had IPC’s in the 50’s, and would still be a few rounds before they would start collapsing.  But Japan was a monster by then, having upwards of 80 IPCs with their air force intact.  After securing China, finally having India fall (UKE employed GHG’s Middle Earth strategy to delay fall, but 3 MIC’s on mainland and air force eventually overpowered), and invading Russia.  They were now ready to massively expand the fleet and take Hawaii.  U.S. still had to commit half of income to Eur along with UKE to put the squeeze on Germany, but Japan could commit all of its income to the fleet and Hawaii now that the mainland was secured.  Sure Hawaii had its stack of 20+ Inf/Art, but the U.S. fleet was about to get wiped, then a matter of just building transports and land units to complete the amphib.  That would only take 2 rounds with Japan income.

    So we then played our next game a couple weeks back, I let my opponents take Axis and I played Allies (along with son of one of my opponents, who was more preoccupied playing games on his startphone in between turns than learning A&A strategies).  Because of skill level difference, no need for bid.  So this gets to the post on this string, and PainState’s Realities.  Namely on points #2 and #3 (I am probably repeating past points made on other string posts too, as they are numerous).  ANZAC is key, which is why I love 1940 over Revised.  This is to get ANZAC to be more than building its stack for South Aust., being relegated to only 10 IPC’s.  As for Japan, all their starting income is susceptible to convoy save 1 (Iwo).  Not the case for Germany, save Norway and if they pick up Norm/S. France/Yugo.  Further, all Japan island money gains can be convoyed.  Only money areas spared are inland China (12), Shan State/Burma (2), and if Japan elects to go into Russia.  Key is to get fleet force built up fast for U.S. and ANZAC., coupled with mecs from UKE Mid East MIC for India stack.  While Japan force is sizeable (especially planes), it can’t be at all places at the same time.  I liken it to a pack of hyenas attacking the lion simultaneously.  And those hyenas are primarily subs, which is something ANZAC can afford with its limited income, and the U.S. can buy stacks.  You can’t build up enough air assets fast enough to match Japan’s before Germany becomes too overwhelming.  You can’t take out Japan’s air force, you just need to take out its ships.  You can get 6 subs attacking @ 2 for the same as a carrier and 2 planes attacking 1 @ 3 and 1 @ 4.  Once Japn’s ships are taken out, flood all the convoy zones with subs to squeeze Japan’s income.  The massive Japanese air force is impotent without destroyers, of which ANZAC/U.S. can be build more subs than Japan destroyers.

    I figure regardless of KGF or KJF, Moscow is going down.  Thats the reality I see, it’s a matter of time.  Either Germany or Japan will have an eventual income in the 80’s, depending on which one gets the Allies focus and the other gets free reign.  The one getting focus will naturally have something less, which to me can be reduced more with KJF (Japan getting squeezed into the teens with convoys), vs KGF (with Germany still being in the 40’s to 50’s, depending on its eventual state of decline).  Once Japan income is squashed, ANZAC has DEI and NO earning 26+, and China is partially restored, then Pacific can be handed over to ANZAC/China to mop up while US/UK (E & P) dedicate 100% spend to Germany.  Question is whether Germany force is too large by then to stop in time before getting Cairo.

    My strategy worked successfully against my opponents, but as noted before their skill level is nowhere near to those in these forums.  Once the U.S. sunk the bulk of Japan’s surface fleet in SZ6, and ANZAC flooded the zones with their sub build, my opponents conceded.  Russia was about to fall, but I was aggressive and strafed the German stacks on the way to Moscow.  With GHG’s Middle Earth strategy with 2 MIC’s, and UKP could now divert its forces west, Germany would not be able to overcome.  So I’m sure those that post all have developed counters to this, and elements I need to consider.  Unfortunately, my time is limited, as I would love to play a lot more, especially on Triple A.  Will be able to so once I retire, not too many years away though.  I do like playing table top version though on wargames, as this brings the element of making on the spot decisions, just like in actual war.  So mistakes are made, opportunities are missed.  Comes with the territory of having to make so many decisions in a short amount of time.



  • Nice post Skip, and welcome to AA.org. I like to read game reports like this, especially from players just getting started with G40. I assume that you have purchased the G40 2nd edition that has the latest rule set. I just wanted to point out that the USA can’t upgrade the Southern French IC to a major, and for example they couldn’t build a major on Norway either. The only territory any power can build a major IC on is their own original territories (not islands) worth 3 IPCs or more that have their flag printed on it. So it would also be illegal for Japan to build a major IC on Manchuria because it is an original Chinese territory (although Japan starts the game with it). Japan could however build a major on Korea if they wanted too.

    Good gameing


  • 2017

    Welcome aboard, Skip!  Thanks for the game report.


  • TripleA

    If Italy gets going without major help from Germany, yeah the allies tend to lose really hard. I have won with Japan, almost always at Hawaii for the last vc, a couple times at Anzac.

    Last vc for Japan is always a pain… Sometimes better to just slam mid east or Africa and bomb Russia for Europe vc win… Or get Germany bombers to Pacific can open the destroyer blockers USA uses.


  • '15 '14

    Hey PainState. Welcome to the forum, glad you found the community.

    Regarding your realities, frankly, all 3 of them are wrong/irrelevant.

    Italy and Anzac are scanvengers and dirt-eaters for Germany or USA. None of them is decisive or the key to the game.
    Obviously it is better for the Allies to get Italy down and to keep more workload on the Germans. But there are plenty of ways the Axis can win the game even if Italy was taken down to very low income.
    If the Allies invest too much in getting Italy down, the Germans are not distracted enough

    Japan is obv. one of the 2 major Axis powers so playing the accurately is certainly essential for the Axis but if there is ONE key nation for the success I would say it is the Germans.

    If I would have to name 3 realities I would name the following:

    1. The German Russian front is all that matters. If you want to be successful with the Axis, make sure you play hard against the Russians and break through Bryansk South as fast as possible. For the Allies sz110 is the key factor to win because it stretches the German attention in the opposite direction of Moscow.

    2. Keep Moscow and India safe. IF Japan wants India no matter the cost, they’ll get it but you need to keep the price high. Getting India must force Japan to lose air and/or to bring the fleet out of position. If Japan gets India without making any concessions, Allies are in trouble.

    3. There is NO such thing as a hammer head strategy the Allies can crush the Axis. Well played Axis simply cannot be crushed early with extreme strategies. Even if USA plays 100% Japan, they can hold the position for a while and in the meantime the Germans will go crazy.
    The Allies kill the Axis by the 1000 bites tactics like Ants kill an animal 100 times their sizes.
    Split your fleet, play the fleet bold, make landings here and there, stretch the Axis attention, try to reuse transports (that’s why 110 is so important!), invite the Axis to attack your fleet or your beachhead even at overwhelming odds IF this diminishes their power against Russia or India.


  • TripleA

    When I first started doing J1 DOW, I won a bunch of games in the Pacific and USA put all of its income in the pacific by round 3 or 4. Japan can ramp up really fast especially if it takes UK pacific out on round 3 or 4, it is really easy from there on out.


  • TripleA

    Honestly, I been seeing lots of USA all in the Atlantic lately and it has been a bunch of free wins for me. They think, yay at war thank to japan DOW 1, go atlantic. They send like 10-20 guys to Norway and take Normandy or something. what I do with Germany is rounds 1-4 I buy everything I need for russia (mechanical inf and armor) because I see USA is buying transports left and right.  itally just buys inf/arty to defend the homeland so Germany can get the most going to Russia.Yeah you can land and take away Norway/Normandy for awhile, but Germany still stacks up to Russia and gets the cash flow.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 25
  • 9
  • 1
  • 10
  • 47
  • 5
  • 18
  • 5
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

67
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts