The assumption was that Moscow was taken with a relatively large stack of armor, while Berlin was only taken lightly. Allow for some variances here, but naturally if Japan takes with 4 arm and Berlin is taken with 20 arm we’re looking at an entirely different situation.
Japan is at 81 the way I see it, pacific islands, eastern coast of africa and trading karelia/belo/ukraine. The allies are at 92 trading the same 3 territories. That’s a conservative measure. Most likely Japan will be able to stack either karelia or ukraine, trading norway and possibly e.eur or balkans as well. I disagree with you with regards to the battle for Africa, as a minimum Japan will hold s.afr, kenya, iea, egypt. They’re directly adjacent to the strategically important sz34.
To repeat what I said about logistics: the axis have much easier access to africa, sure the allies can ship lots of units to africa where Japan in response takes more land in europe. At any point that stack of arm can turn around through caucasus and push into africa. Now, are the allies going to ship even more units? If they don’t start shipping preemptively they will fall behind in the arms race and the units there will be stuck and cornered. If they ship en masse they are still stuck in africa and the Jap tanks can turn around and gain more ground in europe. 2 rounds is all you need to shift 80 armor from ukraine to egypt. The allies will need a pretty hefty fleet to match that.
I also disprove of the allies controlling the med, any fleet there is doing no good. They are better off shipping units from uk/e.us to algeria than shipping from s.eur/w.eur to libya. Japan can sit tight in sz16 and get their support shots at balkans, adding subs/bbs as necessary. The allies are forced to stack w.eur and s.eur to deter landings. Many places to defend, few to attack.
“The assumption was that Moscow was taken with a relatively large stack of armor, while Berlin was only taken lightly. Allow for some variances here, but naturally if Japan takes with 4 arm and Berlin is taken with 20 arm we’re looking at an entirely different situation.”
Well, yes, clearly if Japan takes Moscow with 4 tanks and US takes Berlin with 20 tanks, it is an entirely different situation. But that is NOT what I anticipate happening. What I anticipate is more like Japan captures Moscow with around 12 tanks intact, with Allied control of at least Germany, Eastern Europe, and one of either Western or Southern Europe. Assuming that UK captured Germany on the UK turn and Japan captured Russia on Japan’s turn (best case scenario for Axis; US control of Germany is pretty horrible), then on the turn followng the Japanese capture of Russia, you will have around 14 infantry 4 tanks in Germany, PLUS an additional five or six infantry, around one per territory, scattered throughout Eastern Europe, Ukraine, Western Europe, etc. etc. Japan can only capture ONE territory per turn on the way to Berlin. Assuming that Japan has another ten tanks in the pipeline, that is 22 tanks into West Russia, then Ukraine, then Germany. But that is two more turns during which the Allies can reinfore Germany, so you have 22 Japanese tanks plus 6 Jap fighters plus 1 Jap bomber against 34 infantry 4 tanks 6 fighters AA gun, plus assorted; and please note that “assorted” can quite easily be up to 12 additional US infantry, particularly if the US has control of Southern Europe. Given those odds, the Japanese cannot prevail. But I think that you had rather a different scenario in mind (see bottom).
“They are better off shipping units from uk/e.us to algeria”
The one thing the Allies shouldn’t do is leave their navy shuttling things around the Atlantic. You agree that transports are valuable fodder, yes? The Allies should have around 10 transports (I usually actually have 12+, 5-6 for UK and 6-8 for US). So instead of using those transports to slowly shuttle infantry from Eastern US, those transports can be used as escorts for carriers, so the Allies can choke the Japanese islands off. The Japanese fleet is very difficult to sink, but the Allied fleet is just about frickin impossible. (Assuming the Allies bring some carriers)
As far as the Allies controlling the Mediterranean, I never said that the Mediterranean SHOULD be the long term goal of the Allies. I actually believe that the Allies should run a holding action in Europe, while prosecuting a major naval battle against Japan. The Mediterranean is simply the best way to utilize the Allied Atlantic fleet - or so I believe. (In cruising through the Mediterranean rather than retreating towards Panama and Western US, the Allies can secure at least the north of Africa, and quickly lend a credible threat against India, and soon, hook up with Pacific fleet elements to take the South Pacific. (The last is essential, because the Allies must reinforce their fleet, or lose it).
When you say “80 armor from Ukraine to Egypt”, I think that we’re CLEARLY thinking about rather different games. I really can’t picture a situation in which either side would control 80 tanks . . .
Although we have some different opinions regarding the fine points, I think the major difference is that I believe that the Allies, given a lost Berlin and lost Moscow, should be able to quickly supplement their position with transported and produced infantry for the eventual stallout win; I think that the Allies will contain Japan near or around West Russia, and that the Allies will attack the South Pacific to get the distinct IPC edge. If I understand you correctly, I think that you believe that the Japanese will have a lot of tanks that will allow the Japanese to realistically threaten Berlin very quickly, at least contesting Eastern Europe and/or Ukraine, forcing the Allies to do nothing but defend while Japan gets a deathgrip on Africa for the distinct IPC edge.
“USSR/Japan beats UK/US/Germany in most cases”
Well, I think that although we can both agree that the Allies won’t take Berlin by a gigantic load, and that Japan may well take Moscow by quite a bit, we DISAGREE on the AMOUNT by which the Allies will take, and by which the Axis will take.