I like the strategy, but I think if the Allies only buy planes and send them over to russia to help, it might change things up a bit~
Germany will (eventually) fail?
Being an experienced player (s) of Axis & Allies, I purchased AAE recently.
From my experience of AA, Germany always gets beaten by the Allies due to the simple fact that the Allies has more turns to act upon. (Being able to identify where the IPC’s are spent best…more often)
Win or Loss is solely depending on Allied players ability to identify German weak spots, or where Germany gambles on holding aginst the odds with thin resources.
Initial screening of strategies for Axis in AAE all favour an all out assault on Russia, with russia defense pouring in from US and UK as only way of holding out. It all seems like if Axis are not very well advanced into Russia by turn 4-5 its all over for them (Implying an automatic surrender of control of Africa and Middle East.) (At least only giving it a half hearted effort)
Anyone who has won Axis with a more balanced approach from Germany?
Securing Africa and middle East? Naturally, more resources would be needed to block Allies at Gibraltar, etc… Instead of buying tanks…
Being inexperienced AAE player, I’m also a bit concerned about artillery tactics vs tank tactics. Everyone seems to favor tanks for the Axis…?
The tanks are a mistake, balanced force is the right way to go. If you spent too much ipc on tanks you will lose against the massed infranty of soviets…
I had one game in A&AE, when I played with germans that lasted for about 12 turns :D. I went for russia, but I went against it in the slow way, depleting it’s troops and not commiting too early for an attack, and on turn 5 when I started really to drive in to russia I had 3 major attack groups, one from finland, one to baltic states and one to ukraine. The soviets had to decide which one they would block and made the mistake in choosing the baltic states force. I circled them and my forces moved to capture more land. In the end I went slowly in my attacks…
At the same time, I had built a fleet and made submarines to hold the allies at bay, I got little more luck than normal with my subs. I made constantly more fleet and used fighters to help my subs to fend the allies…
But I agree you on that if the germans can’t take or at least hold africa for many turns they are doomed to fall, they need every ipc they can get. The point in the game is not to waste troops unnecessarily.
I agree with Thamor; as Germany I launched a three-prong Russian assault. The thrust from Finland pulls Soviet defenders away from the main battle, and if you get lucky, you take Archangel, permanently nullifying the convoy.
After holding off the Soviet counterattacks, you really start to eat into his IPCs, adding $$$ to Germany. This offsets the drain on resources in the West. I shift every possible unit to the East. A skeleton force across France, N-B and EFrance is fine for the first three or four turns. Buying fighters and tanks is my preference, salted with just enough infantry to soak off, until the fourth turn when tons of infantry are planted in Germany, ready to shift out to the beaches and hold the Brits/Yanks off from securing a forward fighter base.
Meanwhile, I think taking the Middle East is a gas. Start by amphib taking of Malta on turn one, then send the task force in to eliminate the Brit flotilla in the E Med. Before you know it, the Allies are forking over hard-earned IPCs to you, and your tank is rolling into the Caucasus to support the thrust on Stalingrad and Moscow. You do have to be prepared to live with keeping your battlewagon and destroyer out of the Atlantic for most or all of the game, but if the dice hold up, you take Moscow by turn six, just as the Western Front is under D-Day assault conditions. They miss by a turn or two, depending on how robust and flexible your defense is (and how clunky the Allies are in forming up for the attacks).