Hey ShadowHawk,

Axis victories are few and far between but it’s still possible. It requires some good luck and precise coordination by the axis. The axis have the inherent advantages of close HQ in Europe and if they can collapse Russia and Calcutta, they can turn to the outward fronts without being undermined in the middle.

It’s an enjoyable format and since we rotate sides after each game the Allies are always rooting for the Axis on some level.

I’ve posted on my group’s experience on another thread, but I think it’s worth repeating.  We have found Germany and Italy can steam roll Russia and the UK so an American rescue is necessary. As a result, it is imperative for Japan to not declare war until Rd 4. While it limits Japan’s growth the larger objective of keeping America small and on its turf for as long as possible is more important to the grand strategy. Japan is usually able to run hog wild anyway.

I should also not that we don’t follow the VC win conditions… it’s just all out global domination until someone has to call it and a new world order is established.

Our group universally focuses on the European Axis first. While this likely falls into the Germany first camp, Italy usually gets wiped out first and then Germany. More often than not there will be holes in the German lines which reinvigorate Russia as long as Moscow doesn’t fall.  Again, this is only my group’s experience but we’ve played for years.

This thread is very interesting.  Our group has made it a habit to always reinforce London with the Canadian ground and naval units. At the same time, Germany usually throws its navy straight into the royal fleet.  Otherwise the British have a fleet and will begin western amphibious assaults on UK2.

We’ve found Germany has to throw its full air and naval weight (minus transport) at the British fleet, and also begin its rush to Moscow all on G1. G1 results don’t dictate the outcome of the game, but it definitely sets the tone.

@ItIsILeClerc:

I really like what Ike said about this.
You should turn around and to the exact opposite of what you have been doing for years.
Go for either 8 or 6 VC for an axis win, because if the axis go for a slow buildup, ignoring any VC’s and just go fo an economic advantage during the first 14 turns or so, the game will indeed too easily drag on into the 25+ turn area before -hopefully- a winner can be determined and that’s not even certain. It may cost you 30 to 50 hours of playing, depending on your playspeed.
Seeing that games that last even only 15+ turns need a lot of careful and balanced (calculated) moving, my experience is that games lasting longer in turns also last disproportionally longer in time.

To make a long story short:
if you want a clear winner in a shorter amount of time, agree with each other that the allies will be declared winner if the game lasts beyond a certain point no matter what (say, turn 15 or so, but a ‘line in the sand’ must be drawn).
This forces the axis into going after a VC-win and will therefore make for a shorter game (still worth 10 to 15 turns of play). It may be arbitrary for this game but it is true to history. In reality, the USA alone could have defeated both Germany and Japan (Germany after Japan) in an indefinite amount of time. But the USA wasn’t alone. There also were the Commonwealth and Russia…

Given seasoned play on both sides, axis not going for a VC win and just building up their economy will indeed just result in a concession game (I’d call it a draw) unless you are willing to play like 50 turns or so ;-). I think this is THE weak spot of the current VC-rules.

I really appreciate everyone’s thoughts and insights.  I’ll be bringing all of the points up and it looks like there is a general consensus that confirmed my initial fear/intuition (given enough time the allies will ultimately prevail/comeback no matter what the axis do). Either way,  this is clearly the most fun we’ve ever had and we won’t be stopping either way (we probably all just enjoy the good fight and 50 rounds wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world! ). Thanks again!

I know what you’re saying,  and by playing VC you make the US have to decide which theatre it will really focus on to save the war.  I guess the concern is if by playing VC you let form prevail over substance (as in the axis have the VC and will hold it for a turn but not for two)… maybe I’m being to paranoid/analytical

Hey all,

I’ve got a great crew of buds with whom I’ve played A&A for years.  We’ve built our own house rules but are still very close to the box rules. Our largest deviation has been our distaste of VC for a win (we haven’t ever played a game that way).

For 1940 Global, we usually see the Axis get off to a great start and then hit a wall at about round 7 or 8 (US has garnered its forces and has made a presence somehow). More specifically Germany and/or Japan are finishing the last of Russia when America is landing on the shores. We generally have run out of time after all of this and our games conclude on concessions and the like.  For these games I was wondering if there’s a concensus that VC help resolve the state  of the war or if continuing to play it (recording pieces and resuming later ) is better? Any thoughts?

Test summary from TripleA, engine version: 1.6.1.2, time: 11:10:07

Was this it?

Attempting to get this right, hmm…

Anniversary of BAttle of the Bulge