The Berlin-Rome-Moscow axis and the Anglo-Japanese alliance.

[Clyde85]

Also, is there any way the allies can keep China firmly in the Allied camp? Outside of the Burma Road, what incentive can the allies really offer to China once the Russians start liberating the IPC rich Costal areas? Is China going to be forced into the arms of the Soviets, a axis partner, and if so, should Shanghai count towards the axis total? Dose this make China a defacto axis member like it dose Russia?

[Clyde85]

Im also wondering, if the Soviets start making real progess aginst Japan, perhapse it would be best for British India and ANZAC to join in on the fall of the Empire. This may be the only way to keep China from becoming a Soviet puppet

[knp7765]

This is a very interesting idea.  I never really thought of a war between Japan and China/Russia with Japan NOT attacking the Brits or ANZAC.  You make a good point about Britain ignoring the fall of French Indo-China to the Japanese.  Also, if Germany never attacks Russia but concentrates on smashing France and Britain, then India, and maybe even ANZAC, could come under direct threat from Italy.  In that case, the UK would definitely not want to enter war with Japan.  If Italy did manage to capture India, then the Chinese would lose the Burma Road NO thus hurting their attempts to fight the Japs even though Italy isn’t technically at war with China.  That’s a flaw in the idea of China being in league with the European Axis countries.

So when the US enters the war at the end of round 3, they DON’T mess with Japan but move all their might over to the Atlantic to fight Germany and Italy, is this right?  That’s another interesting idea.  One problem I have seen with the US is even though they do have much greater economy, they have to split it between the Pacific and the Atlantic, which kind of cuts down the effectiveness.  If they can use all of their might and economy on just one front, Germany would have a hard time holding them back.  If they decided to re-enter the Med and go after Italy, it would be even harder for Italy to survive I think.  That might be the best way for the US in this scenario.  If the US defeated Italy, they would have Italy’s income plus their own massive wealth and that would easily out do Germany’s economy, even if Germany had Britain, France and all the European Neutrals under their belt.  On the other hand, Germany wouldn’t have to worry about an Eastern Front and could focus all their attention on holding the Americans at bay.

This offers some interesting possibilities.  I would be anxious to try this out in my next game.  Thanks for the idea.

[Clyde85]

They screwy thing about it is that its all done with in the current frame-work of the games political rules and NO’s.

The thing is, if the Japanese focus on the Asian mainland against the Sino-soviet forces, and dose not attack south, then British India and the ANZAC forces could move west towards Africa and the Middle east, to help support the mother country and stem, and push back an Italian offensive towards India. I think it would be very difficult for Italy to make it all the way to India in strenght enough to actually take it, espically if the Anzac and India forces know their home turf in the Pacific is safe from a Japanese attack, nothing would prevent these 2 powers from going all out to stop them.

[knp7765]

I started a Global game using this scenario this weekend.  So far it’s only gone through 2 rounds (boy this game is long).  For round 1, both Japan and Russia re-positioned themselves but didn’t attack.  Russia stayed neutral and Japan concentrated on China.  In round 2, Russia still wasn’t quite ready but Japan was so they attacked.  Killed 12 of the Soviet eastern infantry and surrounded the other 6.  China is about destroyed, down to just 4 territories and 2 lonely infantry (they lost the fighter and the Burma road is closed)  However, Russia is moving tanks, halftracks and planes to the east and since they are now at war, their units can enter China and help out there.  Japan is very strong at the moment, but I’m not sure if they can last out for the long haul.  Plus, Japan’s biggest strength, their massive navy, is just about useless.

Meanwhile, everyone else is moving toward Europe.  The US has already moved almost everything to the east coast and has amassed a massive force there waiting for round 4.  The Brits have held off Sealion so far.  The Luftwaffe managed to destroy the Royal Navy, but the RAF also destroyed the Kriegsmarine so it’s kind of an uneven balance there.  The UK Pacific forces are starting to give the Italians a headache in Africa.

The weirdest part of this game is no massive buildup on the German/Soviet border.  Except for a few token infantry on both sides, they have both pulled all their heavy equiptment the other way.  Looking forward to seeing how this develops.  Since I am about to start my work week tonight, I probably won’t get back into the game until my next weekend (Monday/Tuesday nights).

[Clyde85]

Thanks for posting!! I had kinda figured that Japan would be in the toughest shape, seeing as how all their objective money and all the IPC heavy tt are under allied control, i’ll be intrested to hear how long they hold their superiority

[The Dessert Fox]

@SgtBlitz:

It would be nice if you could actually play the scenario where Germany and Russia remain best buds for the whole game.  It probably would actually have happened like that in real life had Hitler not been such a backstabbing treacherous douchebag.

This tactic was one of Hitler’s best and worst desicion

Best because it stopped him from fighting a war on two fronts although in the end he did
Worst because it allowed the Soviets to build their forces up and provide them time to replace their army that Stalin slaughtered

[knp7765]

Update on my game in progress.  I am up through round 5 now.  In the East, Japan is making slow progress toward the west.  A strong force in Eastern Russia just destroyed a large Soviet infantry force and has open territories in front of it.  Attempt to totally annihilate China failed, thanks to Soviet help.  China was down to 2 territories but now back up to 7 and threatening to re-open Burma Road.  Japan is fairly weak in Southern China, but so is USSR.  Strong Japan force in Northern China facing nearly equal Soviet force.

In Europe things are going bad for Axis.  Germany attempted Sealion round 4 and was a disaster.  All units lost but 1 bomber.  Seven transports protected by Aircraft Carrier but NO fighters, they were lost in Sealion attempt, promptly sunk by RAF.  USA is in the war now and has a massive fleet.  Took Gibralter, Portugal and Normandy from Germany and Morocco from Italy.  US & British planes destroyed Italian fleet.  Italians pushed out of Africa and Middle-East by Brits from South Africa and India.  Egypt liberated.  ANZAC fleet arriving after long journey from Australia to help out.  Rome is threatened.

It’s weird that Japan gets no NOs from this scenario.  One question:  If USA and UK finish off Italy and Germany, should they turn around and help Russia by attacking Japan?  After all, this scenario is basically two very separate wars.  Here’s another idea, what if USA and UK ended up JOINING Japan, attacking Russia and destroying Communism?  Or, should we just let the Japan/Soviet conflict play out?

[Clyde85]

Intresting strategic situation!
What state is Mongolia in is my first question. You mentioned some of the true neutrals being under axis control so Im wondering if this has impacted the Soviet-Japanese front. I am glad to hear that Japan is able to maintain is supremecy on the Asian mainland after Russia starts helping China. I assumed that once the US got into the fight, and could focus all its 80IPC strait at the euro-axis it would be very damaging, even more so in your game after what sounds like a pretty nasty brawl over there in London!

Now seeing as how you have reached the end of turn 5, there are 2 way I could see you advance.
1 would be to keep playing the game out and see how much longer the Euro-axis can hold out and try to break the dead lock Japan and the Sino-Soviets forces are in.
2 you could bring the Soviets and Japanese in to their new alliances as full members, not just defacto. It would be intresting to see how a full Axis Soviet Union would effect the game, and the same is true of allied Japan.

Would this be the tipping point? Would this give the Euro-axis the shot in the arm it needs to stand up against the allies, and will this give Japan the edge they need to break deadlock in Siberia?

Also, how dose this effect China? since the Soviets and allied with them, dose this make them axis? Should this take away the Chinese Burma road NO, seeing as how they are at war with a British Ally? What status dose China hold? Are they defacto axis? If fighting breaks out between the Soviets and the allies, dose it make China a full axis member? Or dose China have the unique status of being an unaffiliated beligrent, a Playable Neutural power, if you will

I excitedly wait to hear what you do, and thank you again for testing this out!  :-D

[knp7765]

Hey Clyde85,
I just finished my game earlier today.  One thing that might have been a mistake in this game was attributing the normal rules to it, specifically Russia’s status as an ally and Japan’s status as an axis.  When Germany grabbed up the European neutrals, I treated Mongolia as no Pro-Allied.  Russia gained an extra 3 inf in Western Mongolia and Japan simply attacked the other 3 in Eastern Mongolia to keep them from being turned into Russians.  With the nature of this game, Japan probably should have been considered Allied and Russia Axis.  After all, one of Germany’s NOs was trade of oil and wheat from the Soviet Union.  Also, I guess China was as you suggested, an unaffiliated beligerant.  They got the benefit of the Burma Road NO for a couple of rounds or so and probably shouldn’t have.  That didn’t really matter because once Japan closed it, they were pretty good at keeping it closed the rest of the game.  Even Soviet help wasn’t enough with too much going on up north.
Okay, here’s how it went.  Japan finally captured all of China Round 9 and had established a strong line 1 territory beyond the Chinese border, in Soviet territory, all the way north.  Just two spaces from Moscow itself!  In Europe, Berlin and Rome fell Round 8.  ANZAC liberated Paris Round 8.  Last German units destroyed Round 8.  Last Italian units destroyed Round 9.  USA and Britain rule supreme!
By this time, we were growing rather weary of this game so we decided that Japan was indeed an ally and USA and UK would help her to stomp out evil Communism.  On round 9, both UK and USA declared war on Russia and grabbed up a lot of Soviet territory, including Leningrad, which was pretty easy since they already had huge forces in Europe and almost all Soviet stuff was out east fighting Japan.  Round 10 Russia simply stacked infantry in Moscow and Stalingrad.  Japan eliminated the last forces outside of city territories and took Stalingrad.  Britain snatched up all but one remaining Soviet territory and Moscow.  Then USA leapfrogged over their British allies and took Moscow itself with 2 tanks, 3 fighters, 1 tac bomber and a fleet of HEAVY bombers.  Communism is dead in 1945.  Next, Cold War with Japan?
I think in a game like this, the Neutral rules and maybe some NOs have to be changed.  For example, the German NO of 5 IPCs for each Russian city could go to Japan.  Maybe Japan could get another NO for keeping the Burma Road closed.  Back when all we had was the Milton Bradley version of A&A, I came up with scenarios of different combinations of Allies.  The most devastating one was Germany and USSR together.  They could grab up a lot of territory without buying transports.  Then when they had more money, worry about navy and airpower.  The only weakness was no naval presence in the Pacific, which left Eastern Russia and Southeast Asia vulnerable.  Another thing about changing alliances is you often have to change the setup.  If Germany and Russia are friends, there’s no need for them to have huge forces facing each other when they are needed elsewhere.  One way you could fix this is to have the first round be Non Combat movement ONLY.  Or, you could simply devise your own setup from the starte.

[Clyde85]

So a resounding allied victory! I suppose the game begins with the odds stacked against the axis, and once you take Japan out of the picture, there’s no second front for the allies to have to focus on. I am, however, suprised at how well Japan did against the Soviets on their own!  The fact that, despite soviet aid, you were still able to crush China and march nearly to Moscow is impressive.

I would hesitate to change the set-up, but maybe bring the soviets in as full allies of the axis at the end of turn 4 might change things. It might give the axis the help they need, or just make the Germans send forces to help beat back the Japanese.

And last we come to China! Its in such an odd position, being only at war with Japan, and getting pwned, it needs help for anyone who is willing. The soviets are the obvious choice, being the closest(well closest that wont spark a war with the west). It must seem wrong to have China collect money based on British positions, when they are in defacto alliance with the axis. Perhaps, some other stipulation should be put on British support, like only haveing “X” number of soviet forces in their country or somethng like that.

Just wondering if you used the standared set-up or if you used the alpha set-up, and how do you think it would effect the game?

[deadbunny]

This is the weirdest and most disturbing thread about global yet. Regardless of balance issues what would the purpose of allowing Russia to join the axis be? Would this be axis vs allies at that point?

[Clyde85]

@deadbunny:

This is the weirdest and most disturbing thread about global yet. Regardless of balance issues what would the purpose of allowing Russia to join the axis be? Would this be axis vs allies at that point?

Well I certian didnt intend to disturb anyone with it  :-D

It was just a fun little exploit I found in the political rule system. Talking about Russia joining the axis is really more of the home rules section, but allowing Japan and the Soviets to whail on one another while Germany keeps the peace with them in Europe is actually workable with in the standard rules. It was just a fun venture into some speculative gaming.

I had honestly thought that Japan would have been at more of a disadvantage, and that the Soviets would eventualy gain parity with them and start to push them back. At which point, if China is still in the game, I could see it be a very desperate struggle for Japan. However, we have found that the oppsite is true so far, that Japan has enough of an advantage that it can hammer both China and Russia before more forces can be brought to bear. We’ll have to see if this is the rule or just luck.

[Flashman]

Why not just develop this into a full four player game as per my suggestion, with each of the four (Germany/Italy, USSR/CCP, Japan, UK/US/KMT/F looking out only for itself.

Alliances are only by word, never binding, and temporary allies can never co-operate by sharing territory.

Winning conditions are the greatest number of Victory Cities held over your starting count after a pre-agreed number of turns.

The disposition of neutrals would have to be redrawn, e.g. a neutral could be “pro-Western Allies”, or even “Anti-Communist”.

Clearly NOs and the like need to be rewritten also.

[Clyde85]

I agree that if you were to make Japan and the Soviet full members of their opposing alliance, you would more than likely need to re-write the NO’s and such, and maybe even modify the setup, but that would make it more of a house rules kind of thing. What I was wondering was how, with the standard game setup and rules, a scenario like this would play out.

Though I dont see much way of winning as the “axis alliance” in a game like this, how they would capture 14 victory cities with out the Japanese beyond me.

[knp7765]

On Victory Cities, that was another mis-calculation for me.  Usually, at the end of each round I count how many vicory cities each side has.  However, I kept counting the three Soviet cities as Allied and Shanghai and Tokyo as Axis, when it really should have been the other way around.  In fact, I’m not even sure that would work because throughout most of the game the two conflicts really were separate.  Russia was sort of allied with Germany in that one German NO for trade of oil and wheat from the Soviet Union, but that was all.  Japan had even less to do with the Western Allies, more of non-aggresion pact than an actual alliance.  It wasn’t until round 9, after Germany and Italy were totally destroyed, that USA and UK declared war and joined Japan in smashing Russia.  Even then that was more the player’s choice to wrap it up than the actual “game rules” themselves.  If I decide to try this again, I will definitely have to rethink the Victory City conditions and maybe even come up with some new NOs.

Also, I still think a new setup would be in order.  I think the reason Japan did so well against the Russians was because the bulk of Russian heavy equipment was all in the west facing Germany.  By the time they got some units with firepower up to face the Japanese, Japan had already built a sizeable force on the mainland.  Plus, the Japs had much greater air power which I think also told in many of the battles.  Oh yeah, I used that new “Alpha” setup in this game.  While that does cut down the air strength for Japan, they still had a huge air superiority over the Soviets.  If I had used the original setup, it might have gone even better for Japan and they might have actually reached Moscow.

[Clyde85]

Something I had mentioned in another thread was that maybe bumping up Novosbrisk to 2 ipc, allowing the Soviets to build a minor IC would help balance it out a bit, as the Soviets could use this to get reinforcments to the FE theater quicker.

[deadbunny]

One way you could counter this is never count victory cites as a winning mechanic. My gaming group always has played to total domination (generally ends in concession by the USA if axis wins or concession by japan if the allies win, try taking out up to 80-90 troops in a sea invasion!) and it would fit this scenario better than the victory city setup.

[deadbunny]

Well I certian didnt intend to disturb anyone with it  grin

I still find a sense of disturbance to this!

[Flashman]

@Clyde85:

I agree that if you were to make Japan and the Soviet full members of their opposing alliance, you would more than likely need to re-write the NO’s and such, and maybe even modify the setup, but that would make it more of a house rules kind of thing. What I was wondering was how, with the standard game setup and rules, a scenario like this would play out.

Though I dont see much way of winning as the “axis alliance” in a game like this, how they would capture 14 victory cities with out the Japanese beyond me.

I’m suggesting a four-player game, not Axis vs Allies, but Axis versus Allies versus Communists versus Japan; each of the 4 groups fighting entirely in its own interest. Two players might find they have common enemies, but are still rivals in the end, as there can only be one player out of 4 winning the game.