The key to (killing) Russia's heart is in Nenetsia, 2.0

Gimmick win, if at all, with a proper Russian palyer IPM will win.

IPM?

IPM?

Another example of why this game will never be won, except in lucky situations, by gimmick moves that either “win” the game in 3-5 rounds or in the first round. Its called Infantry Push Mechanic and it has won every game that its used in. Read the boards of some of the other games to find out the details.

Even if you take Moscow for one turn,unlikely but possible, you have no supply line that is worth it to back it up. Your victory is only won for a round and then Germany is a hollow tiger, and so is Japan. You have hamstrung both major Axis powers to do this. No Atlantic wall, no reactionary force, no win. Not with sane allied builds and a strategic outlook.

I just played at a Convention and my team (of course we have played extensively together) would have won based on IPM, the constant supply of fodder without the loss of high powered units. The other team conceded, but it was a given with time considering their waste of high powered units…

So, in other words, you’d rather play a game down to the lowest common denominator, infantry stacks, as standard a play as humanly possible, with no attempt at bluffing or subterfuge or camouflage?  Wow, with the Axis having a net disadvantage against the +30 NO of the US from Round 4 on, you think having the Axis JOIN FORCES to take over Moscow by G5 is a bad idea? (And actually, the tank/air stacks combine on J3/G4!)  20 Jap planes and 16 German tanks thrown into the Soviet rear is absolutely nothing to worry about, according to IPM, right?  (Oh wait, that’s ~320+ IPCs (with possibly MORE incoming each round from German transports off Norway OR more planes dumped into Chahar’s airbase) dropped into the Soviet rear… Russia’s $37 a turn is going to take care of it!  YEAH…)

This is one of the best strategies I’ve seen yet, as there’s NO WAY the Japs can help out the Italians in the Med in any reasonable amount of time (which was often the case in AA50), and usually NO WAY to get Japanese and German stacks simultaneously sitting against Moscow (unless the Allies have really bobbled the ball and the game is obvious).  This strategy ENSURES that the Soviets will be forced to consolidate around their capital, and no matter what they do, it may still not be enough, if the Jap player uses his planes suicidally to open a hole for the Germans.  ITALIAN CAN OPENERS ARE A JOKE COMPARED TO THIS.

Plus, even if the seizure of Moscow IS temporary, it throws the Soviets into disarray for several rounds, they lose a turn of production, and Axis forces can run rampant all over while they retake the capital.  I assure you that the Soviets dropping the ball, even for a short period of time, in this version of AA with even greater distances and number of territories, usually means they’re going to keel over, as each map (Europe and Pacific) pretty much plays on its own.

ALSO, the best part about this strategy is that there is no real commitment until Germany 2, when you build the 5 TRN and the Major IC; you can always just call it off or go for Sealion (or just go for Sealion anyway on G3, if it looks favorable).

I like the Baltic idea better than the Caucasus route.  That’s 3 TRNs you’re building that the Russians will just shoot up with a plane on R3.  Plus, if you build 3 transports in the Black Sea G2, the UK is already at war with you, and its perfectly legal to FLY through the Dardenalles to kill them with a plane.

However you get the Jap air force to Europe though, earlier is probably better!  Its ridiculous that the Germans and Italians get as far as they do with the pitiful navies they start with!

Ah, yes, the best thing about this strategy are the OPTIONS.  You’re not pigeonholed into playing entirely defensive on the mainland, with 20 Japs threatening.

gsh34,  wouldn’t it be good for this strat to have Italy buy/move some tanks/mechs to Romania?

This shows more commitment in the southern region, distracting more from a northern offensive. And they can still be a modest can-opener threat in the South.

From reading here and my limited number of games, America likes to go 100% in the Atlantic.

I have been reading that also, which I feel is a Mistake for America to do that. If a Japanese player sent all of his planes to Europe I would run rampant over the pacific with the Allies. You can place all ship builds in the Pacific and move them to the Atlantic if needed. Without Japans planes most of their ground units in Asia will be helpless and it would entice India and Anzac into motion. I would even consider preempting Japan with a UK attack if the big offensive units are gone.

In the scenario that’s being talked about here Germany places little to no ground units for two turns (CV and factory, then 8 transports etc). I feel that this may be deciding factor in the long run. With average dice rolls it may work but all it takes is a few rounds of good defensive hits to throw it off.

I agree if Japan moves its planes away as the allied players in the P I would run all over Japan’s islands. And the allies have more then enough to do it. So America builds enough to defend itself in E and pours everything else into the treat of taking Japan. If Japan manages(somehow) to get its planes back to Japan in time then the USA lands in India and pours its troops up into Russia in a few turns(or frees China), either way it opens up a second front from the axis and causes issues a few rounds down the road. Then the USA switches back to focusing on E while using its fleet in P to keep Japan pinned at home. Japan can use its fighters to sink a USA fleet sittting off its coast but it takes them away from E and messes badly with the allied plan. Again each time they try to fly back the USA repeats its trick and threatens Japan. They can afford to do this a lot longer then Japan can. Meanwhile the USA forces in Asia get close and close to defending Russia or counter attacking Germany.

I can’t imagine a simple IPM build for the Axis would win.  They start the game about 60-70 ipc behind the Allies in income even after taking France.  The two German complexes are 5-6 rounds from Russia.  The supply lines are too long to take out Russia with a simple IPM.  In order for a credible Sealion or Nenetsia threat, they need to build a carrier and transports.  Five or six transports does nothing for a credible Sealion.

You seem to not understand that the IPM also involves a sea wall defense against an allied landing. 6 turns to Moscow as you say, then America can only land once, two turns from Berlin. Build 3-4 infantry per turn in France and coupled with your air force no landing will last. That gives you room to maneuver and pressure/take Moscow. The 60-70 IPC discrepancy is helped by the Total Unit Value (TUV) that the axis start with and should be taken advantage of. I personally think the CV build first round is necessary but some of the other ideas coming out of peoples post seem non logical.

@deadbunny:

[ You seem to not understand that the IPM also involves a sea wall defense against an allied landing. 6 turns to Moscow as you say, then America can only land once, two turns from Berlin. Build 3-4 infantry per turn in France and coupled with your air force no landing will last. That gives you room to maneuver and pressure/take Moscow. The 60-70 IPC discrepancy is helped by the Total Unit Value (TUV) that the axis start with and should be taken advantage of. I personally think the CV build first round is necessary but some of the other ideas coming out of peoples post seem non logical.
[/quote]

Again what stops America from doing a Japan crush if this shapes up? Thats the big issue America is too strong and in the hands of a skilled player can win the game by doing full crushes on one side or the other.

Again what stops America from doing a Japan crush if this shapes up? Thats the big issue America is too strong and in the hands of a skilled player can win the game by doing full crushes on one side or the other.

No redhunter. This is an illustration of why the game is easy in the hands of unskilled players. For the Axis to be successful they have to THREATEN on both theaters (including the western US) to keep the USA from spilling all IPC’s into the Atlantic. If you allow the US player to use its full force in one theater you are asking for defeat.

I say go for the “gimick” win.  The first time I tried something along the lines of building German Aircraft Carriers was back in Revised.  I built two (and a transport), landed four planes and went on my Merry way attacking the med coast and I took stalingrad on turn two.

I think the original idea of this thread is to try something NEW, and win, rather than press on with the old, dull, IPM.  Hey IPM wins more games than not, but if you can surprise your friends with a strategy they have never seen before they may not be able to figure out the counter quick enough.  (If Mr. Rick Bunnell did read this thread I guess gsh34 you are out of luck).

Try this out and let us know how it goes.

Also, a counter to Russia building surface ships is very simple.  Wouldn’t using all those Japanese planes to sink Russia ship do the trick?  Hell, if Germany doesn’t know what to build on G3 why not an Airbase for his Japanese allies!

I say go for the “gimick” win.  The first time I tried something along the lines of building German Aircraft Carriers was back in Revised.  I built two (and a transport), landed four planes and went on my Merry way attacking the med coast and I took stalingrad on turn two.

This was not a gimmick, it protected the German fleet and allowed it the same range as if staying in France in revised. Global is a different game and what you would call a “gimmick” strategy in this case is null and void in Global.

@Daedelus:

I say go for the “gimick” win.  The first time I tried something along the lines of building German Aircraft Carriers was back in Revised.  I built two (and a transport), landed four planes and went on my Merry way attacking the med coast and I took stalingrad on turn two.

I think the original idea of this thread is to try something NEW, and win, rather than press on with the old, dull, IPM.  Hey IPM wins more games than not, but if you can surprise your friends with a strategy they have never seen before they may not be able to figure out the counter quick enough.  (If Mr. Rick Bunnell did read this thread I guess gsh34 you are out of luck).

Try this out and let us know how it goes.

I always appreciate an opponent who tries daring, unusual strategies. They always make a fun game, and that is more important to me than winning or losing. This doesn’t mean someone should just do stupid random things, of course.

Sounds horribly boring for every game to be the same, or worse: merely stacking!