I almost pulled it off

@mantlefan:

@warwinner:

I did it!! It was very close, and almost a failure, but it worked. America fell and the allies surrendered. America was undermanned because the player felt that England was the target until G3 (as has been stated) Also England did scramble on T1 so it’s entirely possible to take out the Royal Navy, but be prepared to lose most of your airforce.

Japan took all of China, but England was going to push in and begin liberating them, however The U.S. had fallen so who gives a sh**  :wink:

The only axis player who did poorly was Italy, with absolutely no territory in Africa, but enough ground units to hold mainland Italy no problem.

Also, it’s important to mention that Germany had heavy bombers on G1 after buying just one research die, so luck WAS on MY side! In addition, I would like to give my respects to the man who posted this strat, as it is most definitely plausible and, if successful, will result in victory for the axis.

Thanks for the breakdown! I’m sure it will be dismissed by some as only luck, but in reality this is a strat that is pretty good the first time you try it against a player. Even if they are experienced, that doesn’t mean they know from the outset to defend the US territories

Exactly. This would be our 4th game of global so we are both pretty experienced. The main thing this strat has going for it is that no axis player in his right mind would risk the whole game going for the U.S. (much like no German Panzer Division would ever go through the Ardennes) the surprise factor of this move is invaluable. That’s why it will never work twice on the same player, but I guarantee that the first time you do this move, the allies will be utterly shocked.

Just four. I wanted to use more, but the timing, and England’s persistence of interfering with my maritime activities forced me to reinforce my fleet with a carrier, as opposed to placing three more transports in Normandy. Also, Russia was built up to a very imposing force, but Germany starts with enough men to play defense on the Eastern borders, and if you devote all your ipc to land troops starting G3 you should still be able to push the russians back, because even if the attack on U.S. fails, the Western allies have been crippled so much you don’t need to worry about them for at least 3 turns (maybe 4)

@warwinner:

Just four. I wanted to use more, but the timing, and England’s persistence of interfering with my maritime activities forced me to reinforce my fleet with a carrier, as opposed to placing three more transports in Normandy. Also, Russia was built up to a very imposing force, but Germany starts with enough men to play defense on the Eastern borders, and if you devote all your ipc to land troops starting G3 you should still be able to push the russians back, because even if the attack on U.S. fails, the Western allies have been crippled so much you don’t need to worry about them for at least 3 turns (maybe 4)

Way to go Jimmy Mullen

I have the feeling the allied player had no idea of what the heck he was doing.

Just this requires dice rolls to be unusually favorable for the axis.

@13thguardsriflediv:

I have the feeling the allied player had no idea of what the heck he was doing.

Here, Here

@ghr2:

Just this requires dice rolls to be unusually favorable for the axis.

It’s an awesome strategy!! The only down side to it is for it to work you’ll need 100% hits for the Axis and 100% misses for the the Allies. Other than that I think it’s really a well thought through plan.

@mantlefan:

@ghr2:

Just this requires dice rolls to be unusually favorable for the axis.

On what grounds? What are the battle(s) that the dice need to be so great in? Why did those battles come about?

Is that a serious question?
In order for Germ to destory the ENTIRE UK fleet like the guy who started the topic said, and take Norm AND France, ALL on G1, the rolls will HAVE to be favorable for the axis.  If not this, than the UK must not be thinking clearly on scrambling.  The german airforce/navy would be spread hella thin for that kinda of comb move.  So unless the rolls were near perfect and/or UK not thinking, Germany is prime to losing the majoiry of his starting subs, potentially losing the starting cruiser, and losing between 2-5 planes on avg.  And that is if rolls are relatively normal.  Same thing for an italy/German attack gibralter.  A good UK player can have the Norm/gib/malta figs, the z98 tac plus any surving uk figs on gib airbase/carrier from 98.  Along with the cruiser and dest from 98 and the 91 cruiser (if it lives), Britain can defend gib from italy with up to 2@2 (carrier can absorb 2 hits and planes can land in gib) 3@3 (2@3 if 91 cruiser dies) and 4@4 maybe 5@4 if the tac is landed at gib and UK has 5 fighters in the area.  The most italy can thow in is 3@2 2@3 and 1@4 (bb takes 2 hits)  all from the navy, his air cant land anywhere unless some how germ took south france G1 aswell.  from a G2 strike at gib (if UK pays attention to Germs buys), uk can defend gib with his air that landed in gib and any surviving naval units from G1.  Germany will only have his surviving naval units plus the transports.  If Germn buys Transports G1 then UK will scramble at gib, if Germ goes like sub and dest G1 then UK can stay and defend from landing units.  Only 2 air units will be in range if Germ builds a carrier G1.  UK can dictate how do divide what units to defend from which side of GIB.  If UK has has any surviving units from the G1 attack, it will be a pain for germ or italy to take Gib.  An effective sealion does not come till G3 at the earliest, so the UK can defend Gib UK1 and move its air and navy back to england and z110 to defend from G3 sealion.  If yu want, I can campare stats on G1s assault on the UK fleet.  Basically, if Germany & Italy are as agressive on G/I1 and G2 as the guy said they are, statistically, the German Air/Navy will be crippled unless the rolls are unusually favorable for the axis.

This of course does not include the French Navy’s contribution.  If italy lets them live for an all out attack on Gib, they can easily reinforce 91 for a G2 attack or dfend 92 for extra defense against italy.

By US3, if things are going to plan for the axis, the US will usually have a strong Naval force off the west coast (sitting there cause of an aggresive Japan).  Also He will deifnately notice Japan at Hawaii or sz 10 and germ/Ita at Gib.  It would probably be safe for him to assume that there will be the potential of an attack on the US.  He can then focus on potential blocks against Japan and start building a garrison in the east.  By this time, the US should have 3-4 carriers fully loaded off the west coast, plus a couple bb/crusiers, and plenty of subs/destroyers (pretty standard play for a US player even when if axis r not going for him) not including fighters on either central or west us (west us figs can scramble vs Japan).  The US wil just need 1 surface ship in the east to prevent an OSBB and would have the majority of its forces defending East and Central US (turn 3 will most likely consit of this)  Just 3 inf in central, 1-2 inf west, and 4 mechs, 1-4 arm 1-3 rtl, and up about 3-6 inf in east.  Worst case for US, 2 inf, 4 mech, 4 arm, 2 art, aa gun, and any amount of figs the US would want to defend EUS with.  thats 40 die points not including aa and planes.  I can see italy I3 clearing 101 for german OSBB G4 but germ won’t have many cruisers/bbs anyway.  Oh, I forgot about the british canadian guys, they will also help defend east US (If germ sunk the trannys) increasing the die points to 49.
I highly ill advise a Kill US First strat, it has very high risk, and its a major douche bag move.  If it fails, axis lose and u waisted your friends’ time.  If it succeeds marginally, then the game might last, if it succeeds overwhelming, then the allies lose and you waisted time.  If you want to piss off your friends, do this strat.

For tournaments, I can see doing this, for friend games, why won’t it piss them off?  It’s not because your doing something different, its that you usually end the game with that kinda move, when hardly anyone got to do anything, which ends up waisting like 3 hours.  If your friends have any sort of lives, they probably only play like once a week at most and they would not like taking time out of their busy schedual for someone to just end the game and waist a significant amount of time where they won’t have much to do another game.  Its basically like if one would fail a G3 sealion, its gg for germ automatically, but alot more extreme.  Just banking the ENTIRE game on one attack so early is like no fun at all.  So, if your friends are rooks or open minded, they would be like “oh, cool attack”  for a short time, and it be alright to try once if you have extra time, but the strat in general messes up the game royally.

I do applaud your creativity and thought proccess in planning this strategy, just its only a strategy to show off, not a practical/realistic one if you want a serious game.

@ghr2:

It’s not because your doing something different, its that you usually end the game with that kinda move, when hardly anyone got to do anything, which ends up waisting like 3 hours.

No kidding! I posted earlier saying that this strat is a 3.5 hour time waster but they claimed I had my head up my a**. As well, I brought it to their attention the total carnage the Axis is going to face on the home front. Keplar and Mantle both claim Germany is plowing into Russia with East Russia forces in full retreat, Italy is steamrolling in Africa and Japan is squashing India. Short of the 100% hit/miss scenario I don’t see this strat even coming close to working. But if anyone is into wasting time and ruining games go with it!!!

@keplar:

even though the attack itself failed, the outcome was not a failure. The US was extremely delayed in attempting to take gibralter.

Typically when the US enters the war, Italy has to spend every ipc it earns to hold/retake gibralter until eventually the US finally has enough to take and HOLD it. When the US finally holds gibralter, usually it’s 2-3 turns until Italy is done. Plus all that time and effort to take/retake gib forces italy to spend less on the african front. With this strategy, Italy had no threats of any kind and was able to freely send 30ish ipc’s worth of units to africa every turn. By this time UK is only bringing home 20ish with convoy loses and they can’t compete with that.

With Germany, keep in mind that I had only 4 transports in my attack, which leaves TONS of troops to head towards Russia. Germany is making 50ish per turn, all towards Russia. Russia starts with very little and only makes 37. Once again, it’s hard for them to compete with this.

I never said Japan was “squashing India”, Japan was trading interior territories with China, and sending transports to Asia and collecting islands when possible. They took Hawaii on J4 and eventually relinked the both fleets together to make a monster fleet that the US could do nothing about w/o spending every penny on the Western coast. Japan makes mid 40’s per turn, US is down to 60 ish. India had a HUGE land army retaking China, but by endgame was making 11 with loss of territories and convoy loses. ANZAC is usually just a small thorn in Japan’s side.

With all this in mind, it seems hard to say that this can ruin a game. Bad dice can ruin a game.

Please break down Japan’s income so we all can see>

@keplar:

With Germany, keep in mind that I had only 4 transports

So let me get this straight, your going to take America out of the war with 4 Nazi transports……Hmmmmmmmm