The Afrika Korps

@Afrikakorps:

So working further on the target.

Take Caucasus, Leningrad, Stalingrad and Egypt in G5

Build major in Romania G1
Build med fleet in SZ100 G2
Italy takes Turkey I2
Germany start producing fast troops
Afrika Korps take Caucasus G3
Tropical Fleet takes Egypt G3
Afrika Korps takes Middle East/Stalingrad G4
Germany takes Leningrad G5

Collect +/- 100 IPC G5

Italy will be making 35-40 IPC I5
Japan will be making 70 IPC J5

Axis making +/- 200 IPC per turn

I don’t think this work for many reasons. Here are two examples; you might get Caucasus 1 turn, but it’s taken back immediately. Building a Romanian Major lets Russia spend extra money on expensive stuff like tanks and then a fleet on G2 is a huge advertisement to buy more tanks and move south. Italy might not have enough troops in place on I2 to get Turkey if the UK brought the right stuff into the UK1 med fight.

During WW2, when Germany launched Operation Blue (seizing Stalingrad for the initial purpose of it becoming a Logistics depot for future operations); some Generals wrote in their diaries wild fantasies of seizing the Caucasus oil fields and the middle east.

Another advantage to doing afrika korps is that if your playing with ygh rules thats a vp right there.

Also i think japan should do a calcutta crush along with afrika korps. That way, uk cant send fighters from india into egypt, otherwise lose infia and/or the possibility  of taking india back

Your plan?  Yes, dave goes through Turkey to slay the middle east, from time to time.  The most direct path avoids this and just pours units into Russia but UK has a bastion in the ME with some relief and that’s what your cool plan was trying to lance

@taamvan:

Your plan?  Yes, dave goes through Turkey to slay the middle east, from time to time.   The most direct path avoids this and just pours units into Russia but UK has a bastion in the ME with some relief and that’s what your cool plan was trying to lance

I don’t get the Turkey thing… doesn’t that turn all the neutrals against you and cause more trouble than its worth?

I think both sides should see the neutrals as the enemy and aim to crush them if the opportunity arises.

If axis can get turkey spain portugal sweden. It cancels out the ipc from south america.

Turkey is a great way to gain access to the middle east. The other options are by sea or through rostov. If italy can open that door it makes life a lot easier for the axis.

If the allies are unprepared then axis can easily grab a stack of territories.

I think that Japan will have to go hard against Russia and germany still needs to go hard to at least to leningrad and or sevastopol so that the Russians dont go having it too easy.

I think that uk factory build in persia iraq and a us landing on morroco could cause further problems for this strategy.

Uk and russia could also team up against fin/swe/nor which would be costly and difficult if all of germany’s ships are in the med. I would probably keep the baltic fleet there and reinforce the northern attack on russia to keep that area strong and busy while the bulk of the axis europe forces go south.

@Afrikakorps:

I think Japan should wait with declaring war, so JDOW3 or JDOW4 and crush China + Russia in the meantime, preparing for an Indian Crush in J4 or J5.

That’s very late. UK Pacific will by then have taken some of the DEI islands and will have built a powerful infantry stack that will be hard for Japan to overcome. Anzac will also have some islands and will have every opportunity to harass Japan.

@Afrikakorps:

My first idea was build new fleet in G1, second idea was to build fleet in G2 Southern France but my current and I think best idea is to build German fleet in the Black Sea, so minor or major in Romania G1 (I will go major). If you are going to crush neutrality, why not optimize it?

German fleet builds in Black Sea allows fast access to Egypt, Middle East and Southern Russia, while far away from USA reach.

That would be a massive early investment, implying that you can’t really be threatening Sea Lion. The UK will notice that and spend its money in Africa and the Middle East, so you’ll encounter strong opposition there. And you can’t just build transports: the UK will have several planes available even after Taranto, and may fly in more from India. Also, the British Indian Ocean fleet may sail towards the Mediterranean, especially with the Japanese not having sunk the battleship.
Also, the neutral crush will provide the British with much-needed additional troops and income: Angola, Mozambique and Saudi Arabia will join the UK, Afghanistan may also, or join the Russians. And apart from what the British will do, you’ll need some units to actually take Turkey - and you’ll probably need to do something about Spain and Sweden too or you’ll be in trouble when the Allies land.

@Afrikakorps:

I hope to cancel this out by using diplomacy to my advantage against the Allies.

You may find that the Allies will continue that diplomacy “by other means”.  :-D

One of the great things about this game is that even the Axis strategies that are optimal have costs. If the Axis focus on X they also create vulnerability Y that the Allies can exploit.  This goes both ways of course, but the Axis start with the initiative and so the Allies are more often in the position of reacting in the early game. The DOWs illustrate this well. A later Japanese DOW should generally improve the Axis chances in Europe but at the expense of Axis chances in the Pacific.

My skepticism of this approach is that I don’t think it accounts for how the allies might change up their approach in response. If the allies just go with the default and build infantry and retreat, this strategy will work better, but I think they may be able to break it if they change up too. Obviously without trying it this is a bit speculative but here would be some concerns.

So far I have liked a J3 DOW, but it is a signal to the allies that you are trying to win on the Europe map and gives the US more leeway to build in the Atlantic. It also may mean the other pacific allies can more safely put energy into the Mid East and Russia while still securing their own positions in the Pacific.

A G1 Romania factory tells the Soviets that you are focusing on them but it also usually means that they can block a G2 attack. They just build tanks in their forward factories and stack in Belarus and W Ukraine. A G2 navy build threatens the Caucasus but the lack of land units means that a G3 direct attack on Eastern Europe is also blocked.  And if you go for the Caucasus you would have a hard time both attacking the USSR and defending your starting territories in the 3rd turn. If the USSR is primarily thinking of your G5 or G6 attack on Moscow and only building inf, than they will have trouble countering. But in seeing that you are not building land units, the Soviets might switch to tanks, mechs and artillery knowing that you will have trouble defending against the counterattack and that territories in E Europe and scandinavia might be up for grabs.

As Kaleun points out, it also lets the Allies know that sea lion is less likely which allows the UK to build more aggressively.

Both sides should certainly consider attacking Neutrals but it is much more risky for the Axis since there are many more Neutrals that the Allies can easily reach. And an I2 attack on Turkey has lots of dangers. If it doesn’t ensure an early axis victory you have given the US  income, plus lots of inf (16 between Spain, Portugal and Latin America),  and a more direct route into  Europe. This could easily mean a secure Allied beachhead in Spain on their turn 3. And as KaLeun notes, it also strengthens the UK in Africa and the Mid East. The UK Pacific also gets 4 more inf and a direct route for its air to Moscow (and vice versa). If you decide to also attack the other Neutrals for their income you are also committing land units that are badly needed against the USSR.

Anyway, just some thoughts. The best Axis strategies (I think) are ones that are more open ended and which allow the Axis player several options depending on how the Allies counter. The allies are put in a position of having to prepare for several possibilities and have to play more cautiously as a result. This strategy really commits the Axis to a particular approach and seems to make it harder to adapt to changes in the Allied response.

Good comment.  Its just like chess–as long as the Axis are calling the tune and the tempo, and you are only reacting to that, you will likely lose.  The VCs are set up in a sort of unfair way, so that the Axis have multiple paths to victory, and can very easily move between them,  whereas the Allies are always plugging holes in their dam as the pop up.

Its only when the Allies have a plan that constantly intervenes in this critical path before the Axis can attempt each step of it, that they even have a chance to win.  Once the Allies are planning and moving into or towards the most vulnerable area/city BEFORE the Axis appear to be headed that way, they can win and stymy the Axis.  Its amazing, there will be plenty of times where you have to move that one extra step forward or put your pieces at risk in order to even arrive at the battle at the correct time.  Any fewer risks or more conservative moves and the dance collapses.

I don’t personally consider taking Tokyo or Berlin to be realistic goals in a normal game against strong competition—you have to completely suffocate their income, and bomb them, and build for many turns to even have a chance of winning that way.

Hi all,

Been thinking about this some more and come up with the following ideas.

The problems with an Africa first strategy are as follows.

1. Vulnerability of Axis shipping in the med.

I think if the axis are going to go the Naval route they need to commit to a naval building program. By turn 5 they will need something like

5DD
1CR
1CV + 2FTR
5SS

A fleet such as this would be able to stand up to about 10 enemy planes. The problem I have always found is you can’t protect transports and new builds. So where do you build them to stop the new ships being bombed straight away. There are plenty of spots allies can base planes on including carriers. This limits the Italian navy to operations in the Adriatic Sea only. :-(

A solution would be to try and save up and buy them in chunks or to try and scare off allied planes somehow.

It would be fairly easy for the Germans to pop out 1-2 subs a turn from Marseilles each turn.  These subs could keep the Med clear or even chase away the allies from SZ91 if you can build enough, but again its the vulnerability of transports that is the problem.  I think a too heavy ship building program will leave Germany very weak on the ground.

2. IPCs.

If you do the math there are about 20 IPCs Italy and Germany can collect in places such as Turkey, Persia, Caucasus, etc, This does not include Egypt or Africa. The problem is that while Germany and Italy are fighting their way through the Middle east, Capturing these territories does not hurt Russia or UK. Most of the money comes from Neutrals or NOs. So while it will be great for the AXIS to boost their income, they really need to hurt the Allies harder.

Solutions.
I think a focus on getting a decent chunk of troops into the Syria/Iraq area by T4 opens a lot of doors for the Axis. I think Germany really needs to boost production by building factories in Turkey/Iraq or even Egypt. Tanks/Mec can be built in Germany but Inf/Art are needed too and they are too slow to walk. If this is combined with a focus on capturing the Russian Factories in Stalingrad and Ukraine, Germany can pump out enough to devour central Asia as well as push into Africa.

Building the Italian Navy has difficulties but if it can be done would safeguard the north African coast, as well as protecting Italy from invasion.

Afrikakorps just reading through your last couple post I think you can probably get Egypt on G3 if Italy opens up the Turkish straights (although I havn’t ran the numbers w/possible UK movement, builds and reinforcement). If the Germans fail to take it down, the Italians will finish it off on Ity3 (they must be at Alex Ity2 w/Luftwaffe backing them up). The one hitch that I can see (as remote as it might be) is that the French dd moves to the Red Sea on F1 (normal), and got really lucky and managed to sink your Italian cruiser/transports in sz99, survived the battle to block out the Germans (which is a possibility lol)

As the allies seeing you built that Romanian Major I will feel all warm and fuzzy inside as UK (no Sea Lion), but see it as a threat to the Russians. Egypt and Persia would be my focus for UK (which I realize could work right into your hands). Might build a minor IC on Egypt UK1, and/or a carrier or transport for S Africa?. I also sometimes build an an air base for Egypt which would force you to account for my scramble on G3 (ties up some of your German air power). The UK Med fleet would probably be gone (Taranto), but the UK Pac fleet would defiantly be heading that way to take its place (possibly joining a new carrier built in S Africa?). With most of your emphasis in the Black Sea G2/G3, Russia will get aggressive. If you split your starting ground forces to go north and south you will find more Russian resistance then you are used to, and a series of counter attacks. Leningrad won’t be a cake walk, and you may find yourself having to defend your own assets up there.

The thing is that the Western allies would love to get into a naval race with the Euro twins, because that means they aren’t building troops to take Moscow early on. Both London and Moscow will feel safe for at least the first 8-10 turns. As soon as you drop those expensive capital ships in the Black Sea G2/G3, the allies will make them a target (thinking they are trapped). The western allies will see this as a challenge and w/o much resistance in the Atlantic the US very well may build up fleet in DC, which will end up being the Spanish Beach Head after the Turkish assault. Don’t think the Euro axis can defend a landing in Spain (Germany would have to kill off the 6 free Spaniards in the 3rd turn if the Japanese attack J3) and push into Northern Africa, Middle East and Southern/Northern Russia all at the same time.

Interesting take though, imagine if the Allies were planing a neutral crush as well lol