We need an allied playbook.

In order to delay a German crush on Moscow you will need the help of US/UK.

The Allies need to at least threatening a landing on S.Fra, Normandy, Norway, Denmark, N.Ita or S.Ita. Everything else is bogus. If you can’t Force Germany to build some ships then they will have free hands on Moscow and it will not matter what they do or how they die.

And, when Germany captured Moscow, they will be in London/Cairo in No Time!

Germany has to send all his assets towards the East. Everytime Germany has or needs to build ships is one to two units less who can march towards Moscow.

If you want to delay a German march towards Moscow, then build up a JFK devinsive line.
J= Novo,Bela,W.Ukr, Ukr, Bessa
F=Bela,Smolensk, W.Ukr,Ukr, Bryansk
K=Smolensk,Bryansk,Rostov and Russia from where you refit and supply your troops.
You have to time it and have to be powerful enough to knock out any Ita Canopeners.

Im glad we agree on some problems, I just want to find a way to take out Japan without either completly abandon Europe or commit to Europe.

A 60 - 40 economy split should work for the US at the bare minimum

70 - 30 might be better depending on the threat level

UK middle east factory is always a great idea for support
A Norway factory is good for the Allied Power who controls it(Unless it is Russia, because Leningrad Factory)

For the Spanish Beach head what if the UK hit Sweden and/or Norway to contain it , just like we do with Turkey

@Karl7:

@Talleyrand19:

Been following this thread as best as possible so sorry if this was already mentioned and I missed it…

But what happens if Allies spend most of their money on the Atlantic with only a few capital ships in the Pacific to join up with Anzac. The Atlantic money goes to transports and capital ships and then tanks and infantry. With England’s help, you hit Spain and Gibraltar  (for the naval base). Then every single turn the US can land more stuff and set up a nonstop funnel. If Russia does its job then axis should not be able to keep up on both fronts. If Germany sent its Dark Skies bombers to try to stop the funnel, then fine you can wipe each other out and still land more US troops the next turn.

My friends and I have done this to each other and the Spain landing always overwhelms the Axis eventually. …

What have you all experienced when trying this?

Yes, this is a good strategy.  The weak point is then the Germans blitz into the middle east, ignoring Moscow.  They can get an economic advantage and then just sit back and outbuild the allies.

Perhaps have Iraq and the Persian territories be treated as True Neutral, just give the UK and USSR extra units to make up the potential difference.

bump… :-D

@Gargantua:

I can’t read that.

You should have gone to specsavers

Oh yeah, and isn’t INVADING RUSSIA!!! actually an invasion of a True Neutral country by Germany due to their NON-AGGRESSION PACT they had signed with them in 1939???

HERP.  A.  DERP.

Dumb rule is dumb.

Yeah, that is correct.

@Flashman:

For us history pedants I’m putting together a spreadsheet detailing the historical allegiances of each Global40 territory as of June 1st in 1939, 1940, 1941 & 1942.  May add December 1941 to this.

Some problems here, for example do I treat “Bessarabia” as Bessarabia proper (Romanian in 1940) or Transnistria?

Also, Poland in 1939: strict neutral or pro-Allied?  Can we treat the Soviet invasion of East Poland as Stalin “activating” a friendly territory?

My Global 1940 map analysis contains dates that might be useful for your project:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36590.0