Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies with an emphasis on Global 1940 2nd Edition OOB (By AndrewAAGamer)
While the title of this discussion refers specifically to Axis & Allies Board Games these Warfare Principles are true for most, if not all, war games and can be used in virtually any war game to increase your chances of victory. The intent of this paper is to assist Players to become better at the game and win more often than they do today.
Definitions:
0. Overview – RISK
If you have ever played Risk the board game 1v1 you already have an idea of how to play most Axis and Allies games. In Risk the more territories you own the more units you get to collect and place on the board. This in turn allows you to capture even more territories and continue gaining more income or units. If you can take over an entire continent you get even more money by accomplishing that specific objective. If your attacks go well you will eventually get cards for a bonus amount of money. The attacker has the advantage by rolling three dice to the defender’s two so it is better to attack than to defend. The Player who gains the most income and therefore has the most troops and uses them most efficiently will usually win.
When you boil it down Axis and Allies is really, as I like to say to new players, Risk on steroids. All the basic tenants you learned playing Risk are the same in Axis and Allies. Each territory on the board has an income value. The more territories that you occupy the more money you collect. Which in turn allows you to buy more units. If you accomplish specific National Objectives you gain even more money and, just like Cards, it you capture an enemies Capital you collect bonus money. Instead of using your money to purchase a standard block of wood you can purchase Ground, Air and Naval units that have different strengths, weaknesses and capabilities. The attacker, by being able to focus their units, has the advantage over the defender though the attacker is not limited to just three dice nor the defender two. It is all out war and mayhem instead! Rest assured the Player who gains the most income and therefore has the most troops and uses them most efficiently will usually win. And that is what this treatise will discuss.
1. The Rush – A quick knockout blow!
I start with an exception to the general principles that I am going to discuss. The reason being twofold, one to avoid the “Yeah, but what about this?” line of questions and two since a Rush occurs early in the game it seems appropriate to address it early here too. We can note that the Rush may use some of the Principles we are going to discuss but that is not the focus of the Rush.
A Rush is when one side (the attacker) chooses to do an all-out attack to eliminate the other side (the defender) before the other side has time to build up their defenses. The idea is to attack the defender with all your original troops on the board that can get to the defender very quickly and to focus on building offensive units that can get to the defender very quickly too or, better yet, at the same time as the original units on the board to overwhelm the defender before they have time to build up their defenses. Hopefully, to further increase the effectiveness of this strategy, the defender will be surprised by this strategy and will have been working towards a long-term strategy and will be overwhelmed by this quick knockout blow.
There are three possible Rush scenarios in the Global 1940 game; all by the Axis. The Romanian Rush, Sealion and the India Crush.
Romanian Rush is when the German player builds a major industrial complex on G1 and places it in Romania with the intention of taking Moscow on G6. While in the short term this is a loss of up to 10 infantries on the attack of Moscow, due to the Romanian complex being 2 spaces closer in distance to Moscow than the Germany complex the German player can provide greater OFP and more HP total units on a G6 Moscow attack due to being able to build a) more expensive slow movers on G2 (artillery) and more expensive fast movers (armor) on G4 that otherwise would not be able to get there in time.
Sealion is where the German Player tries to capture London via an amphibious assault. This is possible because the UK industrial complex limits the total defending build to 10 units at a time and Germany goes first in Turn Order so they have one more Turn to prepare than the UK does. The only lacking unit the Germans start the game with are transports; they already have all the ground and air troops needed for the capture of London. With the large amount of money they gain on G1 building a bunch of transports on G2 is a definite Rush possibility.
India Crush is when Japan goes all out for India ignoring or minimizing any China attacks and money grab of the Money Islands. With a 3 transport buy on J1 the Japanese already have the ground troops, air units and naval units necessary to take Calcutta. This can be as early as a J3 attempt, though usually, a J4 capture.
With the defense of any Rush the best defense is recognizing it is coming and then acting accordingly. Since Rushes are usually an all or nothing adventure stopping the Rush, no matter how painful, will usually lead to winning the game.
Okay, enough with the Rush. Onto the Warfare Principles!
2. Money and Attrition – He who has the most… wins!
The basic concept of Axis & Allies is money, pure and simple. The game starts with so many units on the board. These units are basically your starting money already bought and paid for and placed on the board. Usually the Axis is even or ahead with these starting money units and has the advantage of theater position. Normally the Allies have a greater value of territories to start the game thus they collect more money than the Axis does each Round to start. So, the goal of each side should be to gain or maintain a monetary advantage. The overall mantra is simple; he who uses his money wisest will win. Basically, the general concept to gauge how well you are doing is if the value of units you destroy is A and the value of the units you lose is B and the money you collect is C then A minus B plus C needs to be greater than your opponent’s A minus B plus C equation for you to be winning the game.
Hold on. Based on this formula, A-B+C, if Power A is collecting $48 and buying 4 bombers a Turn (for Global 1940) and Power B is collecting $36 and buying 12 infantry a Turn and neither side is losing any troops then Power A is winning. In reality, we all know that is probably hogwash; Power B is being much more effective in the value it is getting for its money. So, while you should use the formula to gauge how well you are doing the mantra is, again, he who uses his money wisest will win. So, there are other things that must be taken into consideration to ensure the formula works. Those other things are the value of the units you are purchasing, your position on the board and who has the momentum.
a) Value of units: An infantry unit costs 3, an armor unit costs 6 while a bomber unit costs 12. Each has a specific duty on the board but a good bet is the Power that is buying the lower cost unit to accomplish their goal is going to win the game because of the cost of doing battle down the road. So, when you look at the formula, (A-B+C) it has to be viewed not only this Turn but the next one and the next one and the next one. If you are not buying the least expensive unit now to get the job done then it is a good bet that eventually your more expensive units are going to die in battle against your opponents less expensive units and suddenly the formula is going to take a turn for the worse.
b) Position on the board: For the Allies the US is going to account for anywhere from 35% to 50% of the money the Allies collect. However, they have the hardest time getting their troops into the theaters of conflict. Thus, if the money formulas are even then the Axis is actually winning since too much of the Allied money is “in the pipeline” still trying to get into battle. Basically, those units are not really on the board until they are in combat and thus don’t count as much as a unit in combat. In addition, the UK, USA and ANZAC need fleets to deliver their troops into the battlefield. Thus, they must build expensive units to transport the troops and even more expensive units to protect the transports from the enemy. Japan also needs a fleet however since they start with so many planes and ships it is easier for them to deliver ground troops onto the mainland than the UK, USA and ANZAC.
c) Momentum: If the Axis or Allies are losing the money war but are in position to knock out a Capital then the formula is soon going to change in their favor. If the Axis knocks out Russia or the Allies knock out Italy then suddenly the formula is going to change drastically so as I said the formula is just a gauge to determine how you are doing but it is not the sole consideration.
Keeping in mind the cost of units, position on the board and momentum the Player that spends his money wisely, consistently kills a higher value of units than he loses each Round, and collects enough money to have an overall monetary advantage versus his opponent‘s formula is going to win the bulk of their games.
So how do you consistently kill more value in enemy units than you lose? That is the key to the game and the next few topics.
3. The Value of Units – Buy the right unit for the right job!
Units have five main values; Hit Points (HP), Offensive Firepower (OFP), Defensive Firepower (DFP), Mobility and Special Attributes. The key to being efficient with your hard-earned money is buying and using the right type of unit for the job.
Hit Points (HP) is the casualty a unit takes in combat. This has a definite value and is in some cases worth more than the combat value of the lower tier units for each individual category; Land, Air and Naval. As determined by AndrewAAGamer a Land unit HP is worth $2, an Air unit HP is worth $3 and a Naval unit HP is worth $4.
Offensive Firepower and Defensive Firepower is how many pips on a dice are rolled for a specific unit in combat. As determined by AndrewAAGamer, for Land units each pip is worth $0.5 per pip, for Air units it is $1 per pip and for Naval units it is also $1 per pip.
Mobility is the ability to have greater range than a standard unit of the same type which allows projection of force and more rapid deployment. For Land Units, the value is $1 for Mobility and for Air units it is $4. Naval units have no Mobility value as they all move the same.
Special Attributes increase the capability of units in certain circumstances.
• When adding combat value (artillery and tactical bombers)
• Strategic Bombing (strategic bombers)
• Bombardment (cruisers and battleships)
• Repairable (aircraft carriers and battleships)
The chart below uses these five attributes to compare the actual cost of the unit to its purchasing cost. Now I am not saying the chart is exact in every detail however it is generally close enough that it does point out the important facts needed for our purposes:
INFANTRY: Cost $3, Value 3.5, OFCR .333, DFCR .666
Infantry is by far the most cost-effective unit for the job. Its cost is not dependent on any special attributes to maintain its value day in and day out. As a single purpose defensive unit, its DFCR of .666 blows all competition out of the water. Unlike other single purpose units, it is also effective on offense as cannon fodder due to 66% of its cost being for its one Hit Point. With 66% of its cost going to HP, a decent offensive capability and the best defensive capability around it is THE BEST UNIT IN THE GAME hands down.
ARTILLERY: Cost $4, Value 4.5, OFCR .500 (.750 SA), DFCR .500
If Mobility is not an issue the BEST offensive Land unit is artillery. Combined with infantry it has a whopping .5415 OFCR rating. Even with no infantry it attacks and defends as well as armor and provides more HP for the money. Artillery vs armor battles are won by the artillery every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
MECHANIZED INFANTRY: Cost $4, Value 4.5, OFCR .250, DFCR .500
Due to 25% of its cost going to Mobility and not combat statistics the mechanized infantry has one purpose. To provide the same cheap cannon fodder of an infantry but with Mobility attached. If the infantry cannot get there the mechanized infantry is its replacement.
ARMOR: Cost $6, Value 6, OFCR .500, DFCR .500
As an offensive unit, armor is second only to artillery. Because of its Mobility it is an expensive though necessary offensive unit. Due to its high cost, you do not ever want to lose these in combat. These are the Immortals. Use them wisely.
FIGHTER: Cost $10, Value 10, OFCR .300, DFCR .400
King of defense at Sea. Creme de le crème of the air units on defense.
TACTICAL BOMBER: Cost $11, Value 10, OFCR .273 (.364 SA), DFCR .273
On Land this is a blah unit. Its niche is at Sea on a carrier as an offensive unit paired with a fighter.
STRATEGIC BOMBER: Cost $12, Value 15, OFCR .333, DFCR .083
Best high cost offensive unit in the game. With a movement of 6, 7 with and airbase, the projection of force this unit provides is outstanding. Add in Strategic Bombing and it is one extremely usable unit.
SUBMARINE: Cost $6, Value 7, OFCR .333, DFCR .166
Best Sea unit for offense. Miserable on defense.
DESTROYER: Cost $8, Value 8, OFCR .250, DFCR .250
A sub killer and blocker it is the best and only purchasable Sea dual purpose unit.
CRUISER: Cost $12, Value 11, OFCR .250, DFCR .250
Never buy this unit.
BATTLESHIP: Cost $20, Value 18, OFCR .250, DFCR .250
There are rare circumstances this unit should be purchased.
AIRCRAFT CARRIER: Cost $16 Value 16, OFCR .000, DFCR .166
While not technically a combat ship, it is an air transport, I still showed it here due to its defensive capabilities. A must for any Navy.
SIDEBAR: One if by Land, Two if by Sea
Besides Strategic Bombing all battles occur either on Land or at Sea. The units brought to bear in those battles makes the difference between winning and losing.
LAND BATTLES:
Land battles have a combination of infantry, artillery, mechanized infantry, armor and air support. Good management of the proportion of these five unit types is paramount to victory. Every land battle starts with infantry. Infantry is cheap. Dirt cheap. Their combat value is a mere $1 of their total cost. As such they are the best unit on defense and still great on offense as cannon fodder. Artillery combined with infantry is the best offensive combination on the board. If Mobility were not an issue every army would be strictly infantry and artillery. However, for the Attacker their main advance army quickly outpaces their reinforcements as they move towards their ultimate objective. Since one big army is better than one strung out army over several spaces that is where mechanized infantry and armor come into play.
A key concept is you need enough cheap infantry in your army to protect your higher value units from dying and to combine with artillery. Since you cannot always get enough infantry moving forward it is the infantry / mechanized infantry tandem that is the core of any army. Then artillery is the second choice. You want enough artillery to be able to bring firepower into the battle and still have the artillery survive the battle. The longer the battle the more infantry / mech infantry you need. Considering major battles for capitals may go 4-5 rounds you want a ratio of 4 or 5 infantry for every 1 artillery so the artillery is still firing with 3 pips on that last round of combat. Finally, you want for the final punch armor that will NEVER die in combat.
Wait a second, armor fires at three and two infantries only fire at 2; so the armor is better…right? No, because once the armor is dead you lose 3 firepower instead of 1. The two infantries provide you with two casualties where the one armor only provides you with one casualty. What you want is enough infantry so that the armor is never threatened with death and then yes, you do want one armor instead of two infantries because the armor is firing at 3 instead of 2. But only once the armor is safe. This is also true for three mechanized infantries versus two armor, even though it is 3 firepower versus 6 firepower, it is also 3 casualties protecting the high cost armor instead of only 2 casualties. This is easy to replicate. Go to a big battle in Moscow and open the Battle Calculator. Remove armor and put in infantry (1 for 2) or remove armor and put in mechanized infantry (2 for 3) and you will see the percentage chance of winning goes up and the TUV goes up. That is because you are losing cheap units instead of expensive units. At some point it even outs and then goes down and this is now because you have more infantry than you need to protect your artillery and armor so your firepower is not as great as it could be with the already protected higher value artillery and armor. It is a balancing act that reaps great rewards.
While always a blessing and necessary for additional firepower, due to their high cost, air units should only be bought for land battles once the main force is too far away to be reinforced with fast movers (mechanized infantry and armor).
Oh, one last thought for Land Battles. Is your Power on Defense? Remember when I said infantry was the defensive best unit in the game? When on defense, in general, your motto should be “Infantry, infantry, infantry, more infantry and then even more infantry.”
SEA BATTLES:
If you have not noticed it yet I will tell you this; sea units are expensive! Fleets are horribly expensive. Thus rule #1 for Naval Warfare is DO NOT LET YOUR FLEET GET SUNK! The best odds you should ever give your opponent of winning a Naval Battle is 50%, and even that is taking a risk with the Dice Gods. Losing an expensive fleet on the cheap is a really good way to lose a game.
Luckily DFP is cheaper for naval units than OFP. So, if you and your opponent are both spending the same amount of money on your Navy, then neither of you are going to be able to kill each other. That is why it is not uncommon to see two large navies staring at each other in the ocean with neither side able to attack the other one. Therefore, unlike Land combat, Naval combat is often more a game of maneuvering than blunt force.
So, assuming your Navy is not already a lot bigger than your opponents the first thing you must do is get your DFP up and the aircraft carrier / two fighter combo is the best to accomplish that. Once you have an advantage you can start buying tactical bombers to go with your fighters and carriers. Later you can add subs for even more punch but only if you are 100% safe from being attacked as subs suck on defense.
4. Overwhelming Attacks – Die Sucker Die!
Kill them quick. That should be every gamer’s motto. Wherever possible you should always use overwhelming force to attack with for three important reasons.
1)The faster you kill the defender the less times the defender’s units will be able to fire back at you. Since the defender chooses the casualties you can bet the last units you will face will be his most accurate ones. If you are attacking 4 units and hit just 2-3 of them on the first round you are probably costing yourself an additional troop because of it. Remember those troops of yours cost money; don’t let them die needlessly.
2)Overwhelming odds negates bad dice. How many times have you heard someone say, “Dang, that roll went bad, that should not have happened.” What the person should have said was “That was not the most likely outcome of the many outcomes available.” Most gamers look at the average odds and determine what they should attack with, and then maybe they add a tiny bit more. But averages are just that, averages. That means sometimes they will roll more and sometimes they will roll less. And guess what, the fewer the dice you roll the more likely an unlikely outcome will occur. By attacking with overwhelming odds, you still win even when the dice roll badly. If the defender has 3 units and you attack with enough firepower to get 6 hits on average then even when you roll badly you will probably still get 3 hits and win the battle quickly. If you attack with only enough firepower to get 3 hits then I promise you many a time you will only get 1 or 2 hits and cost yourself some casualties and that is not bad rolling, that is just the dice doing what dice do; they roll high, low and average.
3)High value units cost more. During any battle since you are probably attacking with only so many cannon fodder units if the defender gets more hits than you expected than you have increased the chances of losing a high value unit like an artillery, armor, fighter or bomber. The longer the battle lasts the more hits the defender will get and thus the more the battle is going to cost you in money.
SIDEBAR: Battle Dice are not your friend!
Overall: Any game has multiple battles in it. That means you can bet that some unlikely results are going to occur. Therefore, the goal is to minimize these results by using overwhelming odds to increase your battle percentages. I know 90% sounds like a lot however if your strategy to win the game includes 10 battles at 90% your overall chance of winning is just 34.86%. Strive to fight 95%+ battles anywhere you can, knowing you are still going to lose some every now and then.
All or Nothing: For battles that win or lose you the game you should always try to get as close as possible to a 99.99% result to negate bad dice. Two examples are the G1 attack on France and the UK1 attack on SZ96.
Against Players of equal caliber if the Germans fail to take France on G1 you might as well call it a game. This is such a disaster for the Axis that it is virtually impossible to come back from. So that battle should always be the highest percentage you can get so that you win. If you split your forces and take it down from 99.95% to 98% that means twice out of every 100 games you have already lost versus 1 out of every 2,000 games.
Against Players of equal caliber if on UK1 the UK fails to clear SZ96 then the Med is basically being handed to the Italians which makes life extremely difficult for the Allies. Bringing two units into this battle, depending on the units, has a 95% to 98% chance of success. Bringing 3 makes it 99.99%. Again, do you want to lose the game on Round 1 two to four times out of a hundred or one out of ten thousand?
If an attack is a game winning or losing move treat it as such.
Risky Attacks: I see plenty of people do risky attacks to gain an advantage. One example is the J1 attack on the ANZAC SZ62 fleet. The goal is to kill the ANZAC destroyer and transport and thus remove the capability of ANZAC to take Dutch New Guinea on A1. Let’s look at that battle:
• 40% of the time the Japanese destroyer dies. (-8)
• 40% of the time the ANZAC destroyer and transport dies (+15)
• 20% of the time both the ANZAC Destroyer and Japanese destroyer die (0)
• 13% of the time the Japanese destroyer kills the cruiser on the counter attack (+12)
• Total Average TUV = $4.3
So that looks like a pretty good battle. On average for an $8 investment I can get a $4.3 return. Dang good! So, the battle makes sense to conduct. Right? Maybe; it depends. The real question is do you need to win that battle to win the game? Are you the weaker Player, the stronger Player or are you both the same caliber of Player? If you are the weaker Player you may need to take more risks than your opponent. But if you are not then why make the attack? Let’s look at the battle from a different perspective. If you need to kill the transport to win the game than you have already lost the game 60% of the time. And if you can win without killing the transport why risk your overall game 40% of the time when you get nothing out of the attack? What we want to achieve is consistent winning. Not winning only when we get lucky dice; but due to our good play.
What this means is the weaker Player will and should, until they get better, make more risky attacks to try and gain an advantage since they are most likely going to lose anyway. The irony is that by making these risky attacks they are increasing the odds of losing most of their games for the benefit of winning a few games. Good Players should not make risky attacks. As they do not need to, and should be aware that their weaker opponents will make risky attacks, and should take that into account when providing battle opportunities that their weaker opponent will make attacks at odds that the stronger player would blanch at.
Remember the Gamer’s motto… Kill them quick!
5. Projection of Force and Mobility – Hit ‘em again and again and again!
Projection of Force is the ability to threaten more than one area with the same units. Mobility is the engine that drives that ability. An attacker that can smash his troops into 3 or 4 areas has a huge advantage over the defender as the defender must dedicate many more troops than the attacker is using to defend all his territories. A perfect example of this is a UK fleet in the Atlantic off Gibraltar (SZ91). The UK Fleet, with 4 transports, a cruiser and a battleship can deliver 4 infantry, 2 artillery and 2 armor with a bombardment (HP 8, OFP 16 + 7 Bombard) against Norway, Western Germany, Holland Belgium, Normandy, Southern France, Northern Italy and Southern Italy. 9 infantries in each location would provide a 56% chance of the Allies taking any one territory. Since there are 7 defending territories that is 63 units tied down defending against a mere 8.
Since this is not a reasonable defense a smart Axis Player would use his own Projection of Force in France to counter the UK landings by protecting just Western Germany and Southern Italy and using an infantry stack in France counter any UK landing force.
Main areas of the board that allow Projection of Force:
• German bombers in Western Germany
• Axis infantry in France
• Fighters and Tactical Bombers in Southern Italy
• Allied Fleet off Gibraltar
• Axis Fast Movers in Ukraine
• Chinese or Japanese Slow movers in Anwhe and Shensi
• Pacific Ocean = Philippines, FIC (with Naval Base), Malaya, Japan, Caroline Islands and Queensland
One important reminder regarding a force that projects power is that it can only project that power while it is alive. I have seen many a Player tie up a Japanese fleet due to the presence of a US/ANZAC fleet, only to see the Allied Player move the Allied fleet into position where the Japanese Player can finally destroy it. As long as the Allied Fleet lives then the Japanese Player must tie down more ships than the Allied Player is using to ensure they win any sea battle. Once the battle is over those ships are freed up to perform other duties. Any units projecting power that tie up a larger force to defend against it are already doing their job and do not need to actually engage the enemy.
6. One Big Battle versus a Big Battle and a Few Little Ones – Don’t waste a unit Pardner!
Eventually there is going to be a big battle that is most likely going to decide the game. As shown further below you want every possible unit in that big battle and to lose a unit for any purpose outside of that big battle is a waste of the unit unless it takes more units with it than it loses, or has extraordinary ramifications, such as protecting a vital monetary area, or slowing down the route of march. How many times have a heard someone say, “well it is only one unit”. Or “I want to make them pay for the territory.” The problem with this philosophy is the number of times your defending unit is going to fire in small battles versus the number of times it is going to fire in the big battle before it dies.
Using a single infantry in a small battle as a blocker. The defending unit fires once and hits 33% of the time. Over the course of three separate battles the defender has lost 3 units and the attacker has only lost 1 on average. That means in the big battle the defender is down 3 units that would probably have fired 4-5 times and the attacker lost just 1.
Okay let’s look at that big battle now that starts at 50-50:
97 German units (50 Inf, 15 Mech, 22 Art, 10 Arm; worth $358) and 94 Russian units (80 Inf, 2 Mech, 10 Art, 2 Arm worth $190):
Attacker wins 49.9%
Defender wins 49.9%
Both destroyed 0.2%
Now add back in that single German infantry unit, and those three Russian infantry:
Attacker wins 35.7%
Defender wins 64.1%
Both destroyed 0.2%
That is a 28% swing in results. So, were those three little battles worth giving up a 28% swing?
Let’s go back to that original battle again and add 1 German artillery to the mix. That unit is about a 1.1% increase in TUV for the German side and just one unit to a battle that already has 191 units in it and:
Attacker wins 57.9%
Defender wins 41.9%
Both destroyed 0.2%
That is a 16% swing in results by adding only one more German artillery.
Let’s go back to that original battle one last time and add 1 Russian infantry to the mix. That unit is about a 1.5% increase in TUV for the Russian side and:
Attacker wins 43.4%
Defender wins 56.5%
Both destroyed 0.1%
That is a 13% swing in results by adding only one more Russian infantry.
The point is be frugal with every single troop; don’t waste even one, it is amazing what a single unit can do. And the next time someone says “It is only one unit” say back “One unit is a lot!”
7. Consolidation of Defensive Strength – Determine the area of battle!
The attacker is the one that usually chooses where to fight a battle. The attacker will look for weak spots in the defender’s position and assault that location with overwhelming strength. The reason the attacker normally wins the battle is the attacker can usually bring more firepower and troops to a given area than the defender can defend with as the defender can not defend all areas equally strong due to a lack of troops. Thus, usually the attacker destroys a far higher value of troops than the attacker loses himself in any given battle. Over time this advantage is gigantic.
The key to a proper defense is Consolidation of Defensive Strength. Do not spread your troops around. Allowing your opponent to destroy your units in detail is a sure way to lose the game. It is usually wiser to allow your opponent to move into uncontested areas then to defend weakly everywhere. The goal is to have so much force in one key position that you force your opponent to a) not be able to capture that key position from you no matter what and b) to threaten a counterattack into any of the areas your opponent may move into that you left unopposed purposefully.
Thus, it is now the defender, and not the attacker, that is determining the areas that the attacker can attack. The defender denies the attacker the ability to assault their key defensive position and forces the attacker to choose from one of the purposefully weak or uncontested areas to attack. Then the defender can counterattack in force and destroy the attacker’s troops that are now within striking distance (if the attacker attacked in strength) or, more likely, the defender has forced the attacker to attack in limited strength to simply “trade” for the uncontested areas as the attacker does not have enough force to capture and hold the uncontested territory.
The defender is now forcing the attacker to lose as much money in troops as the defender loses money in troops to conduct battle. Therefore, the defender, by consolidating their units, has removed the main attacker’s advantage.
This tactic pretty much forces the attacker to only attack those unopposed areas determined by the defender ahead of time and then the defender recaptures them in turn. This trading back and forth of uncontested areas or dead zones is a key concept of playing Axis & Allies.
8. Dead Zones – A fundamental of the game!
Dead Zones, as defined by Don Rae’s essays, is an area that neither side has the strength to attack, capture and hold with no fear of counterattack by their opponent. The key to game victory regarding dead zones therefore is to force your opponent to spend more money fighting for these dead zones than you spend and thus their attrition of troops (aka money) is greater than yours and you will, assuming money collection rates are close, eventually win by overwhelming your opponent as he gradually is weakened by this burden of troop loss.
So, the key is to capture these dead zones using as limited a land force as possible backed by air power that can leave once the battle is over. Any unit(s) that is left behind can be assumed to be destroyed when the other side counterattacks. THE SIDE WITH THE GREATER AIR POWER IS AT A HUGE ADVANTAGE FIGHTING FOR DEAD ZONES! So, Germany has the advantage over Russia when it comes to dead zones and Japan has the advantage over China.
Here are the most likely scenarios you would encounter and the appropriate amount of firepower required to recapture the dead zone most of the time:
1 Inf = 2 Inf, Ftr = control 93% of the time
1 Inf = 2 Inf, 2 Ftr = control 98% of the time
1 Inf = 2 Inf, Ftr/Tac = control 99% of the time
2 Inf = 3 Inf, 2 Ftr = control 97% of the time
2 Inf = 3 Inf, Ftr/Tac = control 97% of the time
2 Inf = 3 Inf, 2 Ftr/Tac = control 98% of the time
For those playing Face to Face basically you need one more land unit and one more aircraft than there are defenders to ensure a 90+ chance of controlling the area once the battle is over.
SIDEBAR: The Strafe
A Strafe is where the attacker does not want to actually take an area due to either a) a possible counterattack that will destroy their remaining forces or b) they do not wish to have their attacking army vacate the area they are in due to trying to hold it for whatever reason. The attacker is in a position though to make a 1 or 2 round attack that will hopefully kill far more troops than they lose themselves before they retreat. In this way the attacker is accomplishing the basic money goal of killing a higher value of troops than they lose and yet they do not actually take the territory. Normally the attacker is killing infantry, artillery and tanks and just losing infantry or they are killing far more infantry than they lose. A wise Player will always be on the look out for this and try not to put themselves in a position where the attacker can do this to them.
9. Logistics - The Defender’s Friend!
An important concept to remember is that it is easier to defend than it is to attack. One reason for this is that the cost to defend with infantry is more efficient than the cost to attack with infantry/artillery or armor. But a more important reason is logistics. Logistics refers to the cost to purchase units and bring them to the front lines. As an attacker moves the battle line towards the defender’s capital their newly purchased troops take longer and longer to get there.
Germany is five spaces from Russia. Therefore, any infantry purchased and placed on Turn 2 will not arrive there ready to attack Russia until Turn 7. While any troops purchased by Russia on Turn 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are all available to defend Russia immediately. So, it is very hard for an attacker to take a capital until they can build up an overwhelming force. For this reason, the defender should retreat before an overpowering army instead of fighting it to the death as any retreating troops can join up with any reinforcements to present an even larger army to the attacker whereas the attacker only has the same troops he had before plus any mobile troops, such as mechanized infantry, armor and aircraft, that have joined his original army. Thus, the attacker must be collecting a far greater amount of money because his army consists of less cost-effective troops that have to pay for Mobility while the defender does not. Also, the defender is buying lots of cheap infantry and, say it again, we love infantry.
This is not true just for taking capitals but trying to control the Pacific. The US must move towards Japan with its most recent builds and the Japanese Player now has two full Turns to buy ships before the US Navy can attack it. Unless the US Navy started out with an overwhelming Fleet to attack Japan by the time they get there they will be facing very poor odds of sinking the Imperial Japanese Navy.
The important point to remember is as a defender never throw your troops away in defense from a larger army. Retreat and save those troops for when they join any newly purchased units they will prove their worth again.
Follow these Warfare Principles of play; keep in mind that the game is all about money and eventually you’re A-B+C formula will win you far more games than you will lose.
Global 1940 2nd Edition OOB - The Beginner’s Learning Guide
Let’s move from talking about general Warfare Principles to Global 1940 itself. Oh, by the way I am not going to be talking about gambits or odd play. What we want to achieve is consistent play to win as many games as possible. Gambits do not fall into that category because either a) they require the opponent to not have seen the gambit before or react poorly to it to be successful or b) have low overall odds of success. We want to win every time! Not some of the time. In addition, this general overarching discussion is regarding strategy, not tactics.
So, open the Global 1940 Board and what do we see? As usual the Axis have centralized position. The Axis have greater firepower to begin the game. The Axis have the initiative; they will be the ones to determine the overall battlegrounds of the game. The Allies have more territory and money initially. What this means is the Axis will be trying to win the game and the Allies will be doing their best to slow them down, then hopefully stop them, and then push them back for an ultimate Allied victory.
WINNING THE GAME:
There is no argument that the Axis has the advantage in Global 1940 2nd Edition OOB. This is due to two factors.
The Axis only need to win on one side of the board to win the game. If we want a balanced game where either faction wins half of the time then the Axis can only have one third of a chance of winning the game on either side of the board. NOTE: It is easier for the Axis to win on the Europe side of the board than on the Pacific side of the board.
The Axis have five scenarios that can lead to winning.
• Germany takes Moscow.
• Germany takes London.
• Italy gets big in the Mediterranean.
• Japan wins in the Pacific.
• The game develops into a long-term money game and the Axis prevail due to collecting the same or more money than the Allies.
For the Allies to win they must stop the Axis on both sides of the board by stopping all five of their scenarios. Just one is enough for the Axis to win but it takes all five to make the Allies happy.
The key for the Allies is to put more pressure on one side of the board to gain an advantage while stalling the other side of the board. This balancing act is easier said than done. As one of my gaming group members once said, “Axis and Allies is like a balloon; if you push too hard in one area it bulges in another.”
GERMANY GOES FOR MOSCOW
Germany starts with enough units on the board, and quickly gains enough money to buy additional units, that Germany can take down Moscow. Once Moscow falls the Germans push to Egypt and the game is over. Unfortunately, there is no way to stop the Germans from taking Moscow without giving the game to the Axis elsewhere. The key issues for the Allies are a) how long does it take and b) how much does it cost. Losing Moscow does not lose the Allies the game. Losing Moscow too cheaply or too quickly does as it makes the fall of Cairo inevitable. The Allied defense is fourfold. 1) Knowing it is a main target Russia builds and acts accordingly; buying tons of infantry and harboring every unit for the final Moscow battle. 2) Assistance in the form of UK units come to Moscow via the Middle East to delay the inevitable. 3) An Allied fleet reduces German reinforcements aimed for Moscow by attacking the Atlantic Wall. 4) The Allies prepare a defense of the Middle East and Egypt so that once Moscow falls the Axis still cannot win the game. This is the most difficult winning scenario the Allies face.
GERMANY GOES FOR LONDON
Personally, this is the one scenario I love to see the Axis try as the Allies. The reasons being are it is a) a lot easier for the Allies to come back from the fall of London than it is the fall of Moscow and b) unlike Moscow once the Allies see the Germans going for London the Germans have a limited window of Opportunity to take London. Also, it is easier to defend London than Moscow because the Germans need to build and protect their transport fleet to be able to move their ground units against London. The key for the Allies here is not to lose London on the cheap. It must cost the Germans a ton of money and units so even once it falls the Germans are in a weak position because the Bear of Russia is going to come knocking on the door. Surprisingly, once Russia gets into German territory they collect more money than Germany does. Ouch. As long as the Allies do not leave London weak this is not the scenario to worry about.
ITALY GETS THE MEDITERRANEAN
If Italy gains control of the Mediterranean then the Axis will be collecting too much money and will overpower the Allies. This is the easiest way for the Axis to win but luckily it is also the easiest scenario for the Allies to stop. Once UK blows up the Italian fleet in the Med, kills the Italian ground troops in Africa and convoy disrupts SZ97 the Italians are basically removed from the game.
JAPAN WINS IN THE PACIFIC
Though Japan is surrounded by four enemies and has far less income than the four combined Japan can become a monster if left unchecked. For Japan taking India and China is not that difficult. And, as before, the Allied strategy is forcing Japan to spend time and cash accomplishing those goals so that by the time they turn to go for Sydney or Hawaii they are now contained by a large US Fleet.
AXIS COLLECTS ENOUGH MONEY TO WIN LONG-TERM
The final scenario for the Axis comes about when the Allies have performed admirably and have stopped the previous four game winning scenarios. However, the Axis was still able to take enough territory to be close to or even with or, heaven forbid, ahead of the money the Allies are collecting. That is bad news for the Allies. Due to their centralized position and for the most part more efficient use of Land Units and Air Units versus Naval units the Axis do not need to be collecting the same or more than the Allies to win. The Allies need to be ahead by about $10 a Round. If that is the case they are winning a long-term money game and if not, they are losing.
ROLES OF THE POWERS
So, what does each Nation or Power have to do to be successful? What is their role in the game?
AXIS: Win the game by achieving one of their five scenarios…
GERMANY is the main antagonist on the Europe side of the board. It is up to them to win the game. As a land centric Power, with lots of money available to them in the east, typically their goal is to take Moscow and then drive for Egypt. They must defend their coastline from Allied Landings to maintain their income and to deprive the Allies of the opportunity of getting France back into the game. Or even worse losing Berlin.
JAPAN all by herself in the Pacific, will either try to win the game, if the US ignores it too much, or be a constant irritant forcing the US to spend monies in the Pacific that they desperately want to be spending in the Atlantic. While outnumberd Japan can knock out one or two of its weaker opponents and become sizable if the Allies are not careful.
ITALY is the weak sister of Germany. In fact, every true German wishes Italy was just more German territory to feed more income to German Factories and remove the dreaded possibility of Rome falling to the Allies. Normally Italy’s role is reduced to defending German and Italian territory and producing some limited can openers for the march to Moscow and Cairo. It is not unusual for Italy to be doing everything it can just not to be taken. Played correctly by the British Italy should be a non-factor in the game.
ALLIES: Win the game by pressuring one side of the board more than the other to gain an advantage on one side while stalling on the other side…
RUSSIA is the main target of the Axis. Thus, they need to play defensively unless the Germans go for Sealion. The longer Russia lasts, and the more money it collects and puts down in troops, gives the Allies time to gain advantages elsewhere on the board and be ready to repel the Germans once Moscow finally falls.
USA is the key to the game for the Allies. How and where the US spends their money is the difference maker. The US will collect more money than any other Allied Power and unlike every other Allied power its capital is safe from the Axis. Depending on Allied strategy the US will either a) go all out in the Atlantic for a few Turns then turn its full attention towards the Pacific, b) go 100% into the Pacific for many Turns to rout the Japanese and then turn towards Europe or c) have some balance between the two sides of the board.
CHINA is one of the minor Powers that has a lot of importance in the game. Its role is to kill Japanese ground troops. While it cannot stand against a concerted Japanese effort the more troops it kills the harder it is for Japan in the Pacific.
UK EUROPE has the toughest job in the game as it is the closest Power to Germany, is immediately at war with the Axis, and has the most critical initial missions. UK must protect its Capital, knock Italy out of the game, assist Russia in the defense of Moscow, distract Germany and protect the Middle East from Germany after Moscow falls or is turtled. Simple right? Job one, after defending London, is taking Italy out of the game by taking control of the Med, Middle East and Africa. Once that is accomplished it can move on to reinforcing Moscow and start landings on the Atlantic Wall. But Italy comes first! The benefit of playing UK is at least you know what you need to do.
UK PACIFIC Like China there is not a lot India can do to stay alive if Japan focuses on capturing it. India’s mission is to stay alive as long as possible and make any capture of Calcutta a Pyrrhic victory.
ANZAC is the other minor Power that plays a big role. ANZAC is the death by a thousand cuts for Japan. Making them trade the Money Islands and acting as US Fleet blockers. ANZAC’s job is to force Japan to spend money on them so the US can concentrate on getting a superior fleet versus Japan’s.
FRANCE is, well, ummm… does not really have a role in this game except to die on G1.
Remember as the Allies all you are trying to do is slow the Axis down, kill as many of their units as you can, so that when they come for the final push your money advantage overwhelms them.
GERMANY 1 (G1)
As I mentioned earlier it is important for the Allies to recognize what the Axis is doing to be able to counter it. Since Germany is the main antagonist here are some prime examples of G1 options:
• 100% ground unit buy for Germany. The Germans are going to go for Moscow on G6, G7 or G8.
• Major IC in Romania. The Germans are going for Moscow on G6.
• Carrier and two transports in SZ112 or SZ113. The Germans are going for Sealion.
• Submarine, destroyer and carrier in SZ112. The Germans may be going for Sealion though more likely they are building a fleet to contest the British and fight for the Med. This is more a long-term strategy than a short-term strategy.
TAKING YOUR TURN
Here are the four steps to consider when you prepare to take your Turn:
THE BID
As discussed, the Axis has the advantage in Global 1940 2nd Edition OOB; significantly. How much of a bid the Allies receive is up to each Player’s desire to be the Axis or the Allies. Whatever amount the bid is, it should be used to accomplish the Allied goals of slowing the Axis down and making life more difficult for the Axis and to assist the Allies in accomplishing their own goals. Bids should be used to:
I hope you learned something reading this paper. The goal was to highlight key points regarding how to play Global 1940 that will help you win more games.
Thanks @AndrewAAGamer. Very helpful.
@AndrewAAGamer said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):
3. The Value of Units – Buy the right unit for the right job!
Units have five main values; Hit Points (HP), Offensive Firepower (OFP), Defensive Firepower (DFP), Mobility and Special Attributes. The key to being efficient with your hard-earned money is buying and using the right type of unit for the job.Hit Points (HP) is the casualty a unit takes in combat. This has a definite value and is in some cases worth more than the combat value of the lower tier units for each individual category; Land, Air and Naval. As determined by AndrewAAGamer a Land unit HP is worth $2, an Air unit HP is worth $3 and a Naval unit HP is worth $4.
Offensive Firepower and Defensive Firepower is how many pips on a dice are rolled for a specific unit in combat. As determined by AndrewAAGamer, for Land units each pip is worth $0.5 per pip, for Air units it is $1 per pip and for Naval units it is also $1 per pip.
Mobility is the ability to have greater range than a standard unit of the same type which allows projection of force and more rapid deployment. For Land Units, the value is $1 for Mobility and for Air units it is $4. Naval units have no Mobility value as they all move the same.
Special Attributes increase the capability of units in certain circumstances.
• When adding combat value (artillery and tactical bombers)
• Strategic Bombing (strategic bombers)
• Bombardment (cruisers and battleships)
• Repairable (aircraft carriers and battleships)The chart below uses these five attributes to compare the actual cost of the unit to its purchasing cost. Now I am not saying the chart is exact in every detail however it is generally close enough that it does point out the important facts needed for our purposes:
- Single purpose units excel at their specific roles. Infantry is by far the best buy for Land defense and submarines give a Naval battle the biggest bang for their buck offensively followed closely by fighter/tactical bomber combos. Fighters are defensive kings at Sea while bombers are the Air queens offensively.
- Dual-purpose units are more expensive than single purpose units. Armor, destroyers, cruisers and battleships are all dual-purpose units. They attack as well as they defend and thus overall are not as good buys as single purpose units IF all you need is what a single purpose unit can provide.
- Mobility has a cost. However, as they say in football, “The best ability is availability” and having Mobility allows a unit to be able to participate in more battles than a non-mobile unit. A unit that is not able to participate in a needed battle is worthless.
- Units with Special Attributes only receive their “extra” special attributes value when they can use and maintain their special attribute during the game. Therefore, they are not as consistently cost effective with units that do not depend on their special attribute cost to be a good value.
- Offensive Firepower costs more than Defensive Firepower on Land as well as at Sea.
- Experienced Players rarely buy tactical bombers, cruisers and battleships and the chart shows why. Those are the three units in the game that cost MORE than their value. They are niche purchases. Be a Good Player. Don’t waste your money on these units except in specific circumstances.
A very good chart!
However, shouldn’t the mobility column for figs and tacs be 4 and not 0? Thus figs and tacs have a value cost of 14, right?
@AndrewAAGamer said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):
What this means is the weaker Player will and should, until they get better, make more risky attacks to try and gain an advantage since they are most likely going to lose anyway. The irony is that by making these risky attacks they are increasing the odds of losing most of their games for the benefit of winning a few games. Good Players should not make risky attacks. As they do not need to, and should be aware that their weaker opponents will make risky attacks, and should take that into account when providing battle opportunities that their weaker opponent will make attacks at odds that the stronger player would blanch at.
Just like in chess. :)
@trulpen said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):
However, shouldn’t the mobility column for figs and tacs be 4 and not 0? Thus figs and tacs have a value cost of 14, right?
So the chart does not spell it out however I am only comparing each category to itself. Land vs Land, Air vs Air and Naval vs Naval. That is why for Naval none of the units have a mobility cost since they all move the same. Air units cost more than Land units and their greater range is already built into that cost. So the Mobility for Air units on the chart only applies to the Bomber which flies farther than the fighter or tactical bomber. In addition, Air units are able to enter into a battle and then leave which means they are not subject to counter attack. That capability certainly has a value cost though it is hidden in the overall cost of the Air category. What I am trying to show is in each category which is the best unit for any particular function. Land units are always going to be more cost effective than Air units. Just because a units Value versus Cost may be reasonable does not mean it is still the right unit to buy for the job. Otherwise, we would just buy nothing but bombers and lose every time.
The chart certainly could be redone to have the Mobility and after combat movement inherent in Air units shown separately in comparison to Land and Naval units. In fact, the chart could be separated by Land and Sea battles since as we see a casualty on Land has a different cost than a casualty at Sea. I just found it easier to do it this way and still accomplish my purpose for unit cost comparison.
Thanks for the question!
@AndrewAAGamer very nice article…well worth a read!
@AndrewAAGamer Your unit value chart is an interesting look at “true value” versus “unit cost” in G40. If units were priced at the “true value” prices on your chart then 3 units would be cheaper (Tac. Bomber, Cruiser, and Battleship), 4 units would stay the same in price (Armor, Fighter, Destroyer, and Carrier), and 5 units would be more expensive (Infantry, Artillery, Mech. Inf., Strat. Bomber, and Submarine).
What would you think of playing a game of G40 where the units were priced at your “Value Cost” prices?
-Midnight_Reaper
Very nice summary and well thought out. This thread is already well addressing core principles, the next topics that I’m curious about would be the following:
Transports vs. facilities vs. air units. The combo of land units + transports + navy to protect them makes the whole very expensive to scale (except for Japan as you note).
Value of strategic and tactical bombing.
Efforts to deny / open national objectives
Joint ally strategy and tactics (how to coordinate unit buys by power/specialize)
@Midnight_Reaper said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):
What would you think of playing a game of G40 where the units were priced at your “Value Cost” prices?
Interesting idea. The only issue I have is the chart is for comparison purposes of what unit to buy. It is not necessarily what the actual cost of each unit should be. I say this only because of the Special Attribute portion. I wrestled with how to present this myself on the chart because the value of the Special Attribute is only applicable if it is usable. So an artillery is worth 4.5 if it is always paired with an infantry. However if it is not then it is only worth 4. The point of the chart was to show that buying a unit that was not dependent on its SA value to be a good buy was a better buy than buying a unit that was dependent on its SA value to be a good buy. If we want to determine real value/cost than I would think some percentage of SA would be used. Of course this makes for undesirable fractions.
The chart is probably clsoe enough for a fun game so I am good as soon as I can finish off one game. Then we can play.
@AndrewAAGamer said in [Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By
The chart is probably clsoe enough for a fun game so I am good as soon as I can finish off one game. Then we can play.
Oh, crud. I would go and have my typing write a check my butt can’t cash…
I will have to beg your forgiveness, as I do not currently have the time to play TripleA, what with being a dad and going to college at the same time right now (late bloomer, didn’t start college until I was in my 30s).
Perhaps some other time, kind sir.
-Midnight_Reaper
@AndrewAAGamer This is a really interesting analysis. Along these lines, I assume you oppose using russian infantry to picket/block the German advance towards Moscow? Based on your analysis it seems clear that it is wasteful, but how would you measure the value of time/turns? Perhaps via incoming British aircraft added by the turn saved? Great analysis!
@Saber25 said in Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer):
@AndrewAAGamer This is a really interesting analysis. Along these lines, I assume you oppose using russian infantry to picket/block the German advance towards Moscow? Based on your analysis it seems clear that it is wasteful, but how would you measure the value of time/turns? Perhaps via incoming British aircraft added by the turn saved? Great analysis!
Thank you for the question and kind comments. You are correct I oppose leaving single infantry to block the path to Moscow because it does not block the march at all. The German mass just steamrolls those individual blockers virtually for free. Now if you can garner enough forces to actually HOLD a territory a Turn or two before being forced back than I am all for that. The usual key area is Bryansk. The Allies, depending on how the Axis and Allies play it, do have a chance of holding Bryansk for at least a little bit and if so that is a good thing. At least if you are the Allied Player. :slightly_smiling_face:
