Strategy Guide Global 1940

I had a few ideas on this too, since HBG and CCM 3D print various pieces:

light cruisers 2/3/2/10
heavy cruisers 4/3/2/14
light aircraft carriers: 1/2/2/12 one AC
tank destroyers: 3/2/2/5
med tank: 2/2/2/4
heavy tank: 4/3/2/8
self propelled artillery: 3/2/2/5 can blitz
medium bombers 3/1/4/10 can strat bomb

Feel free to add ideas, or comment / modify mine

Hi
I am playing Axis and Allies 1941 with some home rules and I have some questions about what strats I could use to gain an advantage over the Allies. I am playing Germany and Japan against the Allies. The home rules we have are that tanks can blitz through occupied territory. for instance attack an occupied territory then blitz and attack a new space right next to the one they just captured and attack the units inside that space. Please tell me your thoughts on this I know that it is really overpowered but we have one more, bombers can, instead of bombing, pick up one man and drop him in a territory as a paratrooper so you can capture those spaces with nobody on them. We also added bombardment by only battleships, hit on a 4 or less.

So first German turn I captured Moscow and surrounding territory, I did not think about the necessity of taking Anglo Egypt before I found this website so I did not do this and now India is backed up. England gained control over the Atlantic and holds my battleship and 2 subs in sea zone 5 they hold it with a Huge fleet which has a fully maned aircraft carrier and they took western Europe with one tank remaining I can take this back quickly though because I have 4 tanks and 4 inf available in Germany I just wanted to know what I should aim for and what are my goals to try and get. my income per turn is about 20.

If you have any questions you can ask. about the home rules one more I should mention is that transports instead of having no defense can escape. they role one dice depending on how many ships are in the fleet, so if there is 2 ships the transport roles and a 2 or less it escapes if 3 ships it roles 3 or less escapes etc… if more then 6 ships it automatically escapes you can decide if it escapes or not if you decide to escape it can only move one space if it can’t move anywhere to a empty space or where there is friendly units it can’t escape it cannot move into a enemy occupied territory.
again if you have any questions on the home rules just ask thank you for helping.

Hi Manstein,

Cool stuff. Thanks for sharing:+1:

I can text you pics of the map too if you need.
You could look at map Sat if u wanted to show and play allies with me. I got a Gib plan too that u kinda wanted to try.

@Charles:

If you want to have the full experience, also use this neutral expansion ruleset along with the new powers:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38615.msg%msg_id%

All playtests of this addition of 11 powers used these new neutral rules, and I definitely recommend you play these two house rules together.  It allows for fun things like South Africa invading Portuguese colonies, Bulgaria and Italy invading Turkey etc.

We are currently working on implementing the 20-power ruleset for other Global setups.  If you would like to play this add-on in a Pacific/Europe solo game, I can post the theater rulesets on request.

Charles De Gaulle, has your group worked on any other setups recently besides 20 powers in 1940?  I am formally putting in a request (or fan vote) for 1936 with with 20 powers.  Maybe some of the smaller countries that weren’t conquered by Germany yet could act as pro-allied neutrals.  I just think 20 powers would work well from an early starting point.  More variables to “rewrite” history to some extent.  Anyways thanks for your efforts.

@CWO:

I’m not sure I understand the concept of a Pearl Harbor attack involving no Japanese ships, since the whole operation revolved around the use of a Japanese carrier strike force to bring the attacking aircraft into range of Pearl Harbor.  Japanese aircraft in 1941 didn’t have the range to fly all the way to Hawaii from Japan and all the way back again.  The closest that Japan ever came to doing anything like that were one or two very small bombing raids carried out against Hawaii by (if I recall correctly) a couple of flying boats from Kwajalein Atoll.  These flying boats – Emilys, I think – were big and slow and clumsy, could hardly have done much damage, and would have had to fly unescorted since no Japanese fighters had the equivalent range.

As for the Doolittle Raid, it was carried out by B-25 Mitchell medium bombers, not by tactical bombers.  The rule section about these normally land-based planes being carrier-launched is correct (they used special training and techniques to launch from a flight deck), but the rule would have to be more precise than just saying that “The US player can launch 2 TB from 1 carrier” because it doesn’t restrict the location of the carrier and it doesn’t specify that the planes have to fly a one-way mission.  In the actual raid, Hornet had to get close enough for the planes to launch, hit their targets and continue to China.  The planes didn’t have the range to return to the carriers, and in any case could never have made a carrier landing; the techniques they used to launch from a carrier couldn’t work in reverse to land on one.

Also, the pearl harbor attack included Jaanese subs. It wasn’t a pure air attack.

I use WWII Russians and control markers for Bolsheviks. These are controlled by the CPs, but cannot attack outside original Russian areas. Some sort of Siberian railway track to represent the arrival of Allied (i.e. anti-Bolshevik) forces from the east.

Something else I’ve experimented with is the release of POWs; if the war with Russia ends, G & A get a number of infantry to represent the release of prisoners held in Russia. This can be extended to any power being knocked out of the war.

My main change is that collapse is based on national morale, based on casualties suffered & bombing raids on the capitals as well as losing battles and tt. Its fairly obvious that collapse based on income levels favours the CPs too much.

@knp7765:

I think the other nations would welcome such a development. “Oh, you have a bunch of paratroops and transport planes? Good! Now I’m going to invade you with my stack of tanks and mechs.”

Yes, this would echo the principle of unequal force ratios stated in the proverbial Law of the Sword, which says “The guy with the gun usually wins.” Â