Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023

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

@the_jetset:

In fact, it could even be argued that Germany should collect the IPCs for these Vichy French territories after capturing Paris.  … but that might be going a bridge too far.

While I agree with this in spirit, I do think it could be taken too far. You could have people that say it should be this way for all countries: Once the capital is captured, the capturing power now controls all the territories and units of the vanquished nation.
For one thing, this would eliminate any possibility of liberation and I think this game would end up being a sort of Deluxe Risk rather than Axis & Allies.
Imagine this scenario:  Germany goes after Russia and tries punching straight through to Moscow along the north route, thereby NOT taking Ukraine or Stalingrad.  Suppose Japan didn’t attack Russia at all in the far east.  Now suppose Russia was foolish and bought a battleship for the Caspian Sea instead of infantry so they didn’t have a proper defense in Moscow and Germany wins.  Now Germany controls territory all the way to the Pacific and Japan now has a buddy to their north instead of an enemy. Plus, Germany becomes instantly rich, almost doubling their income with all the Russian 2 point territories plus all the troops that were guarding those territories (not to mention Germany’s shiny new battleship in the Caspian Sea.).

I wonder if a crazy rule like this would make games longer or shorter?  Capital defense would probably be even heavier.

@AxisMan:

@Anzac:

You can buy the historical board gaming 1939 global map, from what ive heard/seen its huge!! Its 4 x 8!.

Is it the exact same as the 1940 map?

No, and it’s a more complexed variant.

Good question IKE.
That would be very true to the difficulty of playing allies: Giving up London or Egypt is the dilemma, what will the allies choose… I don’t know what’s best but I think both strategies can work.

Much depends on what happened UK1 and IT1 of course, so lets assume ‘Taranto’ happened (a rather standard move, especially with an allied bid). Without aid of the German luftwaffe (they will be massing against London), Italy cannot safely approach Egypt. Thats 1.

2: After Taranto and Germany pushing through for SL, London is very likely to fall but it is also very likely that it will be a pyrrhic victory for Germany. Russia will be a monster and the USA just needs to destroy the kriegsmarine.

If ‘Taranto’ did not happen UK1 I guess the situation does not change a lot if Uk2 still goes for it and stop Italy in the med… But in this case Uk2 also has the option to superdefend London, indeed possibly giving up Egypt in the long run (but only for a short amount of time if London survives).

I’ll not talk about the the possibility of the USA liberating London, as that also depends on what Japan is doing (and thus, how much investments the USA must make to prevent a pacific sudden death) but the USA should definately have enough ground and naval forces left to prevent Italy from breaking through.

@knp7765:

As Russia, you should definitely grab Norway. With the large US fleet there and London getting liberated, it’s very doubtful Germany will be putting any more boats in the water (…)

I agree completely. I want Norway out of the way first round after London is liberated, just to rid Germany of another 8 IPCs. If the Germans position themselves in Finland however, USA will take Norway instead. Otherwise Germany can enjoy those 8IPCs one more turn.

@knp7765:

(…)Do you plan to liberate Paris if US troops successfully land in Normandy or Holland? (…)

I usually wait to liberate Paris for the exact same reasons as you mentioned. It is a matter of being able to hold it or not. Trading it back and forth with Germany is often unacceptable (but not always), especially if the USA has to spend a lot in the Pacific (sometimes I am forced to invest near 100% in the Pacific with the USA from US7 and onwards because the Japs have taken Calcutta and are investing near 100% on also getting Hawai). For that reason I keep my men and TRS next to each other in Gibraltar, London, Normandy or wherever they are safe while being the most aggressive.

In this particular situation however, it remains to be seen. If taking Paris means the fall of Berlin in a series of falling dominoes then taking Paris it is!

Thanks for explanations IL.

axis advantage boardgame, just like the new 41 and 42.

Just be desperate, hope for the best.

we played a game the other week that you could move your capital when captured (not for victory conditions, just for building and production) to any territory you had an IC on, Major if you had it, or choice of minor otherwise.  While it certainly added a different aspect of allowing you to continue to build, it resulted in nations never being defeated.