A little feedback for you. I think you tried to do too much on round 1. Your forces are very thin. Only an 82% chance to win France? You don’t need to capture Normandy or Southern France on round 1. The extra 2, 3 IPCs isn’t worth how many extra units you can lose because of the narrower advantage in all the locations. As an example, if you hit France with all of those units instead you lose on average 7 infantry. Instead your average outcome between those 3 battles with your setup losses 5 infantry, 2 mech, 3 artillery.
Also spreading those attacks leaves the British fleet in 110 alive, which means he can start building transports and attacking Normandy/Holland for a big boost in income and keeping a lot of resources facing West. Without a bid you should be absolutely murdering both British fleets with your air and navy.
G1 attack on Russia can be good, but you have to be very committed to it. Otherwise G2 is much better. It’s a swing of 10 IPCs from the NOs, so you want to be in position to block SZ 125 when you do attack. Failing to take Eastern Poland is something that can happen, but we also try to do the Yugoslavia “bump” attacking and retreating so you have that stack of infantry and artillery from GSG into Romania in 1 turn instead of 2. You want to push South.
You left Bulgaria for Italy. This isn’t always a bad move, but I do consider it a bad move when doing G1 Russia. You want those extra ground units to control the southern Russian front and push past Bryansk.
Looks like you let the AI control Italy, you should be playing both of them. Italy is incredibly useful to help Germany blitz on the Eastern front. Another reason to wait until G2 to attack is that you can get 2 tanks into position to can-open for Germany if Russia has a weak stack hidden behind a single infantry. Don’t give Italy Ukraine, even if Russia leaves it open. You want that free IC for Germany.
Generally top-League players don’t buy tanks. Mechs are so efficient that the extra attack power from tanks is overrated. You want mechs and air basically from round 2 if you are pushing Moscow hard.
That's 'cause a droid don't pull people's arms out of their sockets when they lose.
Also to your question about the strategic bombers, they serve two primary roles for Germany:
Strategic bombing of London is also useful, but early damage in Moscow before it gets stocked with Allied (UK typically) fighters can pay serious dividends.
Generally I feel Europe OOB needs an Allied bid, which is usually going to to go to the UK since they are the only power that start at war with the Axis. So handicapping them is harder, and Sealion is typically not an appealing trade-off against skilled opponents.
@Stucifer said in Units, Mechanics, etc.:
Also spreading those attacks leaves the British fleet in 110 alive
Hmmm… I don’t think it’s worth it to try and attack both fleets, though
I agree with most of what Stucifer said. Some additional thoughts (I’m no pro, but I’ve played this game 20-30 times):
Yeah, you defijnitely tried to do a lot. Generally speaking it’s not too bad of an idea to leave Southern France for Italy (especially if you’re going after Yugoslavia), and there’s a credible argument for leaving Normandy Bordeaux. Forgoing a G1 and a sea zone 91 attack (I find that too risky) frees up enough air and naval units to hit both fleets, even with a full Allied scramble (you might need to also sacrifice the sea zone 106 attack, but the transport won’t be able to do much in the first few turns while the British consolidate their naval position).
The “Yugoslavia ping-pong” where Greater Southern Germany units retreat to Romania through Yugoslavia is really important if you’re doing a G1, especially when you’re engaging in so many high-risk battles. I’d like to leave Yugoslavia for the Italians.
Italy seems to have been played okay. I think it really helped that the Brits weren’t very aggressive in the Mediterrean on the first turn (the Italians in East Africa should generally be considered low priority-if Egypt is well defended and you’re pumping tanks and mechanized infantry in Union of South Africa they’ve got nowhere to go).
Also, what on earth were you thinking with that sea zone 102 attack on G2? The submarines off Gibraltar could’ve joined the Italians in the Mediterrean and the one in 106 could’ve joined in the attack in 118. I don’t see the logic in that 2% attack.
I’d like to share a series of solo Europe 1940 games I did:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/41133/how-to-win-as-the-axis
Files 2024-8-21 and 2024-8-22 are Sealions gone wrong, demonstrating how Germany has to strike a really fine balance if they pursue this riskier strategy. Files 2024-8-25 and 2024-8-26 are Dark Skies gone wrong. 2024-8-28 is exactly how not to do a G2-moving too slowly, allowing the Soviets to be relieved by the British and Americans. In Europe 1940 (less so for Global 1940, mainly because the Axis have such a huge advantage), speed is absolutely essential to have any chance of victory.
2024-8-29 is the most informative. Partially adapting from Cow’s G1 opener, sending most of the ground units in range to hit Paris gave a 99.5% chance of victory, with little threat from Southern France or Normandy Bordeaux. While admmitedly I didn’t hit sea zone 110 (or do the Yugoslavia ping-pong, though it wasn’t that big of a deal since moving the Greater Southern Germany units to Slovakia Hungary enabled them to engage on the Eastern Front), I was able to destroy all the British transports in range, which is what really makes the British being able to keep a navy so devastating (and clearly hindered them in subsequent rounds). For some reason, I was able to chug along with mostly mechanized infantry, enabling me to move quick enough to gobble up the IPC-rich territories in the south of the Soviet Union and the Middle East before the British built up a menacing enough force with a semi-Middle Earth strategy to halt any German advance to Egypt via a land route. I’ll admit that the main thing that made this victory possible were the Americans not going for Rome and instead opting for targets along the Atlantic, preserving Italy at a critical point. I wrote a more detailed analysis of this game in the thread itself.
Hoped this (at least kinda) helped!
One thing I’m noticing with Germany is that the pathing seems to be such that you kind of want mechs for moving along the southern route in the USSR, but you can kinda maybe get away with standard infantry for heading north?
Specifically, it’s 2 spaces from Germany to Romania, Romania to Ukraine, and Ukraine to Volgograd (i.e. 3 turns, for mech. infantry). Whereas from Germany to Novgorod is 3 spaces (3 turns for regular infantry.)
In my 2nd game, I found myself bunching up in Eastern Poland a lot, before trying to break out in either direction.
2025-1-31-World-War-II-Europe-1940-2nd-Edition – 2nd Germany – G10.tsvg
Totally agree. Fast movers are especially important in the south because they’re expected to proceed into the Middle East as the Allies can usually hold the Italians off in the Mediterranean. Cairo is as many turns away from Berlin for mechanized infantry as Moscow is for regular infanty.
@Myygames said in Units, Mechanics, etc.:
Check out these strategy articles:
Probably worth mentioning at this point, that I did do a quick skim of the first few introductory posts in this thread.
It’s a lot easier to do in East & West, but what that game taught me is to never endanger any offensive units. For example, you should only really leave tanks on the front line if they add enough defense that whatever attack your opponent could put together won’t be enough to kill them. (Artillery I feel are kind of borderline-expendable; they cost the same as mechs and they don’t pack nearly the same punch as tanks, despite being just as vulnerable. I don’t go out of my way to waste them, but I am more likely to gamble with them.)
With a combination of units and can-opening tactics and such within USSR territories, you can do moves where you hit the back-line with mechs and aircraft and let the infantry and tanks hit the front line – because the first attack insulates them from being hit back. I think the ability to pair tactical bombers with fighters or tanks potentially gives the Germans some interesting options; in my 2nd game I shipped a tank up to Finland, which is a theatre I feel you’ll end up doing strafe attacks a lot. Sending a tac up there to assist seemed to give me a lot of flexibility.
I can definitely see the necessity of “fast-movers” for Germany – and if they had income numbers comparable to the US, it’d easily be tanks instead of mechs the majority of the time. I think the necessity of sea movement and transport capabilities means that the US is always going to cap out at 50% tanks; not to say that Germany doesn’t need a ton of infantry, but I could definitely see them going higher than that 50% threshold w/r/t fighting the USSR (if they had the income for it).
The problem I’ve run into in my 2 Germany games so far is that by about round 10, the Germans have nowhere near enough production/output to deal with a war on two fronts. I think Italy was reasonably well-played by my Ai sidekick in the 2nd game, but I still ended up with just a massive wave of US units on the western front, and not enough units to stop them – particularly because my offense was still almost entirely tied up in the east.
About the game attached:
I think you did a really great opener and your moves into the Soviet Union were probably what I would’ve done as well. Breaking out from Eastern Poland is what Cow’s G1 opener implies.
Anyhow, the AI basically handed you the game when they attacked the strict neutral.
Yeah, the tactical bomber-tank combo disproportionately benefits Germany.
I agree that it’s near-impossible for Germany to fight a war on 2 fronts once the US really gets into the war. In my view in your game you may have invaded the USSR too late (not sure whether that was your fault though, I didn’t look at the strength of the opposing sides, but from my experience Germany should be able to enter Soviet territory earlier than that). In Global at least most players plan for a Moscow capture of G7 or G8 I believe. Not sure whether that’s completely applicable to Europe, but that could be an explanation. I hope smarter players will respond to this question (I’m still looking for a more solid answer myself).
@AndrewAAGamer I know Europe 1940’s not your wheelhouse, but what advice do you have for Germany to capture Moscow by G7 or G8? Thank you!
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Units, Mechanics, etc.:
@AndrewAAGamer I know Europe 1940’s not your wheelhouse, but what advice do you have for Germany to capture Moscow by G7 or G8? Thank you!
No idea. Due to time constraints I played one face to face game of Europe 1940 about 8 years ago and it turned out we used the wrong National Objectives.
My experience lies with Global 1940.
