Posts made by Afrikakorps

Will play Bright Skies again tomorrow, this remains a great take inspired by Dark Skies :)

Ik woon in Delft en sluit me graag aan bij volgende potten op 1-2 uur reizen

0636335317

This article was inspired by studies at defense academy on military strategy and consistent Axis and Allies victories. Many of it is also present in the excellent strategic reflection of AndrewAAGamer.

All warfare is based on 4 principles (and deception)

Principles of War

1. Know yourself
2. Know your enemy
3. Negate being dislocated
4. Dislocate your enemy

Dislocation means bringing the enemy out of balance, taking away it’s ability to resist, so that you subdue him to your will. Your enemy will always try to dislocate you at the same time as well. In this strategic masterclass we will delve in how to make sure you emerge victorious after every battle.

In this Strategic Masterclass we will delve into the three major strategic principles you should keep in mind when playing (and winning) your next game: Center of Gravity, Defense, Timing.

1. Center of Gravity

A center of gravity is that point that when broken, the rest of the body collapses. To dislocate an enemy, it is most effective to focus on protecting your center of gravity, and attacking his center of gravity. Clausewitz believes that the best center of gravity was to defeat the enemy army. Sun Tzu, whom I prefer, believes that the best center of gravity is to defeat the enemy strategy.

In the global geopolitical landscape, there are two crucial centers of gravity, one in Europe, one in the Pacific. In Europe the center of gravity is Western Russia, in the Pacific it is South East Asia. The control of these areas decide every game. Ignore them, and you will be defeated. Why is this the case?

Armies cost money
In order to wage war, armies must be amassed. In order to amass them, finances are needed. As Cicero said: “The sinews of war are infinite money.” Therefore, one must always consider it’s economy above all else. There are three ways to gain money: territory, capitals and national objectives. These three elements are the most important aspect of every game.

Strategies versus Tactics
Let us delve into the difference of strategy and tactics for a moment.

Strategy
Strategy is the allocation of resources (time, human & material resources) or concentration of power to achieve a goal, in our case: competitive income and highly effective armies due to buying good composition, so that military units can defeat armies and capture victory cities and win the game.

Tactics
Tactics are always based on confrontation, so limited to the battle. Military units against enemy military units, to defeat them and thus gain a strategic advantage. Western generals and populations at large like to focus on tactics, this is our expertise (like Clausewitz). They often suffer from strategic inertia. As tactics are not concerned about money or centers of gravity – you can gain 100 victories in 100 battles yet still lose the war (as United States did in Vietnam or many other wars). So most important in tactics is army composition in moment of confrontation.

Back to why Western Russia and South East Asia are the centers of gravity in Axis and Allies Global 1940. We have observed that to amass armies, money is crucial. Money can be gained from territories, capitals and national objectives. Capitals are usually well defended and thus need an extreme concentration of force – this is not easy to achieve. Much easier is to capture national objectives coupled with territories, often less well defended as the priority of the defender is the protection of its capital.

Point Swing within the Balance of Power
When territories with national objectives are captured we call this a Point Swing, it affects the Balance of Power. The Balance of Power is in favor of the Allies due to the enormous industry of the United States, and due to Allies control over vast amounts of territory. The goal of the Axis is the push the Balance of Power into their favor, the goal of the Allies is to keep or return the Balance of Power in their favor.

The regions in the board that have the most dramatic point swings are thus the centers of gravity. We can make a distinction of 3 centers of gravity: crucial, important, valuable.

Crucial – 60 IPC Point Swing
These regions decide the game. If the Axis neglect them, they lose. If they conquer them, they win. The vast and luxurious trade routes and cities in South East Asia adds +30 IPC to Japan while it negates -28 IPC to the Allies. This is the center of gravity in the Pacific. The productive agriculture and industry in Western Russia adds +30 IPC to Germany while it negates -25 IPC to the Allies. This is the center of gravity in Europe.

Important – 35 IPC Point Swing
These regions heavily tilt the Balance of Power in favor of the Axis. They are important, yet the game can be won even without these regions. These are the oil from the Middle East and Caucasus, the conquest of China and the trade in the Mediterranean Sea.

Valuable – 20 IPC Point Swing
When the Axis is able to conquer these areas they add value, so they are always good to keep in mind. But, they will not decide the game or be worth sacrificing units that could otherwise focus on the crucial center of gravity. These are the gold from Africa below the Saharan and iron ore from Scandinavia.

2. Defense trumps Offense

While the attacker has a powerful advantage over the defender of having the initiative to strike, when the defender increases it’s defense to such extent that the strikes of the attacker can not penetrate it, it will win. So always follow this rule: negate being dislocated. When the enemy is unable to dislocate you, you will gain 100 victories in 100 battles. As when you can not be defeated, you can more consistently defeat the enemy before he defeats you. It might seem so simple, but is so powerful. What does this mean?

Strategic defense
You must always protect your capital. It is your most important objective, if you want to win. Of course, this depends on the availability of the attacker. When he is out of reach, nothing has to be defended. When he is in reach, all must be done to repel the attacker. Ideally, you even deter the enemy to consider assaulting your capital, or do you something to compel the enemy to stop the assault on your capital. Both deterrence and compellence are strategies to coerce your enemy to do or not do something. Deterrence is preventing the enemy to do something. Compellence is stopping an already undertaken action. What does this look like in the game?

For the United Kingdom, always buy 6 infantry and 1 fighter in your first turn. In the Pacific, also focus on buying only infantry for India and Sydney in your first turns. Your focus is to deter the enemy from thinking it is possible to conquer your capital. Italy has the luxury of a powerful German protector and potential safe zone in the Mediterranean, yet must also always be aware of its capital.

The United States is so well defended that when defended strategically it cannot be captured. The best defended mainland area is Western Europe, it is the best region to defend. As a result, it is not strategic to capture countries in Western Europe when you are unable to hold it against German counter-attack. Germany can easily repel minor invasions with minimal cost. The only way to negate this German defense is a combo-attack of UK and USA on Denmark to conquer Berlin.

Japan is very easy to defend from an amphibious assault, you can easily amass 10 ground troops per turn. What is not easy to defend against a powerful American fleet is Sea Zone 6. So always make sure your fleet has the ability to protect or counter-strike SZ6. When not approached strategically, defending the Empire of Japan at large is also difficult. As the Pacific is so vast and you need to be at different far away locations, ensure you have optimized your internal logistical routes. My preference is to build a harbour on French Indo China so you create the Triangle between Japan, South East Asia and the Lower Pacific. The Allies will attack you from all sides so your priority is to weaken different fronts, to negate the different fronts to attack at the same time and to be ready to counter-attack lost ground. However, when you are able to make use of timing to weaken enemy fronts early on, establish a strong internal logical safe zone and continue to empower your fleet, it can be well defended.

Russia, as centre of gravity, is most likely under heavy attack every game. There are two philosophies to defend Russia, the vast retreat or the mobile counter-attack. I prefer the mobile counter-attack as I find it more historical to Zhukov’s doctrine and more effective in my games. In the vast retreat you aim to amass as many troops as possible to Moscow for the final battle, even the Siberians. In the mobile counter-attack you use mobility to greatly increase your options, as Japan can do with the harbour on French Indo China. This mobility is provided mainly by mechanized infantry instead of infantry and the perfect geographic locations in Russia to optimize this. As a rule, you never retreat the Siberians are this would make their offensive/defensive power disappear for the majority of the game – while it is so decisive in concert with the other Allies on the Pacific board.

Tactical defense
The same strategic principle applies to the tactical level, the battles of army against army. For this we use the best unit of the game: infantry. It is by far most cost effective in defence, but also offensive (as it defends the high value starting pieces from dying all game long). We could summarize their power in two words: mass and fodder. Then we delve into their best reinforcements: fighter, bomber, tanks.

Mass
In all cases of defense infantry will be the decisive factor of winning a game. The one with most infantry, coupled with just several upgrades such as AA guns and high value units will win the game. As a result it is imperative to always build infantry constantly. In the case of Germany and Russia, you want to upgrade them to mechanized infantry when fighting each other at the Western Russian front. This is because of German’s ability to blitz with Italian can-openers (using combo-attack to sneak through Russian territory). It is also because of Russia being able to defend multiple fronts on land and being able to counter-strike when the opportunity arises, as Japan is doing on sea. Besides infantry the most important units are artillery on land and submarines on sea, that greatly enhance your offensive power. I like the composition of 70% infantry for 30% artillery.

Fodder
Every player has starting high value units, while most lack mass amounts of infantry. Your goal should always be to keep all your high value land troops alive: tanks & airplanes. These are your most precious and prized possessions. Never throw them away without a great strategic advantage. This is also why you build (mechanized) infantry as player always. You will often observe that the player that builds most infantry consistently will usually win the game. It is also why it is so difficult for the United States to capture mainland territories, as it can only bring infantry to the frontlines through transports, 2 at once. The most important units to combine with fodder is the fighter, bomber or tank.

Fighter
By far the best defence unit, as a nation you want to have 3 to 5 at least. Due to scramble the ideal joint defensive unit. Aircraft carriers do not add the value on their own, they add value because they allow 2 fighters to join your fleet. When you have a minimum amount of fighters (3-5) you will experience how every mass will greatly enhance your ability to win battles.

Bomber
Why bomber, as it only defends at 1? The defence of the bomber is not its ability to defend which it very low, but it’s vast mobility that enables it so always return back to safety. It range makes it the most effective offensive unit on both land and sea. The ultimate joint operations (and thus flexible) unit is thus the bomber. Yet as defensive trumps offensive, and this using attack as the best defense, bombers are much more niche – often reserved to Germany, USA, UK or a rich Italy.

Tank
As aircraft cannot land in just conquered territories (besides the Dutch islands) they are very powerful in either defense or offense, but not when you are waging a conquest in Russia or China, always ready to counter-attack your now unprotected ground troops. In that case, you want to have elite ground troops moving up with your armies. However, there is nothing worse than 4 Russian infantry with Russian air force destroying your 6 German tanks. So even more than with airplanes, make sure you have enough fodder reinforcing your lines preventing your original tanks from ever dying. Russia is here of course the power that can benefit above all others from some early tank investments, Germany already has them.

In this light, there is another reason why combo-attacking is so powerful such as Italy-Germany or UK-USA. You can reinforce the airforce of your friend in the territory you just captured. So when Italy captures that crucial Russian territory in it’s turn, now Germany can land it’s airforce before Russia attacks, the same applies to USA-UK order.

What does this mean? Never buy cruisers, only in limited cases battleships and tactical bombers. Your fleet will need 1-2 destroyers against submarines, but your sea fodder should always be submarines.

As Germany and Japan it should be a principle to always buy 1 submarine every turn, combined with lots of infantry. As our goal is win the economic game, we can use these submarines effectively to negate national objectives, hunt unprotected high value fleets or convoy capitals.

3. Timing (particular for Axis)

The most valuable resource, above human or material resources, is time. Especially in a game like Axis and Allies when the Balance of Power is in the favour of the Allies when the Axis are inactive. The Axis greatest strength is their explosive power and initiative to project that power. The United Kingdom has this same strength in relation to Italy.

In the beginning, most Allies are still quite weak, while the Axis are quite strong. This difference will disseappear with every turn due to the Balance of Power. The only way to overcome this as attacker is to push the Balance of Power into their favour by 1. Point Swings through conquest 2. Favorable Battles and thus more costly losses at the side of the defender.

Japan
That is why Japan must always declare war in it’s first turn, as the United States are not yet ready to counter-attack, the UK battleship (20 IPC) is still vulnerable and UK pacific economy can be crippled before it was able to buy infantry (from 17 to 10). As the center of gravity is South East Asia, conquering this as soon as possible will greatly change the Balance of Power in the Pacific. By impoverishing UK pacific, it greatly empowers Japanese strength to focus in the seas on USA and on land on China. You use timing to attack a front before the other fronts are powerful enough to take advantage of your concentrated power somewhere else. When you are not aggressive as Japan, you will lose, as you did not use timing to prevent the Allies from being able to work in concert while UK is a powerhouse due to it’s wealth. Besides always making sure you are empowering your fleet with aircraft carriers to land your fighters on, you are building fodder to fight Russians/Chinese, assault capitals or defend Japan.

Germany
That is also why Germany must always focus on Russia, with G1 buy to be able to conquer London when not well defended (but this should never be possible with must-buy of 6 infantry and 1 fighter) such as failed scrambles or over-ambitious against Italy. An ideal first buy is thus 6 artillery + extra. You always try to optimize your further buys for a G5 capture of Moscow, so mechanized infantry, tanks or planes. The longer it wait’s the more powerful it’s enemies will be at both fronts. Like Japan, you want to prevent having to commit to two fronts at the same time. Like Japan, you use timing as your greatest ally to attack and defend at the correct moments. Like Japan, when Germany conquered it’s center of gravity (Western Russia) it will win the game.

United Kingdom
As the United Kingdom your main goal is to cripple Italian fleet. This is possible because at the beginning you have the explosive power and initiative to attack Italy while divided. Never waste this opportunity as when Italy get’s the opportunity to expand, it will greatly shift the Balance of Power. It must only be possible for Italy to grow after heavy German investment and focus in the Mediterranean (and thus not on the center of gravity in Western Russia).

Russia
One more notable country on timing is Russia. When Germany tries to attack you from several fronts such as Scandinavia, Northern Route, Southern Route, Black Sea or even Caucasus, he will divide it’s forces. There is very likely to be a moment, either due to bad luck in a battle, or careless movement, that an opportunity arises for you to strike, when your striking force has mobility 2 instead of 1 (hence the mechanized Russians). When not all German fronts are fully mechanized (as I found is often the case due to starting troops) they can only counter-attack with 1 move, while you have 2. So that gives you timing to relocate your mobile mass to where it is most needed. Even when the Germans respond by concentrating all their troops in 1 army, your mobility gives you the opportunity to misuse it and sever their logistics / invade their soft belly. I believe both Napoleon and Hitler failed not because the Russians followed the vast retreat, but the mobile counter-attack. Try it and you will forever love playing guerrilla Russia. My first buy of Russia is either artillery to power starting Infantry or when feeling aggressive 6 tanks. Then focus on building mechanized defensive army always ready to counter-attack the opportunity arises. Bonus tip for Russia; get Iraq, send 2 Infantry to UK transport in Persia to get the two Italian countries in Africa and two islands in front of Italy. The extra IPC can make a crucial difference. Patience is crucial but will pay off most of the time.

Conclusion
My experience is that when you apply these strategic principles in your battles of Axis and Allies 1940, you will emerge victorious. I even believe that when we start applying these principles to our military or even civil disobedience campaigns, we will start winning. As the nature of war has been constant since the beginning of time. Like all those thousands of years ago, the four elements are still as relevant today, as when Sun Tzu wrote the Art of War.

So to recap:

1. Know yourself
2. Know your enemy
3. Negate being dislocated
4. Dislocate your enemy

Strategic Principles

1. Center of Gravity
2. Defense trumps Offense
3. Timing

It worked, Axis victory in Pacific.
Calcutta fell J3 in J7 Hawaii was taken.

It is basically copy of Cow updated J1 from 2018, but nicer visual overview.

I like taking the battleship, I see it as one of strongest elements of J1. I am OK with UK fighting back there, this helps Italy in Africa where I aim to take Egypt I3 (even after Taranto) with help of Luftwaffe.

J1 : 3 transports, 1 inf

Philipinnes
• 1 fighter, 1 tactical (33) land in 35 carrier
• 1 inf 1 tank japan + transport
• 1 inf Okinawa, 1 art Manchuria, transport

S35
• 1 fighter (korea) land on 35 carier
• 1 tactical fighter (6) land on 35 carier
• 2 carrier, 2 bship (6)
• Destroyer, bship, sub (19)

S37
• Formasa fighter (land 43)
• 2 bombers (land kwangsi)
• Cruiser (s20)

Borneo
• 1 inf, 1 art (kiangsi)
• Transport (20)

S62
• 1 destroyer (33)

French Indo China
• 2 inf siam

Yunnan
• 3 inf 1 art
• 1 fighter 1 tactical kiangsu (land on kwangsi)

Kwangtung
• 1 inf – kiangsu
• 1 okinawa fighter (land on kwangsi)
• 1 tactical 2 fighter (6) (land on kwangsi)

Hunnan
• 1 inf kiangsi
• 2 fighter 2 tactical manchuria (land on kwangsi)

Chahar
• 2 inf 1 art jehol
• 1 mech inf manchuria

Anhwe
• 3 inf, 1 art shangtung

Non-combat

SZ43
• 1 tactical (japan) (2 if Formosa fighter died)
• 1 carrier (33)

Manchuria
• 4 inf korea

Jehol
• 6 inf, 1 aa gun Manchuria

Kiangsi
• 3 inf 1 art kiangsu

SZ 6
• Keep 1 sub, 2 dd, 1 cruiser, 2 fighters, 6 kamizake (defence of Japan)

In my next game I want to do an India push as effective as possible with JDOW1, with winning city Sydney. How would you do it?

General Hand Grenade made an excellent video about the strategy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxSfedTpnbI

Cool the Afrika Korps is still kicking ass!

Amazing this forum is still active, even cooler that there is still talk about the Afrika Korps strategy and even a Youtube video!

Here is the original idea back in 2016: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/28581/the-afrika-korps?_=1640243275057

I am playing again in 2 weeks with my father & brother, after a 1.5 year break. I will focus on Barbarossa as well, and likely use oysteila build orders. Maybe spend some more on Atlantic Wall when USA goes for KGF with my JDOW1 in G3/4.

Greetings, I missed this UK approach in the Allied Playbook (and only played it myself several years ago when I was the UK for 2-3 battles, as we only have 2 games a year) and do not see it in discussions or battle reports.

The basic philosophy behind this UK strategy to handle Italy is to ‘box it in’.

Instead of big decisive battles such as Taranto, where you both lose the Italian and UK fleet because the Axis can scramble their planes, you surround SZ95 + 97 while you bring as much UK fleet and airforce to the Med to be able to counter-attack. As soon as Italy attacks one of the ‘boxed’ sea zones, it get’s out of scramble range, and can be easily destroyed by the UK counter-attack.

You do this by always placing an allied ship in either:
SZ93 (French fleet)
SZ94 (UK cruiser)
SZ96 (UK carrier)
SZ99 (UK destroyer)

This makes the Italian transports useless, as they can never attack either Gibraltar or Egypt in one turn, so this gives you time to counter-attack. Bring your UK forces (fleet + airplanes) to the Med as soon as possible. Italy’s income too small to reinforce their fleet while unable to expand, while the UK can quickly muster even more overpowering forces.

Boxing the Italians is combined with Tobruk, as described in the playbook. You want to clear Africa as soon as possible to start being on the offensive. Ideally you clear Tobruk UK1, then Ethiopia (or wherever they moved to) in UK2.

What often happens, is that Italy is so happy to still have it’s fleet, it does not directly try to get out of ‘the box’ and unites it fleet with the illusion it can protect it. You still kill the Italian fleet in UK2, 3 or 4, but with much more overwhelming forces and Africa + the Med in firm control.

I believe this to be the strongest option of all UK options.

UK can reinforce the med with:
4 fighters, 1 tactical, 1 bomber, 3 destroyers

That can counter-attack in UK2.

It can further send a:
cruiser, destroyer and fighter to counter-attack in UK3

With JDOW1 this becomes even more easy with USA support.

I combine it with a transport in South Africa UK1, and possibly a minor factory in Egypt either UK1 or UK2 based on what Germany did (we consider Sea Lion very sub-optimal but the tradional 6 infantry + fighter remains a standard opening). Persia is also taken in UK1.

I think I conquered Rome with UK early in those games, as you have overwhelming fleet, airforce and troops with 5 transports in the Med in your UK2/3.

@Caesar-Seriona said in The Bright Skies above Russian Counter-Atttack/Chinese Guerrilla:

I’ve been trying to find offensive strategic moves against Axis Europe that wouldn’t hurt Moscow in short term. The only solution I can come up with is the hopes that Germany and Italy spread themselves too thin too soon. In other words, I hope the players have no idea what they are doing.

The problem with Bright and Dark skies shows one simple weakness, you don’t have an army and bombers can’t take land.

Why do you want USA/ANZAC to have either an army or take Axis land? What do the Allies overall benefit from them having an army/taking lands?

My whole philosophy is: play towards your strength, not your weaknesses.

Russia, China and UK excell in building land troops due to their location. Leave the land troop building to these powers.

Russia: use the geography to play torched earth strategy, you have the space and factories to produce a lot of cheap land troops. Don’t waste IPC on fleet, factories and lots of expensive stuff such as planes/tanks.

UK: you are one of the most interesting players in the whole game, as compared to everyone else, you can be anywhere, at any time. You can play with land troops, RAF and Royal Fleet. Capitals can be well defended while close to the action.

China: build lots of cheap infantry, a trade of 1 chinese for 1 japanese is a good deal. As you as you are not wiped out, you will survive and annoy Japan as long as possible.

ANZAC and USA are not based in Eurasia, therefore, it takes a lot of effort and IPC to get their land troops to the coast, and even more difficult to capture/hold mainland factories. Why try to do something Russia, China and UK do much better?

What Russia, China and UK are unable to do, is providing overwhelming airpower that hunt fleets, negate any safe landing spots for German / Japanese aircraft (bombers) and bomb factories. It is the purpose of both USA and ANZAC to lower the Axis income and logistics, so it becomes an equal match for the other allies.

In summary: the purpose of USA/ANZAC is not to fight the Axis, it is their purpose to damage and hamper the Axis to such extent, that it becomes an (un)equal fight for Russia, China and UK. For every IPC that the Axis lose due to actions of USA/ANZAC, is a big plus, and it is enough to secure victory. I’m not sure if I am able to bring this message accros, maybe I should say it this way.

Without USA/ANZAC hampering Axis, the Axis overpower the Eurasian Allies.
With USA/ANZAC leverage, the Axis become overpowered by the Eurasian Allies.

If you start realizing this, the Allies will experience the same enlightenment as the Axis once did.

@Caesar-Seriona said in The Bright Skies above Russian Counter-Atttack/Chinese Guerrilla:

USSR is the Anti-Hero.

But with the game at hand, USSR is forced into defensive infantry is because of how the Axis is placed. UK must sink as many Italian transports as it can because in terms of location, Italy has the easiest NO’s with all of them only being at most five territories away from Rome. The Japanese navy must face an equal enemy because it’s incredibly easy for it to contain its army on the water. China ins’t a death trap for Japan because Japan could in theory just place defense with Chinese cities and it wouldn’t hurt them in long term. China cannot stop Japan from invading India though I wish Chinese forces could go past Burma. Another issue too is that the reason why US forces target Italy first because it’s the easiest Axis nation to attack for it, it’s only two turns away or if Italy is doing great, US can hit it right out of the gates. Literally US can break an Italian NO in one move. Just begin Operation Torch.

The biggest problem with Bright Skies I have is that you are playing UK too loose with the Middle East. My experience has shown me that Middle Earth is almost always a must.

I agree with almost anything you say. You are likely right about the ME for UK, especially since Germany usually waits with it’s DOW. Next battle I will not want Iraq for Russia, just Somaliland + the Italian islands. This enables UK to play it’s strongest game.

Don’t you agree that when India defense is build optimally (mass so infantry), with maximum fighter inflow of Russia, ANZAC and USA, India can be stopped from Japan amphibious assault?

I do not think Japan can hold their cities when China is given all that IPC and space, as they become a monster very quickly.

Indeed, Operation Torch is gold. Destroy Italy and win the Europe game. A dead Italy means Europe falling down east, north and south for the Germans. Rich and powerful UK that can focus solely on hurting Germany (+ only a few USA transports to open up Denmark). This forces Germany to try help Italy, which is less resources on Russia = Russian victory.

@Caesar-Seriona said in The Bright Skies above Russian Counter-Atttack/Chinese Guerrilla:

The reason for the “out of date” strategic deployment of USSR is because Germany has 100% win over USSR.

Although I agree Germany against allied players focused on landings in Europe while the baltic fleet is still alive, with a stable and active can opening Italy, can 100% win over USSR.

I do not agree that when:

• Italy is the target of both USA initial troops + UK in the first turns (especially with JDOW1)
• USA uses its first rounds to buy bombers that kill the baltic fleet + start bombing Europe,
• Combined with amphibious assaults of an aggressive London with maximum IPC income (+5 bonus and Africa/ME in firm control),
• Russia has been building artillery followed by mechanized infantry + tanks

Germany can win over USSR without being overwhelmed in Europe. I think the all-changing crucial element to make this happen is the USA approach: Kill Italy First + bombers asap for the German fleet effectively making Scandinavia and it’s 10 IPC undefendable.

The other belief is that the allies can slow down Japan long enough without a lot of USA support when focused on China (with Russia as the main game maker instead of USA).

I short, it was NOT the United States of America, but Russia that was the Protagonist in the WWII. I believe the game is balanced to materialize this historical result. The Allies were supposed to be favoured for victory, not the Axis.

The most important thing the allies should achieve, is to let Germany spend less on Russia than it normally does, while Russia should be focused on gaining as much IPC as possible. When this is achieved, the Russian can hold, and then push back Germany.

Remember the greatest fear of German strategists: German’s central location between strong enemies, it can not win a two-sided war. I have a new battle this saturday, I will try to make pictures and write a battle report.

For the axis there has been a revolution in playstyle with the JDOW1 with a concentrated German push in Russia. Unfortunately, the concensus of Allied warfare seems to remain based on out-dated strategy, leading to the calls that the game is unbalanced, the allies need a bid, etc. Out-dated concepts are an infantry based Russia, invasion fleets of USA, UK focused on producing fighters for Russia, Siberian forces moving to Russia, and focus on containing Japan on sea instead of land.

I present to you the Bright Skies/Russian Counter-Attack doctrine reloaded.

Russian Doctrine: Counter-Attack
Instead of the defensive infantry mindset, Russia should always be able to counter-attack, or relocate fast to different positions. It has a lot of starting infantry, and with a defense perimeter around Novgorod and Bryansk, both reinforced by artillery stacks, you can start massing mechanized infantry with some tanks. Due to Russian geography, you can become a lot more effective and dangerous with the bulk of your forces mechanized. This also fits more with the historical Russian doctrine, which has developed around the concept of the counter-attack instead of defense.

Although the mechanized Russia thread and the Allied playbook focus on Gargantua’s approach of buying armor and mechanized infantry, I do not think this is the best approach. You have lots of infantry at the beginning, and will buy lots of mechanized infantry to build a mass of troops. What reinforces infantry best: artillery and air Support. Especially artillery will double the offensive capabilities, therefore I focus on building artillery in the first 2-3 turns, after which I switch to mechanized infantry with some tanks in the mix based on how Germany/Italy are doing.

The second rule of Russia is to never allow Germany to attack a big stack with combined forces of land and air troops. The Luftwaffe always makes sure Germany has superiority, so divide your forces in the force of an attack (stopping Italian can opener). For example, you have an equal land stack as Germany and he is about to attack Novgorod. Divide your forces in five smaller forces, so when he obliterates your 1/5 group with his complete army + luftwaffe, you can counter-attack with 4/5 of your forces with your aircraft (while he has not luftwaffe).

Focus on defending the northern route better than your southern rule, to lure the Germans to the south (as this takes more time and is more lucrative for Germany). This gives you also two options: retreat towards Moscow when German push is too strong, or ambush and destroy the Germans and start advancing on Europe/Scandinavia with UK/USA support.

Chinese Doctrine: Guerrilla Warfare
Guerrilla Warfare is about attacking where the enemy is weak, and not defending where the enemy is strong. Japan is an interesting enemy as it has even more overwhelming airforce than the Germans. Contrary to Germany, it is much harder for Japan to attack at all sides. It has to choose and commit, or perish due to stagnation. Whatever Japan chooses, the allies should be so aggressive that Japan loses ground in those 1-2 undefended areas.

One of the more fragile areas for Japan is China. When China remains isolated, it can be easily destroyed within four turns without too much investment. Because it also generates little extra income for Japan, Japan is much more interested in capturing more areas at the same time, such as Spice Islands, Hong Kong/Malaya/Philippines, or Sydney/India. This last fact really helps China, as it just has to achieve 1 thing: survive.

I found that the greatest support of China is it’s location, it can be easily supported by Siberians from the north, Russian armour and planes from the west, UK troops and planes from the south-west and ANZAC fighters from the south-east. Besides possible support from all sides, I really like the guerrilla rule of China that it can build anywhere, and has great attack possibilities with the Flying Tigers. A single turn of opened burma roads often spells doom for Japan in China, forcing him to abandon pacific victory due to difficult victory cities.

The philosophy should again to never think defensive, but offensive. Never let the plane or crucial troops be attacked to defend an area, rather make sure you are able to conquer that specific area again in your next turn. The only moment the allies should commit to the defense is if they overwhelmingly can stack Yunnan, to empower China and make it independent enough to go on the offense. I personally always perceive those 18 Siberian Russians to be ‘Chinese’, destined for the survival of China. From that perspective, it means that China starts with 29 infantry + 1 fighter (assuming Yunnan/Hunan was destroyed J1) against 33 initial land troops of Japan in China.

Why is China so extremely important for the allies? First of all, it defends Russia. This is the biggest advantage, as it enables Russia to focus 100% on Germany, who ideally also has to defend Europe from all sides that UK and USA are attacking. Secondly, it makes life for Japan hell on the mainland, as it needs to commit expensive and slow resources (factories/land troops) it can not invest in transports with troops for the important capital cities. Without the Chinese victory cities, Japan can not win on the Pacific against an focused allied front.

United States Doctrine: Board Control / Denying Axis Logistics
The reasoning behind this strategy is that logistics are the main problem of the USA, to get their economic superiority to a place where it can attack the Axis. Western Europe is very easy to defend for the Germans, so is Scandinavia as long as the Baltic Fleet lives. Yes it can be overpowered by the USA, but it takes the USA a lot of IPC to build a strong enough invasion force, time that is used by Axis to advance and win the game. The moment Scandinavia permanently falls to the Allies, might also be the moment the Germans take Moscow. Also by focusing on 1 Axis, it loses threat to the other Axis, that can go rampage. So how to solve these two fundamental problems of the USA: logistics and threat?

The answer is simple I think: Strategic Bombers. From airbases they can move 7 zones, which is simply amazing, They have the strongest attack value in the game and are relative cheap. Even better, they can bomb industrial complexes therefore hurting the Axis economies, which is crucial for them to maintain momentum. There is one particular target the Strategic Bombers excel against: fleet. While Japan has such a big fleet, it will still take many turns to build enough Bombers to take out its fleet, both Germany and Italy are no great sea-faring nations with only small effective fleets. Germany prefers to build up its luftwaffe instead of its fleet, as its fleet is useless against Russia. Therefore the logical focus of the USA should be to take out Germany’s fleet as soon as possible resulting in SGF (Stop Germany First).

Even before stopping Germany, the Axis have a much weaker partner, Italy. UK alone is already able to take out this medium Axis player when played aggressive, but the USA can finish them off without any investment. The USA have 3 initial transports and a relative strong fleet based for the Atlantic side. One transport will remain in the Pacific with several blockers to slow down Japan if they decide to attack the USA, but the rest will move to the Atlantic. In the Atlantic they get into the Med, kill any Italians left and then convoy it to death. So actually without any investment, the USA will use its initial forces to SIF (Stop Italy First). This should not be any problem or need much consideration.

The mission of this strategy is to kill the German Baltic Fleet as soon as possible, and to do this with Strategic Bombers. It can build 4 bombers every turn, more when in war. In USA4 it can attack the Baltic States with 8 bombers, 9 if the USA is at war in his second turn (and the minor complex becomes a major complex). Normally 8 Bombers should be enough to finish the small Baltic Fleet if the Germans have focused on Russia. As soon the Baltic Fleet is destroyed, the Allied have a big strategic advantage where both the UK and Russia will take advantage off.

A bit more about the destruction of the Baltic Fleet. The Baltic Fleet is crucial for the Germans to keep its Reich intact, but it is also very easy to defend, that is why the UK is normally not in the position to achieve that with traditional aircraft. Germany is also likely to want to keep its Baltic Fleet alive at all costs, and have two tools to achieve that. 1. investing in airbase in Germany, this is the best thing Germany can do and very cost effective taking in account it is likely to have enough fighters to scramble 6 of them in this case. There is nothing the USA can do except for building up its Bombers until it is strong enough. If Germany wants to rescue its Baltic Fleet the only thing it can do is 2. build up its fleet for more hits. This is great as all those ships are IPC that is not invested in artillery and tanks against Russia. So in any case you win, as you give Germany the choice between two bad options: 1. lose the Baltic Fleet or 2. build useless fleet.

The first thing USA does with it’s fleet, is to occupy the Med and uses it’s transports to force the Italians to turtle (and invest all their IPC in the defense instead of can opening). All those initial warships should be used to convoy Italy to death, forcing Germany to support Italy if it does not want to lose Southern Europe/the Balkans.

Other Allies
I play the USA/Russia/China combined with other allied player who plays UK/ANZAC/France so that is why this strategy is focused on those allies.

This fits best with an aggressive UK/ANZAC player who in the Europe map conquers Africa as soon as possible while keeping Egypt. It should be the UK who is doing amphibious assaults every turn in Northern Europe/Scandinavia from London, forcing Germany to commit forces to the defense that are thus not used on the offensive against Russia.

In pacific, it works closely with China and Russia in containing Japan or making Japan suffer from spreading out too thin or attacking one specific area.

I would like to end with this disclaimer from Gargantie: This works better in F2F scenario’s, as players are less likely to be able to unit-focus above 90%. (unlike online when they spend HOURS planning each turn)

As USA I will still buy 4 bombers, and mobilize as much airforce as possible (keep carrier full) on Wake Island + Midway. If Japan did not attack USA in J1, this gives you a striking force of:

4 bombers (you can only build 3 in western)
5 fighters

To attack SZ6 in USA2, all possible to land in Amur.

Russia will buy 3 fighters + 1 tank, able to stack Yunnan or counter-attack Germans / protect factories against bombardments. After initial investment, only mech + artillery, with some tanks. I want to keep the option open to attack Northwest Persia R2 and Iraq R3 if GDOW2. I intend to have 4 Russian units (minimum of 1 fast mover) in Trans-Jordan R5 (Egypt R4) where they meet up with 2-3 USA transports to bring them to: Italian Somaliland, Sardinia, Sicily while fast mover moves to Ethiopia for a +13 IPC bonus R5-6 onwards.

USA will buy bombers again in USA2, and move all bombers to Eastern United States, to kill German Baltic Fleet in USA4.

In my play, Russia serves China, and USA serves Russia. I often play games without USA building anything different from bombers and some ships (mostly subs).

I have the philosophy, that China, UK, Russia infantry need to fight the Axis, while the USA hunts fleet, bombs factories, and convoys sea zones. It works quite well so far.

With the increased focus in pushing Japan out of China with Russia, I am considering to change my approach for next battle, and focus fully on Japan in the first 3 turns. Still, I will not build a single ship.

My plan is to buy 3 rounds of bombers and place them in striking range of SZ6 of Western United States. This gives Japan a VERY BIG problem, as it will be defeated in mainlaind China, and it can not build any ships around Japan, completely destroying his logistics. The only way Japan can respond, is by building more ships so the USA bombers can not overpower the SZ6 fleet, this is a losing strategy, as Japan has to remain defensive all game, while the Southern Allies (UK/ANZAC) can launch their offensive together with Russia and China.

As the starting post of this idea is quite old (2017), I will soon rewrite the idea behind Bright Skies and post it there. Looking forward to the discussion, such as that excellent new USA logistics post!

I will be playing Russia, USA and China again in two weeks.

So far my three plays with this combo, using Bright Skies with the mechanized Russia able to swiftly relocate and counter-attack has been quite succesful.

This time I want to be a bit more extreme with Russia, sending it’s aircraft (3 fighters and 3 tactical in R2) and two mechanized teams to China, to defeat the Japan on the mainland as soon as possible. As USA main focus is building bombers, with a focus on Italy/Germany in the first 3 rounds, Japan can misuse this lack of USA threat and win at the Pacific by decentralizing it’s fleet on JDOW1.

As Japan, I always find the lack of land troops on China the most difficult factor, especially when facing an offensive Allied push from all sides. This inflow of Russian aircraft will likely seal the deal. Aircraft can also reinforce India or be back in Russia when needed.

Japan can either respond by India crush and ignoring China (great: mission accomplished) or investing a lot in factories and mainland troops, slowing down it’s expansion (great: mission accomplished).

Of course, greatest downside is the lack of aircraft and a first turn artillery buy in Russia against Germany. Against a late push G3-4 this is not a problem, as the fighters can be back on time. Against early German push (G1-G2) or Sea Lion this plan should be aborted as you want Russia to be fully offensive against Germans.

For those that are not familiar with the concept of Bright Skies + Mechanized Russia this is the underlying doctrine.

Bright Skies
It takes a lot of time, ships and IPC to make USA useful at a particular front. It would be wiser to not use USA for troops and ships (as troops can be build a lot cheaper by the mainland forces Russia, China and UK) but for bombers. With the first 2 turn buys of bombers, you send this stack to London to kill the German Baltic Fleet. This destroys Scandinavian logistics and make it possible for UK or Russia to capture Norway giving big headaches to the Germans. You also send your Pearl Harbour fleet to the Med as soon as possible, which combined with a Taranto strike will neutralize Italy very early.

Therefore, as USA you do not play to KJF or KGF, as this is not the task of the USA. Rather, you empower the mainland forces (Russia, China and UK) to become strong independent nations by hunting Axis fleet, denying their safe landing spots for aircraft, and bomb their factories. The mission of USA is to:

Stop Italy First (send it’s Hawaiian fleet to the med).
Stop Germany Second (destroy the Baltic fleet and bomb factories)
Stop Japan Third (hunt Japan fleet with bombers/subs)

Mechanized Russia
Instead of the defensive infantry mindset, Russia should always be able to counter-attack, or relocate fast to different positions. It has a lot of starting infantry, and with a defense perimeter around Novgorod and Bryansk, both reinforced by artillery stacks, you can start massing mechanized infantry with some tanks. Due to Russian geography, you can become a lot more effective and dangerous with the bulk of your forces mechanized. This also fits more with the historical Russian doctrine, which has developed around the concept of the counter-attack.

G1: 2 subs, 1 bomber
G2: 8 tanks, 2 mech, bombers
G3: 10 mech, bombers
G4 onwards: some infantry, artillery and bombers (Western Front defence)

Goal: Dark Skies, swarm the Med with Luftwaffe to help Italy, bring 20 fast movers to Russian front before G4 so they can be overpowered. Bomb Russian factories back to stone age.

Most targeted unit: UK ships.

J1: 2 transports, 1 mic in shantung
J2: 3 mech, 1 mic in kiangsu (FIC could be take by UK), 1 carrier
J3: 1 naval base FIC, 2 carriers, 4 fighters
J4 onwards: tanks/mechs 2 chinese MIC + carriers and air

Goal: Conquer China completely and keep it with 2 early factories and steady flow of reinforcements, then invade Russia to reinforce German push. Take the initiative by all out J1 incl. Pearl Harbour, splitting fleet in two groups, then go for either Sydney or India based on Allied play. Get money islands asap to get to same economic level as USA. Start pumping carriers from J2 onwards. Keep India and ANZAC as small as possible to isolate USA.

Most targeted unit: Chinese Infantry.

I1: tank and mech
I2: tanks
I3: transport, troops for Africa
I4: mic in Egypt, troops for Africa

Provide German with mechanized can opening army (first 2 buys), reinforcing the starting 2 mainland tanks. Survive in Africa while German airforce flies in to destroy the British, so they can start their offensive I2 or I3 when UK is weakened and can be defeated. After Germans gave them a kickstart in NO, focus on keeping Egypt and in best case scenario start pushing Middle East/Africa.

Most targeted: weak spots in Russian defence.

Overal Axis focus: Egypt and Yunnan, all other are less important.

Update on the game, which was the fastest and most convincing Axis win we had since playing Allies and Allies over last 6 years, Japan took Hawaii in J7 (India in J4).

I could not resist the experience of doing a Pearl Harbour so decided go for a more conservative slow but steady approach for Japan as I indeed became convinced J3 India + Pearl Harbour can easily be stopped by Allied play. I did take Shan State with 1 infantry to leave the option open, but UK retook it in UK1.

J1: 2 transports, 1 mic in shantung
J2: 3 mech, 1 mic in kiangsu (FIC could be take by UK), 1 carrier
J3: 1 naval base FIC, 2 carriers, 4 fighters
J4 onwards: tanks/mechs 2 chinese MIC + carriers and air

I did the all out J1 as I described in my plan of action. UK + ANZAC both very aggressive taking money islands, but I could therefore destroy their fleets in J2 and still take those islands. I send my transports to Caroline Islands J2 together with main fleet, pressuring ANZAC in defensive mode, with USA in pursuit. Then J3 I combined fleet at FIC (taking Malaya) and J4 I took India. All the time I had most of my air destroying China (Siberians in J2) and China was dead in J6.

Germany and Italy also very succesful. UK made a mistake with not doing Taranto and building factory in Egypt, I took Trans-Jordan I1 and Egypt in I2. It had taked Egypt was 1 tank left, then I send 3 german bombers to help defend it. UK could attack with 1 tactical, 2 fighters and 1 infantry. 2 Bombers hit and secure Egypt for the Axis! German started to reinforce it with 2 inf and air the turns after to hold it against UK attacks.

G1: 2 subs, 1 bomber
G2: 8 tanks, 2 mech, bombers
G3: 10 mech, bombers
G4 onwards: some infantry, artillery and bombers

Germany had a very miserable G1, most fleet attacks dying without succes. Also 110 was very painful, losing some air. I sticked to my plan of G3DOW, concentrated my troops and was able to take Moscow in G6 because of Russian defensive mindset in Ukraine + Leningrad, so I could bypass. In G7 I had stalingrad, moscow and egypt and would have take Leningrad in G8.

Italy had 25 IPC throughout the game. Isolated in Egypt but in firm control.

I was helped that both my allies played their nations for first time again since a long time, so had to figure out again how they worked. Also their teamwork could have been stronger, especially in pacific. I did make sure UK had no fleet throughout the game so it was difficult for USA to have can opening allies.