Everyone has made good points so far on this topic.  A couple questions for all who’ve responded:

Even if the US/UK is able to amass this large force by turn 4 or 5, Japan should be taking out Russia by then anyways right?

What is the Axis strategy then?  If Germany is essentially doomed from the get go should they just take a shot at Karelia?

Would a plausible strategy be to have Germany continually build airforce and/or ships to keep the seas clear?  As was said in an earlier posting of mine you can take out all the seaforce in the area without losing any planes (one fighter should be the worst that happens really).  Turn 1 you could buy 2 fighters and 2 inf, and save 2 ipc’s.  Now you should have 7 fighters and a bomber.  Second turn you should have 38 (you definitely gain 2 in Africa, usually 4) and you could buy 2 more fighters, 4 inf and save 2.  If you go with the plan of buying a carrier in the UK and placing the American fighters on it they will be taken out easily.  If you go with the plan of waiting for the UK’s 2nd turn to buy and then stocking the sea with 2 carriers and 4 planes, Germany gets another turn to buy.  So they go with 2 fighters and 4 inf again.  Germany will be able to attack the UK and US ships with 9 fighters and a bomber; certainly enough to take them down.  So let’s say with 2 trns, 2 carriers, 4 planes that the allies shoot down 6 fighters (that’s fair right)?  We’ll even say 7.  At the end of Germany’s turn they have 4 fighters (counting the two they purchased that turn) and a bomber and the UK and US have no ships.  If you land the fighters in Eastern Europe and stack most of your troops there Russia will still not be able to advance towrads Germany and will have to deal with Japan coming in the back door.  At this point the Axis are well in control of the game.

Thoughts?

That’s usually what I’d buy for UK on turn one too Jennifer (and I agree with the 8 infantry in Karelia too).  But let’s say the UK seas now contain one transport, one carrier and two fighters.  On Germany’s second turn I’m buying 8 infantry and one fighter (this is assuming I bought ten inf and saved 2 ipc’s on turn 1 and took over at least those two undefended territories in Africa whose names escape me), and then I’m attacking the sea force with all of the planes I have (also, there’s an outside chance you still have a battleship from the Gibraltar fight seeing as the only way to take that out is with the UK bomber, and even the sub that attacked the Eus trans if you’re playing with the submerge rules).  But let’s even assume those ships aren’t there; 5 fighters and a bomber attack the UK seas.  Let’s say Germany loses 4 fighters (it’s fair to say that Germany hits with at least two of the fighters and the bomber on the first attack, then we’ll assume the carrier and both fighters hit.  Then the second turn we’ll give the remaining fighter for the UK another hit).  Now that seaforce is gone, there are no more US fighters to put on a newly purchases UK carrier and Germany has its bomber and 2 fighters (including the one that was purchased).  Non combat: Push your ten inf in Germany to Eeur (I think that’s the one next to Germany) along with your fighter.  The territory is still strong enough to withstand any kind of Russian attack and now the UK seas are barren.  It will take the UK and US at least two more turns to begin to make an impact in Germany.  By then Japan is already controlling most of Asia.

If you think I’m oversimplifying Jennifer tell me, but I feel like that makes sense.

Darth: I’m very intrigued by your plan.  I’d never considered saving all the UK’s IPC’s for turn two.  I’ll have to put some more thought into a counter.  I guess the first thing I’d say is that by that time Japan should be in control of most of Asia.  I’ll have to go through the game and see if it’s possible for the Japanese airforce to make it’s way over to help hold off a large UK seaforce.

Thanks for the detailed response Darth.  I’d like to review a few of the points you made.

The first attacks I’d make with Germany are as follows: Eus transport with the sub, Ecan trasport with your bomber, the Gibraltar battleship with the Seur battleship and transport, the UK sub near the Suez with a fighter, the ships in the UK waters with your sub, transport and remaining fighters (I believe there are 4, although you could send 3 and use one of the other fighters elsewhere).  I tested this on the cd-rom version 10 times and the results were generally the same: Eus and Ecan transports were taken out with no problem, the Suez sub is usually done (if you play with the submerge rule sometimes it can get away, but no big deal), the battleship in Gibraltar is taken out at the expense of the Seur transport, and in the UK waters you should be able to take out the Russian sub and transport as well as the UK battleship and transport with only the loss of your ships.  So after all of these attacks you should most likely have taken out all of the sea force in the area, including the Eus and Ecan transports, without having lost any of your airforce.  With that being the case you have a great chance at holding off any major sea action from the US or UK long enough for Japan to be right at the Russian border.

Also, if Russia buys 3 arm 3 inf and has 15 inf, 6 arm and 2 fighters, Germany’s purchase of 10 infantry on its first turn and 12 inf on its second can easily hold off Russia for a while.

Bashir: I’m curious; why 2 trans 3 inf instead of a complex?  Wouldn’t you be better suited to have tanks being produced in Asia by turn 2?

I feel like a Russia-Japan non aggression pact would make it too easy for Germany to be taken down.  The real battle of the game is whether or not Japan gets to Russia before everyone else gets to Germany.

Playing without Russia restricted I could see that being helpful in balancing the game.  What I’m saying, however, is that if you play Russia restricted I find the game to be very even.  I just don’t understand why so many seem to think the Allies will almost always win.  (Maybe I’m just reading the wrong posts, but I feel that to be the general belief of most on the board).

First things first, hello everyone!  I’m new to the board but have been playing the game since I was 12 (I’m 24 now).

The general consesus seems to be that the Allies have a vast advantage over the Axis and that even with special rules in play to help, the Axis still have little chance to win if the all three Allies concentrate their efforts on Germany .  I just don’t see it.  If Germany can hold on against Russia and keep the seas relatively clear until Japan makes its way into Russia the Axis can consistently be successful.

Let me preface by saying we always play Russia restricted (without that rule I agree that the Allies are unstoppable).

I don’t want to go on a diatribe here so I’ll be brief with most of the first round turns; all of the Allies moves are done with the understanding of a concentrated attack on Germany .

Russia - 8 infantry (place on Karelia), reinforce Karelia with units from Russia, move your ships to the UK waters, converge the eastern troops into one spot to try and hold off Japan as long as possible.

Germany - 10 infantry (on Germany) save 2 ipc’s, use your ships and planes to take out all the allied ships in the area, basic Africa attacks, back up your tanks from Ukraine SSR to Eastern Europe so you don’t lose them to a Russian attack next turn, move as many infantry and tanks as possible into Eastern Europe.

UK - (assuming all UK ships were destroyed) Transport and carrier save 4 ipc’s, use planes to take out any remaining German ships, bombing raid germany if you feel like it, use remaining (if any) units in Africa to reclaim land, land fighters in Karelia (including the India fighter), place ships.

Japan - This is the big one.  Complex and 3 infantry (complex in Manchuria), clear out US ships in Hawaii with 2 battleships, sub, carrier and fighter, attack Sinkiang with the infantry from Kwangtung, one infantry from Indo-China and a bunch of planes, land fighters in Manchuria, transport infantry from Japan and Phillipines to Manchuria.

USA - 3 transports 4 infantry, not much to do (transport in Eastern US should be gone), you can use the battleship, transport and a bomber to attack remaining Japanese fleet in Hawaii if you want (I’d only do this if Japan doesn’t have too much left), land the us fighters on the carrier in the UK waters, maybe push the China infantry towards Russia.

So after all of this the Russia isn’t anywhere close to realistically attacking, Germany can fend off more of the surrounding seaforce (in fact, if you landed your bomber in Western Europe you can attack those three transports the US bought).  And even if attacking the ships costs you your airforce you’d still delay them another turn.  You can replace fighters while still providing infantry for defense against a Russian attack.  If Japan plays effectively they should be in control of most of the Russian territories and knocking on the door of the capital within 3 turns which completely diverts Russia’s attention.

So I ask, how is it that this game is THAT in favor of the allies?  I welcome friendly debate.

*Side note    Not to be presumptious, but most message boards have people whose sole purpose in life is to troll and leave inflammatory messages.  I’m not interested in fighting over the internet.  Please, friendly debate only.