Axis & Allies 1942 Game Board Size

@Bunnies:

I wonder whatever happened to this game.

Re:

So what makes you say it’s completely over?

If you’re trying to go KGF, and Germany controls/contests Africa on the fifth turn, and you’re asking for advice, it’s probably an uphill battle.  You would only be asking for advice if you were unsure that you could protect Moscow / crack Berlin, and with Germany fueled by African IPCs, and without a veteran’s perspective on how to run a tight logistic game with the Allies, I would guess probable loss for the Allies.  All the Axis need to do is pump out a bunch of tanks and run a bit of interference with Germany’s airforce, which as you mentioned was quite strong.

It sounds like Japan is screwing around (no industrial complexes by turn five), which means you may have a chance, but again, I lack context.

If US was building some Pacific fleet, and Japan went infantry with very light naval/air support (pumping IPCs into 1 destroyer, then subs and/or fighters to match the US threat) then the Allies really are in  trouble, because then probably Japan has some idea of what it’s doing.

If Japan was unopposed in the Pacific and built battleships and carriers, though, the Allies are probably going to win because Japan can’t just lay back and make Germany do all the work.  Same if Japan used its transports to screw with Alaska/Hawaii/Australia/etc. instead of establishing a fast hard unit core in Asia/India to help support Germany’s push against Caucasus.  You might see Japan doing both (i.e. hitting island targets plus hitting Asia/Africa) with five transports, but four transports on turn five with no industrial complexes built means SOMETHING weird is going on - like I said, either Japan was prepared to meet some unusual threat, or Japan was screwing around.

Yeah - what happened in the game?
I agree with Bunnies analysis - against a decent axis player, this game is probably over. But against novice players anything is possible, they may perform unfeasible or uncoordinated moves. In that case it is all about putting yourself in the position to exploit this. By this I mean armor for Russia, establish atlantic navy to threaten Germany, Western Europe and Eastern Europe.

@LMD:

Every game has gone to the Axis (about 14 games now), and every one has been a KGF strategy.

Do not play KGF.

We routinely go with the Norwegian Gambit (preserving the UK battleship) and have never failed.  Yes, we lose the R fighter on Germany R1, but one Russian fighter does not make the difference.

Do not play the Gambit. Maybe the Russian fighter combined with the lack of the BB as a target is more important than you account for.

This advice isn’t global, of course KGF and Norwegian Gambit are viable strategic and tactical options.

But if it doesn’t work for you, try something else.

R1 Attack on WRus and UKR. Move 6 INF into Bur, 2 INF to Yakut.

US1 build an AC, DD for Western US, placing Hawaii ftr and WUS ftr on the AC. Move Bomber to Alaska. This way you threaten SZ 60 with the fighters, SZ 61 with the bomber. If J2 doesn’t go for Bur, you can reinforce Bur with 2 fighters on US2 and maybe sink undefended transports in SZ61, landing in Bur.
Then go for the Solomons. Try to build to 2-3 transports (moving ground troups to the Solomons. ) and a few planes every now and then for the Pacific (over time, not necessarily in one round). Have a surprise tranny take an island or 2. Threaten Borneo, Phillipines and East Indies all in one go from the Solomons.
Use the US sub and the UK sub roam the islands, threatening transports and ACs.

The main goal is to threaten Japan and lure Japan into spending scarce money on expensive navy. If Japan ignores your moves, be more aggressive. Phillipines is a victory point, so are Shanghai and India.

I am not saying that this is a very great strategy. But it forces many decisions onto the Japanese player.

And if you have problems in the Atlantic, try building the AC, 2xDD on UK1 in SZ2, then be aware you might land the US ftr on the carrier on turn 1.

And I’ll have to say that I played about a dozen of games with Axis where my opponent played the double IC strategy, they ALL went the way I said in the previous post (except I usually don’t lose the islands, I’m quite good dealing with naval fights).

Oh yeah forgot about the printable maps! Thanks!

@GrizzlyMan:

It’s really important for the allies that US is in the game. Russia can’t survive long unless Germany is threatened by US/UK to its west, and Japan can have free reign in the Pacific without the US to quell its expansion

My oldest son was both US and Russia and when Russia fell so did his spirits, especially when my uncle, the UK player, was not able to do anything against Germany or Japan. I struck UK and Russia early and often and it was too much for either one to handle. Next time we play I am taking the Allies so I can see if they will try what I did with Germany. They will be in for a surprise since I know what to do with the US and UK to help Russia and defeat Germany.

USE mediafire.com

I would also have to agree on that one.  I would rather have space for more units as well.

With Germany, I will be attacking the USA atl fleet first turn with a submarine.  I will be positioning my air force to ensure that the allies can not land in Europe or Africa the first turn (easy to do this time, since i will only need 1bomber and 3fighters in range to wipe out any first turn joint allied fleet that decides to move to africa).
With USA and UK, I will be buying shit tons of Fleet Defense, which will delay my landings by 1 full turn.  Russia is going to be in a tight squeeze because of this.

Russia and Japan will be played pretty much the same, except that russia can count on any support through africa being 1 turn late.