My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

Thanks for the confirmation!!!

I’m no veteran, but from my experience you can’t really focus on Sealion AND the Soviets.  Sealion OOB is really quite easy but then you’ve neglected the Soviets and turning your attention to that front while holding London can be difficult.  People have mentioned G4 attack on Soviets and had success but I’ve found with my own games that it’s difficult for me to take them out after waiting so long.  So that’s my suggestion, do one or the other, not both

@Frontovik:

@special:

@Frontovik:

So US is down for 4 rounds. afterwards, what territory should be their main goal? i used to assault normandy or south-france, because of the IC’s. Also thought of aiming at italians, who can break through egypt now. But then russians are hard pressed.
perhaps they should land together with british in norway?

the turn sequence of Alpha 3 is ideal for attacking with USA and reinforcing with UK INFs and FIGs

edit: for me Africa is first priority (UK IPC’s + securing a front and Egypt, a VC), when that is settled i prefer to aim at Norway (NO bonus for Germany and a relatively safe spot to land, AND of course a place where USA can build an IC)

by the time africa is decently secured, russia has fallen…
(atleast alpha 2)

That can happen, but even so, as long as Axis don’t capture either Cairo or London they haven’t won.

Also i said first priority, not only priority ;)

Of course Allies need to be turning the tide by now on the other side of the map.

The best thing to do right now is use the Alpha NOs, using NOs 1 and 5 for the US.

When I play test, I set up the board and try to find counters to an idea as I work though the turns, so no opponent. Obviously, that will not mean the idea works until I try it live. Its just to test the concept. If the concept is sound, I use it in a live face to face game and see how the other guy(s) respond.

This first game I focused on the subs for blockading. That part does not seem reasonable at this point. Its still interesting that it delayed the US transports and gave Germany a nice income, but I don’t think the axis will pull a win out of the bag. By the way, when I meant to blockade I would leave the surface fleet back in the face of a large air force and wait for additional subs, you could then counter attack a DD build with air and sea, taking the air units off so that the carriers can stay back. Even convoy raiding for 22 IPCs would be nice.

Next test, I want to build a G2 transport wave as well, this will force UK to keep with Infantry making Italy’s job easier, and give me the resources to secure S. America while the US is neutral, with enough, I hope to divert 3 towards West Africa again, as having the German land unit in Egypt is a nice thought. I realize UK is the same amount of IPCs as S. America, but I’m testing the concept of taking an area out of America’s way plus they have multiple factory sites if it seems possible to use them.

There are some early risks I discovered. The G2 move to Gibraltar in the first game put the German Fleet of CV,BB,CA,2FTR in range of a UK CA,3 FTR and TAC…a bold player might take that shot. I also had UK do a weak attack [CV+FTR+CA] on the Italian fleet, it worked [damaged CV with a CA] while leaving the Tac for London.

Turkey was a tight fight G3, as I only had 5 inf, 3 arm, 1 tac, 1 bomber in range…I ended with 1 inf, 3 arm and the 2 air. Losing 2 units in Greece could have made it 4 inf for the assault. Turkey missed a lot, I could see losing armor in the future as an outcome.

Other concerns are if Russia stages north and drives on Norway, Germany’s income would plummet. With many transports, I hope to discourage that option.

I had UK protect Quebec, but I’m curious about how many players would suspect a G3 three transports full landing on Quebec? The potential to send planes staged in Gibraltar to sz 101 has merit as building carriers in 106[Quebec] would allow them to land and enable a weak looking axis force to “surprise” the US navy round 4. The transports can then hit Venezuela, West Indies and/or Central America turn 4. [This may prove to be a great move for a failed Sea Lion as sinking a US fleet would delay the US a round or more.]

The South American concept seems crazy since the US can just build large amounts of land forces. However, the US must choose fleet or land, and typically will go fleet, meaning there is “some” time for early gains and possible factories. I’m trying to limit the investment to two German productions as I want turn 3 and 4 builds to prevent Russia from getting their foot in the door.

@Krupp:

Any word on whether there will be more than just infantry that pop up on these neutrals when they  are activated?

I think just infantry, what were you hoping for?

No.

Like other posters have said, they do give some flavor, but most of them just make the game try to follow the track of the actual war. Say for instance, the ‘Russian Winter’ NA for the Soviet Union. Needless to say when playing Germany, it left me in the cold.

Marines are also not a national advantage, several countries had marine/amphibious assault units. Or partisans, several countries resistanced and conducted sabotage operations, not just people in Soviet territories.

So yeah, adds flavor, but opens up a can of worms too.  :lol:

Meh, really, it simply depends on the Axis’ focus on any particular game.  It looks like Russia only gets a crappy +5 NO once it is at war with the Axis, so compared to pissing off the Americans, war with Russia (only) would be a much more palatable option for Japan.  18 land units, while it is quite a lot, would not be expected to be massed together right at the border with Japan, so they could be picked off a bunch at a time, and definitely doable if Japan gets a major industrial complex in Asia (which it probably will in most games).  Plus, Moscow it so far away that sending reinforcements east is probably not Stalin’s top priority, so Japan could hold onto the Russian IPCs for a long time, gaining back whatever the cost was in killing the units over 3-4 rounds.

Also, it is subterfuge to some extent; forcing the Soviets to respond to threats on their eastern front would pull some attention (and troops) away from the western front, which would help Germany and Italy pull off a successful Sea Lion AND Barbarossa in turn.  Kinda of like not letting your left hand knowing what the right hand is doing.  However, with a Sealion going into action on Round 3 or 4, Japan may be forced to focus entirely on eliminating India so that the UK is incapable of sending reinforcements anywhere else.

I’m wondering what Italy will be required to take in the Med to stop UK air from reaching England.  Definitely Gibraltar and Malta, and all of the African coast, excepting Egypt maybe.  Italy has its hands full.  Maybe it would be best for Germany to ditch Sealion and just go after the Med early and take what it can get?