New Axis strategy….has not failed yet....

@Krieghund thanks again. Pretty sure they are going J4 and sealion. Hold on!

Thanks for the tip.
That seems to work better in live games as the flow of the game when PBEM would suffer if a lot of battles should be checked for any low luck desire by the opponent before proceeding.
But an agreement of some sort of medium luck could work even with PBEM
Best regards
MrCunego

We had a game where Axis totally dominated, I mean, allied pieces were basically off the game board, put away, done. We called it day, left the game as it was, one of the players came back over the next day, and it was Germany/Italy VS Japan, where within 5 hours, Japan ruled the world :)

We only did something like that once, but was a cool variant. I don’t think I would like to start that way, but continuing a war after its over by a new declaration or war was a nice touch.

Agree with a lot of what Anonymous has to say.

Let me reiterate: I’m saying the game is 60/40 at most. The only reason I give the Axis an edge is they have more room for error.  For example, a disastrous G1 roll on the British ships doesn’t necessarily spell game over for Germany.  On the other hand, an early game disastrous roll for the Allies (i.e. a Taranto raid that goes horribly wrong) probably spells doom for the Allies.  If the rolling is even early on I’d be inclined to call it an even split.

Well, the UK will slow down Italy, but with no builds/reinforcements from elsewhere, Italy will overwhelm them eventually and without US intervention it’ll go quickly to a 40-50 IPC Italy.

@TheWarNoob:

So I get the overall concept of what I am supposed to do, but what about specific unit strategies. What I like to do is:

G1 is buys 3 subs and a minor IC for Romania, and then move as many units as possible towards the Russia front, primarily in the south.

After that I try to dedicate at least 47 IPCs each turn to Russia, in the form of 5 infantry and 5 artillery to be placed in Germany, and then 3 artillery or infantry in Romania. What ever I have left I try to use to defend the west.

Once I take the factories in Ukraine and Novgorod, I build 3 tanks there every turn. I don’t ever bring Italians in Russia unless they do well in Africa and can come through Iraq.

Is this a sound strategy, or do I need to change it somehow? Any critique is very much appreciated.

With the new convoy disruption rules, it might be wise to purchase an aircraft carrier instead of submarines. Still buy the factory, but station fighters on the AC and move into seazone 109. This will be more effective, especially if you keep the battleship and cruiser alive.

Thoughts: If the US conquer Caroline Island, they can’t land with planes on it. Perhaps they will be supported by British / Anzac ships. But the whole Japanese fleet can attack them in Sz33. And note: Some of the planes from Kiangsi can reach Sz33 and land on AC, because the planes from Sz35 can land in Palau Island or Marianas. If they move to Sz6, please. The Japanese whole fleet with ALL of their planes will destroy them at J4!

Just wanted to point out an error in logic in this step.  Primarily, the United States of America does not need to land planes on the Carolines, Australia has 3 fighters and I highly recommend using those planes.  That way you instantly get 3 scrambles if you are ever attacked.

Saving money can be wise but for Italy, I don’t buy it since Italy is forced into a reaction based plan rather than true offensive since you have to see what UK does to the Italian navy before anything comes into play.

Italy always ends up doing one of three things: 1. Get aggressive and go after Egypt. 2. Can open for Germany. 3. Play defense exclusively to buy time for Germany to get to Moscow.

Anything else I’ve seen usually ends up with Rome going to US.