THE 10 COMMANDMENTS (and then some…) OF AXIS AND ALLIES GLOBAL 1940

@SuperbattleshipYamato
It´s a video over a UK opening but not the opening i use nowadays

https://youtu.be/htJEztSxmo8?feature=shared

@panther Oh, sorry I misunderstood you. It was just my error. I didn’t know about or see that category. Again, I’m sorry.

@squirecam @argothair @Arthur-Bomber-Harris

Howdy friends, been a while.

The OP seems to finally have found the unlock–there is indeed a way for the allies to win! Fancy that…it only took us a decade.

Those, including myself, who argue that the game is imbalanced can attempt to find innumerable workarounds (being forced to play both teams, bidding, reverse bidding, modding etc.) A static and unchanging game with a fixed setup will always have critical paths and good better best moves at each juncture.

J1JDOW is a good move. It leaves Japan weaker against the USA though, and allows the early usa cross that stops the gibraltar block.

In BBR, there is no reason at all IMO to declare war early because it gives the allies bonuses–so tweaking other aspects of the game will affect which strategy is optimal and when it is optimal.

At this point, I think the G40 META is to wait for war to keep the USA contained. That changes because our discussions and opinions keep changing. That’s why we keep working on them.

G42 has no diplomacy, and while the diplomacy was novel and rich when it was introduced, I would favor removing it from all 1 day formats (mods and tournments). Its too easy to game conditions that place articfical limits on the allies movements, the allies are already weaker and more constrained in the early/short game, and it makes the game much slower as you spend 3 hours buidling up and then 3 hours fighting. I’d favor just dumping it and reducing USA income or making its NO easier to interfere with.

G42 is a timed game, I will likely see you all in person at Gencon or another travel tournament later this year. It does require that you build ships with Germany to complete the opener. BBR uses team time and chess clocks, but its not necessary in G42Gencon because those of us who play that tourney are pretty focused on the game and come with a full game plan and contingencies in mind.

As far as ABHs point–I don’t like computer aids. They are an unfair crutch. However, our in-the-head or thumbnail glance odds calculations are often totally incorrect and as intuitions, must be taken as such. I do not rely on either calculators OR my intuitions.

@rommel13579
I also don’t use my mechs to attack.

Thank you very much Young. I’ll follow your advice. Would you recommend using your home rules (national objectives and R&D) also to complete newbies?

With a J1DOW and Japan taking Calcutta meaning to swing back and take Hawaii as well ~J8, the allies can follow 1 of 2 basic strategies in Europe:

USA invests heavily in Europe, opening a second front in Germany’s backyard. This forces the UK to go heavy into the ME with 2 ICs in Egypt/Iraq/Persia (3 ICs is perhaps no unnecessary luxury in this scenario). This is because Calcutta needs to be taken back once Japan grabs Hawaii. A little bit from what comes out of those ICs can maybe get into Moscow as well to aid Russia in keeping it. The UK will have only minor bits of IPCs left to assist the USA in Western Europe (~10/turn, TRS as best buy).

USA invests only mildly in Europe, opening a second front in Germany’s backyard with massive UK aid (not such heavy UK presence in the ME as above). Typically USA serves only as a can-opening threat for UK-follow up. Example: USA takes Norway + Denmark, UK takes Berlin (If Germany ignores the allies and keeps throwing everything at Russia).

Whatever strategy is followed, the Wallies must somehow make sure their threat is in place G5, so that Germany will loose either WG, Rome or Berlin if it builds all aircraft for a G6 assault on Moscow (depending how many investments the USA made and thus, how many the UK was able to assist).

Typical forces USA can expect in Europe with heavy investments: 2DD, 2CV, 5FTR, 1TAC, ~4STR and 2TRS per turn (fully loaded). Early TRS can ofc be filled with Brazilians and other starting units. Once Normany and SF are taken (and/or WG), USA also produces from those factories. US6 should see 27US and 8UK land units and 9 USAF in or approaching Western Europe. A bit too much for Germany/Italy if they focused everything on Russia all the way into G5 and only start building troops against the wallies G6 (10 in Berling and WG each can be overrun -one of them if not both), so if this doesn’t arrest German flow of reinforcements into Russia I don’t know what does…

Investing ‘mildly’ still sees the USA with 2DD, 2CV, 3FTR, 1TAC, 3STR, 6TRS fully loaded.
Because the USA should be able to keep Japan out of Hawaii/Sydney with the extra IPCs put into the Pacific, the UK can put more effort in Western Europe at the cost of the ME, starting a war of attrition with Germany. The few troops the USA has should not be ‘kamikazed’ but used as a can-opening threat (Berlin, see above) and to capture areas Germany cannot recapture (Norway, for example).

On a sidenote: a couple of RAF-FTR really enhances Russian defenses in Moscow. The more ships/early bombers Germany builds, the less RAF the UK needs to send. With Max German land production (i.e. no ships/early bombers at all), Moscow may need 10-12 Spitfires/Mosquito’s to withstand the assault.

These are only the basics of what I know the allies can do. They must be adjusted whenever the Axis adjust… If, for example, the USA invests heavily into Europe and Japan does not look likely to swing back at Sydney/Hawaii but rather continues to invest heavily in Mainland Asia/Russia, the UK may ease their spending in the ME a bit and assist the USA a while in spending much more for western Europe for a couple of turns…

Meh…I think that goes both ways.  As to whether the bomber would be too strong, I think it might be good for the game now.  On the other side, if I had a bomber, I would immediately buy another one.  Lots of creative things to do with that bomber…I think it could prove to be pretty strong…but that’s just my opinion.

@Ashenduke:

@Young:

@Variable:

@spartan:

on the mediafire download for the complete rulebook the 3 player setup does not include France :?

Sorry about that! I must have done something screwy there…

No, That was my bad. I left it off the original. If it turns out that thats the only mistake on the whole document…… not too shabby.

It looks like a mixup of the 3 & 4 player setups. France is listed for the Russian player and British for 4 player.
“Three Players: Player 1: Axis powers / Player 2: United Kingdom and ANZAC / Player 3: United States,
Soviet Union, and China
Four Players: Player 1: Axis powers / Player 2: United Kingdom, ANZAC, and France / Player 3: Soviet
Union and France / Player 4: United States and China”

Fixed it, can anyone spot any other errors?