First game help!

@Moxin The axis do have an advantage, but when you’re just starting out you only need a bit of help as the Allies to win, 12 or 16 bid

That is indeed the strategy, and it relies on the allies having pretty bad luck to smash up those stacks without losing 50% of your starting planes.

Germany can replace the planes, but not at the same time as it builds mechs, armor stax
Japan has even more planes, but it needs even more than Germany does because without them, its a paper tiger.

The problem with doing these stub attacks is if you lose more than 50% of your starting air power before turn 5, you will not be able to force your victory cities and strategic objectives.  The consequences are felt several turns later (7,8), when you cant smash stax because you lost your mobile strikeforce.

@wittmann:

Thanks for finding time for the write up. 1940 is a game you can play 100s of times and still not master it, so don’t worry if you feel you could improve on Germany. Will just have to play again!
It does sound,  however,  like next time you will have to hire the room until 6am and take turns sleeping under the table.

Lol are you on the level?

I think, the problem is Canada.
When I play the Allies, the problem I usually get is, that I fail on Logistic.
I can allways ONLY focus on weapons OR personals and trannys on one turn.
But we know from history that Canada was a vital manufactorer of weapons and armour for the allies.
Maybe a HR will fix this problem by:

When the U.S. is at war Canada contributes some portions to the allies as for the us in the Atlantic one DD and a bmbr for the uk.
And for pacific US one DD.
Each round!
For the pacific, Australia must be allied controlled.
As for the atl. .Canada must be allied controll for the DD.
UK must be allied controlled for the bmbr.

What you think??

You’re welcome. I hope it helps!

@Young:

I don’t play TripleA, but I imagine one can’t change the initial setup. However, in our table top games, players like to rotate different sides and nations fairly so everyone gets a chance to play something different. To achieve this, I think the Russians should trade their fighter in Moscow for a S. Bomber, the Americans should trade their destroyer in Hawaii for a Battleship, and the UK should trade their Mech Infantry in London for a Tank.

Maybe upgrade the cruiser instead

That should balance the game without the need to bid… What do you think.

@ErwinRommel:

Strategy should be simple: send every units possible to London, dont try anything fishy ;)
And send Australian fighters to India. (possible russians fighters if that will make the big difference)

And buy some art if you expect germany going to Scotland, when they do you hit them hard for a round or 2 (but dont win, just do damage)

Thanks
A simple post leads to the question of how….the length of the post is to explain how.

I can do simple and vague.

all units London and surrounding sz, kill German navy, reinforce India with a few Russians, save Africa, and use the Anzac as effectively as possible.

Thank you for the productive post

@SSPanther:

Hey Krieghund (sp?) or anyone else out there, I need to questions answered for a game we are playing now.

1. If the US is not yet at war with Japan, and flies their fighter from the Philipinnes to Burma or Kwangtung, if the Japanese then attack the British in either of those territories, does it provoke the US and bring them into the war? Or can this non-combat move even be made by the US

1. The US, while neutral, cannot move units into or over territories that do not belong to them.  They cannot move a fighter into a UK territory, and thus this example can never happen.

@SSPanther:

2. Can Russia, when not yet at war, move ships into a seazone with UK ships, and can they move into a seazone with German ships?

3. Can Russia, when not at war, move into NW Persia?

Thank you!

2. Yes

3. No, not until at war on that side of the board (so war against German or Italy).