Well, the final result was indeed an Axis victory. It took 12 rounds, although the US conceded defeat at the beginning of their turn on round 12. They were the only Ally left except for 1 British Inf & artillery in Quebec, 1 Soviet sub in SZ 114 and 1 ANZAC Inf on New Zealand. China and France were both extinct.
The US had a powerful navy in SZ 101 and a smallish force in SZ 10 – 1 fully loaded carrier + 5 DD. They had 5 transports worth of men, art and tanks in E US, but could never outstretch the German navy to liberate London. Every time the US made a warship purchase, the Germans matched it so a stalemate developed.
Italy captured Stalingrad on round 11, which was the 8th VC on the Europe board.
Germany captured Moscow on round 12, which made 9 VCs on the Europe board.
Japan captured Sydney on round 12, which was VC #6 on the Pacific board.
By this time, Germany was at 102 IPCs, Japan roughly 112 IPCs and Italy had 67 IPCs. These are territory plus NO incomes. Just territories would be Germany = 69, Japan = 90 and Italy = 46. The US had 72 IPCs, but I’m sure that would be cut down quite a bit in another round or two since all Axis had nothing to do but go after the US. While the naval battles in SZ 101 and SZ 10 would have been huge, by this time the end result would have been the ultimate falling of the US. It might have taken a further 5-6 rounds, but the result would be doom for all freedom loving peoples. So I think our US player was right to concede.
I think my J1 attack made a lot of difference here, plus the G1 Barbarossa. I think it threw our Allied players off balance since Japan usually waits until J3 or J4. Also, our US player kind of fell into the mistake of trying to support action on both theaters. While she was able to set some Axis plans back here and there, it wasn’t enough to make really decisive blows on either side and in both cases, Japan and Germany were able to recover from the setbacks, whereas the Allies weren’t really able to recover from setbacks they experienced. The most dangerous one was Russia’s counter-attack of Barbarossa. They really built up a lot of steam but just didn’t quite get far enough before the Germans rebounded after taking London.
I have always thought the best Allied plans involve USA committing mostly to one side or the other, with just enough to keep the other side in check. Usually, a large US involvement in Europe can really put the hurt on Germany and Italy if they can keep just enough navy to harass Japan in the Pacific so they don’t grow too big. A large US involvement against Japan will usually, if done right, end up shrinking Japan to almost nothing, cornering them on Japan, then they can go over to invade Europe and stop Germany hopefully before Moscow falls.