Cheese to win

@shadowhawk

Agreed. Though it is more bearable online.

Thanks!

Yep, that’s what we did, we just played another round before calling it.

(The way I play Germany:)
Create 1 huge army that marches into Russia and arrives in Bryansk G5, ready to attack Moscow G6, together with purchases from G5 (aircraft in Berlin/fast in Ukraine). Purchases in G1/2/3/4/5 are always aimed at maximally reinforcing this marching ‘deathball’, like ghr and Demandr described.

Russia has no choice but to surrender Leningrad+Ukraine and Germany should gladly take them with some token forces (1 to 2 inf + air).

What the Allies CAN do about this (very generally speaking because of all the variables): Russia retreats into Moscow while building a lot of inf + ART(!). RAF helps to defend it. UK + USA getting strong at Gibraltar/London + Middle East and, very important, setting up ‘bomber command’. Comes G6 Germany cannot attack Moscow because it is too heavily defended. Luftwaffe is tied into Russia (making life easier for the allies preparing for DDay) because otherwise Russia begins counter-attacking, ending the German presence there. Germany can take Caucasus + Stalingrad but NOT in force because then the Russians can break out where it is most effective, attacking and destroying the German army defending Bryansk if there is still some there. If there is not, because all the Germans are in Caucasus/Stalingrad, what is to stop Russia from retaking Leningrad, Ukraine and all those juicy eastern-european countries? Nada.
Too bad this game has no ‘out-of-supply’ rules as this is exactly what happend in Russia, starving the massive German army in Stalingrad.

In the pacific, the USA + ANZAC have Allied task number 1: prevent an Axis (Pac 6VC) win. This does not mean Japan has to be killed (though you can certainly try), but Hawai + Sydney must be held. If Japan crushes India this is an easy job. If Japan clearly invests in taking Hawai/Sydney (luckily the USA goes after Japan so can react), the task is more difficult, but India will be safe  longer and can even become strong strong strong if Japan focuses too much on Hawai. Most Japanese players I have seen, invest heavily into taking India and Middle East and THEN they try to take Hawai/Sydney. This gives the USA breathing space to invest around 20% per turn into the Pacific, spending 80% of its income into Europe. By the time Japan is ready to invest into taking Hawai the USA can switch to near 100% into Pacific (depending on the Japanese investments) without a problem because its forces in Europe are already massive.

Note that I am using the LL system in my games (and posts) to predict/dictate what major powers must do to stay alive. The LL system is usually pretty accurate and if the dice screw you up, well, then it’s the dice, not strategy, that cost you the game.

Japan needs 6 VCs in the Pacific to win, all the allies need to do is Protect Honalulu and Sydney while building more than the Japs.

What if they bypass your Armada by sailing North around Scotland and hit London from from Sz 109. What do you have in London at this point…. 2 Brits and a Frenchman.

So essentially, just two combat units  :wink:  Haha, sorry, but I just couldn’t resist taking advantage of such an obvious opportunity to take a stab at the French  :-D

yeah global can take forever and a day, but at least you had action instead of a mexican standoff.

Surrender isnt part of our vocabulary,  correct me if I’m wrong in alpha2 when London falls that brings the US into the war,      so why not fight    or just give it away  I game for the battles (Kursk) = big tank battles between Germany and Russia or (truk Lagoon) big naval battles between Japan and USA  or the Battle of Britain/Sealion.    and I like to win , to add or change the rules can be fun but this game was not designed to be redesigned by all of us, It’s a step up from the Anniversary edition.  If because the Axis won the last 4 games means the Allies cant win , then I think you may be missing some thing but I dont think so from what I can tell the people on the forum are skilled, experienced players.    There are a bunch of people who think the game is unbalanced with the Allies being the one with the upper hand. This subject might get ya to think that it is balanced the other way.  In 25+ yrs I’ve seen where one side will get a bunch of wins only to be offset by the other,  overall I would say that the score is about 50/50  we play on average 2 games a weekend.    How did Hitler say it……fight to the last man  I think Stalin said it to… Keep gaming and post the results.

by that point in the game we couldnt have stopped you… I’m thinking how we could have stopped it from getting to that point in the first place.  A couple of things come to mind… 1) not stockpiling the russian infantry in Amur and 2) when we saw you only bought 2 transports on G1 UK could have taken out the Taranto fleet and just bought infantry.  This might have stopped Italy opening a second front in Russia and stopped a successful sealion.