Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer)

@WILD:

Ok, so you want to attack the 3 most important neutrals as axis at roughly the same time early in the game for strategic/econ purposes, maintain pressure on Russia, and keep the Anglo’s off your newly acquired territories. Pretty big task lol

What do you want the UK to do on the first couple turns? When do you want to bring the US into the war? You want to set-up and do Barbarossa to keep things looking normal and get to Moscow (axis goal). Should you set-up to hit the neutrals G2, or G3?
4a) Take Turkey to give the axis access to the Middle East and Southern Russia (income/strategic value).
4b) Hit Sweden for more income (easy enough), and probably Switz so the allies don’t ever get 2 free inf.
4c) Take Spain and set-up some kind of def/counter attack (or naval attack), because this is where you are going to be most vulnerable.

1 (UK) - You want the UK to build mostly inf UK1 (no IC in Egypt), so maybe buy 1 ship G1 to lightly threaten Sea Lion, or save most of your income? Sounds crazy, but you probably want the UK to do Taronto so you can kill the Med fleet leaving the UK fewer resources at their disposal to threaten Spain and Turkey.

2 (USA) - Have two choices, both have pro’s and con’s.
a) Leave USA out of the war until they come in on their own and cant preform attacks until US4 (may even entice the UK to attack Japan so the UK tie’s up more resources in the Pac still leaving the US out in the cold?) This will give the Euro axis some time, but the allies will be much stronger when they do come over and could build mostly Europe from the start

b) Hit US navy hard G1/J1. G1 attack sz101 w/German sub to try and kill cruiser/tpt. J1 hit both the Phil (fleet and island), and destroy US Hawaiian fleet (making sure the main Japanese fleet at Wake is safe from counter attack). Also hitting Britt BB etc… again leaving UK w/fewer resources. This sounds strange bringing the US into the war on the first turn when planning for an axis neutral invasion, but the US will be hard pressed to build in the Atlantic because of Japanese aggression. If they build Pac for the first couple turns in response, then you won’t have US ships sitting in sz101 able to hit Spain for a few turns (easier to def for the short term anyway).

I’m assuming you will still set-up and invade Russia G2 (or G3) because you don’t want to tip off the allies, and still need to take Moscow.

When to attack the neutrals G2/G3 or It2? Depends on if you have the use of the German air force on G2, and the Luftwaffe will probably be needed to take out the UK Med fleet G2 (more risk to your mechanized units vs those inf stacks w/o air power). Also who takes Turkey or Spain and when? The Italians could take Greece It1, and be ready to invade Turkey It2 (after the Anglo’s take their 2nd turn) and Germany moves in reinforcements G3. On the other hand Italy could take S France It1, and be ready to invade Spain It2 and the Germans could land some ground/air on Spain G3. In this case the Germans activate the Bulgarians G1, takes Greece G2, and invades Turkey G3 (hides intent). Either way I think Italy takes one, and the Germans reinforce it, then and invades the other (along w/Sweden of course). This allows the axis to basically go back to back and disguise it somewhat. Plus if the Germans hit the neutrals G2, the Americans would surly build Europe on US2.

As you described one of the main problem is that if you take Spain you will have yet another coastal territory to defend, and stacking it isn’t really a good option. Setting up a counter attack from Normandy or S France is a risk because again your units are on the coast and the allies could probably hit either of those territories and kill off your units by sea from Gibraltar. Even setting up mechanized units in Paris could be problematic because the allies could cut them off by taking Normandy and S France. Attacking the combined allied fleet would also be costly, and if it fails the axis are doomed if they lose the bulk of their air power.

I’m not advocating that the axis invading the neutrals early is a good strat, but if I were to attempt it think I would try to take out as much US/UK fleet in the first turn as possible (and turn 2), and try to disguise it best I can. Get the US building in the Pac theater the first couple turns would be key, to keep them out of Europe till like US5?. If they have to start from scratch on the Euro side on say US3 (after you take Spain etc…) then you could defend Spain for a couple turns before withdrawing forcing the US build more before coming over (either more ships, or more ground). Put some pressure on the UK so she builds mostly inf on the first turn, and make sure the UK Med fleet can’t interfere or be used to re-take my prizes (on the bottom of the Med would be the best place IMO). I think I would have Italy take either Spain or Turkey on It2 (Germany reinforces G3), then have Germany take the rest on G3. Need to watch what Russia has in the south because you don’t want them to be in position to counter attack your units in Turkey. Don’t think you can afford to delay Barbarossa past G3 though. Japan should also be ready to kill some Mongolians on J3 if they haven’t already activated them (breaking the NAP and turning them Russian).

Look at my Afrika Korps strategy where I answer all your question!

@Karl7:

@Talleyrand19:

Been following this thread as best as possible so sorry if this was already mentioned and I missed it…

But what happens if Allies spend most of their money on the Atlantic with only a few capital ships in the Pacific to join up with Anzac. The Atlantic money goes to transports and capital ships and then tanks and infantry. With England’s help, you hit Spain and Gibraltar  (for the naval base). Then every single turn the US can land more stuff and set up a nonstop funnel. If Russia does its job then axis should not be able to keep up on both fronts. If Germany sent its Dark Skies bombers to try to stop the funnel, then fine you can wipe each other out and still land more US troops the next turn.

My friends and I have done this to each other and the Spain landing always overwhelms the Axis eventually. …

What have you all experienced when trying this?

Yes, this is a good strategy.  The weak point is then the Germans blitz into the middle east, ignoring Moscow.  They can get an economic advantage and then just sit back and outbuild the allies.

Perhaps have Iraq and the Persian territories be treated as True Neutral, just give the UK and USSR extra units to make up the potential difference.

Japan rarely threatens persia anytime before round 6 or 7, plenty of time to make use out of it.  Persia is also in range of landing planes on moscow or india.  It’s too good.  Egypt factory is risky before round 3 because it does not take much for germany to get enough down there to help italy to perform a strong 1-2 punch.

So Japan has to be ready.

how is that good for germany to see bombers take out his naval? you get like 1 or 2 drops in before usa slams it… that sets you back from the VC win… with the naval and air lost there and the cost of the airbase is enough mech to just have shoved down there anyway.

Not to mention bombers take 1 round to get in position then it hits… it is the fastest way for USA to have an impact. bombers hitting stuff is fast and furious in an otherwise slow process.

there is no infrastructure required for bombers either. you just buy one beer and GO, epic winning, it is bi winning. who needs to drop men to trade ipcs with germany/italy? when you can just blast their stuff in the ocean?

Romania minor is ok for ground units. the naval and airbase is not going to pay for itself.

how many rounds can you get swinging at russia with just carrier 2 transports? and say you pull your air back before the bombers hit? I’ll give you round 1 place romania round 2 drop the 3 naval pieces (30 ipc and + airbase cost which is not really lost and has somewhat a tactical advantage from there… but it can be bombed later).  Anyway caucasus is worth 7 so you would need a good 4 rounds of drops to pay for itself in theory.

trying to defend it is a dumb idea, you’ll typically lose even more out of it and it stalls you from taking russia and reduces threat levels from axis on sz 97.

not to mention bombers are up there in optimal buys for USA anyway. they do lots of things and can switch fronts pretty fast. plus if you shove 7 bombers at 2 tanks, you break even in terms of IPC (1 bomber for 2 tank).

Giving usa a reason to give russia the ability to call in an airstrike on whatever he could not get to… iz not like a good outcome for axis.

It is like call of duty man, spetnaz will air strike the flag and cap it. Allies get gangsta like that when you throw naval down in the black sea.

Trust me, someone did this to me and bombers own. In all fairness I like having some bombers around… mmm munch that naval.

usually bombers are a part of my opener because usually people like to sea lion feint… if they do go through with sea lion I can at least rest assure that japan won’t declare war or 4 bombers fly into uk. Before 3.9 bombers just increased the casualties of germany in taking uk, now it just too much fodder for germany so it actually delays japan if germany wants to go through with it.

if I see a romania IC early on and no naval buy in the baltic… I’ll only have a couple bombers. if naval is bought in the baltic I’ll still get 3 bombers and a couple dds and a carrier.  It’s the typical reaction from usa. bombers can hit naval up top and land in belarus. 3 bombers layin around is never bad either it can hit an italian fleet that moves out. or industrial bomb an airbase before uk attacks italy fleet so no scramble. or bombers can just strafe italian guys between algeria and egypt… so all russia has to do is blitz a tank through tobruk and that other spot for +7 russia.

bombers are good units to have for usa. I don’t see how they are bad.

Russia’s NO has changed so that bombers are more optimal to have so you can just blast all that stuff and clear it out for russia if there is nothing better for them to do.

Okay, thanks. I’ll let that bastard know he was right.