Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer)

@arthur-bomber-harris

Only based on your bidding rules. My bids puts them in a power’s treasury (so they have to be spent later).

@J-o-C I’ve been considering trying attacking the neutrals, mostly for the helluva it. Thanks for laying out thoughts. As far as multi-national forces sequenced, I’m considering sending in U.K. forced into Saudi’s Arabia if conditions permit. Also, ANZAC on Argentina As a capper, maybe Chile also but Argentina first.

Sweden would be tough to get as Allies unless already in Norway so might Axis taking it might the cost of opening Spain and Turkey and make you commit to invading Europe form the south, not necessarily a bad thing.

@Caesar-Seriona said in Multiple pro allied neutrals:

To simplify the rule for any new players that read this; you cannot blitz through a friendly neutral I.E. they stop once they enter.

Just to avoid confusion:

We are not talking about “blitzing” here, as “blitzing” is a combat move, involving hostile territories.

Moving into a friendly neutral territory takes place during Noncombat Move Phase. This is a noncombat move that is further restricted by the above quoted rule.

No discussion for a while now…

Any new conclusions about this strategy?

What’s about an airbase at Gibraltar and moving Egypt fleet west? Yet, I guess there was this topic deep down at forum’s splanchnic times ago but couldn’t find it…

Thank you again for all the helpful advice. You were right on my misstep with Germany building 10 units on Paris instead of 3. You also have good ideas about buying artillery, which I was thinking because you can combine them with infantry to get attack or defense at 2. And the United States targeting Norway/Denmark/Western Germany combined with bombers is helpful. Thanks again for all the great advice from such nice players; you guys are awesome.
AxisandAlliesGeneral

You need a minumum of about 10 posts before you can post links or attachements.  This is due to the forum’s anti-spam software.  The moderators (dezrtfish, DarthMaximus, Guerrilla Guy) can move your post the correct section of the forum.  Send them a personal message if they don’t notice your post in the next day or two.

@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.

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