Map for 1941 axis strategy

with Russia invested in China (IC in Szechwan and raised territory value to 3) and getting the IPCs, pluss the turn order allowing to consolidate, made a KJF more viable. My friend tried it one game but made a couple mistakes with positioning

@taamvan Can you say a bit more about what Japan is doing in your games? It’s true that with a well-executed KGF Germany will be contained to the core territories of France, NW Europe, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania – but that’s still worth $30 a turn and it takes the Allies a very long time to build and load enough transports to crack it.

Meanwhile, a pure KGF usually leaves Japan free to take India, then the Caucasuses, then Moscow – the Allies can certainly rush a few fighters to Moscow, but sending even one ruins the only practical Russian national objective, and if you build too many then you never get enough Allied ground troops to crack the German turtle – fighters in Moscow can’t reach to support an attack on France.

In my experience, without a bid and with NOs on, the Japanese attack on Moscow is much faster than the American attack on Paris, let alone Berlin. How does the Pacific play out in your games?

For purely defensive purposes, buying infantry cannot be beat. When you can swap in an offensive piece (artillery or tank) without decreasing the number of units you’re putting on the board, this is well-advised. The relative cost of units and their defending capability seems to be balanced such that quantity is quality.

For example, Russia starts the '41 version with 30 IPC. For that money you can buy 10 inf OR 8 inf and a tank, etc, etc… OR 3 fighters. If you benchmark every 30IPC purchasing combination against an attacking force of 4inf and 5 tanks (nearly a 50/50 battle with about a 2% chance of mutually assured destruction if you purchased 10 inf), the results are telling:

10 inf - 49% chance of winning [2 * 10 = 20 hit points or 20/6 = 3.3 average hits]
8 inf, 1 tank - 38% chance of winning [2 * 8 + 1 *3 = 19 hit points or 19/6 = 3.2 average hits]
5 inf, 1 tank, 1 fighter - 16% chance of winning [5 * 2 + 1 * 3 + 1 * 4 = 17 or 17/6 = 2.8 average hits]
.
.
.
3 fighters - 0.02% chance of winning [3 * 4 = 12 points or 12/6 = 2 average hits]

No combination of possible purchases perform better than 10 inf in this scenario.

However, when playing against a German Goering that likes to over-extend poorly defended fighters or bombers to gain a couple of IPCs, it’s nice to have the offensive capability to wipe them off the board. I have found this is best accomplished by pushing infantry forward (protecting your offensive pieces from overwhelming counter-attack) and keeping a mix of infantry, artillery and tanks within striking distance of the front line.

For offensive purposes, the best mix of units for the same 30 IPCs, baselined to a 50/50 battle of your 10 infantry against a defending 6inf + 1 artillery (approximately 1% chance of a draw):

10 inf - 50% [10 * 1 = 10 points or 10/6 = 1.7 average hits]
8 inf, 1 tank - 60% [8 * 1 + 1 * 3 = 11 points or 11/6 = 1.8 average hits]
6 inf, 3 art - 81% [3 * 1 + (3 + 3) * 2 = 15 points or 15/6 = 2.5 average hits]
5 inf, 1 tank, 1 ftr - 42% [5 * 1 + 1 * 3 + 1 * 3 = 11 points or 11/6 = 1.8 average hits]
.
.
.
3 ftr - 0% [3 * 3 = 9 points or 9/6 = 1.5 average hits]

For purely offensive considerations, the optimum combination of units in this scenario is 6 inf and 3 art at 81% chance of victory with 4 inf, 2 art and 2 tanks in close second at 80%. No combination of purchases which include a fighter score better than 53% (4 inf, 2 art and 1 fighter happens to be the specific combination in this case). Again, there appears to be a quality in quantity that supersedes just quality. It may go without stating, but if attacking a territory with an AA gun, the numbers will be even worse for the fighter purchases.

For the two scenarios above, the most balanced purchase (averaging the %won for each purchase in its offensive capacity and defensive capacity) is 7 inf, 1 art and 1 tank. This particular purchase is the second best defensive purchase (next to 10 inf) and only 4% less potent than the best offensive purchase (6 inf and 3 art).

I’m not against fighters or bombers, they certainly have their place I just haven’t found justification for purchasing them when playing as Russia (or Germany for that matter) - especially in the early rounds.

Similar conclusion are drawn with respect to naval units - more cost-effective units (subs and especially destroyers) are typically better than fewer high-powered units (battleships and especially cruisers).

Excepting special circumstances (such as no time to get infantry to a developing hot-spot on the map or needing to sandbag funds for a massive naval build against enemies squatting in your sea-zone) a good rule of thumb seems to be to maximize the number of attack/defend points your are bringing to the board, first, and spread over as many units as possible, second.

The point is that randomness is assumed here… I am just as often allies as I am axis and it makes no difference.

that being said I think the game sides are equal. The stats show that.

Any decent A&A player wont care what side he plays.

If you ate truelly concerned about the skill issue, just review the tournies from R3 to the finish.  every player from that point knows how to play the game.

If you do try this I wonder if Russia would be better off sending units to China due to its unique way of sprouting INF.  No reason that both Russia and China get taken out the production race.

Here’s the way I usually approach the Axis in the first AA.  I think it translates over into the 2nd AA as well.

1.  You start off poor so keep your expensive units.  Don’t throw them away for short term gains, because once they’re gone, they’re gone.  You can’t afford to rebuild them. 
2.  Take out the British Navy, all that’s possible without losing airforce… or if you do lose airforce, make sure that England is losing something like a battleship.  If they can keep the fleet they’ll be able to land all along the coast.  This is bad, and is pretty much the end of the game for germany.  It will mean you’ll need to defend along the coast, plus have either some airforce or tanks ready for a counter attack… because if they want something, they can take it with the RAF getting in the attack.
3.  Expand fast, but try to only lose infanty in battles.  If when you caluclate odds you’re calculating that you’ll lose tanks/fighters… it’s not worth it.
4.  With the new game, study the bonus production criteria… aim to take it away from your opponent.  It’s like a guide to what your opponent will do, plus it shows you how to stop them… for example…

Japan:  Has to take an English territory in it’s first turn or England gets extra production.
Germany:  It’s about either Karelia or Caucassus.  Take one or the other, but try to take one at all costs.
Italy:  Brazil is undefended and the USA gets extra production, if it’s available and undefended, might as well nab it.

I have no problem sending up to 5 infantry, 1 armor to China to stop Japan. (20 IPC) it only helps, however, if China can eek out at least one infantry a round themselves!

I do still find humorous the idea of sending 14 Russian Armor into China!  That would be a lark of epic proportions and I may actually do it one game just to see my opponent die of apoplectic shock at seeing the doors to Moscow open up to Germany by end round 3!

You could also set up a trap for allied navies, by sinking the dd and leaving your subs posted there.
If, by any chance, the german player was to be attacked by an english navy that would not dispose of a destroyer, they could trap them by submerging prior to the battle and coming back to attack the fleet on their turn, using planes togheter with the subs.

I don’t exactly remember the initial setup of the game and if uk disposes of a lot of destroyers, but in my opinion, this tactic could work at least once against inexperienced players.