The main problem with the kill-USA strategy as I see it, and perhaps where there is opportunity for dscussion, is that there are little rewards for the Axis if they fail in their ultimate goal of taking Washington.

In other words, the Axis powers are rewarded with both territorial IPC and NO gains for going after the other Allies. An attempt at Moscow, although it may fail, will at least gain some IPCs for the Axis. A failed attempt at America could leave the Axis with nothing gained for their massive effort.

I would suggest that the Axis need one if not several secondary objectives to pursue should they fail to capture America in order to make the strategy more successful. For Germany and Italy, a strong push West in the early game should net them control over Gibraltar and the Med. Another benefit is that the required strong Axis naval force will keep the UK defensive. Japan should probably focus on removing as much of the US pacific income as possible, and should still take the DEI in order to finance the war effort.

A more fanciful idea would be for the Axis, in a scenario where they have deployed heavily, but are unable to take Washington, to instead drop their forces in South America. This could be part of a global neutral crush strategy…or the Axis could pile everything in to Brazil and use DD blocks and their existing forces to build a minor.

Gargantua is right–the money has to be spent on navy to match the American committment. A good way to make this manageable is to have Japan play in a manner that forces the US to spend lots of IPCs in the Pacific.

One way to do this early is to put a large navy with some amphib capability at Caroline. Even if it is a feint, the Americans may feel pressured into spending money and keeping assets west in order to retake Hawaii if necessary. It all depends on the opponent, but whatever it takes to convince the US player to mobilize in the Pacific makes holding Gibraltar easier.

My opponent is pretty skillful at taking and holding Gibraltar with the Axis. He buys a carrier and des on G1, taking Gib if possible on G2. On G3, he likes to back up the navy up to SZ 105 to get out of range of the US coast–while buying and placing 3 capital ships (BB/CV) in SZ 105 on the same turn. (An AB in Normandy would add to the stronghold, haven’t played Alpha 2 yet) This force has seriously delayed the US from advancing in past games, and from 105 it can reach the protected areas of the Med and the Baltic in the event that Germany decides to back down from the naval arms race.

Of course, it costs a lot of IPCs, but the results are quite nice. The UK is seriously weakened in the Med and Africa without the US presence, and German subs can blockade UK almost at will in the early rounds.

My early India strategy revolves around avoiding the J3/J4 crush. I like to take two inf from Malaya and take Java on UK1. The Anzac air force can land there on turn 1 as well and are usually ignored. Turn 2, UK takes Sumatra if still not at war. Taking the East Indies and making only inf buys are crucial to provide those few extra units needed to survive J3 in particular. The two inf could be brought to India instead, but they can net 12+ IPC’s by going on the “offensive.”

By turn 4, India can be in serious jeporday against a determined Japan, often needing allied support by this point. The Russian air force can prove to be a critical last-minute defensive addition, but this is hard to set up for, as there are no convienent staging areas on R3, and this move has to be done before Japan’s intentions are revealed on J3.

By turn 5 and beyond, India’s fate starts to depend more and more on the balance between Japan’s commitment to take it and the other Allies’ effort to defend it. Depending on the balance in the European theatre (i.e. Sealion) the US can shuttle planes into India as early as US5.

My gaming group used to refer to losing one’s capital unexpectedly as a “pooch.” As in, you pooched the game when you let the Russians amphib Berlin! (I have done it, lol!)

When we used to play Revised and Anniversary we would, as a courtesy, let our opponents know when they had made a mistake that would end the game. This of course led to its own set of problems and arguments. The last straw was when I had two capital captures reversed in one game when my opponent “didn’t see it” and ended up losing the game I had basically won twice.

With the debut of Global 1940, the days of us letting each other know about bad mistakes is over, possibly with the exception of turn 1 or 2. Reason being–the game takes too damn long to play (for us) and therefore it just doesn’t make sense to artificially prolong it.

When there is no immediate Sealion threat: The advantage of grouping the UK Navy at Gibraltar (I use SZ 92) on UK1 is that–with help from redeployed Indian planes–it can kill the Italian Navy unless it stays in SZ 95 or 97 on I1. In SZs 93, 94, 96, 98, and 99, the Italian Navy dies I2.

If an airbase becomes non-operational due to SBR, does that prevent scrambling on that turn? (Since SBR happens “first”)

In other words, if Germany was able to knock out the AB in the UK, and the UK saved their fighters for a naval battle in 110, could the UK scramble to protect 110 on that German turn?

Nice catch OP, hadn’t seen that one mentioned before. I think its a decent move for the US to build an AB there. If/when the Sealion threat passes, SZ 119 could be a nice spot for the Brits to move a Canadian-built fleet with US fighter cover.

kdfsjljklgjfg’s point is well-taken, usually the US will bring a sizeable fleet. But with the VC changes in the newest rules, the US might have to do things on the cheap in the Atlantic just to avoid losing in the Pacific.

The US could “hide” their starting Atlantic transport up in SZ 122 on US1 or 2, and take Eire with it once war is declared, flying 3 fighters to Gibraltar the same turn. Next turn, UK can move its Canadian fleet, if any, to 119; then the US builds the AB and lands fighters. The US has all those forces to begin with, so a minimum of 15 could be spent in the Atlantic for the first few turns to get 3 4’s defending the west coast of the UK. Any Sealion threat pretty much kills this one though, the Germans will just amphib the planes.

You are correct–friendly ships belonging to other powers that are in the same SZ as an amphib assault do not fire during the attack.

I’m very pro-Russian mech myself. They have served me the best by allowing the Russians to quickly position massive counterattacks that force the Germans to back off. In other words, while the Germans might be able to push to Leningrad or into the group of 2ipc southern territories in the early game, the ability of the Russian mech to get into attack range quickly tends to prevent the German army from camping out and collecting Russian IPCs.

Of course–as Calvin notes–Russia benefits greatly by having some offensive units to go with the mech. Personally, I find that building a few tanks to keep with the mech stack, along with some early artillery purchases gives the Russians a mobile  counterattack that limits the flexibility of the German player while enhancing your own.

As far as the Russian airforce R1 buy—I used to love this, when the Russians could take neutral territories, as the fighters (place in Volgo) would attack Iraq on R2. With the new rules preventing this, I would probably take Calvin’s advice and use my initial air force as the scramble defense in Novgorod. More air force is good, and probably neccessary, but it may not be needed as quickly as artillery, which is useful to build early so it can be ready to counterattack the front lines R3-R5, etc. Fighters can always be bought later.

This setup looks great on paper. Looking forward to trying it out. It seems like a lot of issues have been addressed at least.

I have one question regarding the Japanese not-at-war National Objective. The requirements were changed (simplified?) from not attacking US/UK/France to not attacking US/UK/French Indo China.

Does this mean that Japan can attack New Hebrides (French island, SZ 53) and still claim the NO? I’ve had a strategy floating around in my head for awhile regarding taking this island J2. I’m guessing you cannot, just need some confirmation so I don’t have to think about it anymore.  :-D

Edit: just remembered that, during the diplomatic negotiations in 1941 before Pearl, the US specifically warned the Japan not to move south into Indo-China. So the change from France to French-Indo makes sense from an historical point of view.