Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Illiniwek80

Probly not too much of one. What works for me, tho, is focusing on Logistics and massing airpower for one objective at a time: e.g., first Leningrad then Moscow. Develop Ground Attack to Level 2. Grind it out to Moscow. What happens further south is kind of up to you, but usually by 1943 whatever I have sent to Africa is up in the Caucasus. Even if it isn't doing a lot, the Russians have either diverted a bunch of units to defending it or I am waltzing around taking their oil. Either way, its good. The AI doesnt seem to know how to cope with it.

Do you have Egypt aleady with Afrika Korps by 1943 then? I was actually thinking of focusing on the southern front and going through Turkey. Of course, I need some RNG luck with diplomacy there.

ORIGINAL: Illiniwek80


I don't play the same game every time, but have always had more success throwing the air force into taking Malta then Egypt with two armor and one infantry. The Afrika Corps spawns and I use it to take Yugoslavia then maybe Turkey (which is a slog, actually. Paratroops help there.) Otherwise it goes for Kiev. Also, when building, don't forget your Hungarian and Romanian armor units. They can be quite effective.

so you don't even go for Egypt?

ORIGINAL: Epekepe



Against AI it is easy to win at normal level, when you get all the game mechanics under control. Like Illiniwek80 wrote, get your best forces (planes, artillery, tanks, mechanized) together and push hard. Soviets AI can't do any serious counterattacks until 1943, because they are so much behind on everything.

ORIGINAL: Illiniwek80

Yup, through Egypt, Iraq and straight to Baku. I'm not saying that it's the 'right' way to play. I don't think there is really a 'right' way to play.

ORIGINAL: smckechnie

I think the first thing you have to do as the axis or allies is to figure out your overall strategy to include if you are going to do any type of diplomatic strategy. I have lost lots of games by really not thinking out my strategy for Allies or the Axis.

Diplomacy towards major powers is advantage allies in my opinion, but could be axis if played right. Diplomacy on majors has such a major impact in the game though and is why it is not allowed in ELO rules. Here are a few scenarios.

Axis put diplomacy towards US. The axis can put more chits to the US that England, India, and China. A couple of hits and the US will not enter the war until spring or summer of 1942. This totally screws the allies, as lower US mobilization means less resources all around for allies. Lend lease delayed too. Axis can wipe out allies before the US gets in war and even when US joins, resources lower than normal. Yes, this takes away resources from the axis, but net gain is pro axis.

Allies put diplomacy toward Russia. A couple of hits with no axis response and you change the equation in Russia significantly. Axis could be dealing with maxed researched Russia, extra HQ, 2 tanks or 2 anti-tank guns upon initially invasion. If axis responds, you help Russia out lots in terms of that is less resources for the Germans to have for Barbarossa. I personally think that no diplomacy towards Russia rules helps the axis lots.

Allies put diplomacy towards US. A couple of hits here early with no axis response. US has resources to build force to invade Europe faster. US lend lease starts sooner. US gets maxed out on research faster. The cascading effect of faster US mobilization is huge. It usually makes the Japanese have to accelerate there time line to attack in the Pacific, which is usually not to their advantage.

Axis put diplomacy towards Russia. This used to be a favored effort for the axis if they were to launch a Sea Lion event. England is usually MPP strapped due to being invaded. Russian mobilization can be brought back down with a diplo hit. This give Germans more time to finish off England and then concentrate on taking Russia. Very hard for the allies to counter, as they are cash strapped.

More on minors later.

Scott

ORIGINAL: Illiniwek80

Ok- I just tried an experiment. I went all in on Sweden beginning at game start, keeping chits at maximum from all 3 Axis powers. This resulted in a total expenditure of 800 MPPs and Swedish entry in July, 1941.

ORIGINAL: Illiniwek80

Well, it gives you a ton. Remember the list if Swedish units I posted earlier? Plus Swedish income.

ORIGINAL: ForzaA


Turkey's a good target for Barbarossa, Spain's good for a naval strategy (extra ports, fair number of ships built and buildable)
(Sweden's a bit of both, also of note is that they might be used to complete the railroad to Norway (and thus the mines both in Norway and Sweden) via Leningrad

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


Revisiting this thread: Is it possible to attack USSR from Sweden? Don't you have to go through Finland - necessitating either an invasion of Finland of allying with them as well?

And speaking of which: Why is it so hard to ally Finland as Germany in this game? In real-life, Finland joined the Axis.

ORIGINAL: ForzaA

Finland will join you after you declare war on the USSR if Finland has any sort of Pro-Axis leaning.
Finland starts with a pro-Axis leaning - though it could lose it either through Allied diplomacy OR through the Allies sending aid in the winter war, and that aid helping them avoid losing to the USSR (though in that case the USSR takes a *significant* hit to their mobilisation) - either can of course be compensated again by your own diplomacy.

Ah, okay; thanks. I wish Allies sending aid event weren't in the game, because Finland did join the Axis in real-life.