Axis victory vs Humans - How?

[Minty]

So I've been SC2 a lot via PBEM since it came out. enjoyin it immensely but I have a question, how the hell can the Axis win against a good, patient Human allied player? Now I know this will cause howls of rage and lots of stories of axis total vistories in May1940 or somesuch but serously how is it done? I normally play allies and on version1.02 I know the ruskies have more of an advantage than on later versions. But still if the Allied player gets some decent IW for the red army and prodoces hordes of Corps and Armies then by 1942/43 the Axis just can't hack it.

You can argue this is historically accurate as in reality there was no way the Axis could hope to win by that time but it really doesn't make for a fun game.

What is a wannabe Third Reich leader to do? Delay Barborossa? Have an early barborassa? Steamroll in on all fronts or use fast corps to cut deep into the USSR and take the siberian backlash? Airfleets are great of course and give the germans a lot of control, but they are horribly expensive and a lot of fast moving corps and panzers is an alternative.

any barborossa strategies and tactics are very welcome. Take riga before the baltics are annexed? DOW turkey? amphibous assaults from odessa to the casucaus? My friends are sick of me kicking their butts as allies and I'm going to try it as Germans again, in V1.02 too just to make it harder!

Thanks

[hellraiser]

Play Yoda

[Terif]

In V1.04 Axis and Allies are pretty balanced – at least personally I don´t care which side to play since both have the same chances to win at the moment .

Nevertheless Axis are more difficult to play for unexperienced players since they can make much more and severe mistakes than Allies. First to name: neglecting the border garrisons to Russia or placing too many units there so russian readiness increases too soon (in 1940 you need 2 units: in Königsberg and Warsaw. End of 1940 you need a third unit east of Warsaw. Maximum is 4 units around Königsberg and 5 units around Warsaw).

The second one simply needs practice: how to conquer minors – most of them can be conquered in 1 turn and even if it takes longer it helps enourmously if the opponent gets no opportunity to interfere and disturb the invasions.

If France falls early or late makes not much difference in the long run since both strategies (Poland first or LC turn 2) have advantages and disadvantages – they lead to different ways but for the goal to win the game they are equal. Only Poland is decisive that it surrenders before 1940 – since otherwise russian readiness goes up.

Some of the gravest mistakes many axis players make are:

1) to battle for naval superiority without a greater goal behind it - i.e. attacking allied ships with airfleets (or even building bombers) and repairing their own ships after battles. This is extremely expensive and only useful if Axis want to clear the seapaths for a sealion or to starve Britain with subs – but against a good allied player who suspects that and knows how to react, it won´t work anyway.. . In any case such battles lead to very weak ground forces for Barbarossa and - depending on the extent of the investments into the naval warfare - Axis most likely looses the initiative in Russia.

2) frequent and unnecessary operating, transporting and building of amphibs during the mid game. This is also pretty expensive and uses up a lot of ressources. Before you operate a unit, think twice if it is really necessary or if it can´t simply walk instead or if it is really needed at its destination point and when . Use only as much units in a distant operation as necessary and not more.

3) last but not least: declaring war to the ´wrong´ minors at the wrong time: here a look into the activation scripts helps a lot – some of the more important ones: Never attack Vichy France, Switzerland, Spain or Portugal before USA is in the war (or you want to bring it in), since USA really doesn´t like it if you attack them. Same for Yugoslavia, Iraq and Iran concerning Russia – wait till Barbarossa before you DoW them or you will be in trouble.

In the end Axis have to get along with the fact that Allies will get much more mpps/turn throughout the game. Allies have to spent a lot more for research at the beginning since they have to research everything three times while for Axis it is enough if Germany researches it. But in the later game they can use their superior ressources to build combat units so they have the chance to turn the tide.

For Axis is important to have reached already a good position until this time so they are not too much outproduced any more and have a better strategical position. Since Axis have the advantage of the inner line and can choose where to fight while Allies have to coordinate their 3 major powers and can´t combine their forces, it is key for Axis to achieve local superiority in firepower in the battles of their choosing. As long as they have enough units to obtain such local superiorities (even if they are far inferior in total numbers), they can keep the initiative. For this they don´t need the ressources Allies get and Axis can cope with from time to time beeing outproduced up to 2:1. Axis only need enough ressources to keep its units ready for battle – so as long as their forces are not shrinking, they usually still have the upper hand.

If Axis did it right and didn´t waste too many mpps during the mid game, they should be able to conquer the line Leningrad-Moskov-Kharkov until Spring/Summer 1942 – in which order depends on the overall strategy (do you want to connect Scandinavia/Finland or prefer to advance fast into the ressource rich area of Krim and Caucasus...) and the defence strategy of the russian opponent .

The first half year of Barbarossa Axis should have the clear advantage in Russia if the axis player avoided the above mentioned mistakes and any resistance should be well considered by the allied player or he can loose it all very quickly. So after this moment (if Allies didn´t sacrifice too many units in fruitless counterattacks or defending hopeless positions) it depends on the skill of both players who will win the war in the long run .

[Minty]

Dear Herr Yoda,

thanks very much, unfortunately I'll be playing Axis in version 1.02 and a lot of beer in riding on the outcome! My opponent will be reading this so I won't give too much away but some of the mistakes you mentioned are ones I have been able to capitalise on in the past and will try to avoid. By the way has anyone ever DOW russia straight after Poland and won? No Western war, just leave france and head east. Allies have to dow Benelux if they want to get in on the western front and can say goodbye to US support. Plus Russian troop numbers are low and will have no advanced weapons. It works against the AI but then so does pretty much everything! Not sure about a competent human!

[jon_j_rambo]

Yodl is right. My last legendary game against him, I trashed the UK, RAF, & RN...only to get owned by the Reds.

[n0kn0k]

Nice read Terif

[Scook]

For point #3 from Yodl, add Ireland to that list. Big hit from all the pressure the Irish immagrants put on Congress.

any barborossa strategies and tactics are very welcome. Take riga before the baltics are annexed? DOW turkey? amphibous assaults from odessa to the casucaus? My friends are sick of me kicking their butts as allies and I'm going to try it as Germans again, in V1.02 too just to make it harder!

Do NOT take Riga as Axis, it will push USSR close to war too quick. V1.02, Turkey can be a quick win for Axis. Do not use amphib assault to take the Caucasus. Whatever direction you head in Russia, go strong, make the Russkie dog pay, and read what Yodl says very close.

EDIT: Bah, the Ireland thing, just thinking from an Allied viewpoint on that one. Take Ireland if it helps you take Britain, but avoid it for the US hit otherwise.

[ October 03, 2006, 08:37 AM: Message edited by: Scook ]

[Colin I]

Terif's template looks great but it highlights one worry I have about the game. I liked SC1 because multiple strategies could be employed to win. The strategies are even wider in SC2 thanks to diplomacy and a few other options. HOWEVER, it seems that the game is tending towards a narrow set of optimal strategies if you are serious. I don't want this! I'm looking for a game not of perfect play but in which diverse paths to victory can come through.

Is there anything we can do in the next patch to help this? Random events are nice because it throws out calculating play and does simulate the shock and surprise of warfare. Fog of war is a plus, at least there is some chance of pulling a surprise; though the diplomatic penalties are now limiting in many cases for some shock invasions (reasonably for North America but I'm not sure about Sealion). Reducing the Infantry Weapons arms race might free up other technology possibilities. Any other ideas?

[SeaMonkey]

Good read Terif, your help to the noobies is unequaled. My thoughts exactly on the balance to this point.

One thing you said, between the lines, just to clarify, "Infrastructure" research for Germany allows for the economical schwerpunkt. Allowance of a 75% reduction in operating costs is invaluable, especially in inclement weather conditions.

IMO if it is found that the Allies have a slight advantage, infrastructure research should allow a 20% reduction per level, for a zero cost at level 5.