My first campaign as the Axis completed and....I lost

[syagrius]

Which is a good thing I was playing with slight advantage Allies, with oil, no fog.

Everything was going reasonably well :Moscow had falled in 1943 and I had managed to get oil in Irak, Iran and Caucasus. I had a good army in France, waiting for D -Day. My subs were taking a heavy toll on the Murmansk convoys. Then..it happened...The Russkies had improved armor and the Allies began to land in the west! Soon I was out of manpower and recruiting kids to fill the holes! I litteraly collapsed, losing corps after corps..lost Paris and Moscow in few turns...Wow

I guess I made a couple of mistakes in this game: first, I assumed that I would have enough manpower trough all the game. Second, I think I have neglected reasearch too much by not buying enough labs, in 1944 the Russians had better armor than me.

Can't wait to get revenge!

[IainMcNeil]

Cool - its a fine balance as if your progress into the USSR could have continued a bit further the Russians might have collapsed and you would have thought the game was too easy. Glad to see it worked out so well this time round

[firepowerjohan]

Interesting to get a summary of one that played through the whole war
Yes, the tech and atlantic wars are games themselves and sometimes vital for the long term war.

[syagrius]

Happy to provide you usefull feedback guys

I think in my next game as the Axis I may try a Sealion. In my first game I was under the impression the RNavy and RAF were too strong to try it. If it succeeds I guess it dramatically changes game balance in Axis favor.

I also noticed it was very quiet in the Mediteranean: I saw this as a good thing in my first game since I had enough on my hands however a landing in Italy or Greece should have put me in trouble sooner!

[Redpossum]

Syragius, if you conquer the british isles the UK does not surrender. In fact, something ugly happens which works very much against the Axis.

All the UK-bound convoys then unload at Halifax, meaning they just skim up/down the coast, never having to cross the Atlantic, and you never get a decent crack at them.

I'm not sure what Slitherine ought to do about this, if anything. But it's ugly.

[alaric318]

hi, for me it is a good outstanding feature that british can continue war from halifax and ottawa as united states alone cannot win against the german war machine, so onwards, it not matters if british at halifax and united states at homeland cross the atlantic, if you control paris and london and possibly stay in control of berlin and rome and can center in the war against the russians this is an axis victory given the victory conditions, as you control two enemy capitals and enemy control 0, if england and united kingdom surrender at homeland it will be much difficult for united states alone to make a second front taken in account the russian front against the axis, so, london conquered and united kingdom surredered is virtually an axis victory if changes are made, it is my opinion that the game is challenging as it is set now,

with best regards,

alaric.

[Redpossum]

Right, alaric, agreed.

My point is just that it may not be to the Axis' advantage to take all the UK ports, or even to invade at all. The determined Axis player might be better off simply tearing into the Russians that much sooner.

The whole Seelowe issue is complex, and something that we betatesters debated hotly, fiercely, and at length. You have no idea how much we argued over this subject!

If nothing else, there's the question of how effective "Dad's Army" would have been. Yes, the Home Guard was made up of middle-aged men. And as I sit here at the age of 47, weighing a good 40 pounds more than I did in my salad days, I am quite conscious of just how large a handicap that is. But on the other hand, the vast majority were combat veterans. They had seen the elephant in WWI, and survived. Personally, I think the Home Guard units would have put up one hell of a fight.

[davetheroad]

Right, alaric, agreed.

My point is just that it may not be to the Axis' advantage to take all the UK ports, or even to invade at all. The determined Axis player might be better off simply tearing into the Russians that much sooner.

The whole Seelowe issue is complex, and something that we betatesters debated hotly, fiercely, and at length. You have no idea how much we argued over this subject!

If nothing else, there's the question of how effective "Dad's Army" would have been. Yes, the Home Guard was made up of middle-aged men. And as I sit here at the age of 47, weighing a good 40 pounds more than I did in my salad days, I am quite conscious of just how large a handicap that is. But on the other hand, the vast majority were combat veterans. They had seen the elephant in WWI, and survived. Personally, I think the Home Guard units would have put up one hell of a fight.

I know we are going off subject but the Seelowe issue is a pet subject of mine. By all means have it as a viable strategy in the game but historically it would have failed, the RN would have sunk the german shipping, end of invasion. The whole enterprise would have failed within a week as the germans in england ran out of ammo and reinforcements.

as for not taking all the british ports so the convoys keep crossing the atlantic, that is so gamey that if a opponent tried it he should forfeit the game.

[alaric318]

greetins, i agree that a sea lion operation given the quality and quantity of the Royal Navy has possibly doomed to the defeat, i think strongly that the United Kingdom army is the better prepared on the war other than the german, so onwards there are a thing that will have make more determination to the fight to the last man, the fact that possibly there are not option to surrender, as happens in russia, the germans will fight, as in russia for total domination and this is what determined to the russians to fight to the last man, despite continuos defeats at 1941, is something difficult to make a simulation on a game but i think there are not a option by the germans to let surrender o make an armistice to the allied powers, so, fighting on, them has nothing to lost, in adition only have to see what difficult was for the allied powers to make the infrastructure navy for the d day, simply something imposible for germany at 1941 or '42, if it have been prepared, will have taken much more time than one or two years, i think that sea lion operation is only a dream on the minds of the leaders of the third reich,

with best regards,

alaric.

[davetheroad]

What is unusual is that both sides get unlimited naval tranport resources, subject to the 4pp cost. Even the allies can launch multiple massive invasions in the early war years when historically the shipping available would only have supported a corps or two on foreign soil. This just does not feel right to me.

As for a significant axis amphibous capability in the MED !!!!!!!

[syagrius]

I guess you guys are right about Sealion: yesterday I tried it after the fall of France. With the difficulty level set at "Allied slight advantage" there is too much British units around London, and the RN was attacking my transports. I would have needed a couple of other battleships however I wasnt able to afford it. I found the operation very costly, losing a few corps, so I decided to reload my game and instead go with UBoats and Air superiority.

As for the eastern front, my army is better in quality than in my first game however it has a price: I have fewer units. I wasnt able to start Barbarossa at the beginning of summer and it was the Russians who joined the Allies at the end of August. So far a very different game than my first one, which is a good thing.

[ungers_pride]

I would suggest that the availability of transports for the Axis should be reduced. They never had unlimited transports. In the real war, Hitler had mainly barges to invade England, and many of those would have sunk crossing the channel.

Just a few points:

1) Hitler never wanted to actually invade or defeat England - he just wanted it to reach a compromise with Germany. He respected the British and felt they could keep their empire provided they allowed him to dominate Europe. His real target was always the USSR.

2) After Dunkirk, Canada had the ONLY fully equipped division in all of England. Had Germany invaded, it would have born the brunt of the initial fighting.

[syagrius]

I would suggest that the availability of transports for the Axis should be reduced. They never had unlimited transports. In the real war, Hitler had mainly barges to invade England, and many of those would have sunk crossing the channel.

Just a few points:

1) Hitler never wanted to actually invade or defeat England - he just wanted it to reach a compromise with Germany. He respected the British and felt they could keep their empire provided they allowed him to dominate Europe. His real target was always the USSR.

2) After Dunkirk, Canada had the ONLY fully equipped division in all of England. Had Germany invaded, it would have born the brunt of the initial fighting.

Yep! The glorious 1st Canadian Division!

[syagrius]

Gosh! I am playing my third campaign as the Axis and will get into trouble again. In my second campaign I tried to build less infantry units to spare my manpower but I ran out of oil and was overwhelmed on the Russian front, so I started a third game. This time I built more units, trying to upagrade as much as I can and not building too much oil burning units. Its 1943, I can't take Moscow yet (however I got the Caucasus oil) and I am in battle of attrition with the Russians and my manpower is melting like snow under the sun!

It seems I have a problem. I I build too much infantry my manpower goes down and if I rely too much on armor and motorized I run out oil too quickly. Maybe I still not researching enough? I have 2 labs for infantry and 3 labs for armor in 1943. Is it enough? I tought I was a good wargamer but having my ass wiped three times in a row is hard for my sefl esteem!

[vypuero]

What difficulty level are you playing? I suggest you remember to always move oil units (air, tanks) by rail unless attacking or absolutely necessary. Don't move units unless they need to move, it uses up effectiveness.

[syagrius]

That is what I am doing Vyp. However planes and subs burn oil altough less than tanks. I am playing with slight advantage to Allies, with oil restriction and Fog of War. My current game is not already lost however I can see a shortage of manpower in the coming. I take too much casualities from the Russian so I suspect my infantry is not enough of good quality. I was just wondering if 2 labs is enough for infantry or should I put more.

[vypuero]

hmmm... well I always max labs out, but 2 or 3 for infantry should be ok, depends on what you do with subs. If you ignore them, i would put more on infantry.

[syagrius]

Ok I will try to max labs, thanks for the advice vyp.

Last night the eastern front collapsed again this time in 1943. For a couple of years I have momentum and then suddenly the Russians outnumber me almost 2 to 1. The Axis just dont have enough production points to max labs, repair damaged units, buy subs, having a decent luftwaffe in France etc...which is very realistic. Wow the game is very challenging for me. Or maybe I am just a bad CEaW player

I guess I will have to stop those Murmansk convoys and have more units if I want to beat the Commies