Axis & Allies:
Ralph Boerke's Tribute to Axis & Allies

Disclaimer: Axis & Allies is a registered trademark of Milton Bradley. The use of their trademark 'Axis & Allies' by Tacit Memnos Infinitum is not approved by Milton Bradley.

---

Axis &Allies: Strategy

Layout: [Top]

I have written the Strategy page based on my assumptions that there are a few strategic points on the map and some strategic or tactical goals one might follow to achieve the supreme strategic goal of winning the game.
The first strategic point is not. It is a scenario I call 'Pearl Harbour' which presents itself at the beginning of the game. Some of the US Pacific fleet is within range of a large part of the Japanese Fleet.
The second is also not about a strategic point but a tactic that has strategic ramifications. Strategic Bombing can break the back of an Axis power if enough Bombing power is brought to bear on it quickly enough.
The next nine zones or territories do represent strategic points. The first four are more important but all can be if the right situation develops.

The pages that follow describe the strong points and strategies of the individual powers in Axis & Allies.

Tactics is just that, the individual units and how to use them effectively.

The Art of War in Axis & Allies. My attempt at a Von Clausewitzian analysis of the 'mother of all board games'.

Axis &Allies Strategic Points:

Pearl Harbour: [Top]

Japan should not attack Pearl Harbour. Yes the US Carrier is pretty weak. But moving the Japanese Navy into this Sea Zone places the Japanese Fleet in range of the American Airforce which can crush it. If Japan takes some Infantry with it to land in Hawaii it must make sure it brings all of the forces it needs as there are now two attacks. What this does is deny the US from using the East USA Fighter in its retaliatory strike on the remnants of the Japanese Fleet (it can't land on Hawaii).

Ususally the Japanese will win these battles and control the mid Pacific for a few turns, but what does this get for Japan? It removes a threat. Japan moves back west and a smaller US Sub fleet can be built to harass the small Japanese fleet which must be rebuilt around the surviving capitol ships (Battleship and/or Aircraft Carrier; if any).

What it does for the US and the Allies. Japan will only have one Transport with which to land Infanty on the mainland (from the Philippines). Half of the Japanese Airforce will be used up in the Pacific battle. Again less fighting units in the Orient. Most importantly Japan will need another turn to regain its supply capacity (Transport). A greater capacity means more units can be shuttled from Japan to Manchuria. It is in the Orient where Japan will get its income. For the USSR Pearl Harbour means a few turns of concentrating on Germany, a respite from Japanese attacks. For the UK this means an extra turn or so to collect income from India or even placing a factory there. For the USA this means that it can build some cheap Transports and Subs and harass the Japanese and also try landing men in the South Pacific. Diverting the Japanese fleet's attacking units from its home waters and leaving its supply route vulnerable to the US Subs and any other new forces the US may purchase.

What Japan should do. Keep the entire fleet in the Japan SZ. It protects its Transports (can build more) and may draw the US Fleet to it where the US Fleet will be in range of the Japanese Airforce and attacking Subs! Hawaii is worth 1 IPC, Asia is worth 17! (5 USSR Asian territories, 2 US China territories and India and UK Mideast territories).

The US Response to the Japanese Fleet Buildup:

America should coalesce its fleet in the Western USA SZ. The USA should build another Sub and Transport and load its two Transports with 4 men, and have 2 Fighters on its ACC. Buying a few more Subs and another Aircraft Carrier and more fighters and another Transport will create a very large invasion force in the Pacific but this takes a few turns.

Strategic Bombing of Germany by the UK (and USA): [Top]

This strategy is sometimes useful. By investing in Airpower the UK can build a Bomber Fleet of 3 or 4 Bombers by its third turn. With this it can damage Germany from 4 to 24 IPCs per turn. Within a few more turns the UK could have 5 or 6 or more Bombers. This will damage Germany's Treasury by an average of 20 IPCs per turn. This will effectively limit Germany to a few Infantry purchased per turn (assuming Germany does not conquer the USSR during this time). If the UK gains Heavy Bomber Technology Germany is finished. Germany has a chance of hitting a Bomber each time it is used against the Factory. The AA Gun should destroy a Bomber on each run when the UK has 6 Bombers. Germany has a chance against this strategy if it finishes off the USSR by say the fifth turn before the full weight of the UK bombers takes its toll. If the USA also adds a Bomber or two then Germany will be damaged that much more. Germany can only hope to do a little damage itself with its lone Bomber. And hope that Japan takes advantage of this to expand rapidly and come to Germany's defense. One little problem with this - The USSR!

UK's decision! What usually happens is determined by the first turn's outcomes. If the UK still has a fleet and Germany has lost its Airpower then it will continue purchasing units for the fleet. If the UK still has a fleet and Germany still has Airpower then it will move the fleet to a safe location and save IPCs to build a more powerful fleet. But use some of the IPCs to buy a Bomber or two in the few turns it takes to save the IPCs needed to build the fleet. If the UK has lost its fleet then either pursue a massive bombing campaign purchasing a Bomber or two each turn or pursue a small bombing campaign buying one or two Bombers while saving IPCs for a new fleet or for other purchases (Fighters, Factory on Eastern Canada, ...).

Strategic Note: The UK should station its Bombers in Russia!!! From here it can hit the German Factory BUT can also hit any new Japanese factory in Manchuria, French Indochina Burma, and India! This forces Japan into buying AA Guns for its mainland Factories.

Tactical Note: If The US and Japan have large fleets and a battle is won by Japan or looks as if it could be won by Japan, the large UK Bomber force could reduce the odds effectively so a US domination of the Asian seaboard is possible. An unexpected move if the Axis are just looking at their factories as targets for these powerful attacking units.

The REAL cost of SBRs: On average a Bomber will inflict 3.5 IPCs in damage to an enemy. After five rounds this is 17.5 IPCs. I choose five here because the odds of the AAgun protecting the Factory is 1 in 6 of shooting down the Bomber. So the lifespane of the Bomber is 6 turns on average with the 6th turn the final attempt. The cost of a Bomber is 15 IPCs so the net outcome is 2.5 IPCs after 6 rounds with the defender losing 17.5 IPCs and the attacker losing 15 IPCs.

The Technology. Heavy Bombers and Long Range Bombers are both great to have. Technology itself is a large gamble but if Heavy Bombers can be obtained then the SBRs take on a whole new meaning and the enemy should be quickly dealt with.

Africa: [Top]

Africa is worth 12 IPCs including UK, German and the UK island (Madagascar) territories. If Germany gains this it robs the UK of 9 IPCs (needs a transport to get Madagascar). This drops the UK from 30 to 21 IPCs. This raises Germany from 32 to 41 IPCs. If Japan and/or Germany gain the other old world territories of India, Persia, and Syria-Iraq they gain another 5 IPCs at the UK's expense (Australia and New Zealand are another 3 IPCs). To gain Africa Germany needs to land forces into it. At game start Germany has 2 Infantry and 1 Armour in Africa but only has 1 Transport to land new units there. The UK has 2 Infantry and 1 Armour in Africa but has 3 Transports within range and 1 Infantry in Syria-Iraq (1 move from Egypt). And the USA has a Transport with which to invade West Africa. Germany is closer to Africa (slightly) and can pick off lone Transports in the Atlantic but usually only after they have dropped off their invasion force cargo. To ensure its conquest Germany will have to keep its Transport in the Mediterranean and will have to protect it. It is limited in the use of the Transport as well, i.e. entering the Black Sea can put it at risk of attack from USSR Fighters. To protect it it must stay out of range of enemy Aircraft and enemy naval forces; this is almost impossible against the UK Bombers. Another way to protect it would be to develop more naval units. An Aircraft Carrier is very useful on defense and offense but costs 42 IPCs (fully loaded). More Transports add the ability of large scale invasions but add only a little bit of protection to the single Battleship single Transport Fleet.

Generally what Germany has after the first turn describes how it will handle Africa. UK and USA responses to a German conquest of Africa. Small scale harassment raids will land a few forces in Algeria or French West Africa. Germany will have to get a larger force against these and this diverts German resources from the Eastern Front and the Western Wall. Once a large UK/USA fleet is assembled in the Atlantic it will have no problem landing forces in Algeria and then just plowing through north Africa. This is where a large German Fleet (with Air forces) can intimidate an Allied Fleet.

If Germany has no large Mediterranean Fleet then the Allied Fleet(s) can move against Italy.

Japan can try to gain Africa with a Transport or two. But it should first gain India and establish itself in the Orient. It also needs to ensure that its fleet in the Pacific is safe against the US fleet. The presence of a Carrier with Fighters or a Battlehisp is useful to go with the Transports to Africa.

Australia: [Top]

I have played Japan many times and hardly ever go for Australia. It is too far away and my fleet needs about three or four turns to invade it (and New Zealand) and return to home waters. If the US fleet has been destroyed and Japan still has a few large ships (say two Battleships and one or two Aircraft Carriers) and enough Transports and Subs to fend off any new US buildup. Then Japan should send 1 ACC with 2 Fighters and 2 Transports with 4 Infantry to Australia. (Infantry can be picked up from Borneo, New Guinea, and Solomons). This fleet can then move to Africa or South America! The bigger Fleet can be used to invade Hawaii and stop any US Fleet buildup. Aircraft in Hawaii can also bomb the Western USA Factory.

Note: To get from New Zealand to South America you can travel through the boxes and end up adjacent to Peru and Argentine-Chile in one move! And even make it into the South Central Atlantic (the word Allies) in ONE (two sea zones) naval movement!!!

UK Factories on Australia or India. Not for the first few turns as they can easily fall into Japanese hands. If the US Fleet has gained control of Pacific then the UK can think of placing a Factory in Australia to produce a Transport and then Infantry to be ferried to the mainland and to conquere the south sea islands. Fighters are also very good for defending the Factory and for use in assaults landing on US Carriers. This is usually for the end game when Germany is no longer a threat to the UK or the USSR and is just a matter of time before it collapses.

For the Allies to effectively use Australia the USA must have a large fleet stationed in the South West Pacific. It takes a while to resupply this fleet with fresh US Infantry in Transports to be used in gaining the islands and the mainland. But with a UK factory in Australia and a UK Transport or two the UK Infantry can relieve the US infantry and assist in defense on both land and sea.

Taking Australia on the first turn. Japan can try this but it will divide its fleet making the two halves easier for the US fleet to attack. The fleet that Japan brings to Australia is small and the Fighter can not attack the first turn. So all we have is a Battleship shot and 1 or 2 Infantry against the 2 Australian Infantry. Here the Japanese should only land 1 Infantry as it can then use the Battlship shot and get 1 UK Infantry. On the second turn it can pick up another Infantry (New Guinea or Borneo) and attack with a Fighter as well. However this does slow down the main Japanese thrusts onto the Asian mainland.

Hawaii: [Top]

Related to the Pearl Harbour option. Hawaii is important to Japan if it has gained supremacy of the Pacific. By stationing its fleet (or a powerful segment of it) in Hawaii and invading Hawaii and stationing Bombers and Infantry and perhaps a Fighter or two and an AA Gun on it it becomes a major staging area for an invasion of the USA from Alaska to Panama. This force also makes the USA build any new fleet in the Eastern USA and control of Panama becomes important to stop this fleet from entering the Pacific.

If Japan does not have a powerful fleet or the USA has an airforce which can destroy its fleet then Japan can leave a force of a number of Infantry and Fighters and Bombers on Hawaii which it can use to do Strategic Bombing on the USA.

Tactical Note: Stationing a Japanese Fleet around a Japanese island means that Fighters can land on the island during a defensive battle.

Brazil: [Top]

Brazil is another nation that is out of the way and hard for the Axis to get and keep. The few times I have done it is if the German Transport or Japanese Transports come from the Indian Ocean around the cape and into the South Atlantic (or sneakily via New Zealand!). I can then land one or two Infantry on Brazil. However the USA can in one turn move a Transport from the Eastern USA to Brazil and retake it so the placement of a Factory is dependent on how quickly I can reinforce the territory (usually only from Africa which in turn is supplied from Southern Europe and a Transport there).

Japan has surprised the USA a few times by taking Australia or New Zealand and landing in Argentina-Chile (invading a neutral for 3 IPCs) and then walking into Brazil. But the USA sees this and prepares a quick reconquest of Brazil. It is a quick move to (South) Africa from this sea zone!

Benefits of a US Factory on Brazil. None. The US is better off concentrating on either a Pacific Fleet (my preference) or an Atlantic Fleet. If Germany is dominant and has rolled great dice and destroyed the UK Fleet and is holding the USSR down and has conquered Africa. The USA would be better off buying two Transports for 16 IPCs in the Atlantic to try to relieve Africa or Finland-Norway and help protect the UK's new Fleet (UK should save its IPCs and purchase an Aircraft Carrier and a Transport and have the US fly two Fighters over to land on the ACC), rather than buy a Factory on Brazil and then it still needs to buy the Transports.

Normally taking Brazil by Germany or Japan is part of the end game after the USSR has been conquered and a large German or Japanese Fleet is threatening the USA. An economic victory is usually right around the corner anyways and Brazil is just a good place to get a foot hold on the continent and then walk through Venezuela-Colombia into the USA.

But if the USSR is holding out and Germany for some reason has a fleet to take Brazil then go for it. It is a large investment in resources and effort to hold it but taking it may mean you are strong enough to keep Africa. With a large fleet you can even threaten the UK or even the USA with invasion. But don't forget the USSR!

Tactical Note: In a recent game I played Japan had a Transport with 2 Infantry land on Brazil and stationed the Transport on the northern sea zone when it unloaded. Germany had four fighters stationed in Western Europe. When the US attacked the Japanese Transport, so its Transports (2) could drop off its men (4 Infantry), with a Bomber it denied this Bomber in the attack on Brazil. Luckily the 4 US Infantry lost against the 2 Japanese Infantry. The German Fighters then swooped down and finished off the US Transports and landed on Brazil. Thus protecting Brazil for a turn or two while Japan built a factory there. Once enough men had been built Japan moved against Venezuela and then up through Panama.

Gibraltor: [Top]

Gibraltor is an outpost territory on the west end of the Mediterranean. Normally I do not see Germany landing men there or Britain (or another Ally) landing there as the territory is worth 0 IPCs.

However I have seen British Aircraft land there if Germany has captured the northern part of Africa and some of the Middle East. In a scenario where Germany has a Fleet that can be easily destroyed (or must be destroyed) with Bombers from England they might only have enough range to land in Gibraltor.

Gibraltor is safe from German land attack as Germany would be halted by a neutral Spain. But Germany can use Aircraft to attack any airforces that have landed on Gibraltor. As Bombers defend poorly the UK should send Fighters to save the Bombers.

In the games I've played Gibraltor was used perhaps 1% of the time.

Spain: [Top]

Spain is an option for the Allies to land units onto the continent without fighting a battle. Would be a good move for the UK if it had, say, 4 Transports and 8 Infantry and did not want to fight a fortified Western Europe (save its airpower). Landing in Spain would cost 3 IPCs and Germany would now have to attack these forces from Western Europe and then refortify Western Europe for any followup attacks by the Allies. This spreads out the German defensive zone. The US could then land Fighters before a German attack and more Infantry onto Spain to fortify it against a German attack.

I haven't tried this and my opponents haven't either but it sounds like it could be a valuable option to open up a second front with relative ease.

If the USA and the UK were both in a position to launch an invasion of Western Europe then the UK could go against WE and the USA could go against Spain. The taking of WE would act as a buffer for the forces in Spain which would then be heavily reinforced the following turn or used for a subsequent attack on WE.

The isolation of Gibraltor would be removed but the effects of this are minimal. Axctually gives yet another area for reserves of Allied forces.

Turkey: [Top]

Unfortunately Turkey is not adjacent to Eastern Europe. If it was attached then the Allies could have a direct route from Asia (and Africa) onto Germany's doorstep. Germany would also have a second route into Asia the first being the Caucasus which is usually blocked by the USSR.

Possibilities for using Turkey could be for a German assault on the Caucasus. This would save moving men into Syria-Iraq and then to Persia to get to the Caucasus.

The advantages for taking Turkey are minimal with the present rules. However with some of the expansion rules and other game variants Turkey does take on the character it did in WWII, namely a powerful potential ally in a powerful position. Many "What If" scenarios start with Turkey joining the Axis or the Allies. For instance if Rommel had captured the Suez, Turkey might have joined the Axis and fought its historic enemy the USSR.

Mongolia: [Top]

The strategic key to Mongolia is that it separates the USSR from China. If Mongolia stays neutral then Japan can only advance onto Russia via the northern route through the USSR and the southern route through China. This two pronged attack does not give Japan the advantage of one front supporting the other.

With Mongolia in its grasp Japan can move a continuous front against the USSR. This could also be seen as a bad thing for Japan as the USSR can also use this to make its front continuous too.

This advantage is shortlived as Japan will move up to Russia's doorstep or be pushed back.

If the USSR is powerful then the advantage of the continuous front would go the the USSR.

I played a game where the Germans moved from Africa to India. This game involved a UK factoryin India and a US factory in Sinkiang. Japan had lost momentum and finally took these territories but the Allies were very strong in the USSR (15th turn). Germany took Mongolia with its 1 Armour. This opened up the territory so that on the next Japanese turn it could blitz its Armour from Sinkiang and attak a strong Soviet force in Yakut SSR.

Solomons to the East Indies: [Top]

This area of Japanese Pacific islands is strategic as it contains 8 IPCs for Japan, one third of its starting IPCs.

The USA can build a fleet to move against this area and capture parts of it relatively easily. A quick move to the Solomons brings the US Fleet within striking range of all of the islands including the Japanese Home Island. A possible staging area of the South Pacific sea zone will ensure that the US fleet is safe from a Japanese attack. From here to the Australian north-east sea zone is one turn and then the East Indies and possibly India or the Philippines the next turns.

Japan would normally counter this with a fleet which was located close to the mainland, in French Indo-China Burma, so as to gain land based airpower in its counterstrike capability. Japan would normally transport Infantry from Japan to Manchuria (or Burma for the turn the fleet moved south) but without the fleet Japan can only put three units per Factory into Asia each turn (maximum). Japan might send its Transports back to ferry men to the mainland.

A major disadvantage to this is the supply line for the US fleet back to the Western USA Factory. Any new Transports and Infantry must come from here, and follow the safe route to Australia and then the fleet. The US would lose some of its men in the attacks and without Infantry the Fleet is a toothless tiger capable of only doing military damage at sea without affecting Japan's industry or income.

If the UK wanted to build a Factory in Australia the presence of the US fleet would protect this Factory and aid in any attacks against the Japanese. US would attack some territory and the UK would relieve the US forces there for the US's next conquest.

A second US Fleet (Atlantic through Panama) or a small Submarine fleet could try to outflank the Japanese and attack in the northern Pacific. Also disrupt any Japanese Transports in the north.

Japan can afford to lose some of these islands as the cost in IPCs can remain small however Wake and Okinawa are within Bomber range of the Japan Factory. Japan can do nothing if the US really wanted to build a fleet and attack through the islands or even in the USSR. Japan can not afford to build a fleet AND keep pressure on the USSR and make conquests in Asia.

To the Next Chapter: Overview