-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Keep US WE low and don't Infantry rush early.
Every time Germany (or an axis ally) did play aggressive and inf rushed - and every time they lost.
I have played Germany once to the end in MP. When we had US WE he conquered Japan instead of invading France, since Japan rushed and fought in India while I built a lot of HQ units.
I am really looking for my next MP game (actually I can't play for one more week due to RL issues) and hopefully I can play an Axis country and my allies are willing to work together and use strategy instead of blind rushing. "Defensive" playing does usually not work if your allies conquer stuff like crazy... and since rushing does not work I'd really like to know if a more historical way of playing (not attacking before Sudeten event at least) pays out...
Every time Germany (or an axis ally) did play aggressive and inf rushed - and every time they lost.
I have played Germany once to the end in MP. When we had US WE he conquered Japan instead of invading France, since Japan rushed and fought in India while I built a lot of HQ units.
I am really looking for my next MP game (actually I can't play for one more week due to RL issues) and hopefully I can play an Axis country and my allies are willing to work together and use strategy instead of blind rushing. "Defensive" playing does usually not work if your allies conquer stuff like crazy... and since rushing does not work I'd really like to know if a more historical way of playing (not attacking before Sudeten event at least) pays out...
hard answer
Fact is i have yet to see Axis winning in MP if SU is human player.
At the end, despite what others say, playing any axis country is far more difficult than pick an ally country (except france
).
The IC and manpower of Allies double the ones of Axis. and so, time is for Allies.
Said this, one would say that quick aggression and build rush is the way cause the only advantage Axis has is the starting position and tech.
However, if axis behaves aggressive, then US and SU will be in war earlier and so they'll have even more IC (CG going down).
Honestly, i don't know and don't know if in multiplayer axis has really any chance (unless allies players are real newbyes).
Last game i played, i took SU. I played quite shitty and not concentrated. Axis attacked me when i was eating, when i was back to comp he was already advancing towards moscow. I made many mistakes, which eneded in losing 90 divisions in encirclement battles.
Germany conquered moscow and stalingrad. But at the end, Germany lost that game too, and was losing even before Allies landing in europe.
I mean, i as SU played maybe the worst game in MP ever while German player played very smart. But SU won anyway.
It's just too easy for US and SU. Maybe the key is to take out USA very early (taking out UK is useless IMO) but it would be very hard and if you fail, you have US in war in '36 !
Fact is i have yet to see Axis winning in MP if SU is human player.
At the end, despite what others say, playing any axis country is far more difficult than pick an ally country (except france
).The IC and manpower of Allies double the ones of Axis. and so, time is for Allies.
Said this, one would say that quick aggression and build rush is the way cause the only advantage Axis has is the starting position and tech.
However, if axis behaves aggressive, then US and SU will be in war earlier and so they'll have even more IC (CG going down).
Honestly, i don't know and don't know if in multiplayer axis has really any chance (unless allies players are real newbyes).
Last game i played, i took SU. I played quite shitty and not concentrated. Axis attacked me when i was eating, when i was back to comp he was already advancing towards moscow. I made many mistakes, which eneded in losing 90 divisions in encirclement battles.
Germany conquered moscow and stalingrad. But at the end, Germany lost that game too, and was losing even before Allies landing in europe.
I mean, i as SU played maybe the worst game in MP ever while German player played very smart. But SU won anyway.
It's just too easy for US and SU. Maybe the key is to take out USA very early (taking out UK is useless IMO) but it would be very hard and if you fail, you have US in war in '36 !
there is no good plan for the reich
as in RL axis dont stand a chanse agaist human players
Well, the only chance is if the Axis really play as a team IMHO.
I have checked some stuff in SP which I want to try out in MP - but usually you have at least one newbie/uncooperative/superaggressive axis player which makes it impossible to work on a real strategy.
Maybe I should also join a group of regular players instead of pickup-games
I have checked some stuff in SP which I want to try out in MP - but usually you have at least one newbie/uncooperative/superaggressive axis player which makes it impossible to work on a real strategy.
Maybe I should also join a group of regular players instead of pickup-games
there is no good plan for the reich
Oh ye of little faith...
Axis definetely have to play as a team to have a chance, and preferably all 3 axis nations should be human controlled.
If you place most of your troops on your border with Austria and demand territory constantly, you should get them annexed by april, making your IC close to 420.
I have found that if you wait too long, the allies and SU will outproduce you. A pretty good tactic might be to just doing research in 36, and when 37 comes, appoint Erich Hoepner (fire support-guy) as Chief of army (or was it staff?). He will make artillery brigades and research cheaper (only good if you intend to use artillery brigades of course). If you balance your production and research pretty much 50/50 you should be able to have a good amount of troops in mid-38. Sometimes it is even possible to take out Poland without the French DoW (if Poland is paternal autocrat), but at this point such a Dow should not be any problem for you.
The appointment of Hoepner usually works good for me, as i have never experienced any significant number of hard units (tanks etc) in France or Poland so for those campaigns i use mostly artillery brigades.
And most imortantly- never build a unit without a brigade! You have the IC to attach them. If you go for the cheaper way to produce a lot of plain units, you will run out of manpower.
It is also important that Japan can bound large SU forces in Siberia, and that they do as much damage as possible to the allies in Asia (Malaysia, Indochina, India, Indonesia, maybe even Australia and New Zeeland).
And of course- prioritize the electronic techs in order to get the research time/cost reduction and IC raises!
These suggestions however is made from my multiplayer experiences, and I'm sure this would differ a lot depending on who you're playing against.
If you place most of your troops on your border with Austria and demand territory constantly, you should get them annexed by april, making your IC close to 420.
I have found that if you wait too long, the allies and SU will outproduce you. A pretty good tactic might be to just doing research in 36, and when 37 comes, appoint Erich Hoepner (fire support-guy) as Chief of army (or was it staff?). He will make artillery brigades and research cheaper (only good if you intend to use artillery brigades of course). If you balance your production and research pretty much 50/50 you should be able to have a good amount of troops in mid-38. Sometimes it is even possible to take out Poland without the French DoW (if Poland is paternal autocrat), but at this point such a Dow should not be any problem for you.
The appointment of Hoepner usually works good for me, as i have never experienced any significant number of hard units (tanks etc) in France or Poland so for those campaigns i use mostly artillery brigades.
And most imortantly- never build a unit without a brigade! You have the IC to attach them. If you go for the cheaper way to produce a lot of plain units, you will run out of manpower.
It is also important that Japan can bound large SU forces in Siberia, and that they do as much damage as possible to the allies in Asia (Malaysia, Indochina, India, Indonesia, maybe even Australia and New Zeeland).
And of course- prioritize the electronic techs in order to get the research time/cost reduction and IC raises!
These suggestions however is made from my multiplayer experiences, and I'm sure this would differ a lot depending on who you're playing against.
Originally posted by MAC
Maybe I should also join a group of regular players instead of pickup-games
No doubt! I wouldn't think many, if ANY pickup games ever get completed. A good solid regular playing group is the way to go IMHO. In a regular group, at least you can be reasonably certain that one of the players isn't going to drop out if he starts getting spanked.
Hm, Bluestew I played meanwhile 5 finished pickup games - ranging from 6 to 22h (in 2 chunks). It's not impossible
The axis certainly can win in multiplayer. In our game humans played UK, France, Russia, Germany and Italy (1936 Standard v1.03b scenario). Germany and Italy planned well and coordinated well (careful to not antagonize the USA).
In January of 1939 the axis started into the Balkans (Russia had brought Romania into their alliance via diplomacy) patiently taking Yugoslavia, Albania, Bulgaria and finally Greece. Upon declaring war on Greece (January 1940) the allies war entry reached 100% and France and England attacked (ineffectively).
Italy drove hard for Suez and closed the Suez canal gaining control over the Mediterranean.
Germany was patient finishing up in the Balkans and making sure Italy was ok. Then on February 29, 1940 lightning struck through Luxemborg to Metz, paradropped onto Nancy and then panzer divisions rolled into Dijon trapping half the French army in the Maginot line. By March 11th it was clear that France was a lost cause. Germany finished them up by Mid April 1940.
At the beginning of May, Germany invaded England. Initially it was tough fighting but a couple critical mistakes by the UK player led to victory for Germany. With England and France completely defeated, Russia resigned accepting that they would be next.
(This took about five weeks of four hour sessions to play out, with an average of about three crashes per session)
- Mithel
In January of 1939 the axis started into the Balkans (Russia had brought Romania into their alliance via diplomacy) patiently taking Yugoslavia, Albania, Bulgaria and finally Greece. Upon declaring war on Greece (January 1940) the allies war entry reached 100% and France and England attacked (ineffectively).
Italy drove hard for Suez and closed the Suez canal gaining control over the Mediterranean.
Germany was patient finishing up in the Balkans and making sure Italy was ok. Then on February 29, 1940 lightning struck through Luxemborg to Metz, paradropped onto Nancy and then panzer divisions rolled into Dijon trapping half the French army in the Maginot line. By March 11th it was clear that France was a lost cause. Germany finished them up by Mid April 1940.
At the beginning of May, Germany invaded England. Initially it was tough fighting but a couple critical mistakes by the UK player led to victory for Germany. With England and France completely defeated, Russia resigned accepting that they would be next.
(This took about five weeks of four hour sessions to play out, with an average of about three crashes per session)
- Mithel
as we have seen in one of the latest games...
who was the name of that french axis player again... ?
Originally posted by L'effaceur
as we have seen in one of the latest games...
who was the name of that french axis player again... ?
I'm afraid I can only remember the name of the UK player
Ok, new questions:
Is it better to look East or West first? (or for that matter North).
WHEN is the best time to attack? (early - midgame - late)
how many resources into the land-sea-air military arena?
Is it better to look East or West first? (or for that matter North).
WHEN is the best time to attack? (early - midgame - late)
how many resources into the land-sea-air military arena?
The Axis starts off with a superb advantage.
Yes, co-ordination with the Axis powers (all three) is a must. As UK i was once slaughtered rather humilitatingly...by a combined Axis attack. Not so much on land but at sea. The biggest weakness of UK is its convoys to the british empire. Co-ordinate the german subs and Japanese navy and hurt the Allies with one fell blow. You can cut off the UK convoys very quickly and actually starve the UK of its vast resources. Japan must take the far east fairly quickly and would required a very good player. Vietnam, Hong Kong, Singapore and the Dutch East Indies must fall in the initial onslaught.
For the Italians? well, lets just say they're be better at home making pasta sauce for the axis....heh, but Italy can be a major factor by distracting UK at North Africa. Most times (with Limited Techsharing houserule in place) Italy has a big problem with North Africa. Plus really, all the IC on North Africa can easily be substituted with Switzerland. Italy can help by taking on the UK and French Navy in the Med and then finally island hopping in the Atlantic. Let Italy handle all of Africa. Lend a nice Armored/Mech Army to Italy and let them roam.
The Early Infantry rush by Germany is still a fairly good idea if you can strike a bargain with the Russians. The Tech edge of Germany gives them all the edge they need for early DOWs.
I would say an easterly assault on Russia would be best for Germany. Basically securing your Eastern Flanks by meeting Japan in the middle of Russia will give you security..allowing you to deploy all your troops on the western front.
So, basically the best German tactics would be co-ordination with your allies.
Yes, co-ordination with the Axis powers (all three) is a must. As UK i was once slaughtered rather humilitatingly...by a combined Axis attack. Not so much on land but at sea. The biggest weakness of UK is its convoys to the british empire. Co-ordinate the german subs and Japanese navy and hurt the Allies with one fell blow. You can cut off the UK convoys very quickly and actually starve the UK of its vast resources. Japan must take the far east fairly quickly and would required a very good player. Vietnam, Hong Kong, Singapore and the Dutch East Indies must fall in the initial onslaught.
For the Italians? well, lets just say they're be better at home making pasta sauce for the axis....heh, but Italy can be a major factor by distracting UK at North Africa. Most times (with Limited Techsharing houserule in place) Italy has a big problem with North Africa. Plus really, all the IC on North Africa can easily be substituted with Switzerland. Italy can help by taking on the UK and French Navy in the Med and then finally island hopping in the Atlantic. Let Italy handle all of Africa. Lend a nice Armored/Mech Army to Italy and let them roam.
The Early Infantry rush by Germany is still a fairly good idea if you can strike a bargain with the Russians. The Tech edge of Germany gives them all the edge they need for early DOWs.
I would say an easterly assault on Russia would be best for Germany. Basically securing your Eastern Flanks by meeting Japan in the middle of Russia will give you security..allowing you to deploy all your troops on the western front.
So, basically the best German tactics would be co-ordination with your allies.