1942 Scenario Optimal Turn 1

[Chernobyl]

So I am a bit nuts and love to craft what I believe to be the optimal moves at the start of the game.
The 1942 scenario has quite a bit going on and there's many opportunities for the axis to exploit the starting state.

Has anyone else played around with this scenario or am I the only one? I've spent quite a bit of time testing ways to cause maximum pain to the Allied sign while protecting against an unacceptable counterattack.

Here is what I found:
MIDWAY:
It's possible to Japan to "win" this battle 90% of the time. I define winning as destroying two USA carriers while not losing a single CV. The method for ensuring a victory is quite complex as the carrier bomber/escort mechanics alone are a bit of a nuance, retreats are possible, and careful end placement of the Japanese CVs is essential to make it possible to screen them from a counterattack (one attack from a sub or cruiser will cause the Japanese CV to retreat into the open where it becomes subject to further attacks). If the American player sends in the USS Hornet then they can reliably sink one Japanese CV, but this isn't really a good idea as the Hornet will then die on turn 2 to Japanese BBs.
I could go into much further detail if anyone is interested.

EGYPT:
I couldn't find a way to reliably kill the British tank. It's totally possible to do so but you need decent rolls. The British tank also sometimes retreats and gets away sometimes. This is too bad as that tank corps sits at Supply=4 which means it would be a full kill.
I don't really think it's worth the risk of going for the kill as the end setup leaves the axis units quite weak. The British player can often destroy the Ariete tanks with bombers (tactical + CV).
It's also possible to severely damage the Ritchie HQ and with excellent rolls you can even destroy it, but again it requires luck and the result leaves the Axis units a bit precarious.
A much more conservative approach involves swap-placing the panzers in the town and reinforcing them to level 10, and destroying only the forward British corps which has supply=4. This does way less damage to UK but the axis units are extremely strong for turn 2.

LENINGRAD:
The Soviets are really screwed here and I usually destroy an army and occupy a fort on turn 2. This requires railing the rail artillery from crimea right up to the Russian army, railing von rundstedt to talinn, and operating a tactical bomber from Egypt. But this causes the Soviet defenses to crumble fast and I think it's worth it. All those armies and the HQ get destroyed at supply <=4 so they are full kills, and many Axis units get freed up before the end of 1942. One important point is to place a sub or other vessel right next to Kronstadt (Leningrad port) to prevent Soviet units from drawing supply from the port itself. Once you use the bombers on turn 3-4 to help destroy the unit next to the finns, Soviets have no safe place to put their HQ and they start losing base supply due to siege rules. From then it's a matter of time. Make sure to swap-place a German army in the hex next to Leningrad on turn 1 because that hex does not face a wall from the Soviet fort you destroy first, and also the army can punish the Soviet player if they boldly go for higher supply by placing their HQ on Leningrad itself.
Soviets have a limited ability to counterattack from volkhov but Germans can counter by moving in an extra corps if necessary. They would also have to rail in one of their HQ which they suffer from a shortage of.

AGC/Moscow:
Soviets have a huge number of armies here and the Germans aren't set up to do much on turn 1. The Soviets can actually human wave advance against Rzhev and threaten to surround it. Germans can't destroy more than one unit in response so they will have to retreat. It may be prudent for Germans to rail or match in an extra corps into this area to slow down any Soviet push. The Soviets desperately need those armies upgraded and railed to the caucasus and Saratov/Stalingrad and in subsequent

AGS:
It is obvious that the Axis have the opportunity to do significant damage here. But maximizing the damage is challenging. The version I have going destroys two Soviet HQ, destroys or damages a few Soviet armies, and encircles several Soviet armies and corps. A Soviet AT is destroyed and one of their tanks gets mauled to make way for the panzers. Soviet fighter and bomber units get severely mauled. All of the Soviet encircled units on this front (3-4 armies, 2 corps, one cavalry) get destroyed at supply= 0 the next turn and the German units are safe in the attempts I made on the Allied side to punish.
It requires railing in some units to hold the original line to prevent your HQ from getting punched and to provide enough manpower to clean up the mess quickly.
There are other accomplishments the Axis player could opt for on turn 1 which are possible, such as capturing Voronezh and encircling a Soviet HQ, destroying a couple Soviet bombers, or killing off a couple Soviet tanks. But all of these involve tradeoffs and they might not be as safe.
I think the end result of the attack I use really puts the Soviets on the back foot as they lack sufficient HQ to make use of their high number of units, and the Germans are approaching both Saratov/Kuybyshev and the Caucasus extremely quickly.

[Chernobyl]

About the overall balance of the scenario, well it does seem dire for the Allies. The biggest problem is USSR which is dying.

Good points for the Allies:
It seems to me the Allies need to land somewhere ASAP. They start just about ready to create some LRAs and commit to a landing somewhere. Not sure if that would ideally be Italy or North Africa or elsewhere. Landing in Italy significantly reduces Italian morale. If Rommel got backstabbed and destroyed that would be a disaster for the Axis too.
France is also quite weak, but I'm not sure if the allies can really do as much immediate damage there.
In the Pacific, Japanese should really attack USSR and China. Japan most likely won't commit a second HQ to Burma areas, so overall the Allies are stronger there. A strategic bomber could also severely weaken Japanese supply there.
USA/UK can move some HQ+tac/medbombers to India or Egypt and these should be able to hit quite hard in good weather.
Japanese navy is distracted repairing after Midway and Allies have quite a high number of land units in Coral Sea region which they could use to make some landings. An extremely smart allied player might note the unit names of Japanese SF units as they start appearing in China and determining which Japanese NM islands are undefended. But an even smarter Axis player could rename the units. But that aside, the Japanese navy starts off busy which leaves room for some small called counteroffensive in the south Pacific.
Allies start with a very high number of DD units and 3 total S+I tech points for 3% random detections so it's extremely dangerous for Axis to raid with subs. Allies should take control of the convoy routes quickly.

I'm not an experienced MP player. Are the allies totally lost in this scenario?

[DavidDailey]

I am interested in this scenario. Are your comments made in regards to playing the AI or against humans? Because AI is stupid and useless. Do you think this might be a balanced scenario with two people playing against each other?

[Chernobyl]

I am interested in this scenario. Are your comments made in regards to playing the AI or against humans? Because AI is stupid and useless. Do you think this might be a balanced scenario with two people playing against each other?

Hi David thanks for your reply. My comments are with MP in mind. It's a static setup at the start, and I am considering what I believe to be worthy tactical moves by both sides (axis first turn, allied response). For example it is possible for soviets to destroy a unit or maul a German tank, but I don't really consider that a great idea for the Allies if it would lead to disproportionate Soviet losses on turn 2. But if there is some counterattack they could muster that cuts off German supply or liberates their forces without compromising safety, then that would be a refutation of whatever the Axis did on turn 1.

I'm also trying to go for "certain" outcomes that the Axis can achieve. Some of this requires sophisticated manipulation of HQs, sequence of action etc.

I'm kind of hoping it's balanced, though a more experienced player might tell me it's not. Allies #1 problem is Russia only has level 1 Infantry Weapons and level 0 AA.

[Chernobyl]

For illustration, I added what the attack in Russia looks like (before I shuffle around HQs and force march/rail a few more units in)

[Umeu]

haven't tried it much, but could give this a try if you want. Maybe as a hotseat, and just email the save around? This way we can go back and try out different things. I don't really want to play the game out until the end but I also like to find out the best opening moves.

At a quick glance, it seems the Axis are massively favored in Russia, since Russia has no anti air capacity, and they are down in infantry tech for at least a year. However, the Allies I think are favored everywhere else on land. I think Midway is not that relevant, though the lvl 3 uboat seem threatening the RN should be able to stabilize the situation I think. So it just comes down to finding a way for Russia to buy as much time as possible before surrendering, which seems inevitable at first glance.

Axis income seems to be around 700mpp + rising for Germany, 120 for Italy and 450 for Japan. So 1270 ish total.

Allied income seems to be around 1950 total. So the difference is about 700.
400 uk
500 us
800 ussr
100 ind
150 ch

It might be somewhat balanced, but it largely depends on if there are ways for Russia to buy 1 or 2 years worth of time.

[Chernobyl]

Umeu I sent you a couple pms