Purpose: On December 7th, 1941 the empire of Japan launched an attack on pearl Harbor, bringing the United States into the second world war. However, with the wars in Europe escalating, the US first set off against Germany. The war took a litte over 3 years before Germany was stopped and Japan surrendered. The purpose of this experiment is to explore the what-ifs regarding the American war strategy, whether to target Japan first, go all out on both at the same time, or just stay out of it altogether!
Hypothesis: Top military experts were involved in the planning of the American WWII war strategy, thus it would be unexpected that Scientific AmeriKen could propose a better strategy. Then again, Scientific AmeriKen is pretty good at the Axis and Allies board game – therefore the hypothesis of this experiment is that a ScienKen war strategy will outperform US military generals.
Materials and Methods: Used in this experiment was the computer game Axis and Allies 1942 Online, based on the board game Axis and Allies. The game involves a world map, placed initial armies involving bombers, fighter jets, tanks, artillery, infantry, battleships and other naval ships. Each round involves purchasing new military units, attacking, non-combat strategic movements, and placing the newly purchased units. A total of 6 strategies were tested (discussed below), with the number of rounds until total victory (capturing all critical capitals and territories) used as the primary metric. ScientificAmeriken controlled only the United States while the game AI was used to control Germany and Japan, and allies Russia and United Kingdom. Standard dice were used as well as other standard settings.
The historical US based strategy is best described as a contain Japan in the Pacific theater while seeking the end of the German regime in the European theater, then seek the end of the Japan empire. This effort took a total of 3.1 years from the point in time the game Axis and Allies starts. Strategies attempted include:
1) All in against Germany
2) All in against Japan
3) Wait 3 turns before employing traditional strategy
4) Non-interventionist - Only supply allies unless attacked again (first being pearl harbor)
5) Go for the end of both regimes at the same time.
For comparisons, number of rounds was converted to months based upon the average rounds needed for the US based strategy. Each strategy was attempted 5 times.
Results: Data are presented below in Figure 1.
Notes – For strategy 2, the Allies lost in the 5th attempt – as the computers obviously cheated (and to simplify calculations) this result was discarded and a 6th attempt was made. For strategy 4, due to lack of attacking US assets in try 3, consent was manufactured by leaving a tanker unprotected near the European coastline. For strategies 4 and 5, excessive round counts were observed (as high as 118 or 22.8 years) before eventual victory. These attempts typically involved world domination by Japan and Germany, but an inept strategy for overtaking the US mainland, that allowed for a long drawn-out victory by the allies.
Other data: An attempt was made where all Allied countries were controlled by ScientificAmeriken with average victory by round 9.0 (1.7 years). A second attempt was made where ScientificAmeriKen controlled all Axis countries where Axis won by round 12.0 (2.3 years).
Conclusions: These data show that a Germany focused strategy was the most effective, ending the war approximately 0.4 years faster than the historical US strategy. However, all other strategies did not fare better. The Japan first strategy, which was slightly worse than the historical strategy, also resulted in a loss for the Allies and thus highly risky. Also, waiting 3 turns (~half year) to enter the war delayed victory substantially (~1 extra year). This raises a question that cannot be tested here that is perhaps the results of the war would have been better if the US entered earlier. Two strategies that were completely bad were essentially being non-interventionist (9.7 years longer) and going all out on both fronts at the same time (3.8 years longer). These strategies led to situations where the Axis should have won, but in any case, the world was in a much darker place in these scenarios. In conclusion, I think it could be said that the US did a decent job deciding what to do back then!
