Axis&Allies board game

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Garth Vader
I don't always attack the US fleet as Japan. In my bad rolling experience I usually lose it all in the US counterattack. They can replace their fleet I can't. I'd probably hit the fleet of a good aggressive US player though because I don't want to have to worry about that fleet.

That's generally what happens if Japan attacks Pearl Harbour. The IJN will be no more, and the US can go island hopping.

[David Floyd]

If the US goes "island hopping", then the Allies generally lose the game.

[Gangerolf]

Ah. Axis&Allies, best board game ever. Maybe 2 years since last time I played it though.

Have any of you bought/tried A&A Europe or Pacific? What do you think about them?

[nato]

Just to reiterate what I said above, to make even a Russia Restricted game fair, the Axis needs to get a small bid, about 6 IPCs worth. This is almost always placed as 2 extra German inf in Libya.

Without that, the Indian counter on Egypt on UK1 is nearly certain to succede. Germany will prolly have to wait until G2 to take Egypt. This all is a fatal setback for Germany taking Africa. The game kind of revolves around that African income for Germany.

About a US Pacific strategy, that is considered exotic and risky. However, it is (or at least was) gaining in popularity just because its such a fun change of pace. It is fun to try after you get bored with the shuck, and gets the game out of the standard choreagraphy of moves.

Here is a great description of it by a guy named Dexdex:

http://www.spring1942.org/WarCollege/Goa/goa28.asp

(If you haven't already seen them, the other GOA corners are good reads also!)

Most of the time though Allies will just go with the standard shuck. It is well practiced, highly likely to work, and requires less preconditions than a Pacific strat.

So "island hopping" is fun if a lot of things go right for it on turn 1, and as a change of pace. However in the vast majority of games, and especially ones you really want to win, it doesn't happen.

[Urban Ranger]

I have only conducted the pacific campaign as the US in Axis and Allies, but it happened pretty much the same way as he described, with loads of subs and such. Subs are great because they can deny sea lanes to the enemy. With a large wolf pack the first strike ability can do massive damage to an enemy fleet before it can hit back.

[Jack_www]

Now that I saw this thread, I think once I get a new job I will get this game. It sounds fun to play.

[centrifuge]

I used to love to play as USSR,

1st turn, (I think that Vel mentioned this), everything from Karelia except maybe 1 infantry retreats back to Russia. This includes the AA gun. Russia's AA gun heads east along with a couple of infantry.

Once they take Karelia, the option to destroy the industrial complex is used.

This sets up an easy counter attack, since Germany will likely be spread a little thin by trying to fortify Karelia. They will be in an espescially tough spot if they also decide to take Causcus the same turn.

The best thing that could happen for a German player is to see the USSR trying to fortify Karelia. IMHO if the USSR does that the first turn they are toast.

[Shogun Gunner]

Originally posted by atawa
I only have the original rules but my strats:

Russia: basicly do nothing more then defend, build infantry.

Germany: Clear the seas around britain and build up tanks for the assault on Russia.

Japan: Take over east Asia in the first 2 rounds, build factory's and join Germany in the fight for Russia.

England: Basicly all they can do is build airforce and make strategic bombing raids into Germany.

US: Land in Africa and move east from there.

Are these your strategies or the Cliff Notes on WW2?

[DanS]

The best thing that could happen for a German player is to see the USSR trying to fortify Karelia. IMHO if the USSR does that the first turn they are toast.

Why is this the case? Russia can defend Karelia without caring whether it wins or loses. To take Karelia, Germany must commit high cost troops, which are then vulnerable to counter-attack.

[David Floyd]

On the contrary, if Russia abandons Karelia on the first turn, then Russia is toast. All Germany must do is this: Attack Karelia with 2-3 infantry and a bomber, vs. the 1 Russian infantry. They will win almost every time.

If Russia destroys the IC in Karelia, then they are extremely handicapped, in that they can only put troops in Russia. As Karelia is worth 3 IPCs/turn, that is also 1 less Russian infantry per turn.

But it gets worse. Once Karelia is gone, there is no Russian threat to Finland or Eastern Europe, and the Ukraine can easily be taken and held. Even the Caucasus can be traded back and forth. This cuts a LOT of income away from Russia, and gives it to Germany.

But, you say, Russia will just counter attack and go back to Karelia after Germany takes it. Great! Just what Germany wants! Now that there is no AA gun in Karelia, Germany can simply use its superior air power with its ground units to destroy the Russian army. Once the army in Karelia is destroyed, all Russia has to counterattack AGAIN with is the 6-7 infantry they built in Russia on the previous turn.

Looking even BIGGER picture, in this scenario Russia has no way to deploy reinforcements to stop the Japanese in Siberia, and no way even to transfer a couple of infantry to India or Persia to help the Brits.

No, once Russia loses Karelia, the Allies have probably lost.

[Garth Vader]

Well said DF.

[DanS]

Losing Karelia the first turn by no means loses the game for the allies.

[David Floyd]

Losing Karelia the first turn by no means loses the game for the allies.

Actually you are quite right, however, I was not addressing this point exactly.

What you are referring to is a G1 move where Germany stacks EVERYTHING they have in a push on Karelia, and probably takes it. This is perfectly alright, though, because the British have a UK1 counter, and Russia has an R2 counter before Germany gets to move again. Most likely, these counter attacks will be facing nothing but tanks.

This means that in a bid to win the game right away, Germany will lose ALL of its offensive ground support and most of its infantry - possibly even some air power - for the paltry gain of 3 IPCs. Sure, they knocked out much of the Russian army, but they won't be in a position to seriously threaten Russia for several turns, meaning that Russia can send a lot more forces east - and maybe, with British support, lock down EE.

Certainly, too, without the presence of a large German armored force in Europe, the US can shuck 12+ infantry per turn to France starting on US3 with no problem at all, and Britain can also come in with probably around 8.

From that standpoint, DanS, you are absolutely correct.

However, the situation I was addressing was one in which Russia simply pulls out of Karelia, and let's Germany take it with 2 or 3 infantry. That sets up a situation of trading back and forth, and gives a major economic and positional advantage to Germany for the reasons I described in my above post.

Play it out sometime - you'll see what I mean.

[nato]

Abandon Karelia first turn? No no no ... I mean no offense at all, but thats not the right thing to do.

Typically, Russia will hit Ukraine on first turn. The big question is whether they will take few enough hits to be able to take Ukraine or will they have to just strafe it (hit it to kill off some units, but not all). They need ... like 8 or so surviving inf to safely take the territory, thus getting 3 extra IPCs ("swing" of 6 total, because its 3 less for Germany) and killing the fighter. If the German defenders hit too many on the first round of combat, the Russians will have to retreat back to Karelia, leaving the fighter alive.

Note you want to be careful not to lose your precious 3 tanks, which is why you need the minimum surviving inf to protect them and make a German counter prohibitive.

After this they set up in Karelia with inf from Caucus, Russia, and new purchases, plus 1 or 2 fighters (1 if you sent the other east to force Japan to guard Sea of Japan trannies). This will be enough to prevent a German attack.

Usually Russia can put enough pressure on EE to force the Germans to abandon it for a turn. After that, the Germans have enough to move back into EE hard (hard means enough to hold it safely). Then most of the game Russia and Germany will trade Ukraine (sending an inf or two and fighters to take it back each turn).

Pressuring EE is why ITS A MISTAKE FOR RUSSIA TO BUY ONLY INF. You want to buy some extra tanks as well, like 3 maybe. The more mistakes Germany makes, the less pressure on Karelia, and the more tanks you can get away with purchasing. Ideally, these tanks will be placed in Russia, where they can pressure EE and also be used to threaten eastern territories that the Japanese will be advancing on.

Germany has a very difficult time setting up early on. They have to eventually hold Germany, EE, and WE hard ... but they lack the men to do this for a while. You want to pressure him early to force him to hold either EE or WE light (as in one inf, so you can trade it) early on.

The German response, before he can hold all Europe hard, will sometimes be to "rock the cradle." This means smashing a landing in WE while holding EE light one turn, then next turn swinging back to smash a force in EE and hold it hard, while holding WE light. The 2 movement of tanks and 1 movement of inf creates this situation.

Anyway, you want to pressure Germany, not abandon Karelia. Theres just no need to do that early on, and usually not later on either. Early on Germany is the one that has to abandon stuff, and later on the shuck usually means that Germany is long past being a real threat to Karelia.

These early Russian Front battles are what I was talking about above, the ones you can lose the whole game in one move on.

[DanS]

Typically, Russia will hit Ukraine on first turn.

Why would Russia hit Ukraine the first turn? It's a waste of time and the default rules forbid USSR first turn attacks in any event.