Help with minor victory game plz

[Romulus]

Ok, when plane retreat from a battle they are, ideally, removed from the battle board and placed in the territory on the map where tha battle is fought.
(If you do not use the battle board leave the plane where they are, simply consider that they are not in the battle from the next round on)

In the non combat move you must land those plane in place where it is legal to do that: territories that you own from the start of the turn or seazone in wich a carrier is present.

If they win the battle… well… it is the same thing!  :-D They stay in the contested territory after the battle is resolved, and land in the non combat move.

In both case the planes may be treated independently and moved, individually, to a legal destination that they may reach.

For Historical A&A I have only downloaded the material, I have never printed it!  :-D
As I said I have had difficult times to convince my friends to play standard A&A historical may be too much for them!!!  :oops:

[SlipShot762]

Thanks so much to everyone, I’m pretty much outta questions for the time…save this:

In a typical 9 VC game, which VC are most often the Axis targets and in what order?

[Romulus]

@SlipShot762:

In a typical 9 VC game, which VC are most often the Axis targets and in what order?

Obvious !!! :-D

• German takes Leningrad on G1;  8-)
• Japan takes Calcutta on J3;  :-)
• German and Japan attack Moscow, using the 1-2 punch (German attack Moscow followed by Japan attack, Russia cannot reinforce between them).  :evil:

[way2slo]

@Jennifer:

Way 2 Slow,

That is why I suggested the possibility of letting the allies move one of their victory cities.  I think it should be limited so that if you move a VC then you have to keep it in the same nation’s territory and obviously, it cannot be on the same territory as another VC.

Might want to exclude any moves to N. America as well as it would be as bad as where they are now, only it would be the axis who can’t win instead of the allies.

So limit it to Australia, Africa or Asia.

Aww…  I want to see if the Axis can take St. Louis.  :evil:

[Guest]

I just had Denver as Japan for a round, but then I lost it…  :mrgreen:

[Romulus]

Las Vegas would be more intersting, maybe!  :mrgreen:

[axis_roll]

@ShadowHAwk:

well i think that 8 Vc is a bit to easy for axis although with a modification ( hold for at least 1 full round ) would be doable. Try keeping karrelia for a full turn with a full WRus stack next to it and a pending UK invasion at R2 with US support.
9 VC however is the same as 10 for the axis.
what do the axis have for options.
India karrelia moscow are really only feasable.

Sure you can take london but if you keep that 1 you won anyway.
Either US VC are also nearly impossible against a competent player.
So with 9 you have to take moscow and this makes defence for the allies way to easy.

The game either needs move CV’s so the allies have to spread to defend 9 of them or some have to be moved around. The whole idea of the VC is to make the players fight around the edges and this is also required for axis win if the allies can focus on a small front they will win.

Much talk arose from the lack of VC’s to make the game more than conquering/holding Moscow.

There are many lists of new VC to be added… I’ve seen lists with such cities as Egypt as a VC!

Anyways….

I am partial to the Enhanced version, which added 3 allied VCs: Stalingrad (Caucasus), Syndey (Australia) and Honolulu (Hawaii).

Of course the VC count to win was also modified.

@Enhanced:

1. 15 Victory Cities
-Stalingrad (Cau), Sydney (Aus), and Honolulu (Haw) are added as VCs for a total of 15
-Allies start with 9/15 VC, Axis starts with 6/15 VC
-Allies need 11/15 VC at the end of a ROUND (ie. US TURN) to win
-Axis need 10/15 VC at the end of a ROUND (ie. US TURN) to win

This opens up the game a bit as Moscow doesn’t need to fall and the Pacific is now really worht something with 2 VCs out there for Japan to go after and the allies having to defend.

[newpaintbrush]

@SlipShot762:

Hey im reading the tourney rules and I think we’ve been abusing tank blitz, help me with this if ya could.

We’ve been allowing tanks to blitz through occupied friendly spaces and unoccupied enemy spaces in BOTH the com and non-com phases……this is woefully incorrect isnt it, and partially explains why it seems germany is guaranteed lenningrad…Under what conditions exactly can tanks blitz?

Have we been allowing germany to throw more tanks than is legal against russia in the first turn?

And what about planes…unless im wrong it seems most of germanys planes can hit lenningrad on the first turn, like 3 or 5 of them…have we been screwing that up to?

Thanks in advance.

1.  Blitzing is combat movement.  You cannot move a tank into enemy territory, even if that enemy territory is unoccupied, during noncombat.

2.  Fighters have to land using their movement.  Leningrad is very vulnerable.  That is not a mistake.

3.  9 VCs is tournament standard.  8 is low.  10 is high.

4.  The Allies cannot protect Leningrad.  It is simply frickin impossible.  Therefore, in 8 VCs, the Allies must either take an Axis victory city, or protect the other VCs.

So - take W. Eur, S. Eur, Germany, Japan, Manchuria, or Phillipines.  Not possible early.
Or - protect E. US, W. US, London, Calcutta, and Russia.  Possible.  You have to build an industrial complex at India, and Russia has to divert a lot of forces to India early.  Against experienced Axis players, India eventually falls, but by that point, the Allies ought to be able to nab one of the other Axis territories (probably Phillipines).

In other words, for 8 VCs, you MUST do KJF with Allies.

I think 8 VCs makes for quite an exciting game.  9 VCs is just the old “imma force the axis to grind their way into moscow YAWN”

[newpaintbrush]

@ShadowHAwk:

Well how about 8VC but keeping them at least 1 complete turn. Capturing leninggrad aint that hard. But defending it. it a whole different ballgame.
Germany can at best move 10 inf 5 arm there. that will be going against the Wrus stack of 9 inf 2 art 4-6 tanks ( depending build R1 ) and 2 figs.
And after that UK2 also has a shot at that same zone ( after germany ) and germany cannot reinforce that much.

And this all relies on japan taking India on turn 1 ?

Sounds doable for the allies to at least survive till the end of round 2.

1.  Germany doesn’t have to stack Karelia on G1 because it just isn’t necessary.  Germany doesn’t even have to capture Karelia on G1.  With 12 inf 1 art produced on G1 and moving to Eastern Europe on G2, Karelia will fall and cannot be recovered on G3, particularly if G2’s build is 8 tanks.

2.  Likewise, Japan does not need to capture India on J1.

3.  It isn’t a question of “surviving until round 2”, but really, being able to sustain the defense of India, London, Moscow, Washington, and Los Angeles, while simultaneously trying to press on to capture an Axis VC.  That’s why the game MUST be KJF; any skilled German player can prevent the capture of Paris, Rome, and Berlin for quite a long time.  A dedicated KJF plan, though, can put pressure on Japan’s VCs (although it is by no means easy, and I think the Allies at somewhat of a disadvantage).

[Guest]

A true 8 VC game may require an ALLIED bid.

Of course that guarantees a short game… the Axis either wins in 5 turns or less, or the Allies WILL win…

[axis_roll]

@ncscswitch:

Of course that guarantees a short game… the Axis either wins in 5 turns or less, or the Allies WILL win…

Not to be a smart a$$, but isn’t that the point of an 8 VC game (short/quick)?

[Romulus]

@ncscswitch:

A true 8 VC game may require an ALLIED bid.

Of course that guarantees a short game… the Axis either wins in 5 turns or less, or the Allies WILL win…

Switch I am going to take seriously what you have said!  :-)

I do explain: I have a small numbers of friends that play A&A with me regularly, so I have not problem to play.
But… in my playing group there are also other people that I still have not convinced to play A&A, because they insist that it takes too much time! (shallow people they are)
they prefer to play Heroscape! And make also tournaments!!! And, evem worst, they dare to invite me!!!

But you have given to me an idea!!!
So I am thinking of organizing games with 8VC, with a bid for being the Axis, that the allied player may place immediatly on the board before R1 (indipendently from wich nations get the bid) and immediate victory at the end of the round (after the USA turn).
Maybe also 4 NA per side, with LHTR 2.0.

It may be a feasible thing? Or it will be a stupid attempt?

[Guest]

Let us know how it goes.

Perhaps a small Allied bid ($3) and 8 VC is a way to play a quick game… of course a quick game is a dice game… but if that is what it takes to get new players “hooked” then I am all for it!

[Romulus]

I will try it next week end this one will be a very bad week end for me! Full of work!

But I will try as soon as possible!

I agree with you that it will be a dice game, but the important thing is to show them that thinking is more important and also more enjoying!

[axis_roll]

Another balancing factor I’ve heard about (but not personally tried) is to give the allies an IC in India as part of the set-up.  This mean UK can place units in India UK1.

Sounds like a nice balancing move.

[triforce]

To be totaly honest I have always set a VC condition for victory (9 or 10), but never really get there.  There just comes a point in this game where you can tell who is going to win and then with the agreement of all players you call the game.  We just play until someone sues for peace.  :lol:

[Romulus]

Well triforce, I strongly agree with you!

The last discussion are only related an idea of Switch that I am willig to try for having short games. This short games should be used by me for having other friends to try A&A. Until now they did not want to play, having little time, and they prefer to play other games.
So we are wondering if was possible to play short games, that may shows A&A, arrive to a conclusion and are mre than a demo.

So just to recall all the idea, and to have other input summarize the rule.

I need a name so:

Axis&Allies Revised FastNDiceous    :)

• 8 VC game
• Bid for Axis. Allied may spend the IPC before R1, placing units without any limitation
• 4 for side, chosen
• UK IC in India

Other Ideas:

• US navy is not at Pearl Harbour (Sz 52) but is on the West Coast (Sz55) ???
• other ???

[newpaintbrush]

Fact is, Axis and Allies is a long ass game.

Allied bid in 8 VC?  Boo.  Give the Axis a chance.

[Romulus]

newpaintbrush, it is only an attempt to have a shorter game.
I would like to play A&A with myy ludic associations. We have weekly a gaming session in a Pub. Whe have an agreement with the pub management and we have three tables in a corner reserved for us, and we play! (and drink beer…)

So I was wondering about a “faster” version. I think that 8VC is slighty favourable for the Axis. So I will try:

• 4 NAs for side
• UK IC in India
• Bid for the Axis

I will try and … let you know.

[newpaintbrush]

1.  NAs heavily favor the Allies.
2.  You gave UK an IC in India?
3.  You want to give additional IPCs to the Allies?

It’s like watching a shaved monkey on fire.  You want to feel sorry for it, but it’s so interesting to watch, you pull out a videocamera instead.

My thought is, if you want a fast and vicious game of Axis and Allies, play 8 VCs with no funny stuff.  You don’t have to explain extra NAs.  The Axis try to smash into India, and the Allies desperately try to fight them off.

BTW, make the new guys the Axis.