yeah, but its imho easier for the axis in the first 10 games you play. allies require precise tactical micromanagment that fits in strategic balance. axis can mess around more… im still not convinced either side has an advantage.
The money! The money! Axis have more :-P!
From a big picture view, the game really comes down to UK and Russia vs. Germany and Italy. And Japan vs. USA.
Japan > USA
Germany-Italy ??? UK-Russia
What makes the game so difficult for the Allies is that I’m not convinced UK and Russia combined can take down Germany and Italy. Germany is very strong in 1941. UK is strong too in 1941 and Russia does what it always does. Where the game comes down to is Italy. Italy is the wildcard. And with NOs, Italy grows too strong too quickly.
The main alternative is:
Germany-Italy < USA, Russia, UK (KGF)
This is the strategy most players are familiar with. But by leaving Japan unchecked, can the Allies win the game? I’m not sure about this yet.
My friends and I are conventional in our play. We passed over AAR, playing only a couple games, and now we’re big on AA50. We usually do not buy tech dice, unless a nation can afford the risk. At the start of the game, it still is not attractive enough to waste not buying units all out.
To me, this game is about tempo, just like chess. The Axis start out with it and the Allies need to come up with a big push early. I’ve seen US stack up Transports for a Euro-landing round 3 or 4. Germany can’t wait to pin Russia down by then. To me, the US and England need to get everything they can going on Round 2. I know this is risky, but then so is throwing everything at Russia for the Germans.
Taking Italy before France is viable depending on the board, but it’s also a big waiting move (tempo loss) seeing that it doesn’t really effect Germany financially.
It’s a good analisys, TGMoses, specially with that sneaky italians creating mess all places and disrupting soviet blockings. I’ll add:
So KJF is not a viable move as it was in Revised
But the triple against west axis (KGF) is not even possible of do if Japan focuses in USA instead of running after soviets. KGF is only possible if Japan decides let allies do it, making KGF is leaving all the initiative to axis. Polar Express is too powerful with a Japan that starts with 5 trannies and colects much more than USA. Also, the old trick of annoying Japan with soviet tanks and some infs here and there (in case of Polar Express) is ended becuase those buffer zones called China and Siberia (both much larger than in Revised). And a JTDTM is still too powerful because the southern path by India is not much more large than in Revised
I think allies can win only with poor axis playing that involves:
I think you can even do one of them and still win easily. I think 2 or 3 of them can start giving allies a chance, but probably it’s better if axis make all the 5 mistakes
By now, the only thing allies can try without axis mercy is try kill the italian fleet as soon as possible, but it’s costly if Italy buys enough boats. Only when italian navy is dead can allies really start trying landings in Europe
My friends and I are conventional in our play. We passed over AAR, playing only a couple games, and now we’re big on AA50. We usually do not buy tech dice, unless a nation can afford the risk. At the start of the game, it still is not attractive enough to waste not buying units all out.
To me, this game is about tempo, just like chess. The Axis start out with it and the Allies need to come up with a big push early. I’ve seen US stack up Transports for a Euro-landing round 3 or 4. Germany can’t wait to pin Russia down by then. To me, the US and England need to get everything they can going on Round 2. I know this is risky, but then so is throwing everything at Russia for the Germans.
Taking Italy before France is viable depending on the board, but it’s also a big waiting move (tempo loss) seeing that it doesn’t really effect Germany financially.
Finally. Someone who uses the phase “tempo” correctly. :wink:
- USA cannot face Japan alone: they need chinese aid (China? rolleyes), UK aid (from were?, play 1942 or Revised) or soviet aid (Moscow is too far)
So KJF is not a viable move as it was in Revised
Several other reasons why KJF does not work:
Russia can’t do anything meaningful. The stretched Siberian front works both ways. The most Russia can do is send troops through China.
Japan goes before UK. This is HUGE. The Allies cannot dogpile Japan Rd1. And provided Japan knows ahead of time that the Allies will be pursuing some kind of Pacific first strategy, they can put themselves in good position to attack India J2.
The Axis make more money - especially Japan. By virtue this makes any KJF strategy more difficult to employ
Japan starts the game with too much beef. USA has to wait until at least USA2 (assuming all naval builds early) to match Japan’s starting navy
- Planes! Japan, I feel has, too many planes in 1941. This means they can stymie most Allied counterattacks.
By now, the only thing allies can try without axis mercy is try kill the italian fleet as soon as possible, but it’s costly if Italy buys enough boats. Only when italian navy is dead can allies really start trying landings in Europe
I agree. Stunting Italy’s growth may be the Allies best way of dealing with the Axis.
Perhaps USA focuses on keeping liberating Africa, while UK bombs Italy’s navy?
USA subs early keeps Japan consolidated, makes her buy some DD’s. Slows her growth at a minimal cost to USA. USA can help in africa, but I have been toying with a way to eliminate the Italian fleet on UK 2, regardless of what the axis do unless they take AES G1… but then the UK SZ2 fleet would live and be a pest that way.
Germany needs to pick her poison (sz2 or AES). I am still not sure which is worse?
Many contend a softening of AES is enough, but I am not so sure.
The key to the axis (early) is Italy, if she can get going, it will be an uphill battle for the allies.
Great minds think alike. :-D
I also had the same strategy in mind.
This involves USA keeping Japan off balance by sending subs to the Pacific. It isn’t a full fleet, but forces Japan to extend. Secondly, USA must liberate Africa at all cost. Morocco is closer to USA than France. UK has the dual role of harassing Axis industry and navy, while also striking Germany where she’s weakest. Russia does what she always does.
I haven’t thought of a guaranteed way to sink Italy’s navy UK2. How’s that been working for you?
Yes, Italy is the key to the game. An invasion of the boot is far fetched. But we must focus on containing her.
but I have been toying with a way to eliminate the Italian fleet on UK 2, regardless of what the axis do unless they take AES G1… but then the UK SZ2 fleet would live and be a pest that way.
Germany needs to pick her poison (sz2 or AES). I am still not sure which is worse?
Many contend a softening of AES is enough, but I am not so sure.The key to the axis (early) is Italy, if she can get going, it will be an uphill battle for the allies.
The UK 1 bomber build works very well. I’ve done it twice and I was extremely satisfied with the results. The problem that arises is that when Germany uses the bomber in sz2(instead of Egypt) and clears sz12 the UK can have a hard time getting it’s navy off the ground early if Germany builds at least 1 aircraft every turn because the UK will begin to rapidly lose income and with such a big head start by the German air force the US will have to bolster the UK fleet.
As a trade off, I like it. Nothing hurts the Axis more than losing the Italian fleet before they can really do any damage in Africa.
Couple that with the UK using it’s remaining bombers(after sinking the Italian fleet) to raid the Italian factory with the US picking up the slack as the UK bombers fall to AA and Italy will have a hard enough time defending itself let alone helping Germany against Russia.
but I have been toying with a way to eliminate the Italian fleet on UK 2, regardless of what the axis do unless they take AES G1… but then the UK SZ2 fleet would live and be a pest that way.
Germany needs to pick her poison (sz2 or AES). I am still not sure which is worse?
Many contend a softening of AES is enough, but I am not so sure.The key to the axis (early) is Italy, if she can get going, it will be an uphill battle for the allies.
The UK 1 bomber build works very well. I’ve done it twice and I was extremely satisfied with the results. The problem that arises is that when Germany uses the bomber in sz2(instead of Egypt) and clears sz12 the UK can have a hard time getting it’s navy off the ground early if Germany builds at least 1 aircraft every turn because the UK will begin to rapidly lose income and with such a big head start by the German air force the US will have to bolster the UK fleet.
As a trade off, I like it. Nothing hurts the Axis more than losing the Italian fleet before they can really do any damage in Africa.
Couple that with the UK using it’s remaining bombers(after sinking the Italian fleet) to raid the Italian factory with the US picking up the slack as the UK bombers fall to AA and Italy will have a hard enough time defending itself let alone helping Germany against Russia.
I totally agree with you, especially regarding the trade off (sink one navy before building your own)
My one tweak on the UK2 attack on the Italian navy involves Gibralter as a staging area for the UK ftrs on UK1. Not a ground breaking strategy as I know others have employed that as a base. I believe our play group will be leaning towards a G1 IC buy in France as it allows a Germany navy build G2 to help keep the Italian navy on top of the water instead of below it. However, I think that cost will be hard for Germany to bear as it would be $15 G1 and most likely at least $14 (a/c) G2 to save the Med Axis navy in SZ13.
The next time you guys play as UK, I want a detailed AA report of how you implemented this strategy and what the results were for you. ;)
Germany needs to pick her poison (sz2 or AES). I am still not sure which is worse?
Many contend a softening of AES is enough, but I am not so sure.
The more I see of the strength of the Allies, the more I’d say Egy is FAR MORE important. I’m very close to saying that if Ger lets the UK ftr live it is almost game over.
The amount of pressure the Allies can bring on Afr and Europe in rds 1-4 is just too great and that is assuming the Egy ftr dies, but if that thing lives to flee, ouch.
Germany needs to pick her poison (sz2 or AES). I am still not sure which is worse?
Many contend a softening of AES is enough, but I am not so sure.The more I see of the strength of the Allies, the more I’d say Egy is FAR MORE important. I’m very close to saying that if Ger lets the UK ftr live it is almost game over.
The amount of pressure the Allies can bring on Afr and Europe in rds 1-4 is just too great and that is assuming the Egy ftr dies, but if that thing lives to flee, ouch.
One ftr is THAT important?
I guess our gaming group hasn’t seen that yet.
Yes. :-D
No, it is the domino effect that follows. It just so happens the ftr is the last casualty in Egy. I’d say the same thing if it were an arm or two. Egy is the key moreso then the unit.
It is just like in Classic or Revised, the Axis need Egy in rd 1. More specifically for AA50 the Axis need Ger to clear Egy. Otherwise Italy is crippled rather quickly. UK stack Per on UK 1 (~5 inf, 1 rt, egy arm ftr if survive) builds Sz 8 fleet, moves 2 inf to Rho from Safr. UK 2 can potentially move Heavy to Trj (or wait in Per for another turn) while UK drops 4 units to Alg. US follows with 4 units to Alg + 4 ftrs, 2 boms. Ita fleet dies in Rd 3 and Axis never get beyond SUD. Germany will never be able to push through Russia and Rome is immediately threatened from Sz 12 and Alg landings.
Major Adv Allies. Japan is irrelevant. By the time they get to Mos (rd 6-7) Ger and Ita have been boxed in for two rds. Now it is the 3 Allies vs. Japan.
AA50 is no different then Classic or Revised. :-)
Yes. :-D
No, it is the domino effect that follows. It just so happens the ftr is the last casualty in Egy. I’d say the same thing if it were an arm or two. Egy is the key moreso then the unit.
It is just like in Classic or Revised, the Axis need Egy in rd 1. More specifically for AA50 the Axis need Ger to clear Egy. Otherwise Italy is crippled rather quickly. UK stack Per on UK 1 (~5 inf, 1 rt, egy arm ftr if survive) builds Sz 8 fleet, moves 2 inf to Rho from Safr. UK 2 can potentially move Heavy to Trj (or wait in Per for another turn) while UK drops 4 units to Alg. US follows with 4 units to Alg + 4 ftrs, 2 boms. Ita fleet dies in Rd 3 and Axis never get beyond SUD. Germany will never be able to push through Russia and Rome is immediately threatened from Sz 12 and Alg landings.
Major Adv Allies. Japan is irrelevant. By the time they get to Mos (rd 6-7) Ger and Ita have been boxed in for two rds. Now it is the 3 Allies vs. Japan.AA50 is no different then Classic or Revised. :-)
I do not agree that the FTR is so important as is the reducing of the UK unit in Anglo-Egypt on G1.
J1, 3 loaded tpts and a full carrier (and maybe a cruiser) should be able to hit Trans Jordan J2 before UK can sink the Italian navy UK2. In this sensem the UK ftr is not as critical as one might think.
It is just like in Classic or Revised, the Axis need Egy in rd 1. More specifically for AA50 the Axis need Ger to clear Egy. Otherwise Italy is crippled rather quickly.
Anglo-Egypt is very important turn 1, I agree. Only once in our FTF gaming group have we forgone SZ2 G1 attack with the bomber. Germany actually took A-E on G1. Germany also developed Jet ftrs on G1 with 3 researchers.
However, the Axis still lost. Yes, the allies got some rolls in their favor that might have ended it much quicker than it could have been for the axis. The UK navy was built UK1 and ruled the Atlantic from round one on…. trading France every turn, and with USA getting into the mix, Northwest Europe and Norway too. UK had too much money for Germany too handle, and the US small but effective pacific investment bother Japan just enough to keep them several turns from threatening Moscow.
We agreed the axis mis-played the control of France, and future games may prove that the UK BB in sz2 is NOT the anchor to victory that she proved in this match.
The only thing I know for sure is that this game is very nicely balanced. :-) :-) :-)
@TG:
The next time you guys play as UK, I want a detailed AA report of how you implemented this strategy and what the results were for you. ;)
As requested….
Germany bought the IC G1 but didn’t try to attack Anglo-Egypt G1 as has been the history of our playing group. Because of this trend, I developed the UK ftr base in Gibralter plan. UK purchased an IC for Anglo-Egypt UK and 2 bombers. Germany did indeed add to the navy in sz13 on G2 (2 DD and a/c). This was costly but did save the Med navy as the allies figured it was best to move into Anglo-egypt strong and invest in a navy of their own in SZ2. A desperation push on moscow (via an italian tank opening) by Germany on turn 3 failed since US developed long range US 2 to cover Russia with an additonal ftr and bomber.
J1, 3 loaded tpts and a full carrier (and maybe a cruiser) should be able to hit Trans Jordan J2 before UK can sink the Italian navy UK2. In this sensem the UK ftr is not as critical as one might think.
That would be an interesting opening. Do you ignore the Philippines to do that?
J1, 3 loaded tpts and a full carrier (and maybe a cruiser) should be able to hit Trans Jordan J2 before UK can sink the Italian navy UK2. In this sensem the UK ftr is not as critical as one might think.
That would be an interesting opening. Do you ignore the Philippines to do that?
Yes. This puts max pressure underneath (Indian Ocean) and really limits what UK can do (India / Australia). In fact, quite a few times both India and Persia (or Transjordan/Anglo-Egypt are attacked J2.
I know the Philipines are a $14 IPC swing by waiting until J2, but other targets are more important J1. The US DD and Tpt are sunk by the BB on J1.
Yes. This puts max pressure underneath (Indian Ocean) and really limits what UK can do (India / Australia). In fact, quite a few times both India and Persia (or Transjordan/Anglo-Egypt are attacked J2.
I know the Philipines are a $14 IPC swing by waiting until J2, but other targets are more important J1. The US DD and Tpt are sunk by the BB on J1.
Losing the money doesn’t bother me so much as 3 TP’s going to sz34 on J2 means that they would be 3 turns away from the Japanese IC so you’d probably have to build an IC near them and/or build a lot of extra TP’s for unloading from Japan.
Normally, I like to have 6 total Japanese TP’s (4 for Japan, 2 for the Pacific and later Africa) and the Japanese income soars so quickly that I find myself having trouble building IC’s fast enough to keep up with the vast numbers of infantry I’m able to afford to produce so building any more than 1 new TP seems wasteful to me. I suppose the extra income from clearing the Middle East and Africa quicker would offset the cost of buying new TP’s, but I’d have to see it in action to convince me to change my J1 opening.
And on a side note, I have been thinking about moving 2 Russian inf from Kaz to Per on R1. My usual Russian build when Egypt stays in UK hands after G1 is 5 inf, 1 arm, 1 fig with the fighter and armor being built in Caucasus to help reinforce Trans-Jordan in preparation for the UK1 bomber build in case only the UK fighter survives the attack. The reason I’ve been thinking about moving the 2 inf is because Trans-Jordan is subject to Italian and German suicide attacks with what’s left in Africa to soften it up for a Japanese landing and 1 fighter, 1 arm from Russia might not be enough to hold it. And if it becomes clear that even the 2 inf won’t be enough to help the UK hold T-J, then I’ve only diverted them away from the German front by one move so I haven’t really hurt myself very much.
