@TG:
Seems pretty true to life. Except for the part about the Allies pushing their navy across the Suez Canal.
How successful was Japan pushing inward to Egypt and Russia?
Overall not very successfull. Although Japan managed to temporarily knock out china, they never reached Egypt and the russians had grown too strong to take.
Hey Guys,
I’ve been scouting the after Action Reports and I’m reading a lot of the same things…
For the No Tech games, 1941 scenario:
1. UK trying to place an India IC is a lost cause
-It’s just too difficult to defend
2. Japan, played correctly, typically becomes a MONSTER!!!
-I have a J1 opening that basically destroys most of the Allied Pacific fleet, positions for a fork move on India or Australia J2, and gets Japan all 15IPCs of their NO money
3. There is no Battle of the Atlantic
-German Navy usually gone on UK1
4. Germany can push early, but more often than not, Russia can hold
-Germany is too weak, and UK can apply too much back pressure
5. USA is mostly forced to go 100% Pacific
-They can never really get to Japan though, and if they abandon for Europe, then the game boils down to that same old “Can Allies get to Germany before Japan gets to Moscow fiasco” :roll:
For the Tech Games, either scenario"
1. It’s a virtual Crapshoot!!!
-basically you spin the wheel and see if you can get lucky
Now I know some of you don’t mind playing A&A like this, but for those of you who want a game with a more historical playout, and a more strategic form of Tech, I’d suggest checking out AA50: Strategic in the House Rules section (see signature below for link)
I agree with your assessment for the most part.
A few comments / observations:
1. There are times a UK India factory is acceptable. It boils down to what Japan does T1. If Japan lunges toward SSR, China, or the Hawaiian Islands, then an India factory is not indefensible. How often this actually happens is debatable.
2. Agreed. China is too weak in 1941 to put much resistance.
3. Agreed.
4. Sure. Again it depends on the rest of the Allies hitting the German rear. Germany can soften Russia up with Italy holding its flanks, though at the loss of operational flexibility.
5. I’m not so sure on this one. Most ‘successful’ build I’ve seen has USA committing entirely to Europe. … Or the opposite.
We might give AA50 a try in the future, but we’re having too much fun with AA50 already. :D
Here is the assessment of AA50 from my play group.
1. Russia is still the weakest link in the Allied chain. It is land locked with Germany, starts with the least production, and is the hardest for the allies to reinforce. Most games come down to the take Germany before Russia falls category.
2. Germany has the most accessible capital for the Allies. Thus many games depend on Germany holding out against a combined assault until Japan gets it in gear. The purchasing of a German navy allows them to hold of any France landings for an extra couple of turns, and if the US and UK don’t work together to counter it, it may be what gives the Axis the victory.
3. While Japan can become a monster, the Axis will still fail without a clear cut plan of attack (ie which Capital they are going for.) We’ve seen Japan collecting 60+ IPCs and still lose because Germany fell and they weren’t in position to take Russia. Japan must threaten SOMETHING for the Axis to win.
4. A UK factory in India is feasible, but will most likely require backup from Russia through Caucasus via Tanks. May be more trouble than its worth, as it pulls resources from Russia and the UK, without having enough production to counter Japan’s 8 placements.
5. Italy should always be cautious, as both the UK or USA can annihilate their starting navy if caught out of position. Sacrificing its fleet for any short term NO gain is folly. Italy should focus on taking out Egypt, a hard to reinforce spot for the Allies, and take the time to do it with ample force.
6. The American player is the most likely to become distracted by a high income and waffle on the chosen strategy. Pick a theatre and stick it to ‘em. Sending in your starting navy to Morocco Algeria on Turn 1 usually sees the loss of said fleet. Take the time to amass a sizeable fleet before moving in either direction; Russia will not fall in the first few turns, so slow it down.
Excellent analysis. Quoted for truth.
2. Germany has the most accessible capital for the Allies. Thus many games depend on Germany holding out against a combined assault until Japan gets it in gear. The purchasing of a German navy allows them to hold of any France landings for an extra couple of turns, and if the US and UK don’t work together to counter it, it may be what gives the Axis the victory.
Agree with all but this one, although I could see where you’re coming from because of the UK to German proximity.
But this also makes them one more turn further away from USA
Other points against (or Arguments for Italy being the weakest Axis capital)
Italy income is less
Italy can only produce 6 units in her capital
No axis help can intervene in a UK & USA one/two punch on the capital (yes, I realize Italy can help herself)
I didn’t really consider Italy in the equation, as they’re a minor player. They can be effective, to be sure, but what can they really do. If the Allies focus on Germany and take it, Italy most likely won’t be able to do anything about it. However, if the Allies take Italy, Germany stands a better chance of having enough units and production take Italy back.
If we lump Germany and Italy together, my point should stand that it is easier for the Allies to take Europe than it is to take out Japan. :-)
I didn’t really consider Italy in the equation, as they’re a minor player. They can be effective, to be sure, but what can they really do. If the Allies focus on Germany and take it, Italy most likely won’t be able to do anything about it. However, if the Allies take Italy, Germany stands a better chance of having enough units and production take Italy back.
Well that’s a main reason why AAR concepts must differ somewhat when trying to use them in AA50.
Italy does contain a capital now, that has an added bonus of their income (varies greatly from 9 IPCs to 20s) if conquered
If we lump Germany and Italy together, my point should stand that it is easier for the Allies to take Europe than it is to take out Japan. :-)
I don’t disagree that KGF is {still} the strongest allied plan
Here’s the skinny:
Italy (as a nation) is easy to contain, but impossible to capitulate.
If the Allies made a concerted effort to contain Italy, it isn’t difficult at all to do so. USA and UK can pipeline troops through Morocco, while USSR makes an armored thrust from the Caucuses. Of course this leaves Germany open to run wild. But in truth, this job is doable by only one power (USA), while UK supports USSR, builds up an invasion force, and/or SBR Germany.
Logistically, the placement of Italy makes it the harder Axis capital to capture. Why should USA and UK coordinate a capture of Italy when they can do something more constructive and reinforceable, such as take France? And if France falls, why not push into Berlin which will end the game? Sure, Rome is nice, but as Whackamatt mentioned it’s easier for Germany to take back Italy than vise-versa.
It’s possible to take Italy first to spice things up, but France confers a bonus to both the UK and US players where taking Italy dose not.
In the 1942 Scenario, I’ve used the 3 starting US bombers to give Italy fits. :evil:
I think it would be interesting to have after action reports after the Spring 1941 tournament
Here we are playing with a standardized ruleset: 1941 scenario, with NOs, but without Techs and in a competitive environment, with what I assume would be with better than average players
Now the game does have a bid, so I think it will change things up a little bit, but this is what I predict you will see…
1. Axis still wins majority of the time (players will likely have a tendency to underbid for Allies)
2. Most victories will be either Monster Japan getting to Moscow, or Allies conquering Germany via KGF
3. Dice will play a very large factor in deciding the outcomes (smart players know to push their units toward their targets, UK–>Ger, Ger–>Rus, Jap–>Rus, US–>Ger)). In these types of push games, strategic options are very limited and results often depend on dice.
Now if this is indeed how most competitive games play out, then I would say Axis&Allies Anniversary has a MAJOR problem
I think as good strategic players, we deserve better, and I think we could use the After Action Reports to maybe modify our bidding scheme to make for a much for fun, strategic, and competitive game.
I’ve alluded to this idea of a pre-placed UK IC in other threads, but if anyone’s willing to play a game (ABattlemap) and create an After Action report on what I suspect will be a much better playout, I’d be more than willing :-D
Pre-placed UK IC
-On UK1 only, during the Purchase Units phase, UK may purchase a “Limited IC” for placement in either India, Australia, or Eastern Canada.
-This “Limited IC” costs 8 IPC. Units purchased on UK1 may be placed at the IC this turn (up to the territory limit)
-This “Limited IC” can only produce INF, RTL, and ARM initially but can be upgraded to a full IC on a future turn (for an additional 7 IPC)
Sure. Having After Action Reports after the Spring 1941 Tournament would be a great idea.
I’ve toyed around with the idea of a IC being placed in India at the start of the game with no build restrictions.
I haven’t tested it out, but I conjecture it makes the South Pacific a more hotly contested place.
I’d also like to see what the average range of the “correct” Allied Bid is.
1. Axis still wins majority of the time (players will likely have a tendency to underbid for Allies)
Agreed
2. Most victories will be either Monster Japan getting to Moscow, or Allies conquering Germany via KGF
Agreed to first, disagree to 2nd. In long run KGF will prove inferior as Japan gameplay improve to a more agressive and innovate way. Never Japan had so much ways of winning the game, and allies ceding one whole theater is only going to speed the process
3. Dice will play a very large factor in deciding the outcomes (smart players know to push their units toward their targets, UK–>Ger, Ger–>Rus, Jap–>Rus, US–>Ger)). In these types of push games, strategic options are very limited and results often depend on dice.
Only true if both players follow the Classic approach, in fact AA50 has a great potential for strategic options, is the setup and China status that does it unbalanced
Now if this is indeed how most competitive games play out, then I would say Axis&Allies Anniversary has a MAJOR problem
I think as good strategic players, we deserve better, and I think we could use the After Action Reports to maybe modify our bidding scheme to make for a much for fun, strategic, and competitive game.I’ve alluded to this idea of a pre-placed UK IC in other threads, but if anyone’s willing to play a game (ABattlemap) and create an After Action report on what I suspect will be a much better playout, I’d be more than willing :-D
In fact the IC should be at India from setup, but there are other mayor problems with China and the swarm of starting jap trannies. I think bids should be limited to Asia and Pacific, that would prevent try-ignore-Japan strats and anyway is the east the unbalanced, not the west
3. Dice will play a very large factor in deciding the outcomes (smart players know to push their units toward their targets, UK–>Ger, Ger–>Rus, Jap–>Rus, US–>Ger)). In these types of push games, strategic options are very limited and results often depend on dice.
This isn’t my experience playing the game. No KGF game in AA50 is ever the same–Germany/Italy and Allied team work make it dynamic and varied in game outcomes. In addition, there’s no reason to think the optimal strategy has been discovered…tactics are still being worked out. Don’t confuse AA50 with Revised–KGF in Revised was a conservative style, KGF in AA50 is an aggressive style. I think perceptions garnered from Revised get displaced onto AA50 and that doesn’t do the game justice.
As for mods to the game to encourage Pacific action or at least provide balance, I favor a China mod where the turn order is switched up and China goes first. I don’t know if a pre-set India IC helps Allies, as that saves Japan the 15 it would otherwise spend on that IC.
@TG:
I’d also like to see what the average range of the “correct” Allied Bid is.
I don’t know what the average bid will be in the spring tourney on this forum, but generally for 41 +NOs, it is allies get 6-9 ipc, with a one unit pr. TT limit.
And most of the after action reports say that China needs something more because Japan walks over them and the Soviets get swarmed by Japan, so the solution is to fix China by using the China mod.
And Germany didn’t have any problems with its subs, Germany had other problems like Russia and the Allies containing Italy which is Germanys can opener.
The last problem was the NO’s because they make the game more favorable to the axis and they make no sence and limit play options because they force players to play historical so they can strike it rich with more IPC.
Solutions?
Get rid of NO’s because they introduce scripted play
Fix China so that japan does not take or threaten Russia too easily
Tanks now cost 6 ( to avoid German all tank buys to beat Russia)
oh and one more common thing: Most of the games either had no NO’s and no Tech, or had both. Very few had just one.
I’m attemping my first After Action with our Double Blind game and some special cards that one of our guys have made up. If you have any questions on the special cards or such, LMK,
Title: Axis defeated among chaos of leaders 1941
Date: Mar 14, 2010
Special Rules: Double Blind, Special Tech Cards, Special National Advantage cards
Victor: Allies
Game Length: 8+ hours
Bias: Allies ( I was US)
Description: Allies plan: Hold Japan in the Pacific with US. Hold Germany on Eastern Front with USSR. UK and US build and attack Germany through France. It seemed that Italy was hell bent on taking all of Africa. Japans plan was to take Russia through China. Germany we couldn’t figure out because he basically sat there.
Some of the “sepcial cards” that were played: Germany: Ablative Armor (allowed to absorb first round of hits); Japan: Super Subs (I believe this gave him 3 on surprise attack); Italy: Advanced pasta making. (don’t remember exactly). Russia: Russian Winter (allowed for 1 complete turn no Enemy troops in or out of Russia). US: SuperFortress Bombers (+1 on Attack, Defence and Bombing runs). Another important Advantage (each team gets 2) was Russia “Lend Lease” program. It allows the US or UK to ship 5 UPC per transport from either US or UK bases to Archangel. UK bought 4 transports in round 1 for this purpose. Russia was getting 20 extra UPC every other turn from the UK.
Needless to say, the Russian winter was HUGE! Germany attacked Russia on turn 2 and most of it’s forces were in Russia territory was a Russina winter hit. Russia could then attack Germany without them moving into Russia. Huge as it wiped out half of Germany’s might in Europe. They also NEVER made any Naval attempt what so ever. UK and US bombed Germany and Italy every turn we got.
Observation: Japan seems like a great power but what is there real purpose? Any thought of getting to Russia takes TOO LONG. They were basically a non-factor in the game. They bombed Pearl but then went away to Russia. Why bother?
I like playing the US but it takes until Turn 3 to be part of the game with any efficiency. Even then, it’s every other turn you can do something.
The was a fun game and the 1st time I’ve been on the winning side of a Double Blind game. It’s much better. ;-)
Brian
I’m glad you had a fun time with your House Rules variant and having National Advantage cards seems like a good idea. However, AARs are for unmodified games, since they’re used to infer trends through statistical analysis. :)
Sorry. Didn’t realize that. Mods can delete if they wish.
Brian
OK. Now is my first After Action Report for a “Base” rules AA50.
Title: 1941 - Axis defeated after Italy goes rogue
Date: Mar 21, 2010
Special Rules: None
Victor: Allies
Game Legnth: 4 hours
Bias: Allies. I played US and Russia
Description: Allies work together as normal but try to occupy France WAY too early. UK only flaw in the game. They tried it on turn 1 and it was a stale mate for much of the game. Germany goes into Russia but spreads himself too then and Russia back Germany out. This also becomes a stale mate most of the game until the closer to the end when Germany got a little Gun Shy. Japan player was right on taking over ALL of China but one territory. He does however, spread himself thin and doesn’t leave any troops behind to occupy the territories he has taken over. The lone Chinese infantry slowly gains momentum and the Chinese take back their homeland. Japan then takes aim at the rest of the Pacific with disastrous results. Japan could not roll the dice and that was the deciding factor. 2 infantry on HI defend themselves against 2 offshore bombardments, tank, infantry, artillery and fighters. Japan BS, CV and CR all destroyed in the following seas battle as well.
Italy’s main goal (in my eyes) is to support Germany in the defense of France. He was doing fine with that until he decided to go rogue and take Brazil. His partner in Japan was totally shocked as the US had an unprotected transport with a tank and infantry about to go to shore in France for support. As he had to do is go into the seazone and the US would have been stopped cold. Instead he wanted Brazil.
After that move and Japan’s disaster rolling, the game was pretty much over as the Allies in the next turn wiped out Japan’s fleet and Germany was about to get invaded. This was the first time I played the AA50 without any special rules. Still a lot of fun.
Thanks,
Brian
