@Panther Thanks for the speedy answer… feels like a strategy that might make me unpopular but if it’s legitimate then I suppose it’s fair game.
After Action Reports
-
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 conqueredIf 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 playersNow 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 -
Thanks. This definitely qualifies under the AAR guidelines.
I don’t know what was the worse mistake. Italy not cooperating or Japan not conquering all of China and allowing that 1 infantry to survive.
Looks like you had a complete breakdown in communications. Didn’t the Axis team try talking some sense into the Italian player?
-
There were 2 guys on the Axis. One playing Japan and 1 playing Germany/Italy. They worked well together until the very end of the game. I don’t know if he got bored or what. Japan kept telling him to take out the Transport and recapture France. After that they really didn’t listen to each other.
If you are going to play more than 2 people, EVERYONE on each side has to work together or they loose. I haven’t played a game yet where this doesn’t happen. As soon as there is a breakdown, the game is over. Even if the plan is a good one, you have to support each other in the plan.
Brian
-
Title: Out of Box (1941)
Date: 26.10.2012
Special Rules: with National Objectives and with Technology
Victor: Axis victory. Germans crushed Russia with little casulties due to dice.
Game Length: approximately 12 Hours and 12 Rounds
Bias: equally skilled
Description: Allies tried a contain Japan and then crush Italy/Germany. Germany was playing very conservativeley, pulling back round 2 and 3 afterwards going for Moskau. UK tried to disturb Germany by taking Norway tunr 1 and landings in NW-Europe. In addition build an industrial complex in india turn 2 with russian aid (4 Inf 2 Ari and 6 tanks). USA build up fleet in Pacific and sent some lone transports towards africa to keep italy busy.
Japan built an industrial complex round 1 in Thailand (French-Inochina). Eventually lost the complex once to russian tanks and sacrificed lots of fighters to regain control and permit a recapture by russians/Brits.
Italy secured France and western europe but struggled to gain control of Africa, where germany helped out.
In the End the US build up a LARGE invasion force (7-10 loaded transports) ant set up an invasion of France/Italy but with Germany keepin all their Tanks and planes from the moskau fight (it was 55:45 fight in Germanys favor, and with major airforce losses and only keeping a few tanks, as was expected by the allies (me)) this game could have ended up with an Allied victoy.Observations/Recommendations: Even tough, Japan was hard pressed, it was almoust impossible to deny japan a major income or to destroy their large starting fleet. Russia had to commit some forces to do so, but they eventually were missed when the german offensive started. It semms almoust impossible to contain Japan without Germany and Italy getting too strong. On the other Hand, It seems not necessary to fight Japan, because they have no major objectives. (This is bad, becaus the Japanese player won’t have much fun)
Even tough this game was close, a more aggresive German would have crussed Russia much earlier, with no chance for the allies to win.Suggestion: Adding an Industial complex in India in Setup.
1. More fighting forced in Asia/with Japan
2. by saving 15IPC for the UK the whole game could balance out -
Suggestion: Adding an Industial complex in India in Setup.
1. More fighting forced in Asia/with Japan
2. by saving 15IPC for the UK the whole game could balance outI would say to game play test your suggestion. Several games. With UK dropping 3 units turn to slow Japan, and a moderate US pacific support fleet in the south pacific, the game might just turn out more even.
-
@axis_roll:
I don’t really get, what you want to say. Do you think it’s a godd idea or not.I think an indian industrial complex is not only for balancing, but for increasing fun for the Japanese and UK player. (In my optinion this is the most importaint part of playing a game.)
-
The idea of the UK starting with an Industrial Complex in India is one my gaming group has discussed recently. It would definitely make the South Pacific Theatre more active and interesting.
People say this change gives too much of an advantage to the Allies, but I feel as a whole the Axis are stronger in 1941 and the game could use some balancing. These are both points you brought up, so I’m glad to find someone similarly minded.
Also, as has been mentioned on these forums, what if UK got to choose the starting location of their free Industrial Complex? It would make every game feel different. Egypt, South America, India, Australia, and the East Indies are all examples of where that starting Complex could go.
Finally, my group has also implemented simultaneous turns to allow the games to feel more fluid. Instead of Germany, USSR, etc. taking their turns separately, all the Axis Powers go together and the Allied Powers go togeher. This greatly speeds up the pace of the game and allows for more joint strategy.
Suggested Topics
