Why isn't Italy in this game instead of Japan?

It was 1990, I was 18 years old… I moved to the big city of Toronto and my new friends were gamers who played Risk all the time. I quickly got bored of it and was looking for an alternative game I could introduce to them and I saw on the store shelf Axis & Allies from Milton Bradley “a game of high adventure” and “decide the fate of the world in just a few short hours” (lol). Unfortunately we were all pretty hammered by the end of the night and the only thing I remember of my first game was punching out all the plastic pieces from the plastic stencil racks and all the roundels from the cardboard sheets. it was an instant hit with the whole group and I played it with them religiously for up to 2 years until I moved back home to Peterborough. I brought my game with me and it wasn’t long before I hooked some old high school friends to it, and over the next 8 years I played Classic edition even more than I did before. After that in 2000, I moved back to Toronto where I discovered Spring 1942, then A&A Anniversary edition and finally Global 1940… ironically, I met someone from that first group from the early 90’s almost 20 years later, we accidentally bumped into each other online and we have been playing 1 on 1 1940 Global games every month for the past 5 years.

Hamar - i liked your thinking.  Still, i have to agree w/ SSG in that part of your strategy is a little rough.
Also if i’m Japan and building an IC on MAN (which i rarely do anymore), chances are i control enough of the board to move my Japan AA to the mainland.

I have to concur with the others who have posted.  A combined transport and infantry build for Japan on turn 1 is the way to go.  If Russia took Manchuria on round 1, and if the UK executed the “Kwangtung Maneuver”, the only place left for Japan to build is Southeast Asia.  While initially it MIGHT be safe (the US can take that factory using China and Sinkiang forces one time in 3, and later will threaten it with a southern island hoping fleet), it is too far from Russia to do any good, and forward progress against Russia proper is easilly blocked by Novosibirsk infantry units.  Japan HAS to focus on gaining IPC’s in round 1 in order to sustain a transport invasion of Russia through the back door (Manchuria to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia).  Also, as Japan builds a transport navy (protect by heavy naval forces that were NOT sacrificed against the US at Hawaii) the US has to garrison Alaska heavilly (that japanease transport fleet ferrying troops to Manchuria is a single move away from an all out invasion of Alaska too).  That reduces the number of US dollars that can be spent on the European war, allowing Germany to maintain the frontal assault on Russia that eventually leads to Japan taking Russia.  So for an opening move, Japan re-takes Manchuria, takes Australia, blasts the results of the Kwantung Maneuver (if executed) or takes China using air force and Kwantung infantry. If Japan still holds Manchuria, they assault Yakut and take it.  If the UK builds in India, that simply takes more pressure off Germany and allows THEM to take Russia, aided by the threat floating through the Siberian lands… too far from India for UK to do a darn thing about.  YAKUT is the key for Japan.  Take it and hold it, you have one territory with all of your west-marching forces to defend it from the Russians, and you force Russia to try to defend TWO territories against your massing forces.  The drain on Russia:  defending Evenk AND Novosibirsk plus holding Karelia and the Caucuses with an income of only 20 or so IPC’s is FATAL, REGARDLESS of UK and US support.  And with Russia gone, the Alllies WILL lose (economic victory is immediate on taking Russia, world domination only a few moves away)

Bad luck on your opponent’s part?

But I’ll tell you what, it’s nice to see some alternative views about how to take a new angle on the game.~kyrial

Thanks :D .

oh and so far as strategy goes, I’ll argue that russia is the most important figure. if they stack up a defense against you, and you are looking at a battle of attrition in karelia- I’d pull back your forces and and go all out for africa. but if they leave you an opening - hit them. but don’t jepordize your tanks. and if they attack in T1 just drive around them. that’s less of them you’ll have to kill later.

Hmm, sounds like ya’ll play with some serious contenders. I don’t know even what RR stands for but i do know this. I like the challenge of playing the axis against all odds. Sure the game is slanted against you, but damnit… I’m gonna try my best to wipe the allies off the board.

Likely the guys I’ve played against just suck, but as germany I’ve kept the seas clear of allied ships for 3 rounds or so and always have moscow by turn 2 or 3, it is usually a bit gamble but it works. As japan, I’ve been notorious for assaulting the US navy and invading alaska with 4+ troops on turn 3 while still having secure boarders in china.

Spread thin? Yup, Gotten beat, you bet… But I’ve won nearly 60-70% of the games and always made 'em sweat. So I say bring it…screw the bidding and the RR…Damn the torpedoes and stuff. If I wanted a fair game I’d play Candy Land with my 2yr old.

-The Fuzzy One

Sadly, the v133 patch does not fix everything and there are still a lot logical errors to be dealt with. For instance, for some reason I can still have more than one AA gun in the same territory. It is not these errors that enrage me (anybody can avoid these problems by just not performing them), but the horrid AI in the game and the sudden crashes (the later being somewhat corrected in v133).