2011 Tournament discussion (AA50-41)

@Cow:

what’s wrong with ignoring japan in aa50? hell when usa goes pacific I usually don’t buy more naval till R3 japan. no reason too as japan’s naval is still superior, may as well get more guys to take the money.

It’s not like usa going pacific stops japan from taking more territories. usa doesn’t make more money than japan. Japan still has enough starting resources to plow through china by R3-4 no matter what, india R3 at the latest, russian territories start getting taken by r4 as well.

usa can’t stop that, unless japan is getting bad luck everywhere. Even then you could have owned in europe while japan was slow mode.

Then again most players take africa seriously, you can have uk retake it back himself sure… but what happens when japan starts taking parts of africa? Also russia gets conquered most of hte time if it is just UK + russ vs germany.
~

europe is where the money is at anyway. germany itself is 10, the entire africa is worth less than germany.
~

people who go pacific in aa50 are obviously screwing around and not playing seriously.

The problem is that AA50 is broken. You cannot win as Allies unless your rival(s) is (are) very inferior or unless Allies receive some bid. Even with bid, 1941, if you ignore Japan, you’re giving the japs 2 very good strategical options:

1. The classical assault on USSR works because Japan is quicker than the USA/UK combo and Germany is usually stronger than USSR

2. The other option is invade America with Japan: make a effort enough strong to stop USA to sending any to Europe. Since Japan has much more income than USA by round 4-5 as much (and is even worst if USA loses Alaska and Hawaii), Japan still has income to send troops to USSR or Africa

1942 is scarier for Japan ignorers, because Germany is even stronger and has a very solid chance to build a Baltic fleet. Even if you buy a India IC and Japan doesn’t do India crush, ¿can you kill the Baltic fleet (that is menacing yankee supply lines), kill the Italian fleet (that is supporting Africa and making life more difficult for UK) and also save USSR while Japan is attacking USA’s rear?

Any case, the only thing that does ignoring Japan is letting Axis achieve economic superiority even sooner without giving Allies a garantee of beating Germany. You have to fight all the map

@Cow:

what’s wrong with ignoring japan in aa50? ….

people who go pacific in aa50 are obviously screwing around and not playing seriously.

Most of the time, I agree with you, but there are times when you should go after Japan.  One is when you have a bid there, or if Japan stumbles out of the gate (bad dice/choices)

The reason this is better is because if you can stop Japan from becoming Godzill, it’s easier to win the game.  Allowing Japan to grow unfettered turns the game into a race:  Who get’s who’s capital faster.

Yes, this is what A&A usually is about, but the race is accelerated in AA50 (1941).

I believe the allies (RE:USA) need to keep Japan honest, if not to keep one $5 NO for themselves, but also for UK too.  Keeping the Japanese navy honest will keep some fighters in the pacific and help keep pressure off Russia’s back door as well as less ftrs in Europe.

I actually welcome a KGF effort by the allies, it’s easy to defend fortress Europe with Japanese fighters whilest I produce tanks to hammer Riussia’s back door.  Let Japan do all the work.

USA certainly has a fine line to walk.

@Boldfresh:

I have to say, I prefer playing by forum.  Of course, I have never played on tripleA so who knows…  :lol:

is tripleA real time?  ie, you and your opponent have to be online at the same time?

Clearly you’ve got mad love for AA50, so you should check it out.  I’m on the lobby right now–TripleA takes 2 minutes to install.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/triplea/
http://tripleawarclub.org/ (community site for the PBEM ladder)

Zhuk, do you prefer tripleA, and if so, why?

Well, I have a typed out answer to this that I’m planning to post on the forums shortly.

But the short answer–yes I strongly prefer TripleA.  It automates the game mechanics to save time and effort and eliminate human error.  You aren’t required to spend time checking people’s maps.  It’s way faster and easier to have a modern computer program doing the heavy lifting for you–all you have to worry about is your buys and moves and strategy.  And that’s just regarding pbem.  For live online play, TripleA is the best and only option for aa50.

but you both have to be online at the same time right?  that doesn’t work for me, i have to be able to “mail in” moves.

@Boldfresh:

but you both have to be online at the same time right?  that doesn’t work for me, i have to be able to “mail in” moves.

No, I’m talking about TripleA as a play-by-email program.  Typically you play by trading maps per email, but you could use it in play-by-forum…you would simply attach the save file to your post, like Amon Sul is doing in his games.  Ideally we would like to figure out a way for TripleA PBEM to post automated summaries and/or post the save files automatically, but that’s still a ways away, and as I understand it developing Global is currently top priority.

The live server is the biggest draw, but that’s a just a bonus.

i’m not quite understanding - do both players have to be online at the same time?  if so, i’m saying that will not work for me, i have to be able to hop on whenever and do a quick move.  i can’t sit for hours and do a game live.

@Boldfresh:

i’m not quite understanding - do both players have to be online at the same time?  if so, i’m saying that will not work for me, i have to be able to hop on whenever and do a quick move.  i can’t sit for hours and do a game live.

You can use Triple A to play both:  Live or PBEM

The problem is that AA50 is broken. You cannot win as Allies unless your rival(s) is (are) very inferior or unless Allies receive some bid. Even with bid, 1941, if you ignore Japan, you’re giving the japs 2 very good strategical options:

1. The classical assault on USSR works because Japan is quicker than the USA/UK combo and Germany is usually stronger than USSR

2. The other option is invade America with Japan: make a effort enough strong to stop USA to sending any to Europe. Since Japan has much more income than USA by round 4-5 as much (and is even worst if USA loses Alaska and Hawaii), Japan still has income to send troops to USSR or Africa

1942 is scarier for Japan ignorers, because Germany is even stronger and has a very solid chance to build a Baltic fleet. Even if you buy a India IC and Japan doesn’t do India crush, ¿can you kill the Baltic fleet (that is menacing yankee supply lines), kill the Italian fleet (that is supporting Africa and making life more difficult for UK) and also save USSR while Japan is attacking USA’s rear?

Any case, the only thing that does ignoring Japan is letting Axis achieve economic superiority even sooner without giving Allies a garantee of beating Germany. You have to fight all the map

Actually in dice games not all of the axis R1 attacks are 100%… a series of 70-80% battles often result in allies dicing the axis out of a few battles. So allies do often win, but axis is favored. Strategically with the addition of NWE on the map (as compared to revised)  you can often dump a few guys there and sometimes luck out and defend it or do a double drop with USA and get a foothold. In Low Luck allies need 13 bid, because there is no chance for them to  defend any of the battles.

France is +11 for UK +5 for USA. italy is not hard to take with usa often times. buy 2 trans carrier 3 guys R1 and drop 6 on algeria… R3 you threaten italy pretty hard with just 6 guys, 2 bombers, 2 fighters… most of the time italy turtles it and you sink italy. it’s just a matter of time. you can buy bombers and drop bombs over italy/germany from UK, which is usually a 3.0-3.5 damage at a 2 ipc cost averaged out. you have what is called. Strategic ADVANTAGE in europe.
~

functionetta in other words, you don’t have to fight all the map. you can lose moscow to take germany/italy and that’s how most of my games go… sometimes I lose moscow a round ahead of taking berlin and that’s ok. Then it is UK and USA vs japan. Guess where all the money on the map is? Europe.  Strategically japan is in a bad spot in a UK + USA vs Japan scenario.

Also taking over america with japan doesn’t usually work. West usa can make 10 guys. Sometimes I drop 10 inf on west usa, because I’ve already got all I need to bust through italy or stack france/NWE with usa.

D-day came way ahead of V-day. you’re better off putting all your chips on it.

Allies is actually pretty straitforward in AA50. UK handles Norway/finland/france sometimes poland/karelia/baltic states.

russia handles ukraine and his bonus money in balkans.

usa handles italy/france/africa.

in other words russia gets the mouth of the crocodile, uk hops on the back, and usa punches the belly. That’s how allies wrestles the crocodile or gator… this is a fairly common strategy… I don’t see what is wrong with it. It usually works.
~

as far as 1942 goes…  yeah you kinda want your bonus money more so than 1941. only because japan doesn’t have 5 transports starting out. so you can actually take territories and make him lose transports that would otherwise transport men.

in 1941 japan only makes 8 guys so you start with an extra one you can sacrifice to take back an island usa ninjad.  plus I usually only dump 6 guys or 3 tanks off japan into bury or SFE  rest of my crap is tanks on india/burma/thailand… if usa goes pacific sure I can’t spam tanks, but it’s not like i won’t ship anything over. All japan has to do is match usa or defend against his air and be able to sink usa if he comes close. which is pretty easy when you make more money.

put complex in thailand R1 or R2 and it is so easy for japan to stop usa. Because one round you can be in japan dropping guys if usa is coming up top another round you can be in thailand place 2 naval, fly fighters from japan on carriers if you bought any.

Thailand is right there next to the money. so you have advantage of placement. usa has a supply chain. just to get to you.

So even when you match japan’s naval you still got to move yours up. So you start off not only a round behind in terms of naval, but a couple rounds in terms of movement.

Where as transports in the atlantic are a 1->alg 2-> france or italy. you threaten a capitol not an island. capitols are more important than islands.

that’s how allies win. they take capitols.

Why play boats and ocean? when you can get a capitol battle that much quicker?

I prefer the aa50 map to any other map. simply because it’s high octane.

Classic is all about infantry stacks and slugfests.

revised is fun too, I do like buying mostly tanks with russia till japan shows up and butting heads with germany.  Playing germany is not so fun when uk shuffles guys through archangel… you got to spot that shit early and bring the fight to caucasus and go all in like chop chop otherwise the game goes to a stalemate. yeah screw that… friggen usa shuffling 8 boats worth of guys through africa like a dickwad turtling the game. yeah fuck that. germany just needs caucasus and that’s it.

aa50 is nice, because they made the map bigger, but still take about the same amount of time to resolve a game. 1942 can end if russia’s round 1 attacks fail… yeah I don’t take russia with less than a 9 bid for 1942. It’s not that bad though… just don’t lose guys in ukraine to italy.  hold caucasus/russia. UK just has to get in 8 guys on karelia/norway/finland area first to stabilize russia.

usa has to handle africa. do a little pacific. then go full tilt europe when the time comes.

I always thought aa50 and revised was pretty balanced. revised favored allies slightly and aa50 axis slightly.

1942 is kind of dicey, because I love doing bomber vs destroyer/transport with russia… makes sz 12 rough as germany’s bomber or 1 fighter has to go to russia’s bomber… then sz 12 either has to have figs or 2 subs.

if not sub vs dd 2 tran and sub vs cruiser and trans… is brutal sometimes. 1942 is so silly sometimes.  all bid has to go to russia in my opinion. russia can do fairly well just hitting belo, EU, and ukraine. if germany rolls exceptional defense it’s so rough for russia. :( most of the time it is fine… but that 1/5 games is rough.

also func, the best player doesn’t always win. even zhukov loses here and there especially when he butts heads with a cow in a dice game. I see 40% odds for france and I take it… mmm that’s what a cow does. shorty got them jeans and them furs.

We are way off topic here but oh well…

This discussion makes me think about why I like KGF in aa50.  I think part of it because I’ve played alot of live Allies on TripleA (like Cow) and its fun.  In Revised, I didn’t like Allies much, and I played mainly Axis, because there was no good short-game strategy, outside of hard KJF, which rarely works against a strong player.  Against a good player, playing Allies was usually a 10-12 rounder and since I normally played on GTO (where there was no save) I never had time for that.

With AA50 I feel the opposite way; I love playing Allies.  There is an excellent short-game strategy and its fun as hell to execute.  I love advancing that monster Russia mid-game and I love making the D-Day landing and seeing Axis morale plummet.  Beating down Germany never seems to get old, though no doubt eventually it will get old.

Don’t get me wrong, the longer competitive global AA50 games are also really fun, but they are for either PBEM or multiple live sessions.

I can understand how especially PBEM players worry about KGF being dominant and how to fix it–I think it partially comes from KGF being so dominant in Revised and how that got boring.  But I think KGF doesn’t get its due as a really fun strat to execute, if not quite as fun for the Axis player to defend against.

But I also think the book isn’t totally closed on KJF/global in 41.  Yamamoto had a KJF strategy for low luck games that was so good that only elite players could stop him.  Yoshi also has a really good one.  There’s always the possibility that new bid strategies will open up new KJF tactics.  We aren’t anywhere close to the sort of uniformity of strategy that you get with competitive Revised.

AA50 has the best map of any game.  It’s basically perfectly sized and the NOs are apportioned well for sharp, tactically fluid games.

I have always appreciated Funcioneta’s idea of the “asian theatre only” bid idea.  At +9 it’s tough and you can get some interesting placements.  art/arm bry, sub 35/inf yun, sub 35/inf ind, 3 inf yun, I’ve even kicked around 3 inf bur, dd 35 (although extremely wasteful in the short run), and 3 inf phi.

I like KJF and although mine needs work v. the elite players (see the first of my 2 game set in the league v. Zhuk), I think +9 is a good number to get a good KJF going.

burma and east indies are an illegal bid. you have no units there, you have to place where you have stuff.

otherwise a russian sub vs a destroyer and 2 transports… you win that and you fuck japan over hardcore. I don’t believe in bid placement wherever you want.

Who said anything about East Indies or Borneo?  Burma you have 1 inf.  You need bid placement in a territory you have units.  I think I favor art/arm bry… it can start a nice domino effect against the japanese.

Any talk of AA50 being broken is absolute nonsense.  It is by far the most superior map of any Axis & Allies variant. Sure it’s not perfect, but nominate a map and scenerio that is?

I am an Axis guy; bring on that KGF, if the dice are not unkind, I will stop it.  But even so, with that, and all my experience, if you look at my Tourny game, Bold seems extremely confident that he will be the victor. This demonstrates that in no way do people feel that there is a lack of hope to win with the Allies. With a bid placement, between 6 and 11, the game becomes very balanced.

So, if the OOB set-up placed another 3 units to the Allies somewhere, wouldn’t that actually take away some of the fun and intrigue that the game has right now?  Each game can be slightly different depending on the bid size and placement.

I would like to see China be a touch stronger, but if that is the only negative of the entire elaborate scheme that is AA50, I can more than live with it.  I retired from Axis & Allies for more than a decade because none of the maps stimulated the kind of strategery and agency that I wanted from the game, even though I loved the basics of the gameplay.  AA50 pulled me right out of it.  I use to play a lot of other games, now it’s just Axis & Allies.