Axis and Allies EUROPE 1940 - WOLFENSTEIN!

@The-Captain Thanks for the quick reply Mr. Cap!

@1940_Fan These are great, thank you for sharing! How do I download these flash cards? Do I have to make a quizlet account?

Until recently, it was only bided for the Axis. But now, in more and more games the Allies get a bid. Let`s see what the best bid option/s for them would be…

I) UK & UK Pacific

Definitely the best Allied nation to give bid to. The ideas are planty, but let`s focus on the best:

1) A sub to Atlantic and/or the Mediterranean

A submarine in the Mediterranean can help strike Italy in sz 97 stronger than usual, but a submarine in the Atlantic can help strike both Italy (sz 95 and sz 96) and Germany.

2) Land unit/s to Alexandria and Egypt

An infantry or artillery to Alexandria and mechanised infantry or tank to Egypt can help strike Tobruk more heavily.
An aa gun in Alexandria or Egypt could be of use too.

3) A fighter or tactical bomber

The ideas are Scotland or Malta. One more fighter at Scotland helps in the defense of sz 109 and sz 111 on G1, and helps in the defense of UK against bombing on later German turns. Also it gives it`s share to the defense against Sea Lion.
The Mediterranean fighter gives UK more options either attacking sea or land Axis units, either defending from them.

4) A transport to Union of South Africa

It helps to move to action the two infantry from Union of South Africa on UK1.

5) An infantry to France

If France bids an infantry there, together with it, it can mean a lot in the defense of Paris.

6) A transport to India

To take Sumatra and/or Celebes, then Iraq, Ethiopia or Italian Somaliland more heavily.

7) A marine to India

The same as in the bid above, just lighter.

II) China

1) An infantry for defense

Best to put to Yunnan, then Hunan, then Chahar, and the least to Anhwe.

2) An infantry and/or artillery for offense

Best to put to Kweichow, Szechwan, Hopei and the least to Suiyuyan.

3) A fighter
Good to have one more for striking Japan more easily. Best to put is to Kweichow.

III) France

1) An infantry to France and/or Normandy Bordeaux

It can help to aid in the defense against eminent G1 attack.

2) A fighter to UK

It can help UK early on on defense, and puts more options for some French attack against lonely Axis land or sea units.

3) A sub to Madagascar

A good escort to the destroyer, can soon be moved to the Shores of Indochina/Indonesia or Mediterranean.

IV) Russia

1) Land units to Eastern Europe border territories

An infantry (or AA gun) to Baltic States/Eastern Poland/Bessarabia to prevent (or back off) an early G1 attack on the Eastern Front.

2) Land units to Eastern Europe offside terittories

An artillery to Novgorod/Belarus/Western Ukraine/Ukraine to counter an early G1 attack.
An option is also a tank to Novgorod/Belarus/Western Ukraine/Ukraine/Archangel to aid in the counter attack.

3) Land units for striking Japan

A mechanised infantry and/or tank to Caucasus and Volgograd.
An artillery or tank to Amur.

IV) ANZAC

1) A marine

If put to Queensland or New Zealand it helps ANZAC to take both Java and Dutch New Guinea on rd 1, and to take both Sumatra and Celebes on rd 2.

2) A transport

The same as in the bid above, just taking those territories more heavily.

3) A land unit to Egypt

An ANZAC artillery or AA gun would be good to have there.

VI) USA

U do not bid with USA. It goes to war late, and does not need anything. If U must, bid a small IC to Alaska  8-)

@CWO:

@Erocco:

@Argothair:

Some early thoughts on your mix of units:

Many of your units are quite similar to each other mechanically, especially on land. E.g., a tank destroyer is C5 A4 D4 M2, whereas a light tank is C5 A5 D4 M2 – do you really need two different units whose statistics are within one point of each other? Another example is Mech. Inf. (C4 A2 D4 M2) vs. Armored Cars (C4 A3 D3 M2). With d12 dice, these small differences will only matter once every 12 rolls. Consider whether your players will want to buy extra minis, carefully squint at the setup, etc., so that they can enjoy the result of these small differences.

I though of this long and hard. I love to have a choice of many different types of units for every situation. I own most of the HBG sculpts so I figured why not.

Just a comment on a possible middle ground between two valid points: your valid point that having special extra units is fun and interesting, and Argothair’s point that having too many special units – some of them having only minor differences between them – complicates things excessively.  A possible way to split the difference is to have a rule saying that, out of the full range of available special extra units, each power is only allowed to buy X types per game (say, for example, 2 types).  This helps to keep things manageable, because each player only needs to remember the specifications for a very limited number of extra types, not for dozens of them.  It doesn’t restrict game-to-game variety because, from game to game, the various players won’t necessarily buy the same special units.

An additional concept to consider would be to have certain types of special units only be available to certain powers, rather than to everyone.  This could result in interesting situations in which the opposing forces can never be precisely matched in composition…and it would also have a historical basis, because in WWII not all powers fielded every type of weapon.

I should start posting some of the work completed to date because that’s exactly what I’ve done. Every Nation has 2 specific units with the exception of Italy which they have one (ideas for a second unit are welcome) and depending on the unit you can only build 1 or 2 per turn. So anything you suggesting CWO Marc has been implemented.

@barney:

wow ! Nice looking map SS

yea Baron I was thinking EP /Belarus junction for the east border, west one would be correct. I don’t think it would change anything though. Just a visual thing. Pretty cool how you did that though : )

Thanks goes to IL. Its his 2005 WW2 map.

Hello Kreuzfeld.

Thanks for the comments and interest.

Here’s what I’ve found in the 6 or 7 games we’ve played so far with this method.

@Aircraft Carriers: Actually, the games we have played so far did not have restrictions on what friendly nations planes could be on what aircraft carrier.  For instance, ANZAC could launch and recover combat move aircraft from a UK or USA carrier.  Carolina made this suggestion and we are going to incorporate it into our “Axis & Allies & Comintern” House Rules the next time we play in early May.  The reasons are the following:

Allies get a little too much of an advantage in the Pacific if they coordinate right.  ANZAC, being basically land-locked if Japan plays right and gets lucky, can just dedicate their IPC’s to pumping out Fighters and TAC’s …. This free’s USA up to just make CV’s and not worry so much about the planes.  …  Limiting CV’s to just being able to launch Combat Moves with their country’s plane balances this

It could also be argued that having carriers launch attacks with their own country’s planes is more historically accurate.  For sure, USA planes were used on UK carriers.  And I wouldn’t be surprised if USA crews even manned some of the planes (that is a TOTAL guess though).  However, most of the time crews trained long hours with the country and navy that they were going to be flying for.  Therefore, the CAG’s were of the same nation as the CV from which they were operating on.

@Casualties:  Any basically “random” method can be used, including all of the one’s you mentioned.  I gave one example and also left it open to other methods that different groups prefer.

@Analysis & Advantage  I fully agree with you.  The GREATEST advantage to this system is for the Allied and Russian players for sure.  In fact, I think it makes for basically balanced game.  The 6 or 7 games we have played so far have had both Axis and Allied/Russian wins.  ….  Here are some additional things we have noticed:

Like you mentioned, Italy/Germany Can Openers are eliminated on the Eastern Front, greatly helping the Russians.  This is SOMEWHAT mitigated by the new rule that doesn’t allow Allied Forces to step on Russian Controlled territories (and vice-versa) to reinforce Russia in the North … But the overall advantage definitely goes to Russia on this one

It is easier for Italy and Germany to combine forces and hold the Med via Gibraltar.  UK –> USA won’t be able to do Can Openers there.  This lets Italy dig into Africa a little bit more.

ANZAC doesn’t get side-showed as easy.  They can pump out subs, destroyers and maybe even the odd cruiser and incorporate them into the UK or USA fleets.  (historically accurate)

I could go on and on … but basically, “It’s a whole new way at looking at the day.”  :-D

Revised Russian Rules:

Russian Revolution: When the Central Powers control 20 or more IPC’s of original Russian areas, the potential for Revolution is activated. Each turn this is accomplished, the German player rolls a die. The first time the roll needs a 6 result to succeed. Each time a new roll occurs, this drops by one.

Effect: When the Russians revolution occurs, they are out of the game. Central power units occupy what they control and Russian units outside of original Russian borders remain as they are and can be attacked, but do not perform any movement/combat. They may defend however. Also, no allied units are allowed to enter in original Russian territories once the revolution begins.

I wanted to find a good houserule to link AAP and AAE together so I thought since I own AAR as well I could use that as a third map to link them together. Anytime I wanted to move troops from AAE to AAP or vice versa I could use AAR. I wouldn’t count the IPC Value of the land represented in the world map. Has anyone else tried this because I think it could work well.