HELP !!!! Need 50th anniversary japan setup chart, or a picture to reference.

@victoryfirst
Never mind, I found it here:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/3158/missing-setup-charts-look-no-more/27?page=2

@bigfatal

Yes and no. The UK has a lot of earning potential, but a lot of it is vulnerable to attack or capture, making UK very “swingy”. If things are go well for the allies, UK will be pretty wealthy, if it goes badly UK can end up being very cash strapped indeed. Playing with national objectives (which is the way I prefer to play) will amplify this even further as the UK is the easiest ally for the Axis to prevent earning any bonuses.

Meanwhile the US has a huge does of IPCs that are rarely touched by the axis, even when things go badly for the allies, and is also the only nation with 20 ipcs of objective bonuses available, so the US is still very much the big spender of the game.

As to what’s in it for the US in the pacific: Its less about increasing US earnings and more about limiting Japan’s. Left unchallenged Japan can reach stratospheric income, bringing the UK economy to its knees as they drive to Moscow.

There are also two pacific based objectives for the US, so that adds 10 potential ipcs of direct incentive, plus the chance to pick up one more for the UK and prevent Japan from earning any, which stacks up to enough money to justify a US fleet investment.

I find allied players that are good with a slow push play style do well fighting it out in the pacific, but those that are better at a quick kill/knockout blow style will have more success trying to kill Germany before Japan gets too big. I also find a pacific allied strat is more likely to work in the 1942 set up than it does in 1941. (Part of the reason I like that set up better)

Without objectives it may be better for the allies to just fight a delaying action in the pacific and focus on Germany, but I have not played that way enough to say for sure.

@squirecam said in Anniversary Errata Optional Rule: Escorts and Interceptors:

@the_good_captain said in Anniversary Errata Optional Rule: Escorts and Interceptors:

@cernel I played three games against forum members that made a point to do this as Germany while I was the allies. After the final repetition and significant impact from the aforementioned, I had to insist on Escorts and Interceptors.

I consider it less significant than the USA bomber strategy but I’m confident enough to make it an axiom of my own axis strategy …and share it in a video, obviously.

The escort and interceptor rule is required for a fair game IMHO. Moreover, no bombing strategy succeeded in eliminating a country’s ability to build tanks and weapons during ww2, and certainly not without getting through fighter screens first.

This answered my question krieghund.

Axis and Allies Anniversary Edition

Players must agree on the following options before starting the game:

Which Scenario are we playing?
a) 1941
b) 1942

How many victory cities will we play to?
a) 13 cities
b) 15 cities (default)
c) 18 cities

Research and Development allowed?
a) Yes
b) No

National Objectives allowed?
a) Yes
b) No

Dardanelles closed to sea movement?*
a) Yes
b) No

Fighter Escorts and Interceptors allowed?*
a) Yes
b) No

*Found in the official corrections/FAQ located here: https://axisallies.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/axis-allies-rules-anniversary-corrections-faqs.pdf

@Panther

Thanks for the clarification and quick response!

Great purchase and you are one step closer to Global!

Can someone please post a pic of the Italian units ( all or even just some of them ) please?

If you play with tech, radar and increased factory production can both strongly discourage SBR.

I have never been in a game of who can roll the most ones since classic, with 3 dice heavies.  I play a variety of opponents and rarely get SBR’d.  And it’s not because I have techs or interceptors on.

Like axis said, sometimes you get sick of these kinds of games (I can imagine), but since I’ve never had an opponent bomb me much, I look forward to the day that someone does.

In AA50 I’ve never seen someone use SBR as an attacking strategy.  Many players don’t do anything at all with their bombers some turns, when they could be SBR’g.  I even played someone who had heavy bombers from round 1 with Germany, and some turns let 3-4 heavies sit there idle while UK remained untouched (yes, this mystified me).  But people don’t want to lose their bombers to AA fire.  SBR is very risky.  You can take in 2 bombers, and it seems like I usually lose 1, so I’ve lost 12, and the recipient loses 1d6.  Now I know that’s not the way to run an SBR campaign or anything, but I’m just saying why a lot of folks won’t bother, if there’s an AA gun.  Besides, the cap on damage limits efficiency in many cases (reduces average below 3.5 per surviving bomber) and you don’t bomb money directly anymore, so the victim does have some options many times.

What I’m trying to say is, I’ve only seen SBR when people don’t know what else to do with their bombers for a turn, or there is no defense (no AA gun).  Bombers are extremely useful in attacking military units, and that’s the way I and most of my opponents use them.