3 Players: 1 Axis and 2 Allies possible?

@Granada:

oh well, i have just tried the strategy against an experienced player and i was destroyed terribly. SZ 12 IS NOT A SAFE PLACE R1. You would not have 2 UK trans in most cases. I played against bid 9 so there was one sub more from the start and an AC on G1. Any kind of convoying system is necessary for US but next time i am going to make sure that i control the atlantic solidly first. I made some childish mistakes too, but if the germans put an effort to contesting the atlantic you cannot just build trannies. You have to sink their ships first and you have to do it quick and as cheap as possible.

Btw if the convoying system is to work smoothly you need for US actually three sets of transport ships, two wount do.

Early allied shipping losses can really hamper your game plan. It is always vital to protect not only the transports, but that British battleship! If Germany invests 24 ipcs in the water, you will have to wait a round or two to be safe, however, thats all right, as Germany took away 24 ipcs from the Russian campaign, you have time to get going.

i have this as well. But its a HUGE file. in GB not MB…

if you got something in sections use media fire and provide links and ill put them together seamlessly and post or mail to you.

I plan on doing AA50 as well like this.

Personally, I think that both options have their advantages.
Sure, playing one on one has something ‘chessy’(and I mean the game :lol:) about it. It’s like you’re trying to get inside the mind of your opponent, deducting his strategy as he/she makes moves and try to make his plans part of your masterplan. It’s fun, it takes a lot of mental work but it’s worth it.
Then again, playing 2 vs 2(I’ve never played with 5 people, and for this I apologize  :wink:) has a lot of good features too. Two minds see and think of more than just one. Putting your ideas together will often result in a better plan than either of you thought of, and defeating 2 of your friends(who are your intellectual equals, at least concerning A&A :roll:) gives an enormous satisfaction. Beating two people who think together to defeat you is something special, at least to me.

To sum up. There will always be people who prefer one or the other, but I believe that each has its charm, and therefor such discussions are a bit pointless. And to end with a golden oldie: “Live and let live”(Unless your opponents are playing on the Allied side, in which case, kill the bastards :evil:)

Oob says that you roll a die, and that each bomber cannot do more ipc damage than production of territory. Maybe the explanation is confusing, but I would not say you must lose the max ipcs. I never played losing max ipcs in 2 years of face to face, and my mother language is spanish, so I suppose OOb are ok in that point. Anyway, a bit of logic says that even as confusing the sentence is, if you roll a die, that die must be used for determinig  the loss of ipc.

Oob rules, however, are wrong in rocket attacks, because they have a picture showing the Russia AA gun attacking Germany’s IC. This made me confusing until I read the FAQ, saying the picture was wrong. If I remember right, this is the only “big” mistake of rules.

@Wazzup:

Well, in a timed Game, I expect an agressive Axis player to build up VCs and IPCs in a hurry.  They have to and are in the best position too.

If japan can be distracted then Russia can be very aggresive from the begening.

I think, maybe SAV file is too big  :? Has somebody bigger this sav files than me?

The rule for holding VC’s is that at teh end of the US’s move (the complete turn of play) X number of VC’s are controlled by one side or the other.

8 VC’s is basically an Axis win (except in very special cases like a 2 turn limit test game where Russia goes suicidal in defense of the Allied VC’s)

Instead of 8, play for 9 for victory.

When one side or the other controls 9 VC’s at the end of a turn, then there is basically no doubt as to what side won.

Germany would be ready to rock and roll with an extra 8 in Africa…  They would benefit far more than giving the 8 to the Japanese since there is very little to check Japan in the long run in Asia.  The Germans would not need to pull troops from Europe to successfully assault Egypt(closing the Suez-sealing off the Indian fleet), and they’d be able to drop reinforcements to prevent an American counter in US1 in Algeria.  The Germans can go after the Brit BB in the Med with the BB prtotecting the planes(The BB isn’t needed to protect the transport against the Destroyer in the Med when amphibbing Egypt because the amphib isn’t necessary).  The sub could be used to sink the tranny in Canada, hamstrining the Brits efforts in Norway in GB1.  They could move both fleets together in G2… without sacrificing Africa.  And take 4 IPCs off the Brits in G2 as well…  Plus the rest of Africa in G3(would be enough to offset what is lost to US in US2)…  Even if the Allies are aggressive in the first round, there is no reason why Germany would be collecting less than 39IPCs(as opposed to 37) in round1, 42 in round 2, and 44 in round 3.  This almost guarantees that Germany will hang around no less than 7 rounds(more than likely 8 or 9)…  Long enough for Japan to strike down Moscow.

Wilk

@trihero:

I dunno, I’ve been talking with a very good Revised player and he never will play the Axis unless he has a bid of 8 (1 inf in Libya 1 tank in Algeria).