Multi nation a/c

@always-wanderer

That one looks great too! Thank you again for sharing these great resources!

Although I have only played a few games of AA50 a few things seem clear regardless of the scenario:

1. Chinamen vaporize faster than the humans In War of the Worlds…for a 1940 population of 455mil you have a better chance of finding a brontosaurus on the map by turn 3, possibly by turn 2 with the 41 scenario. Perhaps the spawn policy should be changed…maybe 1 for every 2 terr rounded up.

2. He/she who controls the Gaza strip rules the world…the strip between Egypt and India plays a major role in deciding the game. If this is in allied hands the russians can usually hold the Caucases… if not their position is tenuous. conversely,

3. Germans cannot live on a diet of sauerbraten alone… a little linguini and sushi help the digestion (of Russia) If the russian player is good I think it is difficult to do it with Germany alone. Just as russia need to hold out until the allies arrive Germany only needs to hold the front with/without  Italy’s help until you can get double/triple penetration on cau/rus with Japan.  Italy can either support france freeing the huns for eastward movement or shuttle thru Istanbul  Btw, I think closed Dardanelles is for pussies.

4. NOs…I don’t know. The axis NOs are more easily obtained but I certainly like the extra 5 I get in russia for no foreigners as it lets me squeeze an armor in here and there.

5. Pocket change…whenever I have a few extra scheckles I find myself buying subs particularly in a no tech game.  Its like a boxer with a good jab. keeps the Japs out of the Americans face, also good for the Med.

6. Advantage who…are the axis really favored???  I am currently plaing a gencom rules game where axis recieved a bid. Maybe this is to offset the allied VC
advantage with an 8 turn / 6 hour limit  an no NOs    I’d like to know peoples thoughts on who is favored and why

@squirecam:

@questioneer:

Yes, by round 4 technically.

I’ve always been of the belief that if games are ending early, either its a particularly bad dice outcome, or the other side is not playing very well.

Questions:

What did each of you buy as Germany?

When you were allies, did he attack you, or vice versa?

Q1  I bought like 4inf, 4tnk, 1ftr.  He bought something similar

Q2  Russia went too strong the first round and it backlashed quickly.  The 2nd game seemed more like the normal Eastern Front stuggle- eventual stack on either side but the Allied planes came in to defend and bomb just in the nick of time.  This is why I think Allies have the advantage.  Against a strong KGF, there are just too many fronts for the Axis to defend- the new map with chopped up territories doesn’t allow it.

I didn’t completley ignore Japan though.  I simply left a small annoying force to sail south and become a potential menace- but I put all my money and builds towards Europe.  Japan is way to slow- you need more builds to get to Russia because it takes forever.  That’s why I think the NOs help balance it out more because they help the Axis more than the Allies on the onset.

In the first game, he did have some dice whoopings.  The 2nd game seemed pretty normal.  Tech really didn’t effect the games much because the games ended fairly quickly (4 rounds).  They are a lot of fun though and pretty balanced I think because both sides can invest in them- especially with NO’s.

I find the US/UK vs Japan option (1941) is very viable.  Maybe I am misreading what was said before, but it actually seems more viable to me than a traditional kill Germany first. (I think this is because Italy can liberate/take land and Germany can reinforce it with fighters to defend now, a very significant and major defensive capability!)

America may be limited to 52 IPC or less a round if they go Kill Japan first.  However, England should be making significantly more than the 20-30 IPC they get in a kill Germany/ignore Japan campaign because of the NO in the Pacific, the non-loss of the NO in the Indian Ocean/Africa/Australia/etc, the increased land ownership in the Asian SE and SE Pacific Islands, etc.  Meanwhile, Japan shouldn’t be earning too much either, America could, realistically, be earning near to more than double what Japan is if played right.

nope, never have.

@axis_roll:

Don’t get me wrong, I like to KJF, it’s more fun, since it IS harder to execute.  I like a challenge.  Probably why I like to play the Axis… they’re the underdog.

So KJF is an underdog type of allied strategy.   :wink:

KJF is harder of master, not of execute. When you master KJF, it’s more powerful than a mastered KGF. First, because very few people know how counter KJF and many start to do strange things. Second, because it’s easier for axis reach economic parity in KGF than in KGF. Third, for league games, I found it’s easier reach 9 VCs with KJF (Manila, Shangai, Paris). Fourth, a KGF strat let Japan try invade american mainland (a strat I still don’t master, but seems very nasty in a initial KGF game)