AA50 Tips & Tricks

@Adlertag:

@Panzer:

Hi Aldertag, I am a little confused about this one as in 41 set-up Russia does not have any planes to start with I believe.  :?

You are correct as always. Russia dont start with fighters, so we need to gather some. Since a carrier cost 14 IPC and a fighter cost 10 IPC, at a total of 24 IPC, you just might cover it in your first purchase. But you still miss one fighter. So how about borrow one from UK ? Land the Egypt or Indian fighter on your russian carrier. I say, you do land your Indian fighter on the US carrier at Hawaii now and then, so why not try to land it on the russian carrier for a change ? Or UK get long range tech and fly a fighter from UK to the carrier. Or you play russia with a bid, just big enough to cover a carrier with two figs. There are so many ways. I bet you dont win many games, now do you ? I mean, with your attitude. Wow. People mail me every day, and ask, Adlertag please teach me how to win. And I tell them

I am not sure what attitude you are refering to as I simply wanted a little clarififcation on your interesting idea, and I did not think you would mind since you are suggesting it. No offense was meant.

Actually I rarely lose and have been playing Axis & Allies since the first one came out 25 years ago and do not need anyone’s help when it comes to kicking ass as the Axis or the Allies in any of the versions. I am actually a little older then you might think.

My trick is to always take out the enemy’s attack pieces wherever possible and always leave my attack pieces properly protected. I try to eliminate as many or all possible counter attacks so as to always control the play. That in combination with exchanging cheap pieces for expensive pieces always seems to lead to victory. That is my one trick that never fails.

I will try the 4 subs next time I play Russia and let you know how it goes.

I will send you a couple of + karmas when I get to 100 posts next week. :-D

@Adlertag:

@Panzer:

Does this strat diminish the Russian front against the Germans? Where they able to take advantage?

This game is all about balance. The Allied nr 1 priority is to sink the Italian fleet in order to protect the African income. It dont matter who sink this fleet, as long as it hit the bottom. Now if Russia sink it with cheap subs in turn 2, then UK will save the expensive bombers and use her resources to pressure Germany up north. So you see, the Huns are not able to take advantage of a Russian all naval build, because the brits will harass them.

+1 as promised.

tanks

+1 karma Adlertag and to everyone here, I’ll get you up to 800 by Christmas!  Think of it as my Christmas gift to you!

+1 to everyone 10/08/09

+1 to everyone 10/08/09

+1 to everyone 10/09/09

@Adlertag:

tanks

one more +1 to help your 800 quest. :-)

@Adlertag:

@Gargantua:

What a poor strategy to be the focus of attention in the “Tips and Tricks” thread.

Here we go, you just got yourself one more smite. My grand strategy this week will be to smite you tree times a day.

Don’t let it get to you, Gargantua, this cat is thin-skinned…  I’ve been called an Islamic fundamentalist by agreeing with this clown.  Seriously.

-1 smite to Aldertag, just because I can, and +1 karma for Gargantua, for pointing out the obvious…

RUSSIA IS IN EVEN WORSE STRAITS AGAINST GERMANY IN THE 1942 SETUP THAN IN 1941!!!  How in HELL do you expect Russia to survive an all sub R1 buy if there’s no more land units forthcoming?  You have Ger units in range of the capital from two nearby zones and they are also an ace away from grabbing not 1 but BOTH of their 3rd NO territories!

The fundamental flaw in your strategy is that the med fleet is OPTIONAL for Italy… It can be simply a DISTRACTION for the Allies to waste IPCs on, and gain little to no income in North Africa while the Axis finish off Russia between Italy and Germany.

Who bases their opinions in a board game forum on the amount of karma they have anyway?

Also, trying both of these suggested "tips and tricks"strategies; the “Red October” AND the “Persian Plunge” TOGETHER is a recipe for suicide with the Allies in a '42 game.

Use of Red October guarantees that the Persian Plunge UK IC build in persia will NOT be receiving the promised 4 inf from the Causcasus as backup, as all 4 subs use up the production necessary in the Caus the first round, and the forthcoming rounds will have so many German units threatening Moscow that moving inf away from Caus seems chancing the Russian capital (and the game).

Attempt these strategies at your own risk.  Either/Or would be better than trying them in conjunction.

I could see the “Persian Plunge” as working some of the time. What it has going for it are that as the U.K., you will get to see a couple of axis turns before you start the strategy.  If it seems viable, then go for it.  I don’t know how often it would work, but I like the dual purpose of stopping Japan and giving the U.K. a chance of retaking Egypt at some point in the game.

RUSSIA IS IN EVEN WORSE STRAITS AGAINST GERMANY IN THE 1942 SETUP THAN IN 1941!!!  How in HELL do you expect Russia to survive an all sub R1 buy if there’s no more land units forthcoming?  You have Ger units in range of the capital from two nearby zones and they are also an ace away from grabbing not 1 but BOTH of their 3rd NO territories!

The fundamental flaw in your strategy is that the med fleet is OPTIONAL for Italy… It can be simply a DISTRACTION for the Allies to waste IPCs on, and gain little to no income in North Africa while the Axis finish off Russia between Italy and Germany.

German units in range are not a problem at all, actually.  Russia can easily pound Belorussia and East Ukraine with starting units and would not need to purchase any land units to protect itself in G1.
That said, I’d rather spend 20-25 IPC’s on tech than plunge it into the Black Sea, of all places.  It’s really irrelevant to me anyway, because I always play with the Dardanelles closed.  I guess that carrier in the Black Sea could help with future amphibious invasions on Bulgaria  :lol:

The only comment I have about Russia on this idea is that they do not have any attack pieces at the start (41) and only just infantry which makes it hard to lunch attacks with Russia right away. That is why my normal game usually involves buying tanks and infantry right away for several rounds and eventually try to get a plane or two as well. This builds your attack force while trying to keep hold of your countries and allows for eventual counter asssault against Germany. This is a proven method to me as I have managed to hang on and turn things around before in a couple of games as Russia in 41. It is not that exicitng of a strategy as it is a more reserved defensive game, but that is the way I always felt Russia should be played. Personnal opinion.

But… I am always open to new strategies, even if they are a little different.

@!ACHTUNG!:

Does anyone have any proven unorthodox strategies they want to share?

I must remind everybody here, that this thread is about unortodox strategies.

Both the Red October and the Persian Plunge are unortodox strategies indeed, and that was the main reason I posted them. I could post my most successful and effective strategie, wich is the Russian Infantry Push Mechanic, wich is basically Russia buy a lot of infantry, and when time is right move a big infantry stack to Berlin. Butt that would not be a very unortodox strategy, now would it ?

OKi boyz and girlz, here my other unorto stratz :

The Graf Zeppelin.

On German turn 1, you buy a carrier and place it in Baltic Sea, and land two fighters on it. Now it will be very difficult to kill the Baltic Fleet in the first turn, so basically the fleet will survi

yes. but historically, the Graf Zepplin was only to carry about 50 Aircraft. 1/2 what American carriers were carrying which was 90-100 aircraft.
So, I think you should only be able to carry one fighter on the German carrier.
Of course other nations like Britain did not have the capacity either.

Last game I played as the Axis I played a little unorthodox myself in the 41 set-up. Germany’s first turn I bought an aircraft carrier and a destroyer + tank and man, Germany’s second turn I bought another aircraft carrier with 2 subs + tank and man. Third and forth turn I bought all tanks. Italy’s first turn bought a transport, second turn a carrier + 2 tanks, third turn all tanks and forth turn plane and tanks. I ended up lucky as UK tried on turn 3 to take out the German fleet and lost badly as Germany had their two loaded aircraft carriers left (only) and UK lost ALL their ships and planes. On turn four I moved the German fleet out in the Alantic towards Gibraltor, and on Italy’s turn 4 they moved their fleet out to the Atlantic as well. USA turn 4 they tried to attack Italy’s fleet before I could combine the fleets and they brought in two bombers, a destroyer, a carrier and a plane. Italy’s fleet was also lucky as I took a hit on the battleship, and lost one cruiser. Italy still had it’s carrier and its battleship along with one plane and two transports. US lost everything, bad rolling. Also on turn 4 Italy sacrificed all its men and tanks to take Byelorussia on its turn and managed to capture it with one tank only remaining, so as to allow Germany to Blitz through on its turn 5 right into Moscow. I rolled in with 17 tanks surprising the unprepared Russians and capturing the capital. Also moved German fleet to join Italy’s and all the of the sudden I have three aircraft carriers loaded in the Atlantic. The Allies player conceded at that point, also because Japan on turn 4 crushed the US pacific fleet as well.
So aircraft carriers definitely can work. That was one of the quickest games I ever played only 5 turns. :-D
So in conclusion, unorthodox can be affective.

What was Russia doing while you were building a fleet, defending?

@coachofmany:

yes. but historically, the Graf Zepplin was only to carry about 50 Aircraft. 1/2 what American carriers were carrying which was 90-100 aircraft.
So, I think you should only be able to carry one fighter on the German carrier.
Of course other nations like Britain did not have the capacity either.

Yeah, but we’re forgetting that the Germans probably never intended to use the carrier for anything more than support and reconnaissance…  They had such a large number of aircraft based in Europe that building carriers wasn’t their number 1 priority…  I mean, its a lot easier if you just use land based aircraft if that’s what you’re attacking with anyway, rather than sink a whole bunch of resources into a giant steel flattop.  The Axis called Italy their Land Carrier of the Med for a reason.

I just don’t like the naval carrier mechanics in A+A.  A player is forced to consolidate their stacks at the end of their turns for maximum defense, which requires carriers for landing planes on to protect the vulnerable fleets, while nearby planes landed on the continent/island bases next to the SZ can’t contribute at all.  It’s not realistic in the European theater with land territories next to narrow SZs, and its really only realistically implemented in the open ocean SZs in the Atlantic and Pacific.  There should be an “intercept” or “scramble” roll for fighters stationed in land territories next to a SZ battle (maybe a 50% chance per fighter) so that the defender can get a chance to add in more air support if they want, unless the land territory the fighter is stationed from is also under attack.

What do you guys think?

I’m not sure about a G1 naval buy, but the Baltic’s the best place to try since you start with a sizeable fleet there.  Only problem in '41 is that Britain starts with like 42 IPCs and can easily build some expensive naval units to sink it.  '42 scenario might have a better shot.

One thing I have tried is building a factory in France G1, then building a fleet in SZ 13 G2.  It can easily stack with the Italian fleet, have two powers growing into it instead of just one, AND be a lot more strategically useful than the fleet stuck in the Baltic.  Only problem is that this only works against weak Russian players, since Germany needs NOs to be viable from Russian territory, and two turns of weakened land unit production leads to a defensive front.  I had a pretty good run in the 41 tech tourney against KGB; but it ultimately failed due to a MONSTROUS UNSTOPPABLE RUSSIAN JUGGERNAUT.  Let’s put it this way; if Germany’s NOT getting her NO’s, Russia sure as hell IS.  And that means Bad News Bear for the Axis.

@coachofmany:

What was Russia doing while you were building a fleet, defending?

On turn two Germnay sent all tanks and men after Karelia and captured it with only tanks left, so Russia tried to recapture it with its availalbe men and tanks and failed, the Germans held and then took Byelorussia on their turn, then Russia took it back on turn 4 then Italy recapture as per previuos post to allow Germans to walk through on turn 5.
Russia tried to counter and he had bought the correct pieces (I think) but luck was on the Axis side, it was close mind you but the Axis came out on top. UK and US tried and failed to stop the fleets, so on turn 5 with no Allied fleets left, Russia captured and Germany/Italy with 3 carrier big fleet in Atlantic and Japan with good size fleet in Pacific, they surrendered. If the dice had gone differently it could have gone either way, but with great risk can come great reward (some of the time).  :-)

1941/1942, no NO’s, playing with 11/12 VC’s

dunno bout balance, but it was most fun game i played in years
you really have global warfare
US trying to protect honolulu, sydney, manilla and such, while russians are fighting germans for leningrad and stalingrad

@Adlertag:

@bugoo:

How would the odds fall with 3 subs 1 bomber?

Now that was a depravity line of thinking. Imagine Eisenhower abort D-day 1944 because the odds was not good enough. We would all be speaking german now. If you want to win games, you need to strenghten your fighting spirit and breed more aggression. Peacekeepers dont win wars, you know that, now do you ? Butt enough talk. Now you better gimme a + karma and help me reach the magic 800 before Frog.

good luck with 800, but i’ll support :)

or worse, we would be speaking russian!