Hey all,

My cousin and I are starting a global game this upcoming weekend against some competition that we have never played before and I was wondering if anyone could give me pointers, tips, or anything to playing Italy? In this game I will be controlling the European axis and he’s going to be the Almighty Japan.

I think I mostly got down Germany with the idea of getting your army to eastern front and then building/adding to a navy that keeps the threat of Sea Lion alive or can be used to sweep into the Med or Scandinavia.

My obstacle comes with Italy, they start out pathetic economically but can become a powerhouse “if” they get ahold of their NOs as well as if the Taranto Raid/Tobruk does not happen.

So any ideas would be helpful about where to concentrate and maybe some turn purchases if the Taranto Raid/Tobruk does not got through or has some terrible rolls. Obviously, I think the best strategy is to turtle and protect western Europe if those do indeed happen and hopefully wait for a Germany to help you acquire your NOs in the much later game, but provided those do indeed not happen I am dumbfounded to the so many options that Italy has.

Your feedback would be most welcomed.

Well I actually found the answer to my question in the rulebook. I must have misread it in my flipping back and forth of reading rules.

“However, if it’s not yet at war by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, the United States may declare war on any or all Axis powers at the beginning of that phase.”

Therefore the US NOs would be collected on US3.

Hello all, my name is Michael.
I’m fairly new to the world of Axis and Allies having just started the summer of 2019 and been playing since; however, my excellent writing and rhetoric skills that I’ve learned in my university studies have led me to study the rulebooks in the world of Axis and Allies in order for me to semi-master/quickly understand the concept and play styles of the game. I’m a university taught environmental engineer.
I like to play AA50 anniversary edition and just recently took on the venture into 1940 Europe with my cousin.
As to how often I play, my cousin and I try to play whenever we get the time. Sometimes it can be once a week or every other week, but at the very least try to have a tradition where a game is played monthly.
I have bought the the 50th anniversary edition and just recently Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940 both 2nd edition so I play with the standard out of the box boards so no I play with no customizations in terms of equipment. However, I guess our (my cousin and I) house rule regards bombardments where you bombard for the first round of combat and the hits on the defending units result in them not being able to return fire. Before that we were misinterpreting the bombardment rules and bombarding every round of combat. But quite frankly, he and I both agree that the bombardment rule as written is probably the worst piece of trash in the rulebook.
This concludes my introduction. My very next post which I am going to work on will be on the “by the book” bombardment rule and what my cousin and I see wrong with it. So please everyone give me feedback on my thoughts about bombarding.

Hello all,
So the second edition rulebook of the 1940 series games says this in reference to bombardments in amphibious assaults (I’m sure it’s pretty similar in the anniversary edition):

“Step 2. Battleship and Cruiser Bombardment
If there was NOT a combat in the sea zone from which you are offloading units from transports, any accompanying battleships and cruisers in that sea zone can conduct a ONE-TIME BOMBARDMENT of one coastal territory or island group being attacked…Roll one die for each battleship and cruiser that can conduct bombardment. Battleships hit on a die roll of “4” or less, and cruisers hit on a “3” or less. For each hit, the defender will move a defending unit behind the casualty strip. These casualties will be ABLE TO DEFEND during the land combat step before they are eliminated.”

Here’s a little background on how I used to play this rule and how I play now. When I first started getting into the A&A, I used this rule very loosely and was bombarding at the beginning of every round of combat in which it was a very good weapon and all defending units that got hit were allowed to fire back. This seemed to be pretty balanced when you were only realistically able to land 3-4 transports a turn or 4-6 every two turns and you had 6-12 guys going up against a giant wall of cannon fodder. However, when my cousin and I were playing we thought about this concept and were role playing it out and our thoughts came to the conclusion that if we continued to bombard then in a real world situation your units could be subject to friendly fire from naval vessels aimlessly shooting an island or coastal territory from miles away, so we changed how we interpreted this rule and how we played it.
We decided to take literal the writings of the rule book in which you bombard for a one time shot and any hits on defending units get to fireback at land units that you are landing. However, we came to this dilemma of “why even buy expensive ships then if there firepower doesn’t really do anything? Why not defend your transports with an enormous amount of the least expensive surface ships (destroyers)?” In our honest opinion playing the rulebook word for word in regards to bombardments seemed way too nerfed. Just why invest 20 IPCs in a battleship that doesn’t get to completely eliminate a defending unit when making an amphibious assault? I mean if it doesn’t have that capability then really a navy that is designed to protect transports should just be a bunch of destroyers in their place. It just seems like there is no incentive to invest in these powerful 3 and 4 attack power ships.
So this new house rule we’ve come up with is that cruisers and battleships only get a one time bombardment and in doing so the casualties that these ships make do not get to return fire. The idea of this rule that we modified actually gives incentive to invest in these pricey ships. It gives the chance for your landing units to stay as strong as possible, possibly have greater chances of taking the territory, and take less casualties themselves such that they can have a better chance of holding the territory in a retaliation.
We have only made this rule though while playing Europe 1940. We are kind of under the impression that this rule would be OP when doing anything in the Pacific theatre.

So I would just like an honest discussion. What are everyone’s thoughts? Does anyone else agree that there is no incentive to invest in these super pricey ships if defending casualties get to pick off at your landing units? Does anyone like playing the actual rule and then can someone suggest a good naval purchase that utilizes offense and defense while still staying true to the rule? Does anyone have any tweeks to this house rule I have described such that it’s still useful in Europe and not OP in the Pacific? I’m pretty knowledgeable of all the rules and learn very quickly, but this is the only rule that I’m conflicted about and have serious questions about.

Well I am enjoying this discussion but I feel like its destroying my previous strategies, but then again in my previous strategies that’s when I was playing with my cousin and playing the bombardment rule pretty loosely compared to the wording of the rulebook in which our primitive house rule allowed all rounds of combat to have a bombardment.

But strategies are meant to be revised. So from now on I think I’ll be protecting my transports with CVs, DDs, and SSs while holding on to the starting the CAs and BBs and maybe throwing a new purchase in for one of those very rarely.

@barnee I first mastered land and sea combat, an air force is the thing that I’m still eagerly learning. I guess with loaded CVs I can come to develop a great air force and learn its capabilities.

Does America collect its NO money right when it enters the war at the end of turn 3 or does it start collecting on US 4?

The ambiguity of how powers go to war and declare war makes it seem as if they would enter the war “after” collecting income then triggering the NOs for collection on US4.

For the most part its nearly 70 IPCs going to Gibraltar every turn, how can Italy afford to place itself on the Eastern Front?

Italy is the softest underbelly ever. If you do the Taranto/Tobruk simultaneously you completely neuter them. Or if Tobruk doesn’t go through because the UK cruiser by Gibraltar was taken out then then Italy is still likened to nothing but a piece oof gum on your show and in this scenario a portion of the UK navy was left untouched around the mainland.

If Italy doesn’t turtle immediately then the southern flank to Germany’s world domination is completely undefended. The smartest Russian player would literally build a wall of infantry and the 1-2 IPCs leftover would be to upgrade an infantry to an artillery. Germany can match Russia by building a wall of cheap units but then it doesn’t have mobility for the absolute shit storm of America that’s landing 70 IPCs of guys every turn.

So still it just seems like a way overpowered Allies advantage. America doe snot declare IRL until Pearl Harbor occurs. So FEC and ANZAC being attacked should not trigger them entering the war, this is the buff that the Axis should get imo.

If Japan does not take care of the BB near Malaya then FEC becomes a real pain in the ass to where Japan would have invest more in the Pacific than on the Asian continent which can become quickly out of hand with the addition of 3-4 Chinese units a turn.

In reality I think any axis buff would have to involve Italy income being upgraded to at least 12-15IPC/turn to allow for the production 4-5 infantry/turn to protect Europe’s soft underbelly and work on the majority of the Atlantic wall in order for Germany to focus completely on Russia OR the other detail becomes in which US always enters the war at the end of its third turn and starts collecting its NOs (or of course unless attacked).

Well that’s the real question in the topic above but it’s solely based around the question of how do you stop America? US can collect their NOs right away and enter the war if Japan DOWs on Anzac or FEC. If Japan doesn’t do that then the FEC battleship survives and can maneuver and then the FEC can become a real money grabber to make itself a strong presence in the Pacific for a few turns at least really confining Japan to building more navy/replacing lost navy units from inevitable battles instead of money grabbing for themselves and beating the pulp out of China.

So how do you win as the Axis in a severely tilted Allies game? No one is going to even threaten the US NOs besides the Phillipines so they can build awfully quick, go right for Gibraltar, then Italy whereas Germany would have to divert from Russia to protect its southern border, then Russia can mobilize, and then UK can start building a navy meaning everything then starts to beeline towards Berlin.

So what is the formula? I mean the Arsenal of Democracy really dissuades me from even wanting to try to play as the Axis. My belief is you can win as the Axis if you’re playing someone who is new to the game.

Please give me some juicy details and make me believe that this is not a one sided game: details involved in purchases, strategic locations, where to place ICs if they are to be purchased and placed.

Is the game broken? Does it need a bid?

Well I actually found the answer to my question in the rulebook. I must have misread it in my flipping back and forth of reading rules.

“However, if it’s not yet at war by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, the United States may declare war on any or all Axis powers at the beginning of that phase.”

Therefore the US NOs would be collected on US3.

Well TripleA allows US to declare war if Japan parks itself in SZ20 which is right next to SZ35 which contains the Phillipines. By virtue of the rulebook US cannot declare war unless Japan is parked within 2 sea zones adjacent to the “mainland” US i.e. WUS or Alaska. So to my hearts content I believe the US enters the war after collect income of US3 and then collects on US4.

I like it this way because it grants one more turn before a storm of literal money floats its way across the Atlantic to a full blown KGF which is a guaranteed game winner all the time in which the soft underbelly of Italy is cleaned up pretty quickly and then Germany has to divert hella resources to protecting/reviving Italy which in turn allows Russia to build even more and finally for UK to step into the fold.

So my point is that I think the game is broken if the US collects 77 IPCs on US3 and therefore should be deferred to US4 where in the meantime on J4 they can prevent 7 IPCs heading to US by taking the Phillipines (+2) and preventing the NO (+5) which is really harmless imo as it downgrades the American Atlantic storm from a Category 5 to a Category 4.999999999999999 (not even a dent).

What are your opinions all on US NO collection on US4?

Does America collect its NO money right when it enters the war at the end of turn 3 or does it start collecting on US 4?

The ambiguity of how powers go to war and declare war makes it seem as if they would enter the war “after” collecting income then triggering the NOs for collection on US4.

Hey all,

My cousin and I are starting a global game this upcoming weekend against some competition that we have never played before and I was wondering if anyone could give me pointers, tips, or anything to playing Italy? In this game I will be controlling the European axis and he’s going to be the Almighty Japan.

I think I mostly got down Germany with the idea of getting your army to eastern front and then building/adding to a navy that keeps the threat of Sea Lion alive or can be used to sweep into the Med or Scandinavia.

My obstacle comes with Italy, they start out pathetic economically but can become a powerhouse “if” they get ahold of their NOs as well as if the Taranto Raid/Tobruk does not happen.

So any ideas would be helpful about where to concentrate and maybe some turn purchases if the Taranto Raid/Tobruk does not got through or has some terrible rolls. Obviously, I think the best strategy is to turtle and protect western Europe if those do indeed happen and hopefully wait for a Germany to help you acquire your NOs in the much later game, but provided those do indeed not happen I am dumbfounded to the so many options that Italy has.

Your feedback would be most welcomed.

I do not have TripleA and I always see it written in the forums. Quite frankly I do not know what it is.

@barnee I first mastered land and sea combat, an air force is the thing that I’m still eagerly learning. I guess with loaded CVs I can come to develop a great air force and learn its capabilities.

Well I am enjoying this discussion but I feel like its destroying my previous strategies, but then again in my previous strategies that’s when I was playing with my cousin and playing the bombardment rule pretty loosely compared to the wording of the rulebook in which our primitive house rule allowed all rounds of combat to have a bombardment.

But strategies are meant to be revised. So from now on I think I’ll be protecting my transports with CVs, DDs, and SSs while holding on to the starting the CAs and BBs and maybe throwing a new purchase in for one of those very rarely.

OK.

So I understand that investing in BBs is probably not worth it once you lose your starting ones.

But why in general neglect developing a navy that has the ability to attack land? If it’s no longer preferred to invest in new expensive BBs, does this still apply for CAs? And what if you get improved shipyards you’re only paying 1 more IPC for a BB than for an ‘unimproved shipyard’ CV - still not preferred?