I was thinking about this the other day and I thought it would be pretty cool just to make the game look nicer.  With AAM: WaS coming out next year, every piece in AAR could be replaced with minis on a board.  Theyll look way better than the regular pieces.  Of course some of the rare miniatures are a bit too large for the regular sized boardgame, but you can fix this problem by making a bigger board at Staples or something.  The only major problem I see is planes, since the War at Sea planes are going to be very small and the AAM planes are fairly large.  Anyways, what do you guys think about it?

Yea, I was thinking of a Battleship/Aircraft Carrier R1 Build with Germany.  Maybe an 8 IPC bid for a second Transport in SZ 5.

As for invading England, really wasn’t thinking along those lines.  I was thinking of a fleet big enough to stop any Navy from building up by the allies so 100% of Germany can go for Russia leaving W. Europe and S. Europe and Africa mostly undefended.

That does kinda suck though.  I like the LHTR better. :)  But then, there’s a lot of good fixes in LHTR, probably why they came up with it.

And, btw, I do have color coded AA Guns and Industrial Complexes.  (Single Smoke Stack ones no less!)  2 For America, 2 For Russia, 2/3(AA) for Germany, 1 for Japan, 1 For England.

@Cobert:

That owl has a serious substance abuse problem.

The “problem” is that I don’t have enough beer and smokes.

–

For the rest - each of the control markers uses simple geometric shapes.  If you want to get a large picture with good resolution, I would recommend copying the avatar pictures to use as templates, then enlarging then editing the pictures to prevent pixellation.

There used to be some strategy sites I’d frequent, but their pictures weren’t all that much larger than the avvie, if at all.

Depending on the stage of the game, Japan ARM from India or Sinkiang could also be an issue, or INF from Persia, or from Africa via TRNs if the Suez is open.

I’ve seen a German in E. Canada before.  Of course, this was a game to the death and England/Russia had already fallen and Germany was just putting teh coup de tat on America.

Well, ya all know me, the AC in SZ 5 is the biggest waste of Cash this side of, well, this side of anything!  I’d rather have 4 fighters or 2 bombers and a fighter to an Aircraft Carrier in SZ 5….(SZ 14 is a different story.)

Of course, you all know this means in the Tourney I’ll be building AC’s in SZ 5 cause no one will expect me too. :P

Rules, registration form, etc. are now posted for the 2007 Singles Tournament.

Links for the various relevant topics are in the Find Players and Game Discussion threads
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=52.0

@yucatan:

Thanks everybody.

Now it’s perfectly clean. :lol:

Yucatan

Oops!
Maybe it was “clear”!! :-D

Yucatan

And the other side of the coin is…

Threaten strafe and TAKE instead.  It just worked in my current game.  Jen was afraid of a German Strafe from Caucuses (I am guessing) making her Moscow force too weak to hold against the Japan.  So she evac’d instead killing the German force and surrendering Moscow.

Strafe Threats CAN be very fun :-D

Pre-LHTR Lend Lease is insane.  Non-LHTR Super-fortresses is also pretty crazy.

Colonial Garrison makes KJF much stronger.  Radar messes with things a lot.  Mobile Industry makes the Caucasus no longer a vital country, and increases the strength of a KJF.  Mechanized infantry lets you do a lot of stuff, as does fast carriers, as does island bases . . . really, MOST of the Allied NAs are quite good.

Germany’s Blitzkrieg is decent because it frees up fighters.  Japan’s Banzai is okay.  (Banzai’s not great against a KJF, and even for a KGF, you need tanks and fighters for that last push into Moscow).  Most of the Axis NAs suck.  It is usually a matter of HOW MUCH they suck.

How to abuse pre-LHTR Lend Lease - UK fighters, US fighters.  You haven’t seen “stupid” until you see Russia producing 8-9 infantry a turn with 14 fighters for backup.  No, seriously.  Russia just beats the hell out of everything.  LHTR changed this, thank goodness.

How to abuse Superfortresses - build bombers to strat bomb, go for tech dice on US3 or US4.  With heavy bombers, you shut down Germany.  LHTR limits total damage per turn, I believe, instead of total damage per bomber, so stops this from doing more than 16 IPC damage.

How to abuse Blitzkrieg - well, you take this fat load of tanks, and use 1-2 infantry to trade territories with Russia early.  Since you can use your tanks to trade territories without committing, now you can use your fighters for other things.  Like . . . getting EVEN MORE territory, or fighting off that Allied Atlantic fleet.

How to abuse Banzai - use a lotta infantry, surprise.

@jsp4563:

My personal preference is for the UK to buy 1AC, 1DD placed in sz6 along with the fighters, the BB & Tp from sz2, and the russian sub. Land the Canadian tank in UK.  Follow that up with US reinforcements (2inf, 1art, 1tnk, 1fgt, 1bmb).  If Germany has his BB & TP in sz13 move the US DD to sz12. In order for germany to carry out “Operation Sea Lion” he has to destroy the sz6 fleet.  To fight through that fleet he will have to divert air units he was going to use during the landing and will probably loose some of the transports.  If he does still attack UK he will be opposed by the combined UK/US ground & air forces.  Doubtful he will prevail.

It’s not just a question of preventing Sea Lion, it’s a question of preventing Sea Lion while maintaining a good position, yes?

Given those moves, the Germans can then attack using Baltic navy and air to wipe out the UK fleet without losing most of its air force in the process.  If the Germans can neutralize the Allies in the Atlantic until they take Moscow, Sea Lion is not so important.  And if the Germans keep most of their air while killing the Allied Atlantic fleet early, the Germans can build even more fighters to threaten the Atlantic.  The Allies have to build new escorts and new transports, which all takes time.  Plus, if the Germans kill a couple of UK fighters, that is going to make a difference in the Indian and Norway fronts.

I assume that the Germans built navy (transports or carrier) and that the UK did not attack, as 1) a carrier build supposes fighters, 2) the battle outcome is not favorable for the UK if Germany builds 3 transports.  Even 2 transports, maybe, 3) this thread is about Sea Lion anyways.

Transport, 2 sub, destroyer, carrier, 5 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 27, count 11.  Or perhaps more, depending on what Germany built; perhaps it built no carrier, but built two-three transports.  I think 5 German transports is a very BAD move, but given those moves you listed, it could actually turn out quite well for Germany given the naval battle.  Even this assumes that the Germans lost a fighter by the end of the turn, which is by NO MEANS CERTAIN without very risky play by Russia or lucky play by Russia.  The attack force is much more powerful with

3-4 transport, 2 sub, destroyer, 6 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 29, count 13-14

vs

1 transport, 1 sub, 1 destroyer, 1 carrier, 1 battleship, 2 fighters, defense 21, count 8.

The German Mediterranean fleet retreats to support shot against Caucasus and/or Africa, and the US DD can only unite with a new UK build.

If forced to make a choice it would be SZ5 and SZ34. Both of them provide access to multiple territories and present many options to the power that occupies it.

In response to the KJF Bluff…

NEVER change strats during a game.  If you are going KJF, STAY KJF.  Otherwise, just go KGF, and STICK WITH IT.

Trying to bluff in the Pacific as the US leaves the Axis with economic dominance, and with USA and UK in NO position to assist a dying Russia.

I’d probably vote for WRus.

As 88 points out the Wrus/Kaz occupation is a game ender.

Wrus commands all of Europe.
While Ukr is nice, it does not necessarily force a retreat for your opponent.
The Allies still could face a giant stack in EE and the Axis have to deal with Allied stack in Wrus and Cauc or possbily Kar.

If the Allies hold WRus they can go from Kar to Cauc with ease, can control Arch as well and still put immense pressure on Ukr, shuffle troops to Mos.

But if the Axis hold Wrus (assuming Japan is playing up to par), that should force the Allies out of Cauc and deadzone Kar and Arch as well, cutting off Moscow.

@mateooo:

Just curious about everyones favorite teeth grinding, god cursing, board kicking, tank throwing, dice rueing bad luck moments.
I just had a pretty wretched start/end of one game.
I was axis.
Russia took Ukraine with 1 INF 1 RTL 3 ARM remaining (already some mildly poor luck)
I then attacked back with 6 INF 1 RTL 1 FTR 1 ARM. (calculated to win something like 95% of the time with ground troops, I might not have all the troops exactly right.
Well, after two rounds of combat, the GER FTR retreats, all other forces destroyed, having inflicted 0 casualties, and the future looks bleak for the Fatherland.

Bad not so much for the magnititude of the loss, but for the complete hope sucking and soul crushing nature. (later looked at the odds for that result… <1%.Â

PLease, share your tales of woe.
Mateo

Same as you. Bid 2 INF to Ukraine. USSR takes, with NO losses. German counter fails.

I still won that game, but man, what a bad start…

Squirecam

@JLord:

I thought the generally accepted rules of bidding were that you couldn’t place more than one unit in the same territory?  Anyways, that is the rule we would follow.  And the thing is, if Allies put 12 IPC somehwere, the Axis will place their bid next and can presumably counter whatever the allies do.

Yeah, it’s also generally accepted that you don’t give a bid to the Allies.

I figured you were doing your own thing, you know?

1. As Russia, how many forces should you put towards Japan to halt their advance?

You cannot stop the Japs.  They have mysterious powerz  Also giant mecha robots.

No, really . . . nothing or lots.  Either you team up with US/UK to stop Japan at Ssinkiang/India.  Or you pull back to Yakut, then to Novosibirsk (you threaten both Ssinkiang and Yakut from Novosibirsk; Novosibirsk is key to defense of the East).  You can’t really ATTACK Japan, or even slow them down a lot most of the time, because Japan players that run tanks can switch the direction of their attack.  If the Japs don’t run lots of tanks . . . then it’s easier to protect the East.  But if Japan builds tanks, run away.  How do you respond to Jap tanks at Mancuhuria, or French Indochina?  Both threaten Ssinkiang.  From Frindo, they threaten India.  From Manchuria, they threaten Yakut.  So if you beef up at Yakut, they run to Ssinkiang, and then you have to pull back to Novosibirsk, then the OTHER Jap tanks grab Yakut.  Ho ho.  Japan tanks yay.

2. As Germany, how would you go about countering a KGF strategy?

Free German beer.  Also, German women are hawt.

Three ways.  Either you try to build up your fleet a bit to slow down the Allies (they have to kill your fleet before they can start landing in force).  OR you build infantry/fighters, and play defensively with your navy, forcing the Allies to keep away from the German navy.  Or you just let the Allies creeeeep up on you with their transports while you send everything to Moscow like crazy, building infantry early and late and tanks for midgame (early infantry and midgame tanks plus German air to hit Moscow, late infantry to trade W. Europe, hold Germany, that sort of thing).

3. As Britain, what would be your main path into Europe?  Do you go NOR/KAR/EEU/GER, or do you try to go through France?

France, because French women are also hawt.  Also the cooking is yum.

No, not rly.

W. Europe (France) is a horrid crack for UK because of German defenses plus S. Eur and Germany counterattack.  You can reinforce with US, but . . . well, it’s REAL messy; it’s hard to race 10+ units a turn from Germany.  Yeah, you bleed Germany, but while Germany’s bleeding, it kills Russia.

Usually I go Nor/Kar/EEu with UK.  NOT always.  Sometimes I just run London-Archangel-Moscow instead.

4. As Japan, what would be your best path for racing towards Moscow to take pressure off of the Germans?

Pokemon!

Well, J1 is pretty much set, you try to progress in Burytia and possibly Soviet Far East, you kill the US fighter in China (it can be a REAL problem), and grab India if it’s free (which it often isn’t).  For J1 build you run 3 transports, or 2 transports 1 IC if Axis bid, but I’m thinking these days that 3 transports is more sound.  Well . . . J2 you drop lots of guys from Japan onto French Indochina and Burytia.  Rinse and repeat.

I find that there is no SINGLE best path to get to Moscow.  If the Allies play defensively, you grab Soviet Far East, Burytia, Yakut.  If the Allies defend India but neglect Ssinkiang, you push through the center.  If the Allies defend Ssinkiang but neglect India, yo grab India and pop an IC there.  If India and Ssinkiang BOTH receive no reinforcements, you grab everything, run lots of infantry into Yakut/China, late midgame, then consolidate at Novosibirsk, or take Novosibirsk with infantry/fighters, and consolidate tanks at either China to threaten Kazakh/Novosibirsk, or at Yakut to threaten Evenki and Novosibirsk next round (it depends on what’s going on with Germany)

Adaptation is the key to winning!

5. As the US, do you mainly aid the brits by following them and occupying territories they leave, or do you stage your own landings in Italy or Western Europe?  Also, how much of your power do you want in the pacific to make sure the japanese dont get too big?

Harry Potter needs my help?

Usually, I find that UK take / US reinforce is only good for threatening Germany.  Actually carrying out the threat is very expensive.  It works against inexperienced German players.  I try to set up transports into Africa with US, and later threaten W. Eur/S. Eur with transports west of Algeria.  Except early Africa (marching east to Persia), though, I find that I usually keep US and UK separate for most of the early game (using UK and US to bleed off early German gains, specifically using UK and US forces to trade territories with Germany so Russia doesn’t have to expend its infantry trading with Germay).  Late game, sure, I consolidate UK/US/USSR at E. Europe, or at Persia/India, or whatever, but by that time I’ve already won.

No power in the Pacific.  If Japan wants to attack US early game, let them, that’s less Russia has to worry about.  I will build Pacific infantry/tank defense late in the game for US to forestall a probable Alaska/W. Canada landing by Japan (there’s really no other easy target in range for Japan, so attack is very likely).  But even then . . . it’s just a holding force to stop Japanese advances while I kill Germany.

Sometimes, if Germany has switched to heavy defense, I’ll switch targets to Japan late game.  With Germany mostly contained, and Russia safe, it is easy to attack Japan.

Yeah, I CAN write a good AI program.  Or at least, if not GOOD,  not bad.

But even writing the algorithm would take a whole chunk of time.  Writing the code, debugging it . . . another chunk.

Time = money.

I have no problem with the wildest requests (“I want Alaskan king crab straight from Alaska, and I want it in three hours!”) . . . but without allocated resources and/or manpower, it’s no go.

Super! Thank you very much for your answers!

…and yes, of course I meant UKR, and not BLK…sorry, my mistake.