i was thinking 1942 for that one, 1941 i don’t build anymore

nope, never have.

dang.

I believe it though…

It is a lot more complicated than the first glance.  I have been testing out different fleets fighting against each other, and it really seems like once fleets get big, destroyers are a major liability. 
If the enemy has a good number of subs, along with some planes or high value ships, then the you would be better off without any destroyers. 
So when is it good to have a destroyer?  If the enemy has few or no high value ships and few or no planes, then you will want the destroyer to negate the subs first strike ability. (or if the engagement is very small, like 1-4 units total, you may want it to make sure you are just outright killed).
So in other words, avoid building destroyers until you see what your enemy is building for a couple turns.  And most likely you should never build them in the pacific.

thx Kang,

@Capt.:

I like more Infantry and keep the offensive with them.  R1 - 4INF 2ART 2ARM.

Try R1 - 1BOM 4INF 1ARM?

Here you have a 2ARM 1BOM and a bunch of Infantry to take back a little from
Germany Round 2.  The Russian bomber(s) can come in handy later too.

That’s my usual build.

Especially when forced to play low luck, 1 bomber and 2 infantry do wonders to swap territories and you can operate on all fronts from Moscow.

3 hours for a game of Axis and Allies?  lol

Expect at least 4-5 hours, plus setup time.  Some of the variants are only about 3 hours or less, though.

@CalmDragon:

@Woodstock:

Another one:

IJN?

Initial Japanese Navy?

Close, try Imperial

Got ya…makes  a lot more sense…d’oh.

Very Cool and useful!  :wink:

Also note that your british fighters dont get to shoot at the german sub at all, as you are not bringing a destroyer along with you.

@Funcioneta:

What’s the problem? Bid a tank in alg if you really think axis need a bid  :roll:

I frankly don’t think a bid is needed at all. But a player I am playing against said we could use one, and since I took the axis, I was wondering where to put my bid. In Triple A, as I said, I couldn’t stick anything in Libya, so I did end up putting a tank in Algeria.

Germany has indeed money for techs (all countries saving Italy and Sparrings of the Far East have enough). Air/naval tech is not so bad for germans (roll 1 tech team round one and even supersubs and improved shipyards can be used), and anyway 4 usable of 6 means some people will still try it for HBs. Also Germans could simply ignore HBs tech and buy normal bombers for SBR London and soviet ICs

As for USA, it’s not them who japs will bomb, it’s soviets as I said, and soviets will have 15-20 less IPCs to spend in repairings and units than germans. Also, nothing prevents a japanese bomber SBR cau, landing at ger and then start merry SBRs on London also  wink In fact, Japan, being the richer country of the game (15+ economic advantage over the richer allied nation), can invest both in tech and bombers

Ok, let’s list what techs each power can use, I list each power if the investment is worth it:

Improved arty: Ger, Sov
Rockets: Ger, Sov, Jap, UK, Ita
Paratroopers: Ger, Jap, UK, USA
Increased fact: Ger, Sov, Jap, UK
War bonds: Ger, Sov, Jap, UK, Ita, USA
Mech inf: Ger, Sov, Jap

Super subs: Jap, UK, Ita, USA
Jet fighters: Ger, Jap, UK, USA
Improved shipyards: Jap, UK, Ita, USA
Radar: Ger, Sov, Ita
LRA: Ger, Jap, UK, USA
H Bombers: Ger, Sov, Jap, UK, Ita, USA

Germany has 6/6 on land table and 4/6 on air/naval, and shouldn’t choose air/naval in most cases. All in all, Allies have a much higher chance of getting Heavy Bombers and turning the tide of the game with them. Even if Allies miss H Bombers they will get good enough techs to make the tech IPCs worth it, but Germany can’t put IPCs into Air/naval table without a high risk of wasting valuable IPCs. With UK and US going for air/naval table and Japan going for it as well, you still have a 50-100% higher chance for Allies, enough to say tech favours allies.

I agree with must of your post, Subotai, excepting by tech issue (I don’t think it’s really broken in AA50, but that’s matter for a new thread) and the bids issue. Of course, 1 inf each territory in soviet frontier and Egypt would crush the balance, and that is the reason for not bidding allied units: Europe and Africa are NOT broken, it’s Asia the one broken, mainly China (but also India and swarm of jap starting trannies).

If something is not wrong, don’t touch it. Fix the broken one instead -> China. Restricting bids to chinese units is the solution. And so, we should bid like this:

(Or something similar)

I told you people to buy 6 copies like 9 months ago!

See you could have created a new commodity with more value than gold.

OK, so this whole debate arises from the rule that tells you to place one of your control markers under your AA gun if you move it into a territory controlled by a friendly power, correct?  There is no corresponding rule that says that if I capture your AA gun when I capture your territory you should place one of your control markers under it.  So, we have one fairly rare circumstance when I can capture your gun when it has your marker (in your ally’s territory) and another far more common one when I can capture your gun when it doesn’t have your marker (in your territory).  In neither case am I directed to retain the existing marker or place a new one.

In addition, the rules indicate that if you or your ally recapture the territory and AA gun, the ownership of both goes to the capturing power, or to original owner of the territory if it’s liberated.  No mention is made of returning the AA gun to its original owner.

Doesn’t that indicate that I get to keep the AA gun completely free of any strings tying it back to you?  And wouldn’t that include technology?

I’d suggest starting here, a large number of discussions about strategies and such for the two setups.

1941 setup:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=63.0

1942 setup:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=64.0

I still view the Allies with a slight adv b/c of the number of Round 1 attacks the Axis must do, particularly Egy.

As for bids, we didn’t use them in our tourney and the Allies are holding their own quite well.  I think they are up a few games thru 23 games.  It might be like 13-10 Allies right now.

In the League we do use bids, but that is also used to determine sides.  A lot of times both players may bid 0 and just let sides be chosen at random.

I did just post a few stats in the League Forum (thru the first 12 completed) in the discussion thread and the Allies hold a 7 - 5 Adv in wins.  Avg bid was 1.3, but 7 games were played with a 0 bid and 2 were played with a 1 bid.

I am assuming you want to drop in Algeria anyway.

Remember Algeria costs the Axis $6 though, which is why 3 trn into Alg each turn with another 2 trn ($14) swapping into SZ12 & 23.

The added flexibility is that in a pinch you can dump 10 troops into Algeria of Congo if required.

But yea, if you are running KJF, then Brazil would be better I guess (but less flexible as all you can really do is shuck into SZ23).

I normally run 60% KJF 40% KIF, which makes spending around $20 a turn on 5 dudes and a tank good, with the little shuck into Congo.

And if Japan ever takes it’s foot off the gas I can spend around $30-$35 getting enough to fill 4-5 trn in the Atlantic.

Thanks to his bump, I think I have my answer.

Just finished reading the rules to AA50 last night. Does anyone know why escort and cap were not included/considered in this version?

Second, jet fighters…. why should the attack factor be increased when their speed made them more difficult to shoot down?