Yeah, it seems to me that Alpha+3 kind of made it so Germany HAS to do Barbarossa instead of Sealion.  I mean, Sealion is still doable if Germany is able to build up enough stuff and kills the Royal Navy, but with the new rule allowing Russia to attack when London falls, it will be much harder on Germany.  At least with Alpha+2, Germany could have a round to build up against the Russians.  I think that Alpha+3 kind of forces Germany into a more historical route.

I am kind of interested in what people are having trouble with these 18 inf that russia can throw towards japan? I think those 18 inf are a lot less annoying than say giving brittain more troops, though giving china more troops at the expense of russia’s 18 inf might be a good change. I honestly like it when Russia keeps her 18 inf on the japan border or near it (18 inf and 2 aa guns less for germany to kill in moscow). If you weaken russia’s power here too much it might be worth it for japan to attack russia’s north. Maybe a good way to test it would be to make a house rule where russia looses 6 inf in the east and china gains 6 inf, but you can only put 1 inf per territory. I don’t know if letting china have the Burma road from the start of the game would be fair for japan? US going 100% japan for first couple turns might prove impossible for japan to beat it china is now significantly stronger with those 4 extra inf yunan plus the extra money and possibility of buying artillery. I see japan as being much weaker on the land since china will be more than just a pain, but a real threat and japan will have to buy more ground to compensate making japans navy weaker and in turn making US’s navy that much stronger. I haven’t played and extensive amount of games, so what do people think about the pacific side of the board and those 18 russian inf? Are you guys having a hard time beating japan as the allies, or keeping japan in check?

@Clyde85:

@Cmdr:

You’d have to be prepared for Italy to take Spain on the same round true.

What is Italy going to be using to take Spain with? In this speculative scenario, isnt the ENTIRE Italian fleet, and perhapse a part of their airforce, destroyed?

Clearly not if they stack a few troops in Sfr before attackin Spain…
But it doesn’t change the fact that it’s probably a bad idea to allow US to land troops there every subsequent round.

Yes, the territory IPC value limitations still apply.

@Cmdr:

@thatonekid:

you really cant take haw j1 can you?? i mean, theres 2 inf and 2 figs there, if they only have 1 trns full of people, then the odds are likely not in their favor.

Yes you can, out of the box Japan may bring:  5 ground units (4 from Japan, 1 from Carolines) and 3 shore bombardments since the only “enemy” ship is a transport.

American only has: 2 Infantry, Fighter, Tactical Bomber, Strategic Bomber to defend with.

It’s only like 33% odds, but I’ve seen some people go for Sea Lion or an attack on a massive army with less odds of success.

thats true, but i dont play with OOB rules.

@Cmdr:

Spend 6 IPC to take out the Russian NO, Wrath.  A submarine in SZ 125 takes away the objective as well as a destroyer does.  It also requires the allies to send a destroyer to go kill it, instead of using only planes.

A submarine isnt a war ship according to our definition of the rules but I wont argue about that. The price of 8 ipc is still worth it.

Russia was buffed in Alpha 2 because many Axis players blew their strength on England, dedicating all of their power to taking it out and thus, not having enough to hit Russia with.  Now that England is no longer a prized posession, but more of a “well, I need one more VC to win, and it is underdefended” move, Russia is getting really easy to take out.

Dont care if russia is buffed, Germany is so much more buffed with their extra planes and units, thats why I find that theather a bit balanced.

Looking ONLY at the game board for the first 3 rounds (bringing you to Germany Round 4, Purchase New Units) one can see that the Axis are more than double Russia’s strength with more than double their income.  That means England and India need to be focused on sending reinforcements to Russia to prevent them from falling (and thus, negating the need to block SZ 125).  With the NonAggression arrangement being virtually nullified, there is no reason not to invade early and heavy with Japan and more reason TOO do it, to remove even more IPC from the Russians. 
So yes, Wrath, I agree, Barbarossa is probably the better avenue and makes Victory more assured, not assured, but more than attempting Sea Lion.    I don’t see Russia ever getting their Objectives (any of them).

If you go after russia on round 4 as germany you are to late imho, you are better off attacking round 2 (with a fake attack on yugoslavia) or on r3.

@Jeremus:

In my case UK liberating egypt would be a blessing from the gods because there is no way japan cant retake it afterward on turn 8. Japan will land 10 units on turn 8 anywhere on the east coast of africa. If egypt is in uk’s hands, both south africa and egypt will be japanese.

I acknowledge the threat of america landing anywhere is big, but to achieve that they will need to build a fleet in the baltic sea strong enough to repell both the luftwaffe and the 6 japanese planes wich will be in europe on turn 7. This will take time and money. They can’t enter their already built fleet since they can’t hold denmark.

By the sound of it, Axis have indeed won the game to an extent that a Norway IC won’t change much anymore (Russia and India fallen and not much US presence in the Pacific?)

The only thing that scares me is if they decide to go in ussr with a lot of tank/mech. This will force me to put a lot of forces in leningrad, but then again the japanese planes can be used for the purpose of keeping leningrad.

Sending land units from Norway is what i would do as well (long term thinking), while moving the Atlantic fleet South to the Med to help out the UK and keep Italy small (if UK can grab Denmark the US fleet could enter the Baltic Sea, but… that might become their grave as well.
Also keep in mind that the USA fleet might follow the Nordic sea route and land somewhere from SZ127

As the Germans another fun little trick is use the transports you start with to land in lenningrad and take it very easily on G2 and maybe even G1.

The Allies won last nite ALPHA+2, last week the Axis won ALPHA+2
  To tired last week to stay focused    up at 5 work at 6 home at 5 game at 7 dog tired by midnite  but this weekend I was able to get a cat nap in and lots of strong coffee

It’s also good to have some ANZAC fighters closeby or in your US pacific fleet (they can land on a US air craft carrier).

When US troops get ashore somewhere, they can land and give a strong extra defence (in Alpha3),
and on islands where there are airbases already, they can scramble as well.

An accompanying ANZAC destroyer (and/or sub) or 2 can also be of value, in case some risky US attack doesn’t go as planned, the ANZAC units can still fix certain problems (taking out something with a sub/DD + fighters, or blocking enemy fleet if needed).

Anyway, teaming up pays off.

@cenator01:

I think this depends on how many new player you have.
If there are 3 veterans and only one new player, give him USSR.
If there are more newbies than veterans, then let them choose, but maybe dont go 150%.
To my experience:
DON’T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO! Give them an overview of their possibilities and goals (USSR: survive, UK: harass Italy, Germany and Japan, US: Go by force, and finish them off)
Its easier for new players to play the allies, because of their very clear objectives (Do not loose), whereas the Axis have to figure out a way to win. Much more preparations have to be taken, to get you on the win. Its much easier to loose for the axis, due to stupid mistakes.

the national objectives are handy guide aswell…

I Can’t wait minor they are excellent.

Each airbase can only scramble 3 fighters.  If you have more than one sea zone serviced by that airbase, you have to choose from the 3 planes which ones go to which sea zone.  Yes, you can split them up if you want to (2 to SZ 109, 1 to SZ 110, etc.).

Well it depends.

Usually, I would say on Average, if you haven’t reached “stable” relative parity by round 7… you’re in trouble.

You should be reaching for it around round 5, holding it by round 6, and trying to keep it round 7 and onwards.

Then it’s all about a SLOW push into Russia with the Germans,  Keeping the DEI with Japan, blitzing off China, draining Russia, and survivng America,  and trying to split the Americ an Income into both theatres.

You can make $20 LESS than the allies a turn, and it’s not a big deal, IF the allies have a sense of urgency, and are giving up transports, to take territories, and try and mess with you as quickly as possible.

THE GREATEST THREAT to the Axis Economic parity game, is the loss of the mediterranean,  via Gibraltar, Morocco, etc, etc.  Make sure you have a plan in place, to cock block the yanks, and brits, and cause as many problems as possible.

Depends on what the counterattack looks like, no?  If all they can bring is two infantry, I think I might go with the tank.  Dunno how to calculate financial value on that one, though.

@Frontovik:

@JeffM:

@Young:

In hind sight, do you think the UK should have attacked the Italians fleet in the same manner, or would you attack the Destroyer and Transport with an all out amphibious assault on Libya or Tobruk?. That way, you could get odds and scramble planes from Malta in a defense effort during an Italy 1 attack.

Yes, I think that moving everything to Malta and then launching an amphibious assault on Torbruk would be the best bet.  I think that you either need to put the UK Alexandria/ Egypt forces on the offensive right away or have them fall back… otherwise, I see them getting destroyed on I2 unless you sacrifice the UK fleet and block SZ 98.

If you attacked Tobruk, you could pick up the Inf and Art from Egypt, have the mech (in Egypt) move through Alexandria, and have all of the ground forces in Alexandria join the fight, you would have:

UK:  3 INF, 2 ART, 1 Tank, 1 Tac Bomber, 1 Fighter (if you bring the one from Malta)

Italy:  3 INF, 1 ART, 1 Mech, 1 Tank

can’t italy ravish the british navy then, killing remaining brits in africa later through landings on tobruk, egypt and moving out of uncaptured ethiopia (to iraq?) ?

Yes, but the English can rebuild them very fast while the Italians cannot.

I still buy the odd battleship.

Besides… it’s not about when you buy battleships as much as it is about how you use the ones you start with.

And yes, 2 or 3, with a carrier mix are great,  I LOVE the Strafing Navy…  Carriers can’t do that aswell, because the fighters can’t land on them after for the retreat! And you can only scramble up to 3! :S

My method of dealing with the Soviets is to strangle them, punch multiple holes in the line, hold the line, and blitz with units to reduce the Soviet IPC count.  Using transports would be excellent.  Could use them as a diversion, the Soviets will man the adjacent land territories, all the while being unable to attack the transports themselves.

You know… for all my games of Axis and Allies, I can’t talk like that anymore :(  I almost miss it.  Infact it’s been so long, I don’t ever remember even talking like that.  Sometimes I see people trying to bait me, or I get blocked.  But aside from the odd trap, I don’t see “much” on the battlefield, that isn’t a typical crunch.

There are no “ambushes” or “flanking manuevers” anymore :(

Sometimes I get to do that against new people but… does that even count?

I guess my strategies are mostly dependant on what my opponent does, and where he makes his movements, and mistakes.  This is where my opportunites to strike are.  And I think strictly in game terms, of how best to accomplish what others might consider insane, or very unlikey, or what looks dumb, but really buys time and isn’t.

Someone else said it here… my turns aren’t thought ahead, but are predetermined…  there’s the "What I MUST or HAVE TO do,  Then there’s the “what I ought to or should do”, then there’s the “What do I want, or what Can I do?”  in that order.  And it applies to the purchase and placement phase too.  You’re likely not going to know all the facts until it’s YOUR turn anyways.

I miss the simple old days…  Russia = 8 inf, Attack, Defend,  Roll Dice, Place.

in some cases, there aren’t those “extra” destroyers to spare… Like going from a naval base you build in Hainan, to Calcutta…

@DutchmanD:

Oh, this is no more ahistoric than Italy being able to take Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and the rest of the Mediteranean when they could even beat the Greek army with their entire military. Not to mention one of the most significant ahistorical flaws of G40, which is that the French troops in Aremain loyal to the Allies for some reason, not Axis Vichy…  and, if they are not at war, why are they killing Brits mercilessly on Italy 1? Don’t get me started on the whole “orginally owned” territory nonesense either, the Germans can buld a major IC in Norway and the UK can build one in Malaya, but the Japanses cannot build one in Shanghai; the Japanese were the first to build factories in Shanghai around 1900 after the First Sino-Japanese War, and by 1937, when they fully officially occupied the city, it had more manufacturing power than the rest of Southeast Asia combined!  Dice Gods forbid the Japs actually being able to make a major IC in an actual manufacturing center that they originally created        :wink:

Ahistoric… hmpf!  Nothing like an instant 10 tnps build by the Germans and the dissappearance of essentially the entire Royal Navy in the Spring of 1940 to make you give up on all the historical aspects of the game we love…
 
All good points, but directed more at game mechanics than historical accuracy.  I agree that the production cycle is not accurate to real life, it should take 3-4 turns for a BB to be built, but the game is not made for that scale.  All units you can build are placed almost immediately.  Both the US and UK fleets are severely nerfed, most likely in order to give the axis a chance that they didn’t have in RL.

As for the other issues, I understand why Vichy is not in the game, you have to draw the line somewhere and Larry choose to add France but have them be inert, while China is also hamstrung.  Otherwise you get a community of people clamoring on the BBS from Bulgaria wanting special Bulgarian rules or some other nonsense.

I have played a game where Japan could build a major in China and it did seem overpowered.  It was maxed on production and China was quickly swallowed up.  It took massive US naval builds and tenuous fighting from India to stall the Japs.  Japan was also able to not build many trns in that game and still concentrate on the Pacific islands.

Thanks for going over the Abandon London moves again James.  One would assume they became even more potent in A3, have you had the opportunity to try it yet?  It’s playing the allies like the Axis, creating the initiative and then keeping it long enough to sack Italy…hopefully.