Got the website wrong. Unless you’re trying to sell us camera equipment. :lol:
Gametableonline is the only site I know that has the graphics just like that on the 1942 map. Haven’t played it since it left the beta stage.
Agreed on the Nauseam part. In the end I just started playing AA1942 from AA Revised. But straight out, in the 20 years of playin axis and the 100 some odd games via board game and the last year on the AA.com website, without a German bid, it is extremely easy for the US and UK to knock out Germany.
Revised always requires an Axis bid, usually 7-9 IPCs. I haven’t played a single game of AA42 yet with an axis bid. (on all the 50 or more I’ve played AA42 since it was released)
Strtegy.
UK takes troops from UK and retakes Eqypt. Builds IC in Africa just in case (many times not necessary but a chance). UK and US land on N. Africa first turn.
I consider the IC on S. Africa a waste. Helps to assure that Africa remains on Allied hands but afterwards it is too far away to have any influence on the center on the board. Also, any units built there won’t reach Egypt until turn 3, giving the Axis the chance to hold on to Egypt for a few more turns.
After that, all US builds transports move to N. Canada. All US land buys go to N. Canada. Every turn US has choice, land on Norway, build IC, land on Western US. At that point every turn US can land troops by US3, just has to place transports right. Depending on Germany’s actions with fighters, US and UK navy’s are safe in sea zone next to Morocco and sea zone north of Norway. If Germany does the exact right thing, they can force US and UK to put navy’s together and operate in unicent. That of course is the difficult part, to time it all just right. But when you are playing the allies yourself, it is not hard to do it just right. Of course there are always room for mistakes, but without them, it is a gauranteed KGF winner. Whatever the Germans do to mess this up, the US and UK can easily counter allowing them to be delayed, However
Whatever the Germans do to delay the UK US, gives the Russians breathing room that result in only holding off the inevitable.
Again, there is room for mistakes where the Germans pull something that is hard to see then surprise, but that is what it takes.
I’ve faced that US strat on Revised a few times but I only tried it a couple of times. I am not a fan of letting the US get Norway (the UK and Russia are harder pressed for cash). In Revised the best action for Germany would be to move a large stack of tanks and infantry to Karelia on G1/2 and contest Norway as long as possible to prevent the US building the IC and the subsequent build up of US forces.
First the website.
1.) It actually axisandallies.com. On the main page they offer, “play axis and allies”. Takes you to a Wizards of the Coast thing. You pay coins to activate the game and play. 3 coins per game. Graphics are exactly like the real thing. They just added AA42. I am playing 5 different games by email at once. My first 5. Playing joint games.
2.) IC in S. Africa. In revised a must when Germany had 9 bid and put it all on Africa. That was it’s only purpose. Not saying there is another way to retake Africa. In AA42 still figuring it out.
3.) The post about victory cities was really strange. The victory city strategy doesn’t exist for the Alllies. You have to utterly destroy both enemies to get that advantage. The game is over way before that condition would ever be met. Unless you are playing someone who like to play to the death.
2.) IC in S. Africa. In revised a must when Germany had 9 bid and put it all on Africa. That was it’s only purpose. Not saying there is another way to retake Africa. In AA42 still figuring it out.
Even with a German 9 bid to Africa on Revised I still think the money spent on the IC is better spent on other units for UK1. Usually the UK/US can perform a combined landing on Algeria and after another round of UK and/or US landings and the Germans can’t keep up with the Allied build up on Africa without Japanese help. Unless Germany still has all of its original airforce intact. But even on that situation it is better to increase the UK’s navy and start taking W. Europe/Norway to prevent the German income from going too up and helping the Russians while keeping the UK’s income in the 30s, while the US gets tasked to releasing Africa from Axis hands.
3.) The post about victory cities was really strange. The victory city strategy doesn’t exist for the Alllies. You have to utterly destroy both enemies to get that advantage. The game is over way before that condition would ever be met. Unless you are playing someone who like to play to the death.
If the Allies keep all of their original 6 cities and hold Shanghai, Manila and Paris/Rome at the end of the US turn, the Allies win. It may be hard to happen but I’ve won games that way.
First the website.
1.) It actually axisandallies.com. On the main page they offer, “play axis and allies”. Takes you to a Wizards of the Coast thing. You pay coins to activate the game and play. 3 coins per game. Graphics are exactly like the real thing. They just added AA42. I am playing 5 different games by email at once. My first 5. Playing joint games.
That’s GTO (Gametableonline), you can see the icon the A&A site you refer to. It’s 15$ to activate and then its free to play games in the lobby, and then about 20 cents a game to play PBEM games hosted on their server. It’s a great website and I’ve used it alot but these days I prefer TripleA due to its superior features and gaming variety (save, edit, stats, v3 and other games, etc).
2.) IC in S. Africa. In revised a must when Germany had 9 bid and put it all on Africa. That was it’s only purpose. Not saying there is another way to retake Africa. In AA42 still figuring it out.
I’d concur with Hobbes’ assessment that a South Africa IC is a suboptimal move (particularly in Revised, but probably also in 42). That said, it would be boring if everyone played the same tactics over and over. While I don’t disagree that a form of KGF is probably the optimal strategy in AA42……its way too early to tell. For example, I have a game going where I played a KGF strategy, BUT I exerted substantial pressure on Japan via subs (i have 4 in the Pacific). Consequently Japan hasn’t taken Aussie/NZ or Africa, so Allies are able to build on their economic advantage. Cheaper/better subs and bombers means that the optimal Allied strategy in 42 likely requires more Pacific action than you would see in a Revised KGF.
3.) The post about victory cities was really strange. The victory city strategy doesn’t exist for the Alllies. You have to utterly destroy both enemies to get that advantage. The game is over way before that condition would ever be met. Unless you are playing someone who like to play to the death.
Alot of games end that way, especially on GTO. On GTO games usually either end with 1 player getting to 9 vcs or the other conceding. VCs introduce some good tension into the game and enliven the Pacific theatre….since Manilla, Shanghai and Bombay are all victory cities, if USA holds them all at the end of its turn that might be game over for Axis.
Well I must say, there have been some great points.
1.) AA42 on line-never really realized axisandallies.com took me to the gametableonline website. I activated AARevised. I don’t remember paying $15. When AA42 came out, started right away with only 3 coins per game. No extra money. Maybe I got lucky.
2.) On victory cities, if the last post of cities is correct, not like the other one which I think included Moscow, as long as holding Rome, (which would seem really hard to me), the I guess the Pacific strategy might work, but don’t you then have to set the victory city setting to enable that strategy to work or is AA42 automatically set at a specific number. I get confused on which rule applies to which game.
The sub and bomber stragety, (spending some money on a offense against Japan) sounds feasable. Would like to have it used against me. So I won’t pooh pooh it.
3.) I just may forgoe the idea of an IC on South Africa, but then again, in AA42 have not been able to use it. Haven’t had too. But it Germany ever makes good headway on Eqypt and keeps it, may try just retaking it from Morocco. Though my first thought is, that lets Germany run rampant for a while giving it extra IPC’s, I can see how the extra Navy, now that it is cheaper, can result in greater damage on Germany in Europe. Will have to see in AA42 but will try it.
Still think an all out offensive on Japan is to risky, but if your good, I denifitely see it as a much more unique more interesting game. May try it for fun sometime.
1 more thing. Just from reading past posts on triple A and looking it up online, it seemed the graphics really stunk and I read complaints about bugs. Those options you mentioned seemed interesting. I play by email on GTO. What is the difference.
I’ve played both, and if graffics are important to you, then GTO is probably the better version. If graffics are irrelevant, and gameplay is more important, I would suggest TripleA. Its a bit more technical to get started, but once you do the slightly less crisp graffics are made up by the fact you can save and reload games and look in on others as they play the game.
I can certainly understand the graphics thing…the first time I played TripleA I felt the same way. But now I’m used to it and don’t think one version has better graphics then the other.
There are pros and cons on both sides. Possibly the biggest pro for GTO is that it’s much easier to find a game of Spring42 or Revised on GTO because of the high volume of gamers on the lobby and playing PBE.
TripleA, by contrast, is primarily 41 and NWO, with Revised the 3rd most popular. The main pros for TripleA are it is less buggy, takes up less memory/bandwith, and boasts better features.
