Of the smaller nations, the only one I’d be comfortable letting someone play independently is Italy. China and France are way too small, and ANZAC goes with Britain. Plus, if one of those nations is being played it’s probably a 3v3 or larger game and I prefer even teams.
Italy has all the elements of the rules without getting overwelmed with game breaking responsibilities. They also get to see the entire first round before their turn which is also a good learning curve. My next suggestion would be the US, however, they will need to be savy buyers with only minor ICs to start the game, and greater responsibilities in multiple theaters. The US must also stratagize more with greater board coverage to be aware of as well as managing the needs of their team mates. The US also plays China , however, China plays by bizarre rules that could confuse a newbe and they should be informed that every power has its own rules to follow, especially China. Russia/France requires an experienced player to defend wisely or the game could end early. Also, newbes would’t gain any Naval or air unit experience playing Russia, where playing Italy or UK/ANZAC would allow them to use bases. Remember the rules state how Multi player games should be divided, some think that they can divide the powers and # of players for each side, any way they like, but the configurations in the book are not optional. It’s not good to give players only ANZAC, China, or France. Even if you gave a newbe all 3 to play, it still wouldn’t be a good way to learn the game IMO. Not sure who thinks it would be a good idea to give a beginner Japan, but that’s a bad idea. The only axis power that should be given to newbes is Italy, than the US, UK, and than The Soviet Union (in that order). If there is only one experienced player in the group, that person should play the axis powers and take on everyone else as the allies ( as a house rule configuration).
France requires an experienced player to defend wisely or the game could end early
LOL What?
:lol: :lol: :lol:
France requires an experienced player to defend wisely or the game could end early
LOL What?
They said Russia/France. Not just France.
Ok Yes they did, and I did read that.
But still, WTH, France???
Why not just write Russia?
Ok Yes they did, and I did read that.
But still, WTH, France???
Why not just write Russia?
I’d assume it’s because the way he/she plays Russia and France are controlled by the same player.
France requires an experienced player to defend wisely or the game could end early
LOL What?
Nice edit job, I’m surprised this stuff dosen’t happen more often (hilarious). According to the rules Russia/France are a package deal in a 6 player game, kinda like the way I bundled UK/ANZAC, and US/China in the same post. I can’t wait to selectively snip a quote from you gargantua, however, I don’t quite have a grasp of the conspiritor’s mind the way you do.
Instead of being a smart a**, can you tell me what you thought about the rest of my post? …… Wait … I have predicted your answer, “it sucked”. Aahhh fame.
I would think the US, the IPC collection is so massive, and the distance so far, that the US probably will not lose its territories. The biggest issue being all of the weight placed on the US players shoulders because of the mentioned industrial might. As well as fighting a conflict in both the Atlantic and Pacific
I would go either US or Italy. I almost said the Soviet Union, however I am not sure how much fun a defensive game would be for new comers.
Some of us like to blitz and push the enemy back. lol
To respond to grasshopper and others. Lets say you’ve got many players, but only 1 of them is a newb. Which would be the best nation then? I think if you have more than 4 players, that they should be on the allies side. There’s only 3 axis nations, if you screw up one you might doom the whole side. On that issue, I think handing a Newb the US is similar to throwing in the towel. US and RUS are the two most important allies. One stalls for as long as possible and the other brings the haymaker. So we’ve narrowed it down to UK/ANZAC. Giving the newb UK might be a bit confusing, playing a nation with 2 capitals and board specific rules…that leaves us with ANZAC.
ANZAC is actually perfect for new gamers. Its shunted off to the side of the board, in its own theatre, which while minor will give the player some opportunities to try other aspects of the game. (amphibs, fleet battles, convoy and naval bases) ANZAC is close to support, so if they make mistakes US can come and rescue them, and if the newb really screws up, it doesn’t mean the end of the game like putting them in charge of RUS or US might do.
Don’t you find that that player gets bored? JUST playing Anzac? Maybe give them France too! :D
How about it they do ANZAC on their own and “share” the Pacific side of UK with the UK Europe player acting as the coach. Like an apprenticeship.
Done it and it works.
I would give the new player complete control of the entire Commonwealth.
This gives him 3 pools of money to play with, one completely on land, one completely at sea and one that is the most influential with some choices.
It also gives him complete overview of the entire board, as everyone’s moves directly impact his gameplay.
If you have a competent player doing the United States’ moves, he can help ‘dictate’ the new-comers actions by his own moves, as India/ANZAC largely move based on American aggression.
There aren’t so many units for him to toy with, but he still feels top shelf because his units are all over the board. There’s no complex naval maneuvering like that between the USA & Japan, there’s no massive calculation of large armies like in Russia, there’s no tight economic playing and strategic allocation like that involved with Germany. There’s no need for rapid expansion across the entire board like Japan.
It is hands down the best nation for a newcomer to play.
@Vance:
How about it they do ANZAC on their own and “share” the Pacific side of UK with the UK Europe player acting as the coach. Like an apprenticeship.
You can also give the newbe Italy with the axis players coaching. If you send the guy/gal to Ausstralia for fear of losing, they won’t learn a dam thing, and they sure as hell won’t have any fun (a perfect recipe for them not wanting to play a second time). And what if that player goes on to play hundreds of games, he will tell tales about how he was given ANZAC his first game …… ANZAC!!!
I got USA in my first game ever.
I rolled 3 tech dice, 6 6 6
We didn’t quite understand the rules, or maybe they weren’t even formal then, but the ruling was that was 3 tech.
1. Industrial Production
2. Jet Fighters
3. Heavy Bombers.
LOL… my opponents/friends were new too… but that was GAME :P
No need to be so serious when you have a new player. Let him play Japan and have some fun. So what if the axis lose! The new guy learns a lot quickly. U.S. might bore him during the first three turns. My choice for the new guy on the allied side would be U.K. Like Japan they get involved quickly and are into land and sea battles. At least on the Europe side.
What do you mean by “new player”, and what is their general strategy game skill level?
I would vote Russia would be the “easiest” for someone totally new to Axis & Allies, or that’s just kinda there to roll dice. A brand new player has their hands full with turn order, how combat works, what units are what. By dealing almost exclusively with a ground war, you can spend more attention on fewer units, which is really a good thing for people just learning a fairly complex game. It’s enough work figuring out which enemy planes can get where without having to know or worry about how subs and damaged capital ships act.
Saddling someone with ANZAC alone would pretty much suck. At least give them France and China, so they can have some ground fighting somewhere. I wouldn’t do that to a new player, though. If you’re having to play with seven, given the minors to one of the vets, who can maybe actually do something with them.
For somebody that’s looking to be highly engaged and have fun, and maybe has played a previous iteration, Germany is hands-down the most fun. Your turn probably takes forfarkingever, but you get to conquer an enemy capital! Immediately! Loads of money, guys out the wazoo; boats, tanks AND planes! There’s a simple basic goal–take Moscow. It’s a ton of work, and they’re probably not gonna win, but it’ll be cool. Plus Germany has such a target-rich environment, new players often take the game in unexpected directions. For that reason alone, I like having brand-new German players, if they’re up to it. The Krauts have initiative–the opportunity to control the shape of a game you’ve never even seen played before is novel. Free of herd-mentality bias, if you will.
I can see it now, a virgin newbe is playing Germany with 2 experienced players as team mates. G1, the freshman says “I will buy 6 research tokens” and the 2 vets discreetly shake their heads. “wait… I mean 2 major factories” the 2 vets than shake their heads a little harder, the allied players roll their eyes, and the beer is already half gone. UK or Italy is a better choice than Germany, let’s face it.
@Young:
I can see it now, a virgin newbe is playing Germany with 2 experienced players as team mates. G1, the freshman says “I will buy 6 research tokens” and the 2 vets discreetly shake their heads. “wait… I mean 2 major factories” the 2 vets than shake their heads a little harder, the allied players roll their eyes, and the beer is already half gone. UK or Italy is a better choice than Germany, let’s face it.
Like I said, somebody skilled in strategy games, and hopefully has played Axis & Allies, of some form, before. Once the rules of research rolls, building, and movement are explained, somebody with most of a functioning brain wouldn’t make those choices, I don’t think. Somebody like that, give them Russia. Tell them to buy infantry and one offensive weapon each turn and play defense–you’re coming to save them.
EDIT: Well, re-reading, I guess I didn’t exactly “say” somebody skilled in strategy games, but that’s what I meant, dammit.
