What is "RR"

Another way to go is to invade Norway with everything you’ve got its an easy win, then on non-com move 2inf to Karelia and dump your fighters in moscow.  Place 3inf and 3arm in moscow as your purchases and wait for germany to invade Karelia which he will if he wants to win.  R2 counter attack with everything you’ve got, its risky but if done well and with UK’s support with reinforcements for defense Germany will be on the run from that moment on.  Why waste days building stacks of infantry and hope for “two’s” to win the day when the idea should be to attack, attack, attack.  If anything your constant attacks will force Germany to focus more on you and less on UK, which then leaves the UK to invade WE or EU if things go as planned.

Think of it this way, do you want to react to Germany’s moves or do you want him to react to your’s!  What is the worst that can happen…you lose  :-D

Wow. Some really informative and helpful replies. Thanks.

@kurt3892:

-There is a downloadable 3rd edition rulebook on the AAWC site…it is under ‘Other options’ under downloads.  You need Winzip to open it.

I downloaded that–thanks for the link–and it is the .PDF of the manual for the game. It explains the “Third Edition” rule changes, but isn’t what I’d consider an actual new edition of the rulebook.

If there never was a full rulebook that was included with any print runs of the board game, or available for download/purchase to owners of the board game, that makes it more understandable that the non-CD-ROM-based A&A crowd pretty much universally sticks to Second or Fourth Edition rules.

Also, it would take some creativity with the bits to bring the Marines and Destroyers from Iron Blitz over to the board game. If I were Hasbro, I would’ve prepared a “Third Edition/Iron Blitz Expansion Pack” to sell in stores with a shiny new rulebook, and pieces for the two new unit types, when Iron Blitz came out. But that would’ve required the project as a whole to have been much better-conceived than it actually was, I guess.

(For instance, how incompetent do you have to be to print way, way too few copies of even a poorly executed computer implementation like A&A: Iron Blitz, and never press any fresh CDs even when used copies turn up on eBay for $100-plus? Was there some reason they left money sitting on the table like that?)

Haha, thanks for the input.

The rules are very lopsided in favor of the Allies, I agree. But again, with Allies not setting up shuck-shuck, and Russia voluntarily going for Japan, I might just pull it off.

As it is, we play games in sets, with switching off between axis/allies. To win as axis is like “breaking serve” in tennis - you’re not supposed to win, but you do anyways. I’m definitely going to go for for a rule change for the next round.

After looking at the board a little more, I think Japan can make up for lost time. Even with good Russian play, Japan can take SFE on J3, and Yukut on J4, while putting adequate pressure to keep the China-Burma front against UK. BB’s swing down in J4 to take potshots, setup for an assault on J5.

With the allied fleet out of position in Africa (not the Algeria-W.Eur SZ, the one below it), it will be US4 or later to develop pressure on Germany. Hopefully by G5, Germany will have broken through the Eastern front. The real question is how much to devote to Africa, to see if I can get US/UK to commit entirely to Africa. (US bought a bomber on US2)

The for an ally’s territory when that ally’s capital has fallen is…

If the territory is liberated from the enemy, then the ally nation that liberated it gets control of it and any infrastructure (AA, IC) that are present.  This includes collecting income.  However, upon liberation of the capital that originally owned that territory, ALL such “protectorates” return to the original nation immediately.

Ally nations cannot seize control of “hold out” territories where the vestiages of a previous ally are still “holding out” against the enemy despite the loss of their capital.

The classic rule is IC’s that you do not start with are limited.

So if Ger takes Kar, they can only place 3 on subsequent turns when they maintain control of it at the start of the turn.

IC placement rules are similar to ftr/bmr landing rules.  It can only happen on territories you controlled at the start of the turn, prior to any purchases.

Rus can easily afford to lose a few inf if it kills Ger arm.

@El:

@cystic:

it may suck, but its an interesting idea. Esp if combined with the Ind IC.
And i’d go with maybe alternating inf and ftrs, with back up from my UK and RUS allies . . .

cc, Explain the “alternating inf and ftrs” part, please!

well,
one turn i might build 2 inf, 1 ftr,
or 3 inf, next turn 2 ftrs 1 inf, then 3 inf
etc.
it depends on the long term planning/picture etc.

Ahhhhh….
Thanx