New Axis strategy….has not failed yet....

@the-captain exactly. It’s good to have your goals ( strategic ) and then be opportunistic ( tactical ) in trying to achieve them. Unfortunately, for me anyway :) , I can get side tracked sometimes with the opportunistic part lol.

I have to remind myself of my goals. Usually during Purchase is a good time for that lol

Yea, triplea is an excellent tool. Playing FtF is best, but those that don’t have a group or the time/space and even if they do, it’s nice to have. Probably has promoted the game more than “almost” anything else :)

Well put. Although I think you mean Norway rather than Sweden.

Appreciate some of your comments on the game.

Game started… let’s see how the first few rounds proceed.  I will post updates periodically.

The major hole in my game was defending Moscow. Only held it once.

A couple of other oversights like not anticipating amphibious assaults. Particularly one where I could have sacrificed a cruiser to kill a transport and thin the assault but didn’t.

@daefish:

Okay so if I land US trooper on a land zone that has Italian troops on it and one german soldier but I’m not at war with Germany, this is not a valid combat move until I’m at war with Germany.

If US troops attacked an Italian territory that also has German units in it, you would basically be declaring war on Germany at that point. In land battles, all Allied units defend together so there is no way not to have war between US and Germany.
I think that going strictly by the rules you are supposed to declare war on a nation before making your combat move, but I think most players simply take the combat move as the DOW without making a formal declaration.
You have an interesting situation there with the US being at war with Japan and Italy but not Germany. I can’t help but wonder how well that would work if you kept it up, but I don’t think it would work out. Germany would simply put an extra infantry in each Italian territory and you would never be able to fight the Italians without attacking Germany as well. Then again, in most of our games, Germany and Italy are pretty separated. Italy usually goes up against the Brits in the Med and Africa while Germany dives into Russia.

@AK_Grown:

Have not thought about Brazil though

If memory serves, Anzac is one move from Brazil (from NZ).  I’ve seen it done, it really didn’t change the outcome though.

It’s two moves.  Once in a while I’ve had ANZAC take Brazil, but never with an eye towards having them spend the money outside the Pacific.  It feels like a bad idea to do so if Japan hasn’t been neutralized yet.

That is why I prefer to incorporate the “no more than one unit per territory or seazone” rule.

I think the great variation that bids provide allow for great replayability. Who wants a game that always depends on what kind of dice Germany got G1? Pick sides, set up the board, roll a couple dice, quit. Blech.

To your point about a 12 being too much, though - only 1 game has been finished in the league this year with a bid over 11, and the axis(-15) won.

Most good players are not going to give their opponent more than 10, is what we’ve been seeing in the league results. And among what appear to be opponents of close skill level, the Allies have won at +9, +10, +8, +10, +9, and +8. And the Axis have won at -9, -15, -7, -9, and -11. Yes, that’s a small sample size, but it seems to be pretty even.

I think the best judges of when a game is fair and balanced are the players. As you can see, over half the games have been run at an 8 or 9. And 2/3 of those games have been won by the Allies. You have people that don’t want to give bids too big, people that acknowledge the Axis has an advantage, people that don’t really want to play the Allies - it’s an interesting and fluid dynamic that always seems to find its own level.

IMO, if transports or any other ship enters SZ with enemy sub, sub should always have the opyion of suprize attack shot. Thats the way i play it.