They are making a new axis based computer game

@Leatherneckinlv:

After play testing some…I came to the conclusion France needs to BB and a Destroyer…1 BB makes no difference…thoughts so far

I am curious, how does Italy or Germany react to that battleship?

I’d be willing to sign up as the noob player, I just finished reading the rules. IF there exists a way to play online with such a ruleset then I could play online. Why would you need 4 axis players though? Isn’t this game purely zero-sum anyway? So a single axis player and a single allied player should be mostly similar to having multiple players on each team.

@GeneralHandGrenade:

All it takes is a commitment to attack by Germany.

Germany buys 2 transports on turn one and 5 on turn 2. Turn 3 they put 16 infantry and 8 tanks plus the air power on London. They will already have that many tanks without having to purchase any so they still have money left over to commit to the eastern border. They take UK’s income and drop the ground units in the east that they didn’t on turn 2 or reinforce London with the transports they already have and infantry they purchase with UK’s money.

If they don’t get it turn 3 they can hit them again turn 4.� � Every single game.

GHC, just friendly debate here :) Buying 7 transports is a lot of IPCs in the critical 1st few turns.

If London has to be hit again on turn 4, I really don’t know how the Axis could win at all. The US will have to be kept of the war through Japan’s turn 3 which means India and ANZAC have enough time to build sufficiently to take care of themselves for a long time. Maybe only China is destroyed during this time, which I believe very critical. The US can fully concentrate on liberating London.

Yes, GHC, don’t get me wrong. Just saying…I like pulling off Sea Lion, even if I lose the game :)

It’s fun to sack London! I know how to execute a Sea Lion. I’ve done it successfully in 2 games (taken London a total of 4 times). In the 2 games London was taken, but not successfully, Germany could barely hold Russia back in both of them; planes had to be taken as hits just to get 1 tank on London. In the successful games, Moscow eventually fell, but in all 4 games London was liberated. The US can easily liberate London regardless.

I agree and already wrote in a previous post that no matter what, London can be taken. Have you ever experienced sacking London against a fully defending UK? If the UK player is able to put 16 infantry on London plus a fighter (UK 1 and UK2). Germany can still take it like you said. But Germany having to drop lots of ground while losing a whole turns worth of purchases is very taxing. The sacked treasury is often barely enough to stabilize and push Russia back. I go for Sea Lion only if everything goes right G1 and then the UK player gets too aggressive. Some people less experienced think a G1 purchase of 1 bomber and 6 infantry signals Barbarossa.

In the situation you describe, an experienced Russian player is going to get bonuses in Hungary and Romania, maybe Russia gets pushed back to their original borders, but Germany won’t be going much further for a very long time. A smart Russian player will have more tanks on the board than Germany and stacked on E. Poland.

Therefore I’m arguing that the HR idea of this thread is still not overkill for the Axis or at least in the situation of Sea Lion as you describe. This will mean though that a smart UK player will have to place 6 infantry/1 fighter on London UK1.

“Germany could spend every penny on executing Sea Lion and still successfully do it, even if the UK is putting everything on London, but at that point it’s too expensive; especially if Germany has to take plane hits to conquer London…”

Well, i guess it could represent an inhabited land. I have not really thought about its representation all that much. I just thought that this was a good idea for an addition to the game. In my opinion, i guess the “houses” could represent a land that has been fortified, mechanized, or one that has a barracks? It’s all up to the player i think.

Yes, very nice.  :-) :-)

Here are some nice models that could be used for adding generals to AA games.

Go to shapeways.com/product/LKWVTVBJC/global-set?optionId=55887495

Here’s what you get with the set:

Set of 37 pieces representing the generals and admirals for each army in WWII. Scaled to be compatible with Axis & Allies board game. Includes the following pieces, broken down by army:

United States: 1 General Patton, 1 General MacArthur, 1 Admiral Halsey, 2 US Generals (Eisenhower model), 2 admirals in dress blues, 1 admiral in dress whites.

United Kingdom: 2 UK Generals (Montgomery model), 1 generic general (Eisenhower model), 2 admirals in dress whites, 1 admiral in dress blues.

Soviet Union: 2 Soviet generals, 2 Soviet generals with winter greatcoat, 1 Soviet general with winter greatcoat and fur hat, 1 admiral in dress blues.

France: 2 French generals, 1 admiral in dress blues.

China: 1 general (Japanese general model)

Germany: 2 German generals, 3 German generals with winter greatcoat, 1 admiral in dress blues.

Italy: 1 Italian general, 1 admiral in dress whites.

Japan: 2 Japanese admirals, 3 Japanese generals.

A&A generals.jpg

Well, like I said I went to Zazzle .com, you upload the image you want and they have it printed and shipped to you as a poster with several different quality paper and finish options. It arrives within a few days. the hardest part was gluing it to the foam core and then cutting the foam core.  The one I printed starts was 34.95 and measures 52.5" x 26.5".  I;'m happy with Zazzle but I’m sure there are other print sites out there you could use.  I’m thinking of revising the map and printing it in the next size up, 39"x78 even thought it’ll probably cost me $150 or so.  I love the idea you had of the gdp. when I did my map I used the militarys budgets  but fudged it a little after trying to figure out the average spent per soldier in each alliance.

I’d like the cat more If it didn’t chew the map to pieces.

I love copy and paste  :-).

I am a big fan of Diplomacy, but can’t imagine adding simultanious movement to A&A. First, as Imperious Leader noted, there would be a large amount of moves to write. In Diplomacy a leader has to write at most 17 orders, but will generally need to issue 5-10. In Axis and Allies both the number and the complexity of the orders increases.
Second, writing down orders will likely serve as somewhat of a deterent to inivation. For example; as Germany I draft a set of orders to strike the U.S.S.R at Causcus and Karelia. If I suddenly see a stronger strategy that involves me completely changing my orders for both countries, the time I already put in that will be lost and the time I will need to write up new orders may deter me from attempting my new course of action. Having to continuously edit a page or two of orders will be tedious.
Third, in real life military leaders would re-act to enemy movements. If as Japan I ordered my units in Kwangtung, Manchuria, and French Indochina to attack China, but was attacked by units in Soviet Far East and India my attack would not proceed. Not only that, the Manchurian units would likely be diverted to re-inforce and/or counter-attack.