Get the Brit Inf back in Egypt and a Russian Bomber for 2nd Edition

@marshmallowofwar but if there are fighters just sitting in Norway, they’re useless elsewhere.

The problem the bombers would be solving is the fighters sitting in Norway just picking up dust. The bombers could be in Moscow, Gibraltar, the UK, Norway, bombing any German production point and contributing to those 1 inf and 5 planes vs 1 inf battles.

The question is in my opinion: is the versatility that the bombers offer worth the cost of having fewer fighters to sit on complexes to intercept, protect carriers and sit on airbases, and secure US landings.

@Tutti Thanks for reading.

The original post addresses purchases after the US enters the war, once its industrial complexes have been upgraded and income is augmented by National Objective bonuses. Thus, “USA1” refers to America’s second turn after entering the war, which would be the first turn they have ~70 IPC to spend. Up to that point, my recommendation is to make those necessary “security” purchases - carriers, destroyers, aircraft, etc.

I understand your aversion to buying ground troops, only to have them sit for a turn while you buy transports the next. When the US is at war, you can certainly do several turns of 5x5x5 buys (5 infantry, 5 artillery, 5 transports for 70 IPC). I’ve done this many times, myself. If your goal is to assemble an invasion force - a force large enough to make a successful amphibious assault and survive an enemy counterattack - the 5x5x5 system will work just as well as the (10x10)+10 purchases I detailed, but only in the Atlantic. Because the US only has one IC on the Pacific, the (10x10) +10 is still the most efficient method of assembling a force to invade Japan.

As for the troops America starts the game with…they can easily be incorporated into your invasion forces, but I usually have other uses for them. To give just three examples: 1) I use the Atlantic transport to activate Brazil and shuttle the Brazilian infantry to Gibraltar or Morocco, 2) The American armor and mech infantry, when parked in the Western US, can deter Japan from invading Alaska, and 3) As soon as the US enters the war, I like to use the transport off Hawaii to capture the Marshall Islands. If the Japanese don’t have carriers within striking distance of Hawaii, taking the Marshalls eliminates the threat from Japan-based strategic bombers, allowing you to safely move undefended transports to Hawaii.

@Young:

Instead of “rewriting” or “reorganizing” the Europe and Pacific books into one, I have thought hard about the possible creation of a separate book that would only be reference, index, glossary or an epic “Table of Contents” if you will. The Star Wars Rebellion game has something like this and it’s extremely effective, plus this would be a complete original work which would not alter the copyrighted material, but rather add a whole separate document booklet that compliments the original material.

Yes, that sounds like a good practical solution to the problem, and very useful too.

Needed to bump this for my Russia strategy video.

never say never in the world of Axis and Allies.  I’m pretty sure I’ve found a way, but as stated, has enough drawbacks of its own.  I could show you in a friendly game.  8-)

btw, question; do you prefer the axis because you think they are better with perfect strat, or because you think it is easier to not lose the game to mistakes?

in most axis games I have played, the allies have been the harder side to play, but they have also been the stronger side. for me it seems like the playtesters have not been skilled enough to play very good, so they have concluded with that the allies need more help. then when the game is released, the game will be fairly even when people play it the first time, but later the allies will will, because learning how to play them gives much more strength than learning now to play the axis.

If I played the same every single game, I would be bored out of my mind. Axis have more options than allies and are the ones in the most control of how the game develops.

To answer your question. I prefer axis because of 1) fun 2) if you get diced throughout the game, you can always just go for the win. 3) axis have to perform or they lose especially if usa is going full pacific (puts germany/italy on the clock for africa and russia).

Did I mention that the allies are boring? Axis do this -> allies got to do this. Axis indirectly control the outcome of what you do and the impact or effect you have on the axis doesn’t come to mid/late game.

Everyone’s axis 1-3 purchases and moves are always the same. HMMM I WONDER WHY. I mix my stuff up depending on my mood and who I play against, but most people have a set way of doing things.

I have a set way of doing this as the allies depending on what the axis purchases / strategies are.

Example sea lion feint -> 1-3 inf rest artillery/mech/tank russia buy. usa 3 bomber 2 dd or 3 bomber 1 carrier. UK 9 inf 1 art.

I always hit 97 and the sz below it as uk, i hate getting diced in one of those spots, because it sets me back a whole round, but the outcome is very good when you win… even if he did not scramble outcome is still good, because you do get to convoy italy… if italy sinks it, he has less stuff than germany so you get to fire more than 1 round typically and that means the french fleet can move.

germany can’t move his naval to take gib or morroco or take uk if japan wants to war round 2. If he does this and puts japan off another round, japan is screwed in pacific, that’s so much income for uk pac and anzac and japan income is put off from being big another round.

so it is an ultimatum the axis face. best move is to just shuffle in the baltic and go barb, let japan explode. Sometimes japan waits to war and I lose UK. That’s fine. I bought offensively with russia and usa. I am ready to push romania push yugo push northern italy and push into rome with my russians. usa can always land air units to help hold. it is beautiful and it is awesome.

The only time I enjoy allies is when germany takes UK over, because the run for italy with russia is too funny, plus I bought plenty of time in pacific by making japan wait till round 3 to declare war… so I don’t have to buy anything for pacific till round 4.
~
in all fairness the guy could not scramble 97 if he wanted 80% at UK. he also had to buy more naval to defend against 2 fighter and 3 bomber from usa the turn he took uk over (so he had to drop 3 destroyers down off normandy)… I think he also bought infantry for germany and air to hit usa if he moved up. he took uk with only tank 2 bombers and a tactical left.

I pulled the pacific fighters into the atlantic side of the map. so I held yugo because of the UK air plus usa bombers. USA moved by gib the turn uk got taken with 4 fully loaded carriers and that starting cruiser the round london fell and it got sunk so germany had to get carriers off normandy to land his air (this was where his london income went to and infantry/art for germany/west germany.

So I had a fun push for yogo at 55% chance to defend. He attacked because it was the only way to save italy. the first round of attack did not go well other than I lost my bombers for usa so in terms of total unit value he was up, but he couldn’t continue or risk germany being taken… So yeah I took italy when he got to liberate it, europe was a mess. Was a pretty cool game, the most fun I had as allies.

most of the time russians just hold romania for some time. usa liberates uk eventually. blah blah you know how those games go.
~
I do like to play allies when I see that no one online knows what the hell they are doing as allies… I’ll take it.

No, I don’t like the idea of allowing the Allies to have 3 complexes in W. Europe.  Especially ones they don’t have to build.  A very common tactic for me is to abandon France to the Allies.  Let them have it and lose all their control in Africa and French Indo China, lose their complexes and then move back in.

Cheers man thats awesome……by chance where abouts in NZ do you live?