Rocky Mountain Axis & Allies Meetup game groups table # 1

@rommel13579
I also don’t use my mechs to attack.

@Argothair:

My play group is very considerate about trying to (a) identify when the game isn’t much worth playing anymore, and then (2) accurately describe the likely outcome of the game.

Right, like there are no hard-and-fast rules about “oh, you lost your capital, or you lost Cairo, or you’re making 30 IPCs less per turn, so it’s game over.” Instead we look at the board and try to see if there are battles or campaigns coming up that are likely (>10%?) to make a dramatic impact on the state of the game, especially campaigns where the underdog is going on the offensive, or where the apparent favorite is in danger of being pushed back if they lose a key attack. E.g. it matters a lot whether Germany has one stack next door to Moscow, with nothing to reinforce it if that stack is destroyed, vs. a steady stream of reinforcements and a huge stack next to Moscow. In the former case, Moscow could recover if it fends off a German battle with 80% odds to take Moscow. In the latter case, even if Moscow pulls out that 20% from the dice, they will still have 80% odds to die one turn later, so it’s not a big deal. The former position is interesting and worth playing on if we can manage to find time for a second session; the latter position is not interesting and the game should be called.

When we call a game, we don’t insist on unconditional surrender. Instead, we try to agree on what the game looks like. For example, “the Allies are way ahead, but the Axis still have a slight chance.” Or, “It’s hard to say for sure who’s winning, but it looks like the Axis have a slight edge.” Sometimes we don’t always precisely agree – one side might claim the Allies are ahead by “a little” while the other side might claim the Allies have “a significant lead,” but so far we have always at least agreed on which side has the edge, even if not by how much.

Hey!  I am in your play group and what you are saying is…. basically right.  Although have we played global together?  Don’t recall honestly

True, threatening Sealion is strong German play, but as Young Grasshopper himself has said, many British players do not fear it much these days, so you might as well hit Russia hard, right from the start, and get the killing blow(in my strategic opinion).
Thanks and God Bless You All from AxisandAlliesGeneral

@Arthur:

You might as well issue an R1 DoW against Japan; at our gaming group we generally assume that Russia is at war unless stated otherwise.  So far I haven’t seen any reason in non-BM games to not opt for immediate war.

This makes perfect sense with experienced players, but I do remember a game where I, playing Russia, managed to delay a Japanese attack for quite a few turns by claiming that we had always been on good terms and that I had never done anything at all to damage Japan’s interests.  :-D

Is there a Pacific map like this?

In my opinion, it’s important to try and take out both UK DD’s, one SZ w/a BB in it, usually SZ111 and SZ112. And also take out the Transports, which means SZ109 has to go. I know that’s a lot to ask of the Germans, especially SZ109, since the UK can scramble 4 FTR’s. The only other strategy I believe is to take 2 Subs and attack the CC in SZ91, instead of attacking SZ109 and then use the 3rd German sub to attack SZ111. Or, you could take the 3rd German sub against SZ106 to ensure the DD’s & Trans death. That way, the UK only has 1 DD that can counter attack the 2 or 3 subs(depending on how many survive) in SZ106. You can use the German subs to take away some IPC’s in the convoy zones. The BB & DD in SZ111 is easily taken out w/the 3 FTR’s & 3 Tacs you can get on it. Yes, you may lose 1 FTR most likely but it’s well worth it to kill a UK BB.

In my first Europe game, the Allies won after 16 rounds.  When the US liberated France, giving them 4 extra men and their economy back, they did help by attacking and taking Western Germany.  The next round, USA was able to move through Western Germany and take Berlin.  Germany was not able to properly defend it’s territories, even Germany itself, because of so much stuff committed to the Eastern Front.  Moscow did eventually fall, but it took Germany a long time to get there and cost them a ton of units in the process.  Plus, the very round Moscow fell, the US took Berlin.
One strange thing about this game was that London was never liberated.  Once Germany took London, they built a strong force of infantry there and the US decided to bypass that to take Rome, liberate Paris and go after Berlin.  The German navy was decimated and the Atlantic was totally controlled by the US so all those troops on England were pretty much stuck there.  On the very last round, after taking Berlin, the US had enough forces left in the area and they liberated London.  Technically the game was over though because the final German round to see if they could retake their capital had passed.  It was really impossible for the Germans to retake Berlin because what was left of their forces were way east in Russia.
In my second Europe game, the Axis won in 8 rounds.  So with those two games, it kind of goes along with history.  Shorter game/war, Axis victory.  Longer game/war, Allied victory.  One big thing that did the Axis in was that they were planning on a short, quick war to achieve their goals.  When the war dragged out, the greater Allied industrial and mineral resources told.