Which nation requires the least skill to play as?

@ohwrm said in Are either of these the National production Chart for the 2004 revised edition?:

I’m missing it and currently trying to find one to print out but since I don’t know what it looks like, I’m having difficulties

http://ernestangely.org/queensland/how-to-find-index-units-aviation.php

The Production Chart at the top of this page is for some version of A&A Global 1940 (the admixture of A&A Europe 1940 and A&A Pacific 1940). While nifty looking, it won’t help you much with A&A Revised.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/9982/new-national-production-national-objectives-chart

This Production Chart is also for A&A 1940, in this case A&A Pacific 1940.

https://boardgamegeek.com/image/63235/axis-allies?size=large

This production chart is for the Milton Bradley version of A&A. Again, nifty looking, but it won’t help you much with A&A Revised.

or if anyone has the game, if they could send me a photo that would be seriously appreciated (I’m also missing the Reference Chart for the Soviet Union)

By finding BGG, you’ve hit on a source of information about A&A, you just haven’t found the right mine shaft to explore. Instead of looking at BGG’s Nova Games & Milton Bradley A&A page, try BGG’s Avalon Hill A&A (A&A Revised) page. Yes, they are both “helpfully” named “Axis & Allies”. This is both technically correct and wildly unhelpful. That said, the BGG A&A Revised page has much information, to include:
A picture of the production and weapons development charts for Milton Bradley Axis & Allies and Avalon Hill Axis & Allies, AH on top and MB on bottom.(source)

But there are also resources on this website that can help you. The front page to the site has a link to “Rules & Downloads”. Going there will land you on a page of basic information about the different A&A games. Scroll down until you get to the “Axis & Allies Revised (2004)” section. You will have two options, a link to download a pdf version of the rules for the game and a link to a setup chart for the game. The setup chart gives you the unique information found on Reference Chart for the Soviets (the rest of the information on the chart is about the names, abilities, and prices for the units in the game, information that is duplicated both in the rule book and on the other four reference charts.

If you want to duplicate the look of a reference chart, combine the reference chart from another country with the setup from here. You might find a picture of another country’s reference chart here.

I hope that helps.

-Midnight_Reaper

@MarineIguana:

First of all, I want to say that USA committing any purchases to the pacific is a mistake. For the same amount of resources, the USA can always pressure Germany more than Japan. This is from my experience playing hundreds of revised games, many at a high level.

That said, assuming the US commits to the Pacific…

1. Japan should always sink the US fleet at pearl harbor. If this is done, Japan generally starts with a 1 battleship, 2 carrier, 3 fighter advantage compared to the USA that will take 5+ turns of buildup for the US to overcome.
2. The US can’t make significant advances unless the Japan fleet is destroyed. The best way to stall the USA is to place your fleet in the sea zone off the phillipines or china and deadzone all sea zone within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. Have the carriers filled with fighters AND try to have an equal number of fighters in a land territory that can reach all the sz within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. For example, 2 carriers can support 8 fighters attacking a sea zone.
3. Japan can continue pushing land units into asia, even with all US purchases going to the pacific. My typical purchases are like 6 inf and 2 fighters. With the Japan fleet off of China

From what I have seen when the allies does a KJF is that, PH really isn’t that easy. If UK commits and is lucky, PH can be very difficult. Complete UK commitment would be  UK india ftr attacking the J sub in 45 with the australia sub, and then landing on PH. The Australia TT taking 2 infs to papua, the indian TT taking 2 infs to borneo, The UK CR attacking the japanese TT in 59 and the India CW either standing in 36 or 49.  At this point, taking PH might be difficult for japan. If they do it with air only (5 ftrs + bomber) they will lose about 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs, 1 cw, and 1 sub. The good news is that they will not lose boats to a counterattack, and can use their boats to deal with the british fleet, the bad news is that they are spread out, will be in trouble on land and will take 3 ftrs in losses for only 36 US ipcs (+ 10 UK).  If they try to do a heavy PH, alot of the uk fleet survives and UK will keep borneo until J3.

I still feel it is a bad move, since you are handing africa to the axis, but japan will be in trouble.

@Fleetwood:

Okay, thanks for the reply. Stacking Karelia is a bit of a habit since I’m used to being able to do it against a lot of opponents. Against a considerably lesser player, victory comes quickly that way. The only issue I have with making drops in Archangel is how difficult that makes trading WE since I’m assuming the German player at some point abandons and deadzones it. I would hate to let Germany have it for free or to have the Brits cash out 6 short. The UK might not be able to do both, depending on the German plane placement and how many capital ships are available.

Agreed that Western must be traded, but if USA is in the Med they can take up the challenge (12 can be defended minimally assuming the Kraut figs aren’t on Western).

In my last two PBEM games, one as Axis, one as Allies(in progress) the Axis has won(1 inf to Ukr, 2 inf to Lib). In both, the Japanese controlled Africa, entered the Med, held Novo and were/are able to take Moscow. I think I just need to adjust improve my Allied play to beat better Axis play.

That kind of bid would throw my Axis game off…I wouldn’t allow a bid of 9 unless it was a tech game.

@ncscswitch:

Baiting is best done AFTER you have determined that your opponent might be subject to it.  The most common way of determining that is by a moderately risky attack by your opponent in the first 1-2 moves of the game.  If they roll for moderate odds battles (70% or less) early on, then future baiting may pay off.

Or if they try for a Russian Triple on Russia 1. :P

But honestly, baiting only pays off when you are winning.  Otherwise, baiting will always help your opponent.

Thanks!

Here is a wild one…

Catholic Mass:  Allows Italy to ONCE call for the Pope to endorse Italy’s roll in the war.  If succesful (1 in 6 on die) would create 1 INF in every neutral nation that was largely Catholic, controlled by Italy.  Effected nations:  Spain, Argentina, Peru, Venezuala.  IPC amount for each effected nation raised to 1 each.

And this for your “frogmen”
Scuttle Crew:  Would allow 1 INF to attack 1 Allied naval unit that PER INF that is adjacent to an Italian held territory containing INF (Italy specifies targets).  INF rolls normal attack (1 in 6) and if succesful sinks 1 Allied ship. Such attack preceeds normal attack round.  Failure is loss of Italy INF.

Started playing in 1990. Currently playing an informal tournament with 2 friends. It’s gonna take us 24 games to play every combination of team/countries, and we are only starting game 4 next week. I have always loved the game, but took a 10 year hiatus at one point…. lack of players near me.

Variant 3 will make subs more or less useless against a Japanese fleet with at least one BB. So I think it is better to not mess up too much with the rules and vote for variant 2 or 1. In plain english, it is not worth fixing a rule that is supposed to fix another one. Things can get too complicated if one does! :wink: