Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
Global 1942 Scenario by Larry Harris
-
@ampdrive attacking the USA on the open usually ends up as an even trade, whether you attack Solomons or pearl harbor. Japan usually ends up weaker for trading ship/ship with the USA.
-
I see your point.I think I’ll forget attacking sz62.Instead send to sz49 2ss,1dd,3 fgt vrs bb,ca,dd,tt.Japan loses likely 2ss,1 fgt+the dd on USA counter.
NCM up to 2 ca to sz46 to protect IJN (2 loaded cvs+bb)
I think it’s important for japan to take advantage of opportunities presented by intial set-up. -
Japan lost 4 carriers at Midway in 42, so why still so strong in this setup?
-
And UK navy takes huge brutal beating in 42 v. 40.
-
I think versions of A&A starting in 1942 begin before battle of midway and after German defeat at Moscow.Sort of April or May 1942.
-
I have a feeling GENCON will be canceled but if not I will be there.
-
How you play 1942 depends on how many turns you plan to play. In tournament its around 6-8. Not enough time to get capital victory unless a complete failure on dice or strategy. I have a new plan this year and its completely based on the length of the game.
-
@taamvan said in Global 1942 Scenario by Larry Harris:
@ampdrive attacking the USA on the open usually ends up as an even trade, whether you attack Solomons or pearl harbor. Japan usually ends up weaker for trading ship/ship with the USA.
On a game with fixed turns taking Hawaii turn 1 is a must at 86% and 3-4 casualties.
-
@ampdrive ah, ok. thx
-
Hey all.
New to the forums. Love Axis & Allies. I have played several board versions, TripleA and steam.Going to play Larrys Global 1942 setup in a couple of weeks on a lovely LT.Dan / Siredblood map print.
Is Larrys 1942 variant still considered to be a fairly balanced setup by the community?
I find it a bit weird that the US player so easily can take out two german subs before the german player can use them at all.
I want that destroyer in SZ 101 to be a cruiser, lol. -
Hi @dead-head said in Global 1942 Scenario by Larry Harris:
I find it a bit weird that the US player so easily can take out two german subs before the german player can use them at all
I remember this being talked about but forget the opinions. You could do a search here and maybe find it.
Also, Oztea has a 42 setup if you wanna give it a roll sometime.
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/20575/oztea-s-1942-global-setup?_=1651779408535 -
@dead-head said in Global 1942 Scenario by Larry Harris:
Hey all.
New to the forums. Love Axis & Allies. I have played several board versions, TripleA and steam.Going to play Larrys Global 1942 setup in a couple of weeks on a lovely LT.Dan / Siredblood map print.
Is Larrys 1942 variant still considered to be a fairly balanced setup by the community?
I find it a bit weird that the US player so easily can take out two german subs before the german player can use them at all.
I want that destroyer in SZ 101 to be a cruiser, lol.No. I’m doing a advance 42 game. I’m looking at in my setup moving 1 German sub from Baltic (3 on Setup) ( have convoy boxes) to the sea zone in Atlantic ( 2 subs already there ) where they have the option of bringing 3 subs to US coast and only 2 going towards UK fleet turn 1. Since if this game does start technically early 42 then Germany was at there peak in subs in the Atlantic. The German bomber stays in Berlin plus I have a paratrooper there to give Germany another option for that bomber.
-
They are playing BBR on his map this weekend.
I’m headed to Gencon to play in the G42 tournament. It is worth playing and those two subs have killed the dd before. If you feel that its imbalanced you can use a bid. Its a faster game–and you can use the tournament rules to keep it to 8 turns/1 day, I recommend it.
https://headlesshorseman2.com/uploads/3/4/0/0/34000156/glenoverlot42.6.21.pdf
-
Where is the setup charts for this ?
-
https://headlesshorseman2.com/uploads/3/4/0/0/34000156/glenoversetupplan2021_8.31.pdf
its been around for a long time. It isn’t perfect but its faster and cleaner than G40 (I’d actually mod G42 before G40). And it is canon in that it has Larry Harris bless and playtest by the original crew.
-
Thanks for the replies Y’all.
@taamvan GL on Gencon! And thank you for the updated setup-chart. I see a few changes on the german side. -
its easy to forget there are no factories on normandy and southern france too, in that version. Also the turn order is different. Lots of welcome changes.
-
1942 is a good game for timed games or games that you want to finish in one day. 1940 on the other hand has way more openings and variants that 1942. Because of this 1940 is best played in email rather than live. For 9 years we would play 1940 in a live format every Easter in a 2 day game session. At the end of the 2 day game sessions we still only had one or two games that came close to being completed. Some 1940 strategies require the game to proceed more than 10 rounds or more. In fact after taking data from the forum online games most games ended on turn 15 or so. This takes way to long to play in one day or even 2 days. 1942 solves this problem and still keeps the game strategic and interesting but 1940 still has more possible openings and endings.
-
Good point. We often end G40 games by surrender/mutual agreement, but there are a variety of skill levels and so some players wither. The bloodbath, mark movel victory card and Young Grasshopper systems also address this by reducing it to an 8-10 turn game, and are based on G40.
-
@taamvan
We always play the the Larry Harris 1942 setup. I notice here that it shows an update from Greg Smorey and Kevin Chapman. Looks like one extra uboat and one extra German tank in Libya. Is this setup approved by Larry Harris?
Suggested Topics
