Game History
Round: 8 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy 2 artilleries, 1 destroyer, 1 fighter and 9 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens; Combat Move - Japanese 1 transport moved from 21 Sea Zone to 20 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Shantung to 20 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Jehol to 20 Sea Zone 2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 20 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Java to 43 Sea Zone 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 2 fighters, 1 infantry, 1 submarine, 2 tactical_bombers and 1 transport moved from 43 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers moved from 36 Sea Zone to Paulau 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 21 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 submarine moved from 6 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 armour moved from Shantung to Kiangsi 1 artillery and 5 infantry moved from Anhwe to Kiangsi 3 artilleries, 1 fighter, 4 infantry and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kwangtung to Kiangsi 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 21 Sea Zone to Kiangsi 1 marine moved from Kwangtung to 21 Sea Zone 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 marine and 5 transports moved from 21 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 8 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 8 infantry and 1 marine moved from 6 Sea Zone to Korea 1 armour, 2 artilleries and 5 infantry moved from Southern Manchuria to Korea 1 fighter moved from Japan to 22 Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from Japan to 36 Sea Zone Combat - Japanese Battle in 22 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 2 fighters, 1 submarine and 1 tactical_bomber Americans defend with 1 destroyer and 1 transport Japanese win with 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Japanese: 1 submarine Casualties for Americans: 1 destroyer and 1 transport Battle in Kiangsi Japanese attack with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 fighters, 9 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers Chinese defend with 4 artilleries and 9 infantry Japanese win, taking Kiangsi from Chinese with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 25 Casualties for Japanese: 6 infantry Casualties for Chinese: 4 artilleries and 9 infantry Battle in 36 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 1 submarine and 2 transports Americans defend with 1 destroyer Japanese win with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 1 submarine and 2 transports remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Americans: 1 destroyer Battle in Paulau Japanese attack with 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers Americans defend with 1 artillery and 1 infantry Japanese win, taking Paulau from Americans with 2 fighters, 2 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 4 Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry Casualties for Americans: 1 artillery and 1 infantry Battle in Korea Japanese attack with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 13 infantry and 1 marine Russians defend with 1 infantry Japanese win, taking Korea from Russians with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 13 infantry and 1 marine remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3 Casualties for Russians: 1 infantry Non Combat Move - Japanese 1 aaGun moved from Southern Manchuria to Korea 1 aaGun moved from Anhwe to Shantung 1 infantry moved from Shantung to Anhwe 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from Java to 43 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 cruiser, 1 infantry, 1 marine and 1 transport moved from 43 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 bomber, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from 36 Sea Zone to Davao 2 fighters and 2 tactical_bombers moved from Paulau to 36 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kiangsi to 6 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kiangsi to Kwangtung 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 22 Sea Zone to Davao Place Units - Japanese 3 infantry placed in Shantung 2 artilleries, 1 fighter and 6 infantry placed in Japan 1 destroyer placed in 6 Sea Zone Turn Complete - Japanese Total Cost from Convoy Blockades: 1 Rolling for Convoy Blockade Damage in 42 Sea Zone. Rolls: 1 Japanese collect 44 PUs (1 lost to blockades); end with 44 PUs Objective Japanese 6 Home Islands: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 47 PUs Objective Japanese 4 Control Dutch East Indies: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 52 PUsLeague General Discussion Thread
-
Please take advantage of us! š
@surfer incentive to complete 3 games š¤
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in League General Discussion Thread:
@simon33 you donāt have to discuss NG infantry. Just deny the placement if they want to put a troop there and hadnāt requested that exception prior to bidding. Rules are clearly posted on the forum and their job to know they have to ask for exceptions.
Guess so but if they then donāt want to play is it a loss? We would need @gamerman01 for that one.
-
If nobody has made a move in the game, it would be a bit rude to claim a win for a League match. Call it a āno-contestā and move on to an opponent who is capable of reading the rules.
I have certainly had many times where my opponent pointed out rules that I did not fully understand. Sometimes they showed me the statement in the rulebook. Sometimes it was ambiguous and a mod had to make a determination. In all cases, I was able to resolve the interpretation differences and continue playing the match (like most grown-ups are capable of).
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris Guess thatās a reasonable viewpoint. It would make me frustrated to go through the whole bidding process and then not actually have a game though.
-
@simon33 Not as frustrating as getting diced on G1 and giving up since you failed a 99% roll on Paris!
Hopefully the unsolvable disagreement over NG is also a 1%-frequency event. I donāt see anyone in the League playoffs who did a NG bid, but havenāt searched through every single match.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris And those scenarios have certainly happened to me.
-
Allowing bid units to blank territories or zones is a whole new frontier we donāt want to broach.
New Guinea is an exception that many players like, and allow, but if you have one exception, people will want more.
New Guinea has to be agreed by both players and should be done before bidding, otherwise you would probably need to bid over, yes.I would suggest that players who want the New Guinea bid in play should be the ones stating that before bidding starts, because they are wanting something beyond default league rules.
In the event that you bid against such player and then find out heās placing an infantry in New Guinea, you would then have to re-bid if you donāt accept it, and you can point out to him that it is not standard.
If you are in a playoff game and hypothetically the New Guinea player will not budge, he would forfeit the game because he refuses to play by league rules. Of course sporting and reasonable adults would work it out with zero animosity, but the answer is ultimately you have to play by the rules, this is how we prevent tug-of-wars
In regular season play, you would simply not start the game.
-
Thanks for the discussion guys. It has always irked me slightly about the NG bid but never seemed worth having too much of an argument about.
-
The last game I played, I decided to just go ahead and list out all the things Iād place with the bid, and my opponent liked the idea and did the same. With this method, you would know about a New Guinea bid before agreeing to a number
-
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
The last game I played, I decided to just go ahead and list out all the things Iād place with the bid, and my opponent liked the idea and did the same. With this method, you would know about a New Guinea bid before agreeing to a number
I think that is reasonable for a playoff game but a pain for a regular season match. YMMV.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in League General Discussion Thread:
@simon33 Not as frustrating as getting diced on G1 and giving up since you failed a 99% roll on Paris!
Hopefully the unsolvable disagreement over NG is also a 1%-frequency event. I donāt see anyone in the League playoffs who did a NG bid, but havenāt searched through every single match.
I think most players could find an alternate placement for those 3 IPCs. Otherwise, you could rewind the bid 1 turn, and have the other player take Allies.
-
OK, this is actually going to be pretty great.
There is now a pinned thread for
PTV
BM4
OOBThreads devoted to those versions. Talk about characteristics of the version, strategies, your regular season games, and hopefully the PLAYOFFS!
I would think we will enjoy more discussion about each version separately, and also this general discussion thread can be much cleaner and everyone will just be so much happier
ENJOY!
-
@Stucifer I will plan on it. Although PTV has just that much more to react to with the additional scramble rules. There is definitely a learning curve. You might take me down the first several games.
-
2025 League rules have been updated from 2024.
There are only a couple sentence structure corrections, and proper links provided for the rankings, and that the BM and PTV rules are now located in their respective discussion threads and not on a dedicated pinned thread where it used to be.
Just remembered, the one change being made is @Arthur-Bomber-Harris proposal that the past year champion and runner up are automatic 1 and 2 seeds for the playoff, assuming of course they enter. After that, lifetime ELO score at 12/31.
Thanks, @Arthur-Bomber-Harris , that is a great idea.
-
@simon33 I would never allow for that bid and never have. It is like a bid-multiplier, and I wouldnāt accept that.
-
@simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Since its the time in the year for reviewing rules, can I suggest we change this one to allow land units on empty territories, really only an issue for New Guinea.
- The nation placing a unit in a territory or sea zone must have started with a unit in said territory or sea zone prior to placing the bid.
Reason for change is that pretty much every player accepts the bid and so does Triple-A. So why not make the standard rules what is normally practiced?
Let me jump on this post. Thank you, Simon. Is there a reason we donāt take January to adjust the rules for OOB slightly? People say itās stale or boring, so why not change it? Iāve said this before (International Federation of Axis & Allies Players) but since we are the aforementioned, may I suggest the rule of 3. Per year only one rulebook change, one adjustment to bid, one adjustment to a unit. You donāt have to make all three changes, but you can.
I would personally suggest the top 3-5 players in the OOB bracket make the adjustments. I would also ask that they come up with an option bid number and placement. That can serve as an optional guardrail or a base for other players. Lastly, I would suggest they have one of the tripleA guys in the discussion.
-
Might I also suggest an in-person Axis & Allies gathering to bring us all together? It could be exotic or in Danās Jensenās hometown. Or perhaps mostly based around the person who can or is able to host it? Or just swarm onto a local, smaller con like Totalcon up here in New England? We can invite Larry and make it a thing.
-
To broaden the post, why not take January to adjust any of the various game?
-
@crockett36 Stucifer is actually coming to visit my brother and I in february and we are going to be rolling many many dice.
I would love an in person get together. The question is where?
-
@Daaras and again, Iām aiming for less tournaments more gathering so the games would be fun not necessarily Extremely competitive walk away with a trophy.





