High res photo of AnA classic (if you want to make a new board)

@Krieghund perfect - thank you very much!

@hirohito22 said in Classic - some reflections:

@DoManMacgee both maps of date 12 unjustly keep japan tanks away from Moscow or place Moscow “east” of true location and east of caspian sea, this nt only aids Moscow buut unjustly aiding Moscow, at game start, when should be three steps from east coast to Baltic not more and two steps in same turn to Moscow from pacific coast as in photos of original post. as fans we can influence the production of a real game.
however I doubt allies would ever win if ipc were accurate so at least fix the map. thanks.

IMO all Axis and Allies game pieces (in pretty much EVERY version of the game) merely represent a power’s ability to project military clout. In other words, its not literally a tank driving from Hanoi to Cairo in two turns, its that powers ability to project military strength into that area of the globe. The scale and simplicity are relative to the complexity.

There are more advanced, hex based games that will certainly satisfy your craving for the level of historical accuracy you seek.

@Death_FromAbove When you say “meet me” what does that entail exactly? I play by forum for the most part so is that what you mean? Or are you thinking of playing live?

My preference is the following: 2nd edition rules, no bid, RR, no IC (all rules from the OoB rules)
+strict neutrals (as mentioned in my YouTube video)

I haven’t played 3rd edition since the computer game came out. In my opinion that would be quite a different game than what I’m familiar with. If you insist though, I’ll play a Utah with you if you play my pref above?

I continue to play classic as it is used in a summer historical gaming program that I teach in.  The 6th through 10th graders pick up the rules pretty quickly, and generally we can play enough in the time alloted to determine a probable winner.  We have just purchased the 2004 edition, and after my initial review of the game, we might work some aspects, mainly the destroyer into the Classic game rules.

I am not a fan of the new board, as it looks depressing, and the though of staring at it for several hours over a 5 day period is even more depressing.  The use of victory cities makes the game much more complicated for a beginning gamer, while the classic game of focusing on the capital simplifies the game greatly and clarifies what each players objectives are.  I am not a fan of the National Advantages either, especially as some of them are incorrect historically, and it one case, totally wrong.

All of the weapons development focuses on increasing attack capabilities, nothing increases the defense capabilitiesl.  By the end of the war, with the development of the Hedgehog and Squid antisubmarine projectiles, and use of larger depth charge patterns, the Allies were killing over half of the subs attacked, and aircraft were using sonobuoys, homing torpedoes, and Magnetic Anamoly Detection gear to locate and attack submerged subs.

There is no consideration of the proximity fuze used by the US and UK from 1943 on, which drastically increased the effectiveness of anti-aircraft fire, to the degree that between intercepting fighters and anti-aircraft fire, the Japanese were taking losses of 90% of their aircraft in conventional attacks.  Also, the British and the US shared all information relating to radar with each other during the war, so if the British get to use radar for their antiaircraft, so should the US.  Also, radar allowed for far better positioning of intercepting fighters, so in theory, your fighters should be able to defend at 5 with radar, rather than 4.

Japanese tanks were not exactly potent, to say the least, yet Japanese tanks have the same attack as the Sherman, T34, or Panther.  The Allies loved to see a Banzai charge, as the normal casualty exchange ratio started at 10 to 1 and at times hit 700 to 0 (Merrill’s Marauders in Burma).

The Germans did attempt to use the Stuka in the Battle of Britain as a strategic bomber.  After one week, it was withdrawn because of heavy losses.  When they tried again with fighters later, the British had a field day shooting them down, and German fighters never had the range to really attack anything significant in Britain.

Overall, I do not regard the Revised Edition of the game as an improvement over the Classic edition.  We will likely incorporate the destroyer into the classic rules, most likely using the destroyer rules from Axis and Allies Pacific.  The units will also prove useful in expanding the Axis and Allies Europe game to five players, and for my expansion of the Pacific game, as we will now be able to distinguish between Indian and Australian units, or use the odd color of the UK units for the Dutch.

@Jennifer:

1)  8 Infantry purchase. (Purchase Phase)
2)  Sub/Trn to Spainish Sea Zone Submarine (Combat Move Phase)
3)  Two fighters to Baltic Sea Zone fleet (Sub/Trn) (Combat Move Phase)
4)  Land fighters in Karelia (Non-Combat Move Phase)
5)  Move all land units from Russia and all but 1 land unit from Caucasus to Karelia (Non-Combat Move phase)
6)  Move 2 Infantry, 1 Armor from Soviet Far East to Yakut SSR (Non-Combat Moe Phase)
7)  Move 2 Infantry from Evenki National Okrug to Yakut SSR (Non-Combat Move Phase)
8)  Place 8 Infantry in Karelia

end result:

19 Infantry, 3 Armor, 2 Fighters in Karelia
1 Infantry in Caucasus
7 Infantry, 1 Armor in Yakut SSR
(Probably) 1 Submarine in Spainish Sea Zone

24 IPCs on round 2.

Next round either take E. Europe or retake Caucasus (lightly) and start staging British and Americans in finland/norway and move them into Karelia.

Germany should cease to exist in 3 rounds.

I assume you did not play with bids, so I would slightly alter the combat moves. By some they are regarded as weak moves, but hey everybody got their own oppinion.

My usual R1 movements (no bid, no rr)

buy 8 inf

Attack sub sz, with 1 sub.

Attack baltic fleet with 1 fig and 1 tran

Strafe Ukr with everything available from Kar, Cau and Mos (8inf and 3 arms if I am not mistaken). Most optimal result is that you leave Ukr with 1 fig or 1 fig and an arm. (retreat to Kar with your remaining forces)

Attack Man (I believe you can hit it with 5 inf, 1 arm and 1 fig)

NCM 1 inf to cau from russia, rest to Kar.

NCM 2 Infantry from Evenki National Okrug to Yakut SSR
8.) NCM Land you fig (baltic battle) in Kar

NCM Land your fig (Man battle) in yakult

Place 8 inf in Kar

Collect 27 IPC’s

Optimal result:
Kar: 14-16 inf, 3 arms  and 1 fig
Cau: 1 inf
Man: 1-3 inf and 1 arm
Yak: 2 inf and 1 fig
SpZs: 1 sub
Baltic: 1 tran

This is if everything went according plan with dice in your favor. I think a lot of people here will agree with me that this will give Russia the most potential and will set back the Axis the most. But again playing with no bid is really flawed, but you should discover that yourself first before you understand why bids are necessary and where to place your bid.

Using three boards is basically an alternative to having to write down all the info instead.  I think a btter alternative and keeps the game much more playable.  It helps if you have a third (neutral) person that can moderate between the three boards.  This can also help keep encourage each player to keep game turns short.

Imperious Leader gives a good example of the three board play with his Jutland game.  It’s under the “Other Axis and Allies Variants” section

i like europe simply bc im a german guy and pacific doesnt have em^_^ but its to short playtime being over w/in like 4-5 turns. takes longer to set up the dern board

god looks like either my “c” key is broken or im too stupid to hit all keys. and c even sounds quite logical… :-?

thanks for the information. the chat sucks anyway coz of the linefeed after x characters. 3 lines of chat are also not too good…