Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies (By AndrewAAGamer)

@freh said in Bids for allies - 60???:

Wow, I’ve been away from the game so things must have shifted and strategy must be evovling. I just can’t imagine losing with the opportunity to put $60 worth of allied units before the game starts. Are there any patterns to bids? Does it get concentrated in one nation (defending UK against initial German attacks, or giving Russia some more offensive bite) or is it spread out?

As I said my gaming group in Seattle has gone up to $60. I am not sure that is true for the general community. The placement of the Bid depends on the Player. Sometimes it all goes in Russia, sometimes it all goes to UK Europe. Personally I think that is six of one half a dozen of another. Bid units in Russia protect Moscow so the Allies do not need to help Russia defend their capital. Bid units for UK Europe assist UK in defense of London and in taking out the Italians much faster which allows them to assist Russia either with direct unit intervention for the defense of Moscow or intense pressure on the Atlantic Wall. The end result is basically the same. Either the UK is strong and gets help to Russia fast or the UK is weak and struggles but never has to send help to Russia because Russia is strong. Personally I like a 50-50 balance between UK Europe and Russia. Best of both worlds. :)

One constant is that normally at least 80% up to all 100% goes on the Europe side of the board versus the Pacific side of the board.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned it’s that for allies there are no half measures…

At least playing against equal or stronger opponents

In any case, Japan must be crushed (above all) as well as Italy.

If you aim for a KGF and let Japan rage in the Pacific there is always the risk that with a coup they will be able to take the 6 VC and the game is over… even if the Allies are close to taking Rome or Berlin

Of course if you only tighten up on the Pacific perhaps also using the Russians (right @MrRoboto? :))… you have to be very organized in Europe to avoid Hitler arriving in Cairo (or London)…

Very expert players are able to do this of course… but in my opinion there is always a percentage of risk that the game predicts (like all clashes on A&A) but which you can try to avoid.

And above all the Allies should fight in a more aggressive way (which I have not yet learned to do) but not recklessly… aggressive in the sense of making the Axis risk more than necessary in certain battles (land and naval) because otherwise the the outcome is almost always for the Central Powers of the board.

I kind of think its crazy to leave the UK with large expensive THREE capital ships that you could easily sink and only lose your subs and maybe a plane or the battleship.  At the very least I can see the value in trying to do the battleship retreat.

If you really wanted to convoy UK into oblivion, I’d plan on Barbarossa G3 or G4… buy the G1 bomber and carrier.  Kill as much fleet as you can, retreat the German battleship if there is only 1 UK ship.  2 subs at Canada, ignore cruiser down south… G2 buy depends on if the battleship is alive but you need a destroyer and bombers and 2 or more subs.  1 sub is for sz 125, the destroyer for the Russians, 1+ sub joins the bombers in killing anything at Gibraltor.

I’d also consider taking S. France on G1 so on G2 you can build a carrier and transport there, which protects the Italian fleet and can help out with ground forces.  Puts more pressure on UK in Africa to push their spending all over, not concentrated.

By G3 you’ve got an idea whether you can get away with convoy sz 109.  Maybe the German carrier heads north after turn 3 if Italy gets things under control quickly.

Or if things don’t go Italy’s way, they can buy subs to hit things off Gibraltor, too.

guess its a good point then, if DoW changes nothing about Mongolia then do it!

@teslas:

This is not a houserule board, but I can’t help it.

“Does not help Moscow.”

Yes it god damn does. The first time you SBR Mosocw you’re taking off from Eastern Poland. Maybe the second time, too.

“Does help Calcutta.”

Not really. Bombers are probably coming from a Kwangsi air base after J2. The only time it’d help them is on J2 itself.

Speaking of which, I usually don’t bomb Calcutta. The potential loss of a strat bomber sucks, and they’re not building more than 2-4 units a turn anyway after UK1, so the first six damage doesn’t matter at all. And then just a couple turns later, their income is so low (2-7/turn) that they’re not building anything that matters much anyway. This is only a very minor influence, but it might matter: if you bomb it, you’re bombing what will be your own factory.

To comment on this part that you added to your original post… once captured, the Major IC with max damage will immediately downgrade to a Minor IC with max damage, so if I really want to use it… it will only cost me 6 IPCs.

Guys,

––Just to add to your answer a bit. ‘Kreighund’, the rules guy, basically said that in order to CONQUER an Allied teritory, there must be a ‘COMBAT’. What that in essence means is that the teritory must have been previously conquered by an Axis power.
----If the Allied territory still has the same ownership after having it’s Capital subjugated,…you are simply ‘Re-inforcing’ the territory for the current owner.

Tall Paul"

The only thing that has deterred me personally if the German opener where they skip the SZ111 attack and use 3 Subs in 106.  One plane goes to Italy and the rest land in a manner that they can be used to hit the surviving British ships wherever they go in the Atlantic.  If the UK wishes to try and make sure their ships go down fighting G2 then the SZ97 attack will be skipped in order to keep air assets available.  The Bomber (might) be used with the 109 DD to try and hit the German Subs off Canada, which is a big impact already on the odds at SZ97.

@Ashenduke:

@Young:

@Variable:

@spartan:

on the mediafire download for the complete rulebook the 3 player setup does not include France :?

Sorry about that! I must have done something screwy there…

No, That was my bad. I left it off the original. If it turns out that thats the only mistake on the whole document…… not too shabby.

It looks like a mixup of the 3 & 4 player setups. France is listed for the Russian player and British for 4 player.
“Three Players: Player 1: Axis powers / Player 2: United Kingdom and ANZAC / Player 3: United States,
Soviet Union, and China
Four Players: Player 1: Axis powers / Player 2: United Kingdom, ANZAC, and France / Player 3: Soviet
Union and France / Player 4: United States and China”

Fixed it, can anyone spot any other errors?