Battlestarpimptastica vs BarbaLoca

It’s also worth remembering that one sub on one cruiser is a coin flip, because the cruiser only rolls its attack if the sub misses.

Final word?

One thing worth mentioning here is that Africa is essentially a trap for the Axis.   Whether the Italian fleet survives or not, it is very hard to make much of an income difference or gain any NOs before America enters the war and takes it back, or without compromising some other more critical front. Â

Italy only risks 2 IPCs by losing Africa.   In our Game 92 on Saturday, I had the entire Italian navy survive because my opponent did exactly what you suggested, and attacked Tobruk rather than Taranto.   The counter is quite favorable to the Italians, to send in their entire fleet on the attack and clear the med for your NO.   Even with the gigantic navy, I was still boxed in as I couldn’t control either Gibraltar or Egypt in the long term though I took both of them once.   Â

Buying more ships is a trap, and you can’t really hold Gibraltar.   I spent all my $$ on strategic bombers and mechs to help Germany on the eastern front and using Italy to protect the Atlantic Wall or help leapfrog Germany in the East is stronger than trying to take the Maghreb or the Levant.  If you keep any transports, the most effective thing to do with those is threaten/cover/block/rush out of Gibraltar but its going to be hard…

One of my buddies said that far from wanting to reinforce the Italian stack on Tobruk, he wanted to evacuate it from Africa.  Its ineffective and trapped on a good day and easy to annihilate on a bad one.

@capnstak:

Is there a significant difference between the two or could I use the videos from Alpha 3.5 rules and apply the same way as with 2nd edition?

It should work.  The big difference is that the UK has 1 less Infantry in Egypt in 2e, and 2e has the rules about the Soviet-Mongolian defense treaty.

We know about that one - most Russian players just keep the sub there for some reason.  I guess for the possible defense when a destroyer/plane go to take it out to cut the bonus.
The Russian sub is usually kept there, as Variance said, for the purpose of Convoying Norway / Germany. Kind of a little Russian jab that just sits there, taking 2-3 ipc’s per turn, until Germany does something about it.

Japan is m fav country to play and like many other players I try not to get into static purchaces,  as its easy to counter.  I employ this strat to quickly balance the navy between the US and Japan, forcing US to build more on the pacific side.  Generally the first 2 or 3 turns i play with japan I purchace transports and ground units, I try to get as many troops to the main land so by turn 3  you have so many troops you can afford to slowly filter planes off the mainland to newly bought carriers.  I also load the land up because I find when I go to take the DEI this usually weakens my mainland leaving openings for China an UK.

I want to start it AND finish it.

The axis have more options, the allies are more reactive.  That’s not to say the axis are not reactive and the allies have no options, just which is their primary role.

Right now, the game is gambit-ish to me.  The Iceland Gambit, the Gibraltar Gambit, the SZ 9 Gambit, the Indian Gambit, the Australian Gambit, the American-Pac Strat Gambit.  That last is a bit less gambit like since it is seen coming a long ways off, it’s just mostly unstopable atm. Alpha 3 will fix that and we should see the American Pac-Strat be required, partially, with a required investment in Europe by America - either not happening should default a win for the Axis. yay

Allowing a brief digression, if we were to compare AA50 to AA42, we find AA50 adds:

More board spaces

[liA nicer looking larger board[/li]

An additional power Better rules for China Cool new factors such as NOs and technology

AA50 is a better game with more bells and whistles, but some might prefer the relative speed and simplicity AA42 has to offer.

Back to the topic at hand,  if we were to compare AA50 to AAG40, we find AAG40 adds:

More board spaces

A nicer looking larger board

Additional powers

Much better rules for China

Cool new factors such as Politics, bases, neutrals, and convoy disruption

Tactical bombers and mechanised infantry

New rules for ICs

expanded rules for 2 hit warships

AAG40 has more features above and beyond AA50 than AA50 has over AA42.  Some people still might prefer the relative speed and simplicity of AA50, but you have to decide if you think you’ll be one of them.

Me, I think AAG40 is the best A&A game ever!  It obsoletes AA50 more than AA50 obsoletes AA42 (though all three are highly playable solid games).

One more thing, although AAG40 is new and optimal strategies are nowhere near having been refined, it looks like AAG40 has more viable strategic options than previous versions of the game.

@fanofbond:

T Where as aa42 would, in my opinion leave me felling I had just chosen to play a lesser game

I wouldn’t say AA42 is a lesser game. It is definitely shorter and smaller but for people like me that don’t have the room to set up an AAG40 game, AA42 fills the niche nicely. I added in NAs, NOs, a 1941 setup (thanks to Hobbes), and research and development to AA42 to make it a little better, or more like Revised with AA50 rules. And AA42 does not have all of the errata or set up changes to balance the game. Also, at retail price it is about $150.00 cheaper than AAG40.