Most Surprising First Round purchases you have seen?

Russia’s abilities in AAR seem to have been a mistake (IMHO) by the creator.  Back in the day, I had some pretty neat games where the United States mostly ignored Europe while Russia beat the ever livvin snot out of the Germans virtually single handedly. (You did need the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy to generate threat and reinforce of course.)

Talk to me about the Russian triple one day.  I am not on that computer or I would repost it…won more games with that then any other version of Axis and Allies ever!

Well, I would recommend taking some time to browse through some of the posts in this section of the forum, because it is no longer very active but most of the advice is still prudent.  There are also a few articles about A&A revised strategy for each nation.

In general, though, I would recommend that you immediately try to pressure Germany with all three allied players, while not forgetting about important pieces that are already on the board (such as British Fighters and Navy scattered in the Indian Ocean / Pacific area, or the American transports in the Atlantic).  Try to minimize the amount of money that you spend on expensive naval units, focusing on ground units and transports as much as possible.

Also, depending on exactly what rule set you are using (box rules, Larry Harris Tournament Rules, house rules, etc.), you should strongly consider some strategic bombing raids on Germany with your existing bombers.

As Russia, I usually struggle to contain Germany on the Eastern Front, so be careful and try not to expose too much armor to German counter-attacks.  If you can keep Germany from pressuring Caucasus that is good.

As Britain, I tend to purchase some big boats on the first turn, play a little bit defensively until I am certain that a German invasion is impossible (I often try to sink their Baltic Transport ASAP to accomplish this), and then I work on pressuring Germany.  Make sure that you purchase the right amount of transports and keep your navy alive, otherwise you can end up out of time and feel like you are wasting your turns.  A turn that you are not landing troops in Africa / Europe / Russia or trying to invade Western Europe, is in my opinion, a bad turn for the UK.

As the US, I used to hold the orthodox position that the only correct move was to transport units into Africa or Europe every turn, although I have lost to US players who are aggressive in the Pacific.  Try to look for opportunities, and don’t be afraid to be a little bit “cost- ineffective” in your battles if it means forcing Germany to engage several players at once.  I maintain that Africa is best left to the US, and if the US idles with its Atlantic transports it can mean losing the game for the Allies or at least a hard game for the UK.  Even if you are doing a “Pressure Japan First” strategy, I highly recommend landing your Washington Forces in Algeria right away, and trying to add targets in the atlantic for the strong (but finite) german air force.  Reinforcing UK’s moves is generally a good idea, too, if you can.  Remember that the UK and US get to move (in that order) between Germany’s turns, so look to strengthen the UK position every turn with this pattern.

I do agree that beginners should stick to the London factory.  It does require skill pulling off the india IC.  But It just depends on how you and your allies play the game.  If each of you are gonna do your own thing, the game will certainly be over quicker than usual.  Thats the key…… Teamwork and persistance.  Control the game by limiting the enemy of options.  Do this and you’ll win no matter who you are.

@ncscswitch:

Paint, I think you misunderstood Romulus.

He was not posting subsequent combat, but subsequent NCM’s.

oic

@rjclayton:

As always, it depends what the board looks like after Moscow falls.  Typical board would probably have Japan holding all of UK’s territories except Canada and Great Britain.  With an income that low how long could UK really hope to last against a combined GER/JAP with income over 100 IPC?

It depends on how persuasive British ladies are.

Rawr.

Anyways - I already posted regarding what I think Axis should do after Russia falls.

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

I think a well rounded strat will allow you to do both relatively seemlessly while if you venture too much into a “reactive” strat it may not allow you to take adv of mistakes as quickly.

Don’t you mean “OVERreactive” strat?

If you make unsound purchases based on what you think your opponent’s going to do, that is overreacting.

If your opponent sees your mistake, and acts in the best possible manner to exploit your weakness, that is reacting.

Yes.

But also:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
Maybe I’m nitpicking. :-)

You can think proactively (2-3 turns down the road) and force your opponent into difficult decisions or mistakes.

I’m of the school that assumes that their opponents will be worthy, hence that mistakes will not be made; hence that losses will be from bad luck or the aggregate result of suboptimal plays, rather than from a blatantly wrong move.

To clarify, you can NEVER “maneuver” your opponent into making a mistake.  Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

–

In other words, say I know you like alcohol, and that you don’t really care too much about money.  So I bring free drinks to our poker game, you get drunk, and I win lots of money.  Did you make a MISTAKE, or a CHOICE?  I think you made a CHOICE.

Now, if you were holding a straight, in five card draw no wilds, and you folded, you probably made a MISTAKE.  But that was your choice.

If you were drunk when you folded, I would say that you made a CHOICE to enter into a situation in which you would more readily make MISTAKES.  But still, folding on that straight would be YOUR MISTAKE.  Nobody forced you into folding.

I think we’re agreeing with each other.

(your mistake or not) Your betting pattern, poker face, demear at the table all provide the other player with information into the decision about their hand.
You come out betting strong, with a stone cold dead face, I read that as hell I can’t beat him I fold.  I made the choice, but you willfully provided informaton that helped me make a decision.  All be it a wrong decision but at the time I assed all available info and came to a conclusion, which in this case was wrong and a mistake.

The whole theory behind deadzoning is manuevering to get your opponent to (help them if you will) make a mistake (or bad choice).  Yes your opponent makes the choice to move in his whole army, but you set up the board.

I also play assuming your opponent is “worthy” and makes no mistakes, but that doesn’t mean I won’t set “traps” to test them.  B/c as we both know, no one is flawless and I’ve seen plenty of good players overlook the smallest things from time to time (including myself).

I think we are agreeing with each other here.
I think these statement are equivalent:

ME:

Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?

YOU:

Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

Perharps I shouldn’t have used the word “mistake” in the first sentence, but they basically say the same thing.  Force a person into a “lesser of two evils” decision.

Alas I have not played since about 1999.

Correction to my previous post:  I should’ve said the entire high value (IPC-wise) German empire.  That should make more sense now…  :lol: