Things you can do in a seven player game if you get shafted being China

Also…
All units are expendable, if the expenditure accomplishes something. Most units will be expended, but the challenge is to have them go in a way that they gave their money’s worth. Another important aspect of the game, which should be apparrent to a veteran player, or one with intelligence, is shielding of units. Some units (the more expensive ones) need to be protected by the less expensive ones. Infantry need to take hits for tanks, Destroyers and Cruisers should take hits for carriers… etc. Being able to scrape your expensive and better units out of a fight is essential for continuing operations and saving money. Make your enemy bleed more than you do.

I have seen a few Allied players skip the Flying Tiger attack. It is not a move I agree with. I will sacrifice Japanese planes I CAN REPLACE to take out that plane that can not be. It gives China a chance at offensive attacks and some defense.

I see no reason for Japan not to attack China. While killing all the Chinese troops in round 1 of a '41 game can be a bit of a stretch, the flying Tigers and some other territories should be attacked. While Japan may not want to spend the effort to totally eliminate China it is worthwhile to reduce them to just Chinghai. This way they can not produce any troops and are no longer relevant.

From the Allied side it is worth Russia’s troubles to send some forces to China to delay the Japanese. If China can be held to 2 or 3 territories they will produce free infantry and increase the amount of forces Japan has to commit for an advance through the central Asian front. In most games Russia will eventually have to retreat it’s forces as the Japanese become too numerous to hold out over China and its infantry, but again the whole idea was to delay Japan anyway. As far as other Allied liberations occurring these are very rare. Normally this will be done by the US and it will also normally be after all the high value UK territories and the Philippines have been liberated.

I would say just come to grips with the reality that China is a good idea badly implemented in AA50.

@katfishkris:

i dont think china really had 15inf.  more like 6-7.  but those 6 or 7 inf wanted to attack manchuria,  which had something like 3arm & 2inf.  the US wanted to use their long range heavy bombers to blast the japs first, followed by the chinamen to take the IC.  wasnt sure what the rule was on that ‘combined’ attack.

That’s still a lot of Chinamen.  I’m lucky if I have 2 or 3…hehe.  Seems a risky proposition to use your Heavy bombers, the Manchuria IC is useless to the allies.  Depriving it to Japan could be usefull, and might be worth sacraficing a bomber.  All depends on what else was going on.

I have not yet played a single game of AA50 with tech. I choosed the 6-10 games option, but I think almost as many games I played have ended rnd 5 or sooner. So for me it’s about 50%-50% split between up to 6 rnds, and more than 6 rnds.

My record for “long game” I think is 9 rnds, maybe 10.

With NOs I would be suprised if games takes longer than 10 rnds. NOs are a mechanism for shortening games, b/c one side will get substansially more money than in a game w/o NOs, as soon as they start getting the upperhand.

If one side play very aggressive and makes a do-or-die strategy, its often over after 4-6 hours. But if both are playing conservative, you often play at least 10 hours. After 10 hours, when our wifes are calling freneticly, we often decide together who would be ah probable winner, by the overall positions on the table.

@templeton:

… but there were nearly 100 players. (http://www.jimwallman.org.uk/tlw/index.htm) That way you simulate the reality of missinterpreted orders, bad briefings…

This looked like an amazing simulation. I can’t imagine having conflicting political and military objectives along with poor communication. What wonderful chaos that must have created. Were any of the German Generals shot for not following orders?

@templeton:

I like to try and do this for Axis and Allies, and hope to get 12 people playing in the new year. This way you can have Japanese Army and Japanese Navy and make them argue over strategy. Ditto the US are split into ETO and PTO - that way you don’t get such a strong KGF, as the other player wants to follow KJF.

Keep us posted on this one. It has some real interesting potential – I’d like to try and get this working with our local gaming group. We can usually muster 10 people or so once a month and get 2 boards going at once so combining it to one group wouldn’t be too far of a stretch.

What kind of white “control” team do you need to pull this off, and how to you keep the dialectic tension at a high level within the teams?

I am going as the “Big K” for Halloween this year.

you mean this?

http://www.mavav.org/2006/12/21/burgerkingxbox.jpg

I found that sending men in the baltic sea in AAE was a faster way to send troops out to the front which it did also i some how took leningrad on 1st turn and he was pissed because men in russia and belorussia had a choice and they had to retreat and keep a few men there. So making a bit of a navy for germany can be profitable if the russian rolls are “5’s”