Axis and allies revised for sale signed by larry harris

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.

See other thread about Russia strategy… overall I can just say: DO NOT PLAY WITH NAs. In my opinion they are very unbalanced and can shift the game into certain directions very much. Just as examples: Lend-Lease for Russia is a lot stronger than e.g. Trans-Siberian railway; Luftwaffe Dive Bombers are strong; Joint strike or Colonial Garrison are sick; same are Superfortresses which are just stupid especially with heavy bombers.

Maybe I can help.

Let’s start with Russia. The two most popular opens and the moves that I alternate between are attacking West Russia and Ukraine, and West Russia only. 3 infantry, 3 tanks is what I buy regardless of which open I use. I would not recommend attacking 3 territories, there’s way too much volatility in the dice to be a consistent first turn move.

Russia 1
Buy with 24 - 3 inf, 3 tanks

Combat
3 inf, 1 fig Kar to wr
3 inf, 1 tank Arch to wr
3 inf, 1 art, 2 tanks, 1 fig rus to wr
1 inf, 1 art Cauc to wr
10 inf, 2 art, 3 tanks, 2 fig vs. 3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank

Average result, Russia takes it losing two infantry.

Noncombat
All Eastern inf move west(just my preference)
both fighters land on Caucuses
aa gun to West Russia

Build 3 inf, 1 tank on Caucuses, 2 tanks on Moscow.

End result is
~8 inf, 2 art, 3 tanks on West Russia
7 inf, 2 tanks, 2 fighters on Caucuses
4 inf, 2 tanks on Russia
4 inf on Yakut

It’s important to note that West Russia has a huge strategic value, all of Russia’s units can meet here on the first turn and it commands the 3 prongs of German advance. Russia has deadzoned Karelia, Belorussia, and Ukraine because without horrible rolls, their units on West Russia and the tanks they built are enough to kill a German stack moved into any of these territories. In the early stages of the game, I view Russia’s primary job to contain Germany by preventing them from advancing past Eastern Europe so stacking West Russia is a must.

Now your problem was a counterattack of West Russia on the first turn. If Germany was sending all or most of their planes to West Russia, what were they sending to Anglo-Egypt and what did they send to attack the med Battleship? The Allies will be able to exploit Germany skipping either move. If you’d like to avoid the possible German counterattack altogether, try this.

Russia 1

Buy with 24 - 3 inf, 3 tanks

Combat

West Russia
3 inf Kar to wr
3 inf, 1 tank Arch to wr
3 inf, 1 art rus to wr
9 inf, 1 art, 1 tank vs 3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank

Ukraine
3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank Caucuses to Ukr
2 tanks, fig rus to ukr
1 fig kar to ukr
3 inf, 1 art, 3 tanks, 2 fig vs. 3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank, 1 fig

Average Results West Russia taken losing 3 inf, Ukraine taken losing 3 inf, 1 art

Same noncombat, same placement.

End result:
~6 inf, 1 art, 1 tank Wr
~3 tanks Ukr
5 inf, 1 tank, 2 fig Cauc
4 inf, 2 tanks Rus

Now the typical result is that Russia has taken West Russia solidly and has ~3 tanks sitting in Ukraine. This move takes out more German offensive units, destroys a German fighter, creates a buffer around Caucuses, and forces a counterattack - Germany cannot pass up such an opportunity to destroy Russian tanks. Actually taking Ukraine may depend on the dice, if Russia rolls really well, and Germany whiffs on defense, it might be better to just retreat and save the tanks. If Russia takes Ukraine, Germany’s got to either commit tanks or divert planes from other attacks - both are uncomfortable decisions for the Axis player. As with the other move, without awful rolls, Russia should still deadzone Ukraine, Karelia, and Belorussia. This is a solid opening that among other things, prevents the counterattack on West Russia.

What has Germany been attacking first turn apart from West Russia? I think I understand what your opponent has been doing with Japan but I would advocate building transports before buying mainland factories for them. Don’t be alarmed if Japan just rolls through Asia, just try to prevent them from taking territories in force. Specifically, try to deadzone Yakut, Sinkiang, and Persia as long as it doesn’t mean giving Germany some ground. What have the British and Americans been doing in your games?

This really is wonderful!thanks a lot

Looking at the map and the way the territories are laid out, I think there are some very cool things Russia can do if they are forced to fall back to Cauc and Mos.

Yo.

Caspian Sub has 20 articles posted on their site. Many are pure strategy articles; some are Axis puzzles. They are all for revised.

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Caspian_Sub/

Peace

@prof_tc:

1: Are you sure the Superfortresses aren’t too strong? Then again, it is historically accurate.

2: what happens as you lose tanks with the Ger. heavy tanks?
I know you tested all these new rules, and I’m sure you made a decision. I assume that the first is a heavy tank, and then every 4th after that.

1. The superfortresses advantage is now counterable for the Axis, but cost a lot to develop Jet Fighters! However to old rule of mine that I have in these revised NAs may be a better choice since now the U.S. needs to develop heavy bombers as well. This variant with one additional die per bomber in a SBR is not really playtested! But compared to the original one, I am sure it wont be worse to the Axis as long as they can counter it with jets! :wink:

Damage caused by heavy superfortresses (Heavy Bombers development and Superfortresses advantage) against an IC protected by jets (Jet Fighter development):
5/63(1/61+1/62+1/63+1/64+1/65+1/66) + 5/61/610 IPCs = 10,1 IPCs

Damage caused by AA fire and intercepting jets (on a 1:1 ratio for fighters and bombers) on bombers in a SBR:
1/615 + 3/615 = 10 IPCs

This means that the German and Japanese player needs to develop Jet Fighters to an average cost of 30 IPCs and have as many fighters protecting each IC as there are U.S. heavy superfortresses within reach for a potential SBR! The allies would just have a slight advantage to the axis if conducting a SBR with heavy superfortresses, it is even less then for a regular bomber that conducts a SBR on an IC only protected by an AA gun!

2. this is from another thread about “Heavy Tanks”:

First cycle of combat:
Put the first 2 tanks on 3 and every third tank on 4. Repeat this until all tanks are on your battleboard. At the end of the combat remove casualties.

Second cycle of combat:
Remove all remaining tanks from battleboard and redeploy them by putting the first 2 on 3 and every third tank on 4. Repeat that until all your remaining tanks are on the battelboard… and so on!