@Argothair:

Sure, Axis_Roll, you’re right about the NOs. I could have phrased that better by saying: “If the Allies hold Gibraltar and Morocco, then the Italians will not collect any of their NOs, even if the Axis own the rest of Africa and the rest of the Med.” In other words, if your goal is to cancel the Italian NOs, you don’t actually need to get any deeper into Africa than Gibraltar and Morocco.

This is not true, which is why I brought it up.  Here is the text from the A&A50 rules, page 23:

Italy: “Mare Nostrum”  Our Sea. Mussolini wanted to re-establish the greatness of the Roman Empire. This could best be demonstrated by controlling the entire Mediterranean Sea.
–--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gain 5 IPCs if the Axis powers control all of the following territories:
Italy, Balkans, Morocco/Algeria, and Libya,
and no enemy surface warships are in sea zones 13, 14, and 15.
(See Sea Units, pg. 28 for information on surface warships.)

Gain 5 IPCs if the Axis powers control at least three of the following territories:
Egypt, Trans-Jordan, France, and/or Gibraltar.

The “$2 territory means a $4 swing” was meant to illustrate the point that Germany’s $2 gain is also a $2 loss against it’s mains early enemy (UK).  It also helps to show why the five $1 Russian territories in Asia can indeed add up to meaningful amounts.

Something I noticed in your post may be a typo, but is not true:
@Argothair:

“Italy’s NOs require it to hold Morocco and Gibraltar”

Italy’s most commonly achieved/held National Objective is: "Axis control 3 of 4 territories:  France, Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Gibraltar).  Morrocco is part of the other N.O. that is easier for the allies to cancel/counter.

So, if the Axis can gain $45 in Africa without committing too many additional units, that is another 15 inf or 9 tanks in Europe.  Pretty solid return.  This necessitates SOME sort of allied response, and as you point out, you don’t want to spend too much to get these IPCs back (mainly for UK).  The best, most effective move for the allies is a fleet in SZ12, with UK and USA dropping unit enough to overwhelm the axis units in Egypt.  Be leery of being forced the long way around because of Japanese support (inf and/or fighters).

@Narvik:

I don’t believe this game is designed to favor the evil Axis. I believe it just takes longer time to learn to play the Allies properly.

I second this notion to some extent, mainly because good coordination is required to fully utilize the allied powers.  Not too often are Germany and Japan able to greatly help each other achieve the same objective.

@Argothair:

I’m looking at Norway/Finland/Karelia, and with the NO it’s worth more than all of Africa put together. I’m looking at the Caucasus, and with the NO it’s worth more than all of Siberia put together, including the Urals and Novosibirsk. How come people’s strategies don’t reflect that? What am I missing?

Yes sir, Norway/Findland/Karelia can be lucrative territories for either side.  However, those are almost impossible for Germany to hold (1941 scenario) very long, especially if UK moves into SZ3.

What I see happening is Germany gets strong enough to trade Karelia (conquer but not enough to hold against a Russian counter attack).  This can be useful because it is $7 IPCs, just don’t let the allies bleed you dry.

Regarding Caucasus, you may be correct in it’s value to the Axis.  However, it is a bit of a long path for Japanese units to get into position to help the Germans squeeze Stalingrad.  Those long supply lines can be expensive due to overhead like expensive transports or ICs (no to mention the time it takes to get there).  Also, if the allies have gained control of the Med/Africa, Japan will have to fight through those units in Persia to get there, or face a combination of allied units defending.  In other words, it’s not easy for the allies to get combined defensive forces in the $1 Russian territories, especially not ground units, so Japan has an ‘easier’ path to Russia that way.

Couple of things.  Are you familiar with the idea of opportunity cost?  If the Axis can gain some money in Africa early, and play defensively once the allies start to arrive, then the Axis African units are tying up Allied resources that might have otherwise been landing in Europe or supporting Russia.  In this sense, Africa can be a worthwhile investment (as long as you don’t over commit units there).

Also, consider the IPC’s as twice their cost.  Not only is Germany collecting +2 for Egypt, that is -2 for UK.  So that’s a $4 swing.  This can add up to where UK and/or USA are almost forced to put some units into Africa so that the Axis can’t get that money on the cheap.

Finally, consider who’s money is being taken.  Germany’s biggest (early) threat is UK.  Keeping UK’s early money as low as possible as fast as possible should be the Axis main goal.  Along this vain, the axis can squeeze Russia on both sides if Japan takes the northern route to Moscow.  Transporting directly into far east enables 4 tanks to make it to Moscow in 3 rounds (buy/mobilize in Japan, SFE, EVE, Moscow).  Getting to evenki is a $10 swing.

Manchuria works as well, but you are killing Chinese to do so.  Those allied units are only meant to be killed (IMHO).

I would like to add caveats a couple of tips above

@Gargantua:

Tip: Always play for the money, if the money is on your side, so is time-@A&A.org

I will forgo a few dollars to maintain position.  In my eyes, key positions are more important than a few extra IPCs for next turn.

@Private:

Never leave a force where it can be attacked by a stronger one. Retreat. Live to fight another day.

NEVER is an absolute; “most of the time” is a better rule.

There are instances where you might wat to bait your opponent into attacking your weaker forces, especially when you can afford to lose your pieces and have a counter attack set-up to kill his conquering units.

@Fizz:

Ive played about 10 games of this and axis has won all but 1 soo my question to all of you is there. A strategie that yo guys do to win with allies… any tips would be nice thanks  :-o

One simple rule change that we implement is a Restricted Dardenelles straight: 
Bulgaria is the only territory accessible via transport(s) in sz16.

This helps keep some of the axis med fleet off Caucasus, helping Russia on that front.

More ideas that we use

Here are our Chicago Rules bid rules:
Bids under Chicago Rules

Add units before game play begins.  Only one additional unit per territory/sea zone.  The territory/sea zone must already contain at least one unit to permit a bid unit to be added.  No Bombers, Battleships, or Aircraft Carriers can be placed as part of any bid.

Russia may not place more than $10 worth of units (no tanks may be bid) in the following combination of territories:
Karelia, Baltic States, Eastern Poland, Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine, Belorussia, Archangelsk, Urals, Russia, Caucasus, Kazakh, Novosibirsk or Evenki National Okrug.

Chinese inf may be also be bid units, at a cost of $2.  Other Chinese bid units are regular cost.

Bidding Rules:

1. Allies may bid $28, with a maximum of $25 being placed as instant units, remaining $3 can be split amongst the allies, being added to their first round IPC bank.  Dardanelles straight is closed.
2. The allies can bid to Open the Dardanelles straight, with the resulting bid increasing to $30.  Same restrictions apply.
3. If the allies have not opened the Dardanelles straight (bid option #2), the axis can ‘force open’ the Dardanelles Straight, but the bid level is now $36 (as a penalty for forcing open the canal).  $4 of that bid must be an artillery for Russia in the Caucasus.  The Caucasus artillery must be included in the $10 limit of Russian bid units.  The $25 unit limitation is still in effect.  In other words, the bid is $25 in units, $4 (Russian artillery in Caucasus), and $7 in cash to be split amongst the allied countries as the allies deem fit.

@Fizz:

Ive played about 10 games of this and axis has won all but 1 soo my question to all of you is there. A strategie that yo guys do to win with allies… any tips would be nice thanks  :-o

Are you playing with National Objectives?  Those tend to favor the Axis.
Tech is always a wild card, even with the two charts.  If you do use the out of the box techs, the allies have the early extra cash to spend on weapons.  Good luck, maybe you’ll get those long range paratroopers for USA that can’t be stopped!

@wittmann:

Anniversary got my vote.

Mine too (1941 set-up)… With some tweaks.  We’ve made some nice house rules that really add some new viable strategies to the game as well as to give the allies a better chance at actually winning.  Anyone interested, PM for a copy.

@wittmann:

YG is living in hope,  Mr. De Gaulle. There will never be another Edition. Larry (or his sponsors) has given up on us. Sadly, we won’t see any more games of this genre.

Aren’t there already ENOUGH versions of this game?  I guess I would’ve rather seen few versions that enables a larger group of available players.  Oh course this is my personal opinion, coming from a guy who played one version (original/second edition) for 20+ years before the avalanche of new versions became too frequent to keep up with.

If there is a transport in a sea zone adjacent to a land territory that the attacker wishes to conduct an amphibious assault, I understand that naval vessels can do one or the other (not both):

1. Conduct offshore support (cruisers, battleships)
2. sink the transport

This is due to the fact that you cannot split naval combats in the sea zone into two separate battles.

Can a fighter be allocated to sink the transport, allowing the naval vessels to conduct an offshore support shot?

@AndrewAAGamer:

Wow!  A bid of 28!!!  That is amazing.  You say the Allies “may” bid to 28.  Does that mean that lower bids are accepted and the lowest bid is the Allies?  I have sent you a private message - please do send me the Chicago rules.

We HATE dice, so some of the ‘imbalance’ is because we play Low Luck dice.  This helps the axis in the first round, so the bid needs to be increased.  A bid this high also enables the Japanese monster to be slowed.  In fact, the Pacific is a very active theatre in our games.

Here is our current bid(s) under the Chicago Rules (house rules) for 1941:

Bids under Chicago Rules

Add units before game play begins.  Only one additional unit per territory/sea zone.  The territory/sea zone must already contain at least one unit to permit a bid unit to be added.  No Bombers, Battleships, or Aircraft Carriers can be placed as part of any bid.

Russia may not place more than $10 worth of units in the following combination of territories:
Karelia, Baltic States, Eastern Poland, Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine, Belorussia, Archangelsk, Urals, Russia, Caucasus, Kazakh, Novosibirsk or Evenki National Okrug.

Chinese inf may be also be bid units, at a cost of $2.  Other Chinese bid units are regular cost.

Bidding Rules:

1. Allies may bid $28, with a maximum of $25 being placed as instant units, remaining $3 can be split amongst the allies, being added to their first round IPC bank.  Darndelles straight is closed.
2. The allies can bid to Open the Dardenlles straight, with the resulting bid increasing to $30.
3. If the allies have not opened the Dardenlles straight, the axis can ‘force open’ the Dardenelles Straight, but the bid level is now $34 (as a penalty for forcing open the canal).  $4 of that bid must be an artillery for Russia in the Caucasus.  The Caucasus art must be included in the $10 limit of Russian bid units.

I can send you our rules if your are interested.  We’ve found the 1941 game to be pretty balanced under the Chicago Rules.

Let us know how that goes.

There was at least one petition thread here (or elsewhere) requesting new copies of the Anniversary Edition.  I do not believe anything ever came of that, since AA50 was always released as a limited edition.

Hawks in 6

Should be some fast and high scoring games.
Gotta love playoff hockey

@General:

But it does seem like small and fast teams like the Rangers and Habs are much better suited for the regular season marathon where they can outskate and outskill different opponents on a nightly basis.

Some might qualify the Chicago Blackhawks as this type of team, but yet, they’ve had great success in the playoffs.

Am I mistaken in my assessment of the Hawks being akin to your description?

@ABWorsham:

Time has given us a better view of this question. Who is better between Matt Ryan or Matthew Stafford?

They are both as good as the team around them.  In other words, they can’t carry a bad team all on their own, but they will help more than hurt a good team that surrounds them.

@Gargantua:

I would eat the witch doctor, and lay with the virgin 2nd year med student.

Just to make sure my bases were covered.

yep. it’s all about the BASE

@CWO:

The lyrics can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sacred_War

Thanks!
Interesting, inspiring DIRECT words

We shall drive a bullet into the forehead
Of the rotten fascist filth,
We shall build a solid coffin
For the scum of humanity!

It is easy to forget how difficult it was for those in the most affected areas of WWII.

@Imperious:

The greatest song of all. When this song is played in Russia every stands during the whole song. The respect for the dead and the sacrifice is felt strongest in this song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDGPaJQAf1I

would be interesting to see the words (subtitled) to the song

Interesting post.  I do not have enough of my closer friends (in physically proximity) that frequent this or other A&A boards, so in that regard, the news of my demise would probably not be posted unless explicitly indicated in my last wishes/will/trust.

Assuming I predecease her, I am not sure what my wife would do with my A&A games and playing board.  It might bring her pain to be reminded of me in that fashion enough to want to ‘just get rid of it’.  Conversely, she may give it to my face-to-face gaming friends to enable it to continued to be used.

Seems odd to ask her, but yet, because of this post, I will.

Funny thing about Life, it requires planning even when we no longer have it.