My gaming group could careless about overall stats and couldn’t be bothered to let me take them.
Haha well then what a waste of time this was. I guess you missed the point, I wanted to see what other games looked like from a statistical view, so this post was obviously not for you and you shouldn’t have wasted our time here.
Well I guess you could put it that way… So I would really like to see what an Axis victory or at least a prolonged game would look like statistically. I work two jobs and I’m in grad school so I only get to play every couple months, if you play more often try keeping your stats one game and posting them on here, I would be interested in seeing the difference.
Why not just make the USSR its own side altogether. Aside from taking money from the Allies, that’s about what they were…
Just let them attack from R1 and their goal is to take Berlin and Rome. If they have those at the end of a round, they win.
That’s how it is in the Hearts of Iron series, USSR + Mongolia = Comintern. So it would be the Comintern vs. Axis vs. Allies. I like that idea because then you could have a Cold War set up too if USSR takes out Germany and the Allies take out Italy and Japan.
Well, he’s new to A&A Global, but we’ve been playing together for about six years. It wasn’t his best game with Germany, he couldn’t make up his mind between sealion or barbarossa which cost him valuable time, plus he made some questionable purchases and didn’t roll very well.
Do you guys keep your stats? I think they help explain the game from an economic standpoint, assess the performance of the different powers, and provide insight to the challenge the Axis faces. The stats reveal some obvious themes, mainly, the Axis pays less to inflict damage but can’t replace their losses, so the Allies slowly get bigger and bigger. However the stats also detail the efficiency of the various powers.
Here are my stats from the last game I played with a friend. I was the Allies and he surreneded to me on R5 when I captured Berlin because Rome would also fall on USA5. So the below stats are through 4 full rounds and then just the German and Russian turns in the 5th round
-all values are in IPC’s-
Total Axis Kills: 626 Total Axis Losses:711 Axis Kill-per-Death Ratio (KDR): .88 Total IPC collected by Axis: 538
Total Axis Losses Recouped: 76%
Germany: Accounted for 51% of total Axis kills and 53% of total Axis losses with a KDR of .86. Average German expenditure to inflict 1 IPC of damage: $1.13.
German losses recouped: 77%
Japan: Accounted for 28% of total Axis kills and 30% of total Axis losses with a KDR of .83 Average Japanese expenditure to inflict 1 IPC of damage: $.99.
Japanese losses recouped: 84%
Italy: Accounted for 20% of total Axis kills and 18% of total Axis losses with a KDR of 1.04. Average Italian expenditure to inflict 1 IPC of damage: $.57. l
Italian losses recouped: 59%
For the allies, I’ll just summarize with the highs and lows. Total Allied IPC collected: 814 Allied KDR: 1.13 Total Allied Losses recouped: 130%
The highest average price paid by an Ally to inflict 1 IPC of damage was the USA at $107.3 while the lowest average price to inflict 1 IPC of damage was UK East at $.26. The The highest KDR by an Allied power was USSR with 2.33 while the lowest was France at .31.
I went five for five once with my AA gun against the Luftwaffe over Moscow - I think those are that’s like a 1 and 7,000 odds. It was a game turner because he attacked and I beat him with only one infantry left remaining in Moscow
I think the game is won or lost on the Eastern front. Germany’s only chance is to attack the USSR by G2 and be as aggressive as possible - it’s a race against the clock before the Americans come over. Turtling worked for me in my first game of Europe 40 a couple weeks ago as the allies. I was playing against an old school A&A gamer who’s been playing since the late 80’s. He attacked USSR on G3 and since he was taking his time and being very cautious, I pulled back and was able to build hordes of infantry in Leningrad and Moscow. He attacked Leningrad in G5, however, I proceeded to roll some of the worst dice in my life, and he wiped me out with few losses. Even though he blew me away in Leningrad, he was too slow, as by that time he had to deal with the Americans in the west and couldn’t mount a serious attack on Moscow until G7 at the earliest.
This goes beyond the scope of Axis and Allies, but I disagree with you about the capture of Moscow. If the Germans would have captured Moscow I think it would have caused a political crisis within the USSR sufficient enought to result in a regime change and the balkanization of the empire. Stalin’s government ran on political suppression to quell devolutionary stress, I believe the Russian people, and especially the marginalized ethnic groups within the USSR, would have capitalized on the fall of Moscow and formed break-away republics. As it was, Ukranians and the Baltic peoples saw the Germans as liberators, so the fall of Moscow would have been disastrous for the Soviet Union - the communist empire would be in an irrecoverable state of disarray and I believe there would be at least a negotiated peace.
Is there any rule against aggressive American expansionism in South America? If there isn’t an Axis d.o.w. on the U.S., is there anything that prevents it from conquering the neutrals in South America for the first three turns and picking up a few more I.C.'s while it waits to get involved in the global conflict? Although it doesn’t really need more money, there could be some definite advantages for the U.S. to having some air and naval bases south of the equator.