Posts made by Col.Stauffenberg

@Imperious:

Just review the good things, but mention you would prefer a larger map. But for 25 bucks what do you expect?

A larger map. The board doesn’t even have to be larger, just the map.

@habs4life9:

Let’s say you moved the Moscow ftr to China on R1 and you won Indochina with the 3 inf 1 ftr plus crusier bombard attack on UK1. That means you did not counter in Egypt, which means the German are totally free to blitz Africa. This will do the Allies in in the end. In addition, even with the Indochina forces taken out, Japan can still hit China with 5 inf, its bmr, the Japan ftr and the Manch ftr. Japan can still set up its shuck. Only now they will have to choose between giving up Manch to the Russians or surrendering Shanghai to the British. They’d probably save Shanghai and send their shuck over there instead of to Manch, so they can’t hit Buryatia. But Manch is a small price to pay for the sake of Japan advancing through China regardless and working to protect Shanghai, because Germany is strong as hell now. Japan’s navy is sufficient to keep the Americans at bay in the Pacific for a few rounds. I think a skilled Germany can reach Moscow quicker than the Allies can break down the Japanese defenses in E.Asia and/or the Pacific, and at that point it’s game over. I just don’t like KJF because it seems entirely too risky.

Germany can have some of Africa for the first couple rounds but steps can be taken as early as round 1 to stop them if you forgo the Egypt counter. It all depends with how much he won Egypt with. Say if it’s with one tank, you can fight with an INF and a bomber.

Every allied strat is dependant on what Germany did. Even still, with such a head start in Asia, the allies can divert forces back to Caucus from india. With no or minimal land forces and two factories, Russia never has to worry about diverting forces backwards. It is risky but any winning strat involves risk against experienced players.

I’m not posting a review of 42 because I love Axis and Allies. I don’t want to bring up my complaints with the new map so it’s probably better if I say nothing.

@The:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

KJF is a viable strat in my opinion. I’ve seen it work many times. The best way I’ve found to screw them over would be -

RUS- move 6 INF to BURI
Land 1 FIG in China

Uk - Buy 1 IC and 5 INF. - attack Borneo with 3 INF, FIG, Cruiser hit. AC takes out Trans. Attack New Guinea with 2 INF. Sub does whatever. Land Fig in China

If you win these fights which is entirely possible, Japan is already in a bind. US builds an IC to place in Sinkiang, an AC, trans and sub. Build pacific navy for two more rounds and move out by round 4. I have thought of counter attacking Pearl but I haven’t tried it yet.

Hope Russia can hold out, and for the first few rounds they can. UK buys only for the IC in India for rounds 2 and 3 and saves the rest to plop a navy down in round 3.

It is tricky, you just have to time it so the German stack on the Russian front isn’t big enough to take them down. As soon as the stop sending forces to the front have to concentrate on home defense, the game is almost yours.

Cannot you only invade Borneo with 2 infantry?

Also, what’s the purpose of the 5 infantry purchase on UK1?

Oops, I meant to say French Indochina. I’m not a fan of the Borneo attack.

The five infantry purchase is to defend the UK homeland from the German transport that’s going to live if Russia doesn’t use the plane to attack the Baltic Navy, which if they are landing in China, they probably shouldn’t risk it.

If Germany didn’t attack your navy, say they went for the med cruiser with the sub instead, then you’ll want to be using those trans on round 1, most likely to drop stuff off in Norway or Africa. If you don’t plan on doing those moves and want to keep your navy alive, then you don’t have to buy INF. In fact, it might be better to be conservative and save 15 on round 1 and buy and Atlantic navy on round 2.

Total victory is totally pointless. Once you’ve achieved standard victory it’s all but impossible for the opponent to come back. In these scenarios you could wait until battles are overwhelmingly in your favor and would just drag the game on and on and on.

KJF is a viable strat in my opinion. I’ve seen it work many times. The best way I’ve found to screw them over would be -

RUS- move 6 INF to BURI
Land 1 FIG in China

Uk - Buy 1 IC and 5 INF. - attack Borneo with 3 INF, FIG, Cruiser hit. AC takes out Trans. Attack New Guinea with 2 INF. Sub does whatever. Land Fig in China

If you win these fights which is entirely possible, Japan is already in a bind. US builds an IC to place in Sinkiang, an AC, trans and sub. Build pacific navy for two more rounds and move out by round 4. I have thought of counter attacking Pearl but I haven’t tried it yet.

Hope Russia can hold out, and for the first few rounds they can. UK buys only for the IC in India for rounds 2 and 3 and saves the rest to plop a navy down in round 3.

It is tricky, you just have to time it so the German stack on the Russian front isn’t big enough to take them down. As soon as the stop sending forces to the front have to concentrate on home defense, the game is almost yours.

Touche.

Good to see you on here Grogtune. Perhaps you will learn the skills necessary to defeat your Windsor opponents. :lol:

I like to buy a carrier and move my subs out to sea zone seven. I also use the other Atlantic sub to take out the UK cruiser in the med as I hate losing planes and recently lost two and had to retreat. Last time I tried this, the UK player went for a round one drop off in karelia and didn’t buy navy because I was in striking range and he doesn’t like to wait to build up. I was able to trap him there and take him out. When he finally decided to save enough moeny for a navy (41) it was round six and I was making 50 ipcs as GER. I wound up buying 7 transports (already had 2) and took out England next round. It was my one of my favorite victories because Japan had just gotten pushed off the coast, with their Navy about to be destroyed.

@skinny1:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

@skinny1:

I thought about incorporating the National Advantages into AA42 but saw that some of them refer to specific color sections of the AAR map. I have never used the NA and feel it would be too much of a hassle to squeeze them in to AA42. After a few games of AA42 with oob map I might consider using the AAR map with the AA42 set up and see how that plays. There is a difference between the 2 though. The size of Alaska and Western Canada was changed and the placement of Central US was moved. Does that alter any strategies in the game from AAR and AA42?

It would but only crazy ones you can only play on noobs, like Canadian Shield or Operation Hollywood. I can’t imagine a viable strat where the new layout comes into play. The main difference is that you’re depriving Japan of a potential 6 IPC cash grab in Central US.

The last time that I played AAR I was Japan and moved east. When I got to Western Canada/Alaska area the US decided to quit so I was not able to do the 6 IPC cash grab and move into Eastern US to end the US as a country playing the game. I was a little disappointed that the game ended after about 3 rounds. Granted, I was playing my 13 year old and he was the US but I was having a lot of fun. I am fairly new even though I have had the games for a few years. I do not get as much playing time as I would like but I do have all the board game starting with the 2nd edition MB game.

Yeah, you’re not going to be able to do that against more experienced players. The US is easily the safest country to play. Their only difficulty lies in effective shipping, which can be one the most difficult things to do in the game.

@skinny1:

I thought about incorporating the National Advantages into AA42 but saw that some of them refer to specific color sections of the AAR map. I have never used the NA and feel it would be too much of a hassle to squeeze them in to AA42. After a few games of AA42 with oob map I might consider using the AAR map with the AA42 set up and see how that plays. There is a difference between the 2 though. The size of Alaska and Western Canada was changed and the placement of Central US was moved. Does that alter any strategies in the game from AAR and AA42?

It would but only crazy ones you can only play on noobs, like Canadian Shield or Operation Hollywood. I can’t imagine a viable strat where the new layout comes into play. The main difference is that you’re depriving Japan of a potential 6 IPC cash grab in Central US.

@skinny1:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

@skinny1:

I was wondering if anyone used the victory city board, marshaling cards, and plane tokens from AAR and the damage markers from AA50 for AA42? I copied those and printed them for use with this game. I like AA42 with the new map, rules from AA50, and the cruisers. I think it is a great game. I found sheets of the AA50 IPCs on Board Game Geek and printed those as well. I don’t mind not having the R&D since I never used it before much anyway. I did change the victory city sheet from the 3 victory options to the two that are in the AA42 rules. Black marker, a little white out tape and black pen and voila. I am not too creative with creating my own things so I did the best with what I knew how to do. Also, Board Game Geek has mobilization charts for this game that I printed and laminated. I wish those types of things were included like they were in AAR.

We do the opposite. We play 42 on the Revised board. The new one is too small.

Do you play with the optional rules/National Advantages in the back of the Revised rules?

Not really. We play with no national advantages but we use a couple optional rules. We use the fighter as AA against bombing runs one. We also use a couple house rules , like you can return on Cruiser bombardments but not battleship ones and subs can block lone transports, but only lone transports.

@KaLeun:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

We do the opposite. We play 42 on the Revised board. The new one is too small.

The boards are not the same.  There are some differences especially in America.

There are only like 2 differences and they’re inconsequential.

@skinny1:

I was wondering if anyone used the victory city board, marshaling cards, and plane tokens from AAR and the damage markers from AA50 for AA42? I copied those and printed them for use with this game. I like AA42 with the new map, rules from AA50, and the cruisers. I think it is a great game. I found sheets of the AA50 IPCs on Board Game Geek and printed those as well. I don’t mind not having the R&D since I never used it before much anyway. I did change the victory city sheet from the 3 victory options to the two that are in the AA42 rules. Black marker, a little white out tape and black pen and voila. I am not too creative with creating my own things so I did the best with what I knew how to do. Also, Board Game Geek has mobilization charts for this game that I printed and laminated. I wish those types of things were included like they were in AAR.

We do the opposite. We play 42 on the Revised board. The new one is too small.

@Malekith:

Can you explain the mechanics on this? I dont understand how this could happen in turn one?

@Chompers#2:

I played the allies today and my opponent used his transport to get five inf into India on turn one and he landed one British fighter and one Russian fighter.  He used his cruiser to auto kill the Japanese transport in range then purchased an IC in India turn one.  It is pretty much impossible for Japan to take that back next turn.  After that he was able to build tanks in India to mess with Japan and stop them from being a factor against Russia.

He seeded Africa to Germany but he also killed my battleship and transport near Africa on round 2 by purchasing a russian sub turn one and then attacking my battle ship with the Russian sub and two Russian fighters.  He is able to then use the sub as the first troop to be removed that the battleship most likely kills and the fighters finish off the battleship and transport.

How would you guys counter the Indian IC on turn one to make Japan effective in helping against Russia.  At the end of the game when I attacked Moscow my attack fell short and I was defeated.  I brought 31 tanks 10 Inf and 1 bomber but there were just too many inf and fighters in Moscow by that point.  Any advice would be appreciated.

I think he was talking about picking two guys up and adding them to the existing 3 guys in India.

@Malekith:

Just wondering: I didnt think you could put troops on a ship and off load on same turn? Or am I misunderstanding? Or is this a new rule, I have the 2007 version with no cruisers

@Derek77:

As far as Germany turn one is concerned, I think a lot of players use the battleship to kill the med destroyer and land 2 units in Egypt with the transport from Italy and kill Egypt turn one with one plane from Balkans and 2 units adjacent to Egypt.  The one game I didn’t do this, the allies made short work of me……  the med cruiser can be killed with just planes.

You could always do that.

Thanks for sharing. Going to use this tonight.  :-)

@Cuyahoga:

Col.Stauffenberg ,  so if I follow what your’re saying…is that the Axis for you do okay when G battles in Africa and they build up on the Eastern Front, but let Japan do the attacking of Japan?

I’m new at this, but I was thinking that the Axis need to eliminate Russia, before the US can get heavily envolved in Europe.  And I was wondering if that could happen faster if G and J both attacked Russia on every turn? Maybe Japan might be in position to be more aggrasive.

thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Oh yeah, the Axis need to be attacking Russia from both sides all the time. But Germany always has to worry about defense. To do this, they need the African money. They keep trading the Eastern front, eventually exhausting Russia’s forces. In the new game, with defenseless transports, it takes the allies a lot longer to become an unbeatable presence in the Atlantic. The US can’t get heavily involved in Europe for at least 6 rounds, and if they weren’t doing anything against Japan, they’re going to be huge and already threatening Russia’s border. Africa is Germany’s lifeblood. Their Eastern front only needs to be a threat, until Japan is there. It’s more important to make survival your main priority.

@Mannstein:

Thanks for the advice. You’re right, german fleet builds in the Baltic Sea sure looks like a bad move - it’s just too expensive.

But what about buying an extra transport for the Med in G1? It looks like a necessary purchase, if you want to defend Algeria and re-retake Egypt in G2 after a british counteroffensive in B1? And Stauffenberg, what vessel would you by to support that transport? A carrier?

Seems a&a '42 is all about the japanese getting to Moscow before the british and american get to Berlin? When you’re used to play A&A Europe, where the germans attack and expands in the first three turns, it’s hard to see them rolled back in this game, just waiting for the japanese aid.

I would buy nothing for Med on round one. There’s no point to defending Algeria. It’s only a buck. The goal is to get your tanks to gobble up the other IPCS in Africa. If the allies land on algeria, let them move up to Libya and destroy them with your INF and Art that you moved up round 1, plus a trans drop off, battleship hit and some planes. Or you could just let them chase you in Africa. If UK took Egypt round one, then just take it back. They probably only have a couple pieces there anway.

Another transport is a good idea for the med, because it also threatens Caucus and can move guys to the Ukraine front, if not in Africa. A carrier and destroyer should be enough to lock it up for a long time. I’d do it round two or round three if nothing is threatening it.

You seem to have enough experience to know what’s going on because your UK moves are pretty standard. I like to attack French Indo but this is about Axis strategy.

I think the flaws here are too much naval purchases for G on round 1. The AC in the baltic is an ok move but if your allied oppenents are always going KGF then it’s a waste because you can’t keep up. An all land forces purchases, mainly INF with one or two pieces of hardware is never a bad idea. Nor is ten INF and a fig. The attack on the British Navy isn’t always the best move. Taking out the lone transport for free is a good one. It will divert that US destroyer from Africa most likely, and if it doesn’t, the G sub can still strike everywhere it wants to. I also like moving the subs out and getting them ready for a round two strike. The sub can also attack the cruiser so you don’t lose a plane.

I like to attack Egypt with 2 inf, 2 tanks, 2 fighters (my allied oppenents NEVER attack Ukraine and nor would I. Seems waaaay too risky. We usually just stack west russia and maybe take out the german baltic if we’re feeling lucky) and a bomber.

It’s Germany’s job to hold out for Japan, and the best way to do that is by buying tonnes of INF and securing Africa. Naval purchases can go in the Med, but putting them in the Baltic isn’t necessary.

As Japan, I prefer the transport build, 2 on round one with 2 destroyers. It’s more effecient that way.