Hi Bass,
As it happens, I have a dog eared print out of the rules to hand since I recently dug out my copy of the game to give it a spin (sadly, playing against myself). I can email you a scanned copy if Axis Roll can’t locate his set.
They are excellent: every unit plays a role, National Advantages plus bid makes every game a strategic puzzle before you even start.
It’s one of the reasons I can’t bring myself to get involved with Steam
Thanks Krieghund, that’s most helpful…
Tom
Morning pro’s
Quicky here: US FTR lands on UK carrier- rules say it is treated as “cargo” Does this entail all the following
If the carrier is attacked by Germany on Germany’s go, the FTR does not contribute to the fight
If the carrier is attacked by Germany on Germany’s go. the FTR cannot be used to soak a hit
If the UK carrier attacks Germany on UK’s go, the FTR cannot be used to soak a hit
Thanks,
Trusty
The mega offshore strategy:
Its definitely do-able though it seems to become a race. If Japan is not delayed with an UK Indian build or a significant amount of US Pacific naval build up, she quickly gets to a point where she can threaten Caucasus. Now with both St. Petersburg and Caucasus threatened, Russia is in a pickle and Germany may just have to hang on to France for one go to win on VCs no matter how grim the offshore scene.
“Subs are good sub hunters”
That was well said. We had a great deal of sub on sub battles in our last game.
Though the dire need to dominate the oceans to prevent convoy raids remains a millstone around the allies neck because it leaves Russia on its own.
Incidentally, we roll NAs randomly at the start to keep the game fresh and force ourselves to think anew, If Germany gets wolfpack and the US and GB fail to get naval NAs they are in trouble…
Trusty
Convoy raids seem to heavily tip Enhanced A and A into the Axis hands.
With wolfpack, and even without, if the Germans build subs solidly for three turns, then investing in supersubs, and the Japanese simultaneously builds its fleet further, the US has to abandon either abandon the Pacific or Atlantic naval arms race. That done, the appropriate Axis power parks a load of subs off one of the US shores, from which they simply cant be budged .If it’s the Atlantic the same subs raid US and GB for 20IPCs, if it’s the Pacific, the Japanese can use its BBs to bombard L.A forcing an infantry trade at a loss for the US.
A German sub build effort lets the Ruskies into Europe of course, but a sudden infantry switch by Germany easily starts pushing them back as their lines get extended. And Germany only has to build subs until the Allies have lost one or other ocean.
The only allied defence I can see against this threat is for GB to immediately start building ships and with some US assistance, choke any sub entry to the Atlantic. Stretched by this investment the best the Pacific US fleet can do is sit off Washington- even a retake of Hawaii will be difficult. Meanwhile the existing Japanese island troops are used by the Axis player to acquire territory in Asia…
I’m thinking of bidding less than zero to play Axis… Anyoen see any counters to this strategy?
Trusty
Thankyou folks. I’ve just purchased a secondgand A & A Europe.
Tristy
Morning pro’s
I am a big fan of A&A revised (pref enhanced rule set) I’d be interested in playing in a more local area
D-Day, Europe, Pacific, Battle of the Bulge, Guadalcanal, all come up every now and then on E-Bay
Which is best? I’ve looked at reviews and so on boardgamegeek so please don’t feel obliged to give your reasons. A quick poll would be helpful though.
Ta
Trusty
Thanks pros
In real life, this presumably hangs on the question of whether a fleet can continue to track a sub after the DDs initial location of it though I wouldn’t know such things
Its useful to be reminded that Detection only affects the first round- I keep forgetting that.
So my q devolves to a simple AAR one (since in subsequent rounds subs are necessarily “detected” and that becomes a red herring)
I could’t find any mention of the specific scenario at hand (DD starts but is lost in combat) which is why I posted
So Axis Roll you are saying subs can submerge once there is no longer a DD present- presumbaly that means they also get opening round fire?
Trusty
If opponent detects your subs and then chooses to let all his destroyers go in the course of a battle, your subs immediately regain their special abilities (submerge, opening round fire) for the remainder of that battle, right?
Actually that brings up another question now that I think about it. If the above is true, can subs submerge of the end of the round which opponent sacrifices his destroyers? I would assume not.
Trusty
Thoughts on KJF
Despite the initial advantage of having remaining fleet after Pearl Harbour its v. difficult for Japan.
If you push hard on land, the US fleet quickly outnumbers you at sea. If you throw everything into the Pacific, you never make up the income deficit you start the game with and its only a matter of time before a massive sea battle takes you out.
On the plus side, while Japan is struggling to get by Germany may be doing well- as Jennifer says; if all you do is slow the US, the Germans may get to Moscow in time.
The single worst thing that can happen is that Tokyo comes under siege since then you have to waste IPCs building inf there. So you have to match US naval build, exploiting the defender advantage enjoyed by carriers and FTRs.
Given Japan is poorer than the US you have to make savings somehow and the obvious one is to use island inf for your mainland campaign instead of buying them. So build a bunch of TRNs and start getting them to the mainland asap, Once the US is strong enough to get past the Jap fleet then it wont make much difference whether there’s inf on them or not.
Because its so slow getting them over you probably wont make any headway in Asia if the Allies put an IC in Calcutta or Singkaing and you’ll start to shrink if they put both ICs there.
If you can grab Calcutta early enough to stop an IC build that helps because then you either get a clear run at Asia or face US IC build which detracts from their Naval effort. On the other hand, letting the Brits build 3 inf a go in Calcutta does detract from any bothersome behaviour around German shores, allowing a straightforward infantry push at Moscow which if done efficiently is going to win eventually. Of course Tokyo may fall soon afterwards…
If you play with the enhanced rules then the Banzai national advantage, Russian-Japan treaty, US reinforced carriers Tokyo Express and Yamamoto battleships change things a bit.
Trusty
Out of interest does anyone know what military unit (squadron, batallion, etc) each purchase stands for. That is- for 3 IPCs how many men would actually show up on roll call if this were an actual war?
Presumably everything would be scaled to the most expensive purchase so one battleship unit equalled one battleship
Trusty Sapper
Interesting!
It’s worth hearing that the NA developments were designed to exploit each other, so I’ll proceed on the basis that they all have a time and place. Perhaps this constitutes a stealth advantage to the Axis since they can delay two choices while the allies can delay only one…
ta
Trusty
Morning Pro’s
Russian AARe NA
“Place 1 free INF/TURN during the Mobilize Units Phase in [Yak,SovFE,Bury] if you control it”
A literal reading suggests Russia can recapture a Siberian territory and place and INF there at the end of that go.
But this goes contra the general principle in A and A that you can’t build in places you’ve just acquired.
What do y’all do please?
Ta
Trusty Sapper
Thankyou all, esp Magister and ncsswitch.
I’ll run your two methods through a dozen or so simulations and see which does best
Trusty
I’ve played half a dozen Enhanced rules games and obviously the national advantages set up the nature of the game. Assuming you are not trying to make things difficult for yourself to freshen everything up the following seem to be the best choices, but I’d be interested to know if there are any glaring omissions
No brainers
Japan- Banzai
Russia- Siberian Conscripts
UK- Commonwealth
US Reinforced Carriers
Barely brainers
US- Pacific troops
Perfectly acceptable
Germany- 88s, Wolfpack, Afrika Korps, Divebombers (Germany seems to have the most viable alternatives)
Japan- Tech advantage, Yamamoto, Kaiten, Kamikaze, Tokyo express(?)
Pointless given better and more flexible alternatives
All the rest
(ps 1 I think Panzerblitz may allow clever manouvres but I haven’t yet worked them out)
(ps 2 given a good opponent, investing in INF, while not necessarily optimal, must be close to optimal since, from a game theoretic point it is a strategy that is very difficult to exploit, right?)
Trusty
I’ve played half a dozen Enhanced rules games and obviously the national advantages set up the nature of the game. Assuming you are not trying to make things difficult the following seem to be the best choices, but I’d be interested to know if there are any glaring omissions
No brainers
Japan- Banzai
Russia- Siberian Conscripts
UK- Commonwealth
US Reinforced Carriers
Barely brainers
US- Pacific troops
Perfectly acceptable
Germany- 88s, Wolfpack, Afrika Korps, Divebombers
Japan- Tech advantage, Yamamoto, Kaiten, Kamikaze
Pointless given better and more flexible alternatives
All the rest
(I think Panzerblitz may allow clever manouvres but I haven’t yet worked them out)
Trusty
Anyone have any quick and dirty means of calculating expected outcomes of a battle (either in terms of who wins, or IPC loss) with
Kill dice (think that’s the right term- basically all the attack values summed and divided by 6)
Number of units
I can do it slowly by iterating each combat round, or quickly using a simulator, but I would like something that can be done mid game in the space of about sixty seconds
Trusty
Ps- (in low whisper) can anyone answer a Diplomacy rules point I have?