Axis & Allies Revised or Original

Look up the AARHE map files… they are revised configuration

what I prefer to do is this;
3 inf + 3 tanks on R1, hit ukraine with 2 tanks 2 planes and 3 inf, everything else on west russia, stack bury, and mover everything else west. turn 2 I prefer to buy 1 ftr, 1 art and 5 inf, this is to be able to scirmish on a front that is 3 terretories wide.

on UK1 my first priority is to retake egypt if possible,  to do this I use the bomber,  the india ftr, 2 inf from india, 1 inf from jordan, this should usually at least be enough to kill all the german units, even tho you lose all your infs (depending on defending luck turn 1)
I usually land in algeria, because germany are usually not capable of counterattacking the combined UK an us fleet, If this is not possible, gather the fleet west of UK with my new AC.
if for some reason germany has done a quite common mistake to only have 2 inf and 4 ftrs in france, I attack it, if egypt is not possible i often land in borneo and papua, while using the ftr + sun against j sub, and land the ftr on pearl.

US will usually buy AC + trs + inf/art tanks (if I buy 6 units it will be 4 inf 1 art 1 tank, and long game, more tank than art)

the overall gameplan from this point will be for US to land 8-10 units in africa each turn,  UK build 6-7 units + 1 ftr and at some point swich to landing in norway, when strong enough. USSR keep on scirmishing germany.

If I have a successful game, the US in africa will make it to persia, and be able to match the japanese there, possibly making it to cauc. I once had more than 150 units in cauc, only 50 was ussr. then the win is plain.

if japan manages to be fast enough, I will move all my us trannies to the med (8-10) and start landing the units in africa in s europe (16-20 / turn). I will lose it a few times, but germany will not be able to build more than 10 units / turn, at the same time UK will land in france each turn, and if USSR are not able to hold moscow from the japanses, the entire russian army will start walking towards berlin, doing a final suicide charge to kill german units.

I have had a more than 80% successrate with a bid of 8-10 (set in libya) with this stratigy.

on, and people seem to forget that trannies are prolly one of the best fleetunits on defence, UK/US fleet is often 1 BB 1-2 AC 2 DD and 10-12 trannies. you need a pretty good attacking force to deal with that. And that is before you add the ftrs on defence.

btw, I also 400 games in an insane amount, with some intelligent research, and planning, you should be able to figure it out in much less, especially playing online.

I have, but what I haven’t figured out yet is whether or not the game was already “in the bag” for the axis before that point.  Still fairly inexperienced at this Revised stuff…

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

I think a well rounded strat will allow you to do both relatively seemlessly while if you venture too much into a “reactive” strat it may not allow you to take adv of mistakes as quickly.

Don’t you mean “OVERreactive” strat?

If you make unsound purchases based on what you think your opponent’s going to do, that is overreacting.

If your opponent sees your mistake, and acts in the best possible manner to exploit your weakness, that is reacting.

Yes.

But also:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
Maybe I’m nitpicking. :-)

You can think proactively (2-3 turns down the road) and force your opponent into difficult decisions or mistakes.

I’m of the school that assumes that their opponents will be worthy, hence that mistakes will not be made; hence that losses will be from bad luck or the aggregate result of suboptimal plays, rather than from a blatantly wrong move.

To clarify, you can NEVER “maneuver” your opponent into making a mistake.  Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

–

In other words, say I know you like alcohol, and that you don’t really care too much about money.  So I bring free drinks to our poker game, you get drunk, and I win lots of money.  Did you make a MISTAKE, or a CHOICE?  I think you made a CHOICE.

Now, if you were holding a straight, in five card draw no wilds, and you folded, you probably made a MISTAKE.  But that was your choice.

If you were drunk when you folded, I would say that you made a CHOICE to enter into a situation in which you would more readily make MISTAKES.  But still, folding on that straight would be YOUR MISTAKE.  Nobody forced you into folding.

I think we’re agreeing with each other.

(your mistake or not) Your betting pattern, poker face, demear at the table all provide the other player with information into the decision about their hand.
You come out betting strong, with a stone cold dead face, I read that as hell I can’t beat him I fold.  I made the choice, but you willfully provided informaton that helped me make a decision.  All be it a wrong decision but at the time I assed all available info and came to a conclusion, which in this case was wrong and a mistake.

The whole theory behind deadzoning is manuevering to get your opponent to (help them if you will) make a mistake (or bad choice).  Yes your opponent makes the choice to move in his whole army, but you set up the board.

I also play assuming your opponent is “worthy” and makes no mistakes, but that doesn’t mean I won’t set “traps” to test them.  B/c as we both know, no one is flawless and I’ve seen plenty of good players overlook the smallest things from time to time (including myself).

I think we are agreeing with each other here.
I think these statement are equivalent:

ME:

Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?

YOU:

Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

Perharps I shouldn’t have used the word “mistake” in the first sentence, but they basically say the same thing.  Force a person into a “lesser of two evils” decision.

sure, I’d play ya IRL.  But I’m in NYC and you’re around Chicago, I think, yes?

OH wellz, what can ya do?

There has been some extended discussion of adding additional nations in the House Rules area, which would be the correct venue for such discussions :-)

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=41.0

Revised is sometimes also called 4th Edition.

It’s not a copywrite violation I’ve done it, not at kinkos but at another repro place