@cernel That’s quite a loophole you’ve discovered. It’s things like this that made LHTR necessary. You are correct about point 1. Regarding point 2, I see nothing in the rules that would disallow attacking an unoccupied enemy-controlled territory with only air units.
Transports are no different than other units in this game as regards casualties. They don’t need to be taken last, and they are not automatically destroyed when alone. If you choose to sacrifice your warships to protect your transports, they can retreat if they survive.
Hey everyone! This Covid-19 social distancing thing is killing me! I am having two dear friends come over this weekend for an in-person game of Axis & Allies Revised (2004).
We want to use the OOB ruleset, and find a way to have a shorter game, but the “minor victory” rules where you only need to hold 8 victory cities for a full round of play seems a little too short. The “major victory” rules where you need 10 victory cities seems a little too long (and typically boils down to moscow falls or berlin falls).
What does everyone think about playing a match for 9 victory cities. I know that is in the LHTR, but I wanted to play the OOB rules with this one tweak.
My question is really: If we play a house rule of "must hold 9 victory cities for one full turn (Russia-USA), will the game still play out in less than 5 hours?
The point of agreement on how to represent additional units is that all players can easily recognize what each proxy represents in order to facilitate game play, and it should be reached before starting the game. Anyone who would use this to attempt to gain some sort of advantage is someone you should think twice about playing with.
@ponef In regards to what? This thread kind of wound up diverting itself in like 3 different directions:
Whether UK should retake Egypt B1 Vs. send the FTR from the India Carrier over to the US Pearl Harbor Fleet.
Whether Japan should attack the Pearl Harbor Fleet, the UK India Fleet, or both on J1.
Whether UK should attack Borneo B1 or not.
The answer to basically all of these boiled down to some combination of “it depends on how the dice went G1” and “are you playing under WBC Rules or not”. Seeing as WBC no longer runs tournaments for Revised (or any A&A, for that matter), we’re left to assume all games being played will be OOB rules (or at least LHTR), in which case Egypt suddenly becomes much less of a priority in the grand scheme of things.
Personally, I got to try the strategy out at the 2018 WBC in one of my games. It worked well for me, as Japan was routinely baited into attacking the USN, losing the TT and the DD in the process. This allowed me to wipe out the remaining IJN Fleet A1 (Bomber from East USA + FTR from West USA + Navy from US West Coast + FTR from Hawaii). This crippled the IJN and let me rapidly come to dominate the Pacific.
@gbb8brm Welcome to the forum 🙂
As long as the seazone that surrounds the island does not contain any blocking enemy ships it is friendly and may be passed through. The seazone is not part of the territory.
The Production Chart at the top of this page is for some version of A&A Global 1940 (the admixture of A&A Europe 1940 and A&A Pacific 1940). While nifty looking, it won’t help you much with A&A Revised.
This production chart is for the Milton Bradley version of A&A. Again, nifty looking, but it won’t help you much with A&A Revised.
or if anyone has the game, if they could send me a photo that would be seriously appreciated (I’m also missing the Reference Chart for the Soviet Union)
By finding BGG, you’ve hit on a source of information about A&A, you just haven’t found the right mine shaft to explore. Instead of looking at BGG’s Nova Games & Milton Bradley A&A page, try BGG’s Avalon Hill A&A (A&A Revised) page. Yes, they are both “helpfully” named “Axis & Allies”. This is both technically correct and wildly unhelpful. That said, the BGG A&A Revised page has much information, to include:
A picture of the production and weapons development charts for Milton Bradley Axis & Allies and Avalon Hill Axis & Allies, AH on top and MB on bottom.(source)
But there are also resources on this website that can help you. The front page to the site has a link to “Rules & Downloads”. Going there will land you on a page of basic information about the different A&A games. Scroll down until you get to the “Axis & Allies Revised (2004)” section. You will have two options, a link to download a pdf version of the rules for the game and a link to a setup chart for the game. The setup chart gives you the unique information found on Reference Chart for the Soviets (the rest of the information on the chart is about the names, abilities, and prices for the units in the game, information that is duplicated both in the rule book and on the other four reference charts.
If you want to duplicate the look of a reference chart, combine the reference chart from another country with the setup from here. You might find a picture of another country’s reference chart here.
This simple different wording would have probably made all crystal clear, and saved this whole (and other!) discussions, as well as my question.
I suppose that those dicussions lead to a clearer wording in LHTR and are one reason why submerging submarines had been moved to another step during ‘Conduct Combat’ starting from and including the Anniversary ruleset.
@Seadog Not a problem! Glad to hear you found the advice helpful.
I don’t want to go into too much detail on what you did for AA50, as that game has its own sub-forum, but I’m glad you were able to find my advice generic enough to apply to multiple A&A titles.
However, for the Anniversary game, playing a more aggressive Germany is usually favored in the 1941 Scenario (due to how weak the Soviets are at the start of the game), and even somewhat in the 1942 Scenario (If Germany can make a foothold in Eastern Ukraine early, Japan can reach the territory with almost its entire airforce on J2, there is a thread on this strategy I’ve posted in quite a bit called “Unstoppable Axis Strategy”, if you’re interested).
In one of my games, I had staged UK in Karelia with about 15 units…
at one point of the game, I also had 5 trannies in SZ 4…
I pulled 10 units out of Karelia and put them into an amphibious assault in Western Europe!
Germany didn’t see that one coming, I can tell you!!!
USA could easily reinforce W-E massively as well, so G ended up looking at about 20 units in W-E.
I can tell you: the next round G was taken and my adversary resigned 😛
1. Odds not in your favor: A. survives: 22% D. survives: 73%
2. If you fail, you have just lost the game.
3. If you succeed, you will have lost more units than the money you will get from UK, while letting Russia get ahead in the builds.
4. You will lose Gbr against the UK or US counterattacks. If you retake it, you will lose it again.
According to odds and some of my calculations, this strategy will win you the game less than 20% of the time.
The main reason you could do that is because you took London on G2, so he couldn’t possibly increase his naval force (not to mention he lost a fighter off his carrier). Plus, the US didn’t really put any effort into co-guarding the UK fleet because he is trying to go after Japan first.
You made an excellent choice in this circumstance and it is a good example of what I think the German navy was designed for, but in normal circumstances the costs would have been greater and the benefits less if the US/UK had united in SZ8 and built some navy together (and not lose the capital :lol:)