Each unit with a combat value would get one die. One attacking infantry would roll one die(scoring a hit on a “1”) and the defending infantry+artillery rolls 2 dice(scoring a hit for each die showing “1” or “2”). This continues each round until combat is resolved or attacker retreats
Hey man, with the Naval Base on America’s Eastern USA territory, you can reach Sea Zone 91, bordering Gibraltar and Morocco. You can drop troops in either. Note that your ships can only pass through into the Mediterranean if the Allies control Gibraltar.
You can also get back in one turn via the Naval Base there.
If Germany is building an air fleet, make sure the UK puts an Air Base in Gibraltar for scrambling.
@Admiral_Nimitz said in What to buy as the Soviet Union in E40 when neutral?:
@Gentlegamer I think your buy is too aggressive.
That’s how I roll, baby!
The idea is to defend while preserving the ability for strong counterattack. You want to be trading territory in Poland, not the outskirts of Moscow.
You gave an example of a huge stack of Soviet infantry failing to defend Moscow and a force infantry and fighters being able to resist conquest. This is sound; but if you are at the point of defending Moscow that way, you have already failed, in my opinion.
Perhaps you are working a war of attrition on behalf of the Allies, but the key to victory in the European theater is putting Germany on the defensive.
This works better in the Global game because the ships that begin off the coast of India aren’t going to be there in the Europe only game. As mentioned in this thread Italy could also take either or both of the territories required to use the Suez Canal. And remember in the rules that if Italy took either T-J or Egypt, and you manage to control both territories on your 2nd turn, and Italy does not take either of those territories, ships cannot pass through the canal until your 3rd turn because canals are only usable if they were friendly at the beginning of your turn, not at the non-combat phase.
It could work, and you would be able to add a destroyer (that starts the game in SZ 71) and a few extra fighters to your attacking force but an Italy player will be able to send a ship as a blocker if they see it coming (like their destroyer). A drawback is you’re giving Italy at best 1 turn, and at worst 3 turns, to use the ships that begin the game in 97 to do things in the Mediterranean. Allowing the Italian Navy to mass their ships is not as bad as Moltke suggests because the UK still needs to attack SZ 96 (I would suggest using the cruiser at 91 if it is there on your first turn, and the fighter in Gibraltar), and Italy needs to be attacking the French ships that begin the game in 93 and they might take 1-2 losses while doing so. But for your SZ 96 attack on Turn 1, if the destroyer lands a hit, take the loss for the cruiser and not the fighter. Not only is Italy in a better position to get the NO for no Allied surface ships in the Med, but the fighter that went to attack SZ 96 from Gibraltar could be used again for when you do finally go and attack the Italian Navy.
Thanks for the advice, he made the mistake of leaving all of his transports with a weak fleet made of carriers And planes. I attacked and when I had Damaged the carriers I retreated, so his planes crashed. I Appear to be winning and the Italians have no more opposition in Africa, thanks a lot for advice.
You get to spend all of your starting money at the start of your first turn. At the end of your first turn you get the IPC value of all of the territories you control (plus the value of every National Objective met). That money from the end of your first turn will be your starting money at the start of your second turn. Continue until game ends.
You are correct about that Persian air distance, my mistake. I had been looking at the Caucasus routing not realizing that the Caspian Sea-Kazakhstan route cut off a space. That saves half a turn’s worth of UK income.
That last game I had hopped an Africa fighter over and shuffled a mech in, but didn’t do a fighter build in the Persia IC because of the miscount. I had tried “overworking” the German air and main thrust by pincering two infantry forces through Bessarabia and Baltic States, and a Brit landing in Norway under cover of the surviving half of the Home Fleet (SZ 106 transport had survived G1 but went to Britain because I wanted to force Germany to buy defensive forces.) However, I found I still had enough German air plus late arriving mech/tanks along with a portion of the spearhead infantry to handle these, take Western Ukraine, retake Norway, while still continuing the spearhead to Belarus next to the main Soviet stack with mech/tanks, etc. in Bryansk. And the Scandinavian infantry took Leningrad/Novgorod.
R3 counterattack odds were very poor for Russia and were going to leave a tank stack that would still have enough mech/tanks reaching it the next turn to be unstoppable. So the retreat to Moscow was made on R3.
On G4 I strat bombed Moscow’s IC with three bombers. I decided not to scramble the two Russian fighters for this as I needed their defense as badly as the IPC’s. I figured the ~50% chance of losing one of two fighters outweighed the lower chance of clipping a bomber at ~33%. The IC’s AAA missed and the bombers inflicted enough damage that I had to spend several infantry’s worth to repair for a final infantry build there on R4, which was mostly a waste as calcs showed it would not hold even with some UK help. But I stayed and was bludgeoned. German tanks reached the Caucasus on G6 and would have been unstoppable. US landing and Brit round 5 stacks/w UK fighters reinforcing in Normandy were crushed on the counterattack that turn. It would have been much better to do a fighting withdrawal toward Persia, maintaining a threat to keep German support forces in theater, rather than be unceremoniously swept away.
Welcome to the forum
Why don’t you just look into the rulebook(s)?
It is all described there in detail. No need for anyone to write that off.
See pages 40/41 in the Europe1940.2 rulebook.
Or what are you asking for here?
I would consider an IC in Romania with a airfield. this would allow you to crank out troops toward Caucuses and not worry about building more than transports in the black sea. with the airfield you can scrambler fighters stationed there in defense and they can be used to attack with ground against Russia.
An aggressive UK player can virtually eliminate the Italians from the game on UK1. This is dependent, however, on the Germans and if they give indication of a Sea Lion or not. I typically purchase a transport, infantry and artillery for South Africa first, and use my remaining 14(global) or 15(Europe) IPCs for navy or air in the Atlantic because Germany has typically decimated the available forces on their first turn.
IF the Germans make no Sea Lion preparations you can send the entire RAF from London to strike the Italian battleship (The Taranto raid). The fighters can land on the carrier, because you will need to bring the navy parked at Egypt as well to discourage a scramble. Don’t get too attached to that Mediterranean navy because it won’t last long, but the blow delivered to the Italians makes its loss worth it. The combat strength of the UK in this attack is 15 with 6 units, and the Italians have a strength of 7 with 2 units or 19 with 5 units made possible by a full scramble supported by Germany. Not the best odds, but still a good battle for UK because you are killing valuable units. They don’t stand a chance without the scramble, so the Italians might scramble their two planes which is even better because you get to kill the Italian Air Force. Even if the Germans send planes to scramble I make this attack because it’s one of the few opportunities to chip away at the Luftwaffe which gives the Germans enormous flexibility.
With the cruiser in SZ 91 (assuming it wasn’t sunk by the Germans which in many cases it won’t be) I usually strike the Italian fleet at Malta. I will throw in the fighter from Gibraltar for good measure and land him on Malta. The Malta fighter can either support the Taranto raid or be used in an assault on Tobruk.
The Tobruk battle is perhaps the most important one on UK1. Italy has 3 Inf, 1 Art, 1 Mec, and 1 Tank to face off against the British forces in Alexandria totaling 2 Inf, 1 Art, and 1 Tank. Poor odds for the Brits. Wait a minute, you have a Mec in Cairo that can make it into the battle, and the transport in SZ 98 can’t be used for fighting the Italian fleet so load up an Inf and Art for amphibious assault! Now we have a combined UK strength of 3 Inf 1 Art 1 Mec and 1 Tank, which is equal to the Italian force. Now this isn’t enough to take the territory without exceptional dice, so we need more forces. Well here’s where the Malta fighter and the Tactical Bomber from SZ 98 come in. I’ll bet you were wondering why he wasn’t in the Taranto raid. So the UK now has a total combat strength of 20 with 9 units against the Italian force of 6 units and a strength of 13. Good odds, and as a reminder the British can replace lost forces fairly quickly, while the Italians cannot.
This is my standard opener for the UK and it effectively knocks Italy into irrelevance. They are reduced to only one weak fleet, and only 2 units in North Africa.
@derpsa As Germany you have to eliminate the Allied warships in Sea Zones 110 and 111. If you don’t sink these ships, the Allies will quickly be able to launch amphibious assaults against you. Then you’ll have a lot of trouble holding on to France and you’ll never make it into Russia.
When Germany Is at War with the Soviet Union:
• 5 IPCs per territory if Germany controls Novgorod (Leningrad), Volgograd (Stalingrad), and/or Russia (Moscow).
Theme: High strategic and propaganda value.
The “or” indicates that it is 5 IPC per territory. Be it one , two or three.
to @djensen @Panther @redrum . You all have put a lot of work into the transition. @simon33 has been helpful with his comments as well.
And thank you to everyone else helping out with the change.
It may take a while to get used to the new program, but it’s gonna work just fine : )
@Midnight_Reaper said in 20 Years of Axis & Allies .org:
@CWO-Marc As for what we did and did not have back in 2000, I made a small chart
Great chart, Midnight Reaper; it brings back lots of memories. A further point to note is that, in Classic, only the infantry sculpt was nation-specific and was based on authentic WWII designs; the equipment sculpts started following the same design principle with Europe / Pacific / Revised, though it took a long while to achieve (by combining E1940.2, P1940.2 and 1941) a full array for everyone except France. We were also treated to some neat special-category sculpts: the German blockhouses in D-Day, the American and German trucks in Bulge, and the entirely-other-war sculpt set of 1914. Another nice development in the official games has been the addition of China, Italy, ANZAC and France to the original five powers (US, UK, USSR, Germany and Japan). And in the early days, people who wanted extra types of units (or extra colours to represent other countries) had to make do with third-party products like the Xeno and Table Tactics ones or the Enemy on the Horizon expansion set, the quality of which was uneven and the availability of which wasn’t always great. Things certainly have changed.
@JustLuthor I have the True Neutral Lid done (All true neutrals and mongolia). I’ll work on the other one soon. Let me know if you need the sides of the box too. The colors may not be fully match with out of game box if printed out.
True Neutral Box
Howdy all! Andrew here AKA AndrewAAGamer. Been thinking about posting a lengthy introduction here and finally got around to it. Here is some history of my gaming experience. Currently living in the Seattle area of the good ole US of A! Looking to help other Players become better Players and have some fun gaming too.
I have always loved wargames and when I was little, I would watch my three older brothers play Blitzkrieg; an early Avalon Hill game representing for the most part World War II. I would sit and watch them play for hours and they never let me play because I was too little. There is an 11-year gap between me and my next oldest brother. But I was hooked and like many little boys loved playing wargames. As a teenager I played Midway, Gettysburg and Bismarck and while I loved these games the rule complexities and time it took to play the games made it difficult to play and find opponents. Of course, there was Risk but it was so basic and the main goal was to hide as long as you could.
So, when Milton Bradley came out with Axis and Allies in 1984 it was a done deal for me and I have never looked back. The ease of playing these games in comparison to the Avalon Hill type games is dramatic and having real miniatures instead of cardboard squares – Wowsa! I have played and own all of the Axis and Allies variants and of course many, many more including the Milton Bradley Gamemaster series excluding Broadsides and Boarding Parties which I have never played. Oh, my Fortress America copy is the one with Saddam Hussein on it! I have so many games as my wife says – “You have too many games that take up too much room”. I disagree; you can never have enough games.
As for my gaming experience…
Face to Face: I belonged to the Portland Axis and Allies Meet Up group for over 10 years. The organizer happened to keep track of the games played and in Team games I was 152-3 if I remember correctly. It may have been 152-5 but nevertheless it was well over 95% of the games I played in I won. Now I say Team games because we also played games like Shogun and Conquest of the Empire and those, what I call gang up games, I did not do as well because frankly my opponents would literally say at the beginning of the game “Hey let’s all gang up on Andrew and knock him out because if we do not then we will lose.” Now while they were right, and I understood their reasoning, it did not make if fun for me knowing I had no chance to win and the best I could do was take out whoever attacked me first so I shied away from those games for the most part. But in Team games like Axis and Allies where the sides are set I was virtually undefeated.
From 2013 until now I have played in the Seattle Meet Up group and while we do not keep official statistics, I estimate I have played in around 100 or so games and have won about 90% of them with the following exception.
There is one team of players that joined our Seattle group and they are excellent at Global 1940. In our first game of Global 1940 they cleaned my partner’s and my clock as the Axis. Now we only had about 10-12 Global 1940 games under our belt and unknown to us they had hundreds! They used a German opening we had never seen before and kicked our sorry butts all the way home. Then in our rematch game we were the Axis and we used this newly discovered J1 opening thinking to return the favor and kick their butts only to find out not only did they know how to perform the J1 attack better than we did they also knew how to defend against it and, throw in a Neutral Crush attack we had never encountered before, they again gave us a beating. Well, I am not used to losing two games in a row, so the challenges were on! We beat them in the third game and that is when we found out they played online at TripleA. They told us they had played for over 10 years and hundreds of games and this was the very first time they had lost as a team; ever. That challenge series continues but due to time constraints we play via PBEM now instead though we always love to get a face to face game going.
Face to Face plus PBEM: Well my partner and I caught on fast and as a team my partner and I went 12 and 5 against them before one of them got tired of losing and only wants to play face to face anymore. I do not blame him because I am significantly better online than I am face to face. Online I have time to study every move where you cannot do that face to face. Thus, mistakes happen more often face to face. I like to study the game board, to me that is fun. I do not like Real Time games and play Turn Based games instead. For example, I played and love XCom. After playing it on normal to understand the game I then played it on the highest level. Legend I think it is called. Once I beat it at that Legend level it said less than 1% of the people who had ever played the game won it at that level. Then I kept playing it till I beat it via Ironman. Not many people have accomplished that I am sure. Probably because they are not patient enough or crazy enough to try it. I love games like the Panzer General Series Turn Based games; played them all and beat them all with Major victories giving the computer the highest bonus in money and experience. I love the challenge of beating them when it is most difficult. Anyway, I digress. So, his partner dropped but one of them still plays us and we are 6-1 against him so far. Of course, we do have an advantage now because it is two against one.
Having said all that we are all aware that there are plenty of people who do well in their face to face gaming groups only to find out when they get online they are not as good as they think they are. That is why I mentioned the TripleA team that was undefeated till getting beat by us. However, I do have some online experience too.
Online: For 3-4 years I played at Days of Infamy before unfortunately it closed. For those who are unaware of Days of Infamy it was an Axis and Allies Pacific gaming area. They used a Chess like rating system to determine rankings. The original Pacific, not Pacific 1940. Pacific by the way is a GREAT game if you have never tried it. There is a complicated sub stalling rule you really need to understand but the beauty of the game is that it usually comes down to Turn 7 or 8 and either side can win. None of this the game is only half done but is already over but needs to be played out stuff. It is like D-Day that it usually comes down to the very last turn. How exciting! Now we played to 24 instead of 22 as we found 22 to be just too easy for the Japanese to win. Also, we gave the Allies $15 to put five additional infantries in India to remove the India Crush strategy from the game which we all found distasteful. So, my first 10 games I went 2-8; not an auspicious start but there is a real learning curve to the game. By the time I was done I was the highest-ranking Player. I also achieved a rating score higher than any previous rating ever. In addition, there was a yearly Admiral’s Tournament and in the history of the website I am the only one to be the highest ranked Player AND win the Admiral’s trophy at the same time. Good times.
Later I played at the Superpowers website. Yes, the original website to help test and advance the game before it came out to buy. I think the online site is still up. Again, by the time I was done I was the number #1 ranked Player in spite of the fact that the way some of the online games worked they were gang up games and those were very difficult to win and frankly not very fun. As I mentioned before I prefer team games so that was the main reason I stopped playing there.
From there I went on to Axis and Allies Members Club (AAMC). They played Classic, Revised and AA50 as Global was not out yet. In fact, just before I left Global 1940 was just introduced and there was discussion as to whether to add it to ABattlemap or not. Now I was only there for two years as after a while I found the experience distasteful. As it was a manual gaming system, not TripleA, there were a lot of errors made by the Players and there were exact rules how to remedy any errors. My experience though was that too many people would not follow the rules or ask to not follow the rules and if you, me in this case, asked them to follow the rules I was the bad guy and a “rules lawyer”. Funny how the people breaking the rules were okay with that and the ones of us that wanted to follow the rules were the bad guys. That is probably the number one reason I want fun games where both sides are happy as I do not want arguments over game play. So, for the two years I played there I only played in tournaments. I mention this to understand the competition level that I was not playing chumps to drive up my winning ratio. Every game I played counted in a tournament. For the two years I played there I ended up winning 75.4% of my games. That was the highest winning ratio in the club during that 2-year period. I also made it to the finals in 50% of every Tournament I entered. And I won that Finals game exactly 50% of the time too. Oh, and how I remember that one Revised game I made an unforced error that cost me the game. I could have had a winning Finals record percentage! Nevertheless, the end result was I won 25% of every Tournament I entered. I had more Tournament wins than any other Player in those two years and they gave out points, how many depending on if it was a Major or Minor Tournament, for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place. My total points earned over the two years was greater than any other Player.
So when asked this is why I tell people I am one of the Best Players in the World. Everywhere I have played I have eventually been the #1 Player for the time I was there. Not only in my in-person gaming groups but online too against Players all over the world. Until there is a worldwide ranking system for Axis and Allies, wouldn’t that be great, I guess it will have to do. Usually though the people I tell yawn, say that’s great, and move on. We Axis and Allies Players get no glory.
I now am at the point I want to play to have fun and help others learn to be better Players. I have always enjoyed coaching other Players and providing tips and I guess deep down I have some teacher blood in me. Trying to figure out how best to give back to the community. That is one reason I wrote the Warfare Principles of Axis & Allies.
Oh, one more thing. The huge Japanese battleship was called Yamato. Yamamoto was the name of Japan’s most famous admiral. Maybe the arrival of Admiral Yamamoto would indeed correspond to having an extra battleship, but I’m not sure that’s what you intended.