For your reference, the official A&A Europe FAQ:
How can the allies win in AAE?
-
iv’e found the same thing about A&A pacific.i wonder if there can be another A&A game as good as the original.
-
The thing about AAP that I like is theres like 10,000 ways to play America, and Japan just needs to react to America’s moves. Every game is different, but usually seems to last the same amount of time.
-
notice how thegame has a lot of repetitive tendinces like japan wins by vc’s,us overpowers japan.
-
I dont know why everyone likes the basic game so much. A&A Europe is a good game with many different options.Germany has more options by far then it has in the basic game.
Like buying Navy. Germany also has a varitey of ways to win. Just because one method works well doesnt mean you should use it over and over again. Half the fun of playing the game is finding different ways to win. -
the thing that makes the original game so much fun is the many options you have. Britain needs to divide its few forces between several theatres to maintain its income. Thats what it makes so fun. In AAE the allies have only one victory, so everything can be directed to Germany. In this situation, a perfect build up and attack scheme will dominate the game, while in the original A&A there were various strategies good enough to win the war and it all depended more on luck with the dice due to the small number of units on the board. Thats why i think AAE should be played with less units on the gameboard. These massive battles in Ukraine and Belorussia are boring and the outcome is usually the same.
-
Attacking Russia isnt the only way to win.
I played games where the Germans never attacked the Russians, and still win. The Eastern front turns into a cold war and Germany takes Britain.
There is nothing wrong with the basic game, its just, well, basic. After playing the Xeno expansion for years i couldnt go back to the basic game. The added Units,speaical rules and the larger map (more territories) made the frist game too bland. I Personally like the size of the starting armies in A&AE and A&AP. It offers wicked range and tight game play. -
The size would be fine if the game board just had more territories. Russia can defend itself by massing infantry at the Ukraine-Belorussia-Leningrad line. I wanna see german tanks blitzing through russia while russian infantry defends important strategic points like cities etc.
-
How can the allies win?
Simple, they cant.
Germany elects to not spend its initial IPC’s, adding them to his 40 from the first turn income. Germany then buys 5 transports and 1 destroyer. The opening turn for the Reich then proceeds as usual, with many naval victories and convoys being captured. However, Germany does not attack Russia with any substantial forces, but instead moves several artillery pieces into Germany to add to the assault force while moving infantry to the front lines to the east to replace them.
Germany then places thier transports and destroyer into the sea zone off the coast of Germany which is within two zones from all Great Brittain’s sea zones (cant remember the name of the sea zone at the moment)
This forces the allies to make a hard decision: To attack the convoy of transports with planes (the only thing available at this time), most likely losing thier entire airforce while only depleting the convoy, weakening thier defensive capabilities in the process, or letting it go unmolested and baring the full brunt of ten ground units supported by planes + amphibious assault on the second turn.
This strategy is absolutely devastating. Even if the allies know fully what Germany is planning on doing and they spend thier entire 12 IPC’s at the beginning on 4 infantry for England, they still will be defeated, unless they have some VERY hot dice. The Americans, with thier starting fleet destroyed, are limited to flying thier fighter and bomber to England, therefore are not a significant factor.
However, if by some chance Great Brittain does defeat both the first and second assault, Germany will not have enough ground troops to sustain this tactic, and will most likely be forced back with a chance of being overran by the re-organized russian forces.
My best advice to defeat these tactics is for the U.S. to spend all of its IPC’s on fighters the first turn and hope that G.B. dosn’t fall on Germany’s second turn, then fly the planes over on the U.S.’ second turn while Russia puts the proverbial screws to Germany in the east beginning with turn 1. G.B. would be forced to buy all infantry as soon as those transports are on the board and until they are destroyed or Germany’s ground troops are depleted.
(I’d recommend an optional rule: Germany is restricted from buying transports on the first turn, however not from spending thier initial 12 IPC’s on a transport)
This is a fun game. Thanks for reading my over-analytical commentary.
Rikimaru
-
So you’re saying there’s a chance…
-
If you ignore the Russians they will kill Germany. Think of all the infantry they can have on the front in the first turn; then it’s only a turn or two to build offensive force, then they can plow through German lines like the fall of '43/summer of '44.
-
i gotta try that……
-
Your talking operation Sea lion. Here is my opinion on that.
If the battle goes bad, your dead. The allies can easily prepare for it. Second, WHY would you ever want to save your initial 12 IPCS? You go first. The russians will be on your A$$. I highly doubt you can attack succesfully on the second turn.
-
I disagree with some of the replies to my post. Why would Germany not want to spend thier initial IPC’s? Good question, but there is a logical reason. Often the Allies’ placing of units purchased by the initial 12 IPC’s is directly related to what Germany purchased and where units were placed. If Germany does not spend this cash this leaves the allies guessing. Secondly, for the strategy I suggested it makes absolutely no difference whether this money is spent before or during the first turn. Why telegraph your strategy? However you do have a point that the allies could reinforce england somewhat, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it could be done easily.
You are also correct stating that this is somewhat of a “do or die” tactic. If the invasion fails Germany will most likely be pushed back with little chance to do much of anything except prolong the game.
Riki,
P.S. is A&A: Pacific as good as Europe? Havent played it yet, and wondering if its worth dropping another $40 on a board game.
-
What I do is always buy a bomber every turn for the USA and each turn bomb Germany economicly and I also have Britian Bombing them as well. With Russia I buy all infantry and push every last person I can towards the Eastern Front(Russia’s view)to help slow the Germans down.
-
There is a difference between placing units with the 12 IPCs and buying it first turn. With the 12 IPCs you can put the units anywhere that you already have units, after that, you can only build where there is an IC. (and you can’t build any more of them)
-
You think that the original game is balanced ?
Why there is “bidding” on every serious A&A gaming site ?
The original game is biased for the allies like all the variants are.
-
The Pro, umm its based on history, its suppose to be imbalanced
-
If the games were historically accurate, the axis in the original would have no chance ofwinning. Japan’s land holdings were extremely exaggerated.
-
“everything that i said was just a pack of lies” - Napoleon
A&A is pretty good if played by a bunch of ignorant amateurs… if you experienced veterans are so good, why dont u set up your own game… like A&A in space? there’s lotsa room for you to manoeuver around there. Don’t forget, Montgomery got his ass seriously whooped by rommel even though that desert fox guy had half his troops and made more mistakes than Montgomery… war is unpredictable, thats a fact…
-
For the sealion: let the UK build subs to protect itself by stalling the german fleet. Move a sub in, submerge without fighting in your turn, not allowing germany to load up troops on his turn.
Suggested Topics
