@Cow:
I also share this idea, that Allied victories take longer than Axis ones. I felt it already on 1st Ed., where the Allies win by securing Africa and earning more than Axis while preventing Russia from falling.
omg I get it now, you always played the income game in revised.
Look most games are not played the way you play it.
Russians charge full steam. buys 4 armor and arty or 3 inf 3 armor. kill ukraine and west russia with every available unit. bring everything toward russia/caucasus from the pacific side. If germany stacks karelia, russians all in, same for ukraine or belorussia. From west russia you skirmish karelia/belo/ukraine. meanwhile the brits are either A) dropping norway round 1 B) dropping algeria round 1 with usa and germany has like 50/50 odds as killin the fleet or algeria. UK could shove 2 fighter 1 bomber at 2 sub 1 tran and 1 dd or use the bomber to take back egypt or fly all the air in range of sinking the germany transport/battleship in africa. carrier/dd should always attack the lone transport japan has. the australia transport either takes new guinea or brings new zealand to australia and threatens borneo. Sometimes uk will attack FIC or borneo same turn if egypt defended itself.
Japan will eventually churn out armor and go to take russia, usually the allies rush berlin out of the game before japan falls, hence the 7-9 bid the axis get in revised… which either A) goes toward holding karelia G1 or B) gets placed in africa to blitz
Now, if you play the turtle game. there is a huge problem. 1) the turtle game usually involves usa shuffling units to africa and those units marching toward caucasus/india while the uk shuffles archangel to russia. - It is not hard for germany to stack karelia and strafe your archangel drops. - germany can rush caucasus alternatively - japan has 2 battleships so usa will have it hard trying to march its way in time.
Plus germany doesn’t have to keep units at west europe. He can make a good push to hold west russia and if germany holds west russia, caucasus is done, and when germany has caucasus, that is not good, because then the income starts to even out. Sure you could say usa will have 6 bombers 1 germany, but japan can do the same thing to america from alaska.
none the less the income game was always boring. I am disappointed that you play that way, when the allies can just rush berlin no problem and win outright. Now maybe if the axis started turtling right off the bat, would I go, you know what… how about I just make more money and win that way. Usually that is not the case.
~
Anyway that was a rough analogy of how revised was played. Usually players rushed. I understand the forum games are much more conservative, but it is not representative of live games people play in real life. No one does that, because there is this popular game called monopoly that is based on income. The triplea lobb is half n half, which is cool, because there is a good mix of play styles. As well as a good mix of dice and low luck games.
Aggressive strategies do work in both dice and low luck for revised. You can ask Bayder, if he ever comes back lol.
I play as I like to play and as it makes me win :)
I’ve actually played bayder several times on TripleA (never won him though) and he was a master of Revised. But he would switch between both aggressive and passive - he would also be trying new stuff all the time- and if your opponent is playing for income and his strategy is winning then you adjust your own strategy and vice-versa. It’s all a matter of the right conditions and also to force your opponent to play in a style that he’s not used to. Bayder also controlled that by almost only playing Low Luck but he would respond to your moves.
This is why critiques such as above: "I’m disappointed that you play the income game’ are meaningless to me. Actually, I’d be glad to disappoint you during a game - because it means I don’t play like you expect me to play, where you are confident of your abilities, which can give me an advantage. So, I’m already starting to defeat you even before I roll the dice :)
And from my experience on A&A (including TripleA and GTO), if you play the long-term game you have a better chance of winning, because you know the long-term effects of certain actions and how to use them to your advantage. Haven’t you ever heard the phrase: “amateurs discuss tactics, professionals discuss logistics”? That pretty much sums it up for me.
