• '21 '20 '18 '17

    We have gone back and forth on this for years, but ABH’s records and point of view are persuasive.

    As player skill increases, the Axis advantage is preserved, because the Axis are harder to manage and plan but easier to win with
    Certain evolved exploits in the game such as strategic bombing and turn order exploitation cause Russia to collapse but if you try to make Russia stronger, Germany has little choice about what to do or how to do it
    There is a ton of variety in the game, but only one critical path
    The USA can demolish Japan, but not Germany

    The Allies have no rational victory condition, but the Axis have many
    The Allies have only one way to attempt that victory (destroy Germany or Japan) while the Axis can focus on VC after VC and win on either board without destroying the Allies in detail
    Taking an Axis capital is a victory condition, but Rome doesn’t matter and Berlin and Tokyo are unassailable
    Once India or Moscow fall, the writing is on the wall and the Allies have to do something game changing in order to stop a cascade of events that lead to a loss (all 3 axis taking Iraq Persia and Egypt)

    That does not mean the game is broken, because you can

    bid
    play balanced mod which addresses some of these
    add your own mods or house rules
    distribute new/veteran players onto different teams
    play a variety of opponents
    play different games besides just Global so you don’t beat a dead horse

    176 games of AxA played since 2014

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18

    Only way Allies win ever with no bid is if you turn NOs off. Otherwise it’s an Axis stomp basically every time.

    And this is coming from a guy who barely plays G40 competitively.

  • '17 Customizer

    If the Japanese don’t attack before 3 turns to keep the Americans out, then they cannot take the islands, India, etc.  They are relegated to the Chinese endless whack-a-mole scenario that just burns up ground forces and does not really gain much IPC$ or ground.  If they attack before turn 3 then they unleash 72+ IPCS while they are at 40ish?  The Japanese can’t really build any airbases or ports early on…cannot afford it.

    The Germans can’t do Sea Lion or much of anything, fend off the Russians, help the Italians, etc.  One game I convoy robbed USA with constant subs but once learned that is easily defeated.

    I think we are pretty experienced gamers.  Played just about every Avalon Hill wargame there was when younger (more complicated than A&A), played original A&A, etc., 1942, now this.  Person I play with is WW2 junkie, had a museum, can tell you what happened at every battle, knows the different piping on uniforms…you name it.

    We both struggle as Axis…just don’t see it.  American IPC is too much.

  • '21 '18 '16

    I guess the word “mastered” was not the correct choice. I should say the US strategy has gotten very “surgical”, which implies continued practice.
    It was a mixed group of about 6 guys. Continually changing factions each time the game was played. At first, Germany was unstoppable every game. Then, Japan was a behemoth.
    This was likely due to inexperience for all involved. As the Allied strategy developed, it went from massive US bombing campaigns on Germany to all out submarine convoy death to what it is now.
    Its basically morphed into a Japanese assault from all sides, with UK DOW on turn 2 usually. This pre-empts some of the usual Japanese gains as Yunan becomes a fortress.
    Most of our players wait until Japan is out of position and then slam with USSR forces into Manchuria and Korea. This disruption is usually enough for the Japan player to panic. Then the US brings the hurt with a massive bomber buy. This is followed by a massive sub buy and Japan is usually neutered. Not overrun, neutered. We all know what that means.

    Then Germany gets a taste.

    This is usually predicated by the big Bryansk standoff.

    Obviously we made some house rules to vary the game. I’ve posted here before. This creates less linearity for our play group and offers one time and continuous advantages for each faction. It also offers some disadvantages as well. Some very devastating, but not too out of the realm of reality.

    Mostly Allied wins at this point. Usually an Axis win is from some achieved technology or a really great opener. Maybe we aren’t as skilled as some of the others here, but, win or lose, we have a great time and have never run out of beer. So win win for us!

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    If you run out of beer, that is far worse and more ignominious than than unconditional, total surrender.


  • @taamvan:

    If you run out of beer, that is far worse and more ignominious than than unconditional, total surrender.

    Naval historian Samuel Eliot Morison, if I’m not mistaken, once wrote that the United States Navy could probably win a war without coffee if it had to do so, but that it would really prefer not to have to try this.


  • Thank you for clarifying it.

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    @Arthur:

    It is easy to recognize people with limited G40 experience based on how they respond to this question.  Early-game lack of strategy by the Axis is very damaging because of the initial economic imbalance, and hence more damaging to neophytes compared to when they play the Allies.  If Germany and Japan grow too slowly, they will inevitably be crushed.  Also, if they spread their focus into too many gameplans, forces get too thin and none of the efforts will succeed.  Allies don’t have as much of an issue with this.

    The data from lots of League games suggest that an Allies +40 bid is now necessary to balance the game.  That doesn’t mean that Allies have no chance: a bad first round for Germany alone could result in a -40 outcome compared to expectations.  A bunch of planes could crash and burn going after the UK fleets, or a bunch of fast movers could be blown up in the Paris attack.  It doesn’t take too many tanks or planes to reach a 40 TUV swing.  I have had such horrible dice rolls that I gave up after G4.  Almost all of my air force was gone despite being relatively conservative in attacks.  Issues tend to compound themselves, making bad luck turn into horrible luck.

    ABH speaks the truth.

    Anyone asking this question should just be referred to the league history,found here: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34806.0

    The evidence is overwhelming: no bid G40 2nd is heavy Axis favored. The Allies can win, but unlikely.

    The Axis simply secure econ advantage by turn 5 or so and go on defense until they gain overwhelming military superiority.

    Playing the same group/people over and over tends to stultify one’s skill.  I speak from experience.  Joining the league was a rude awakening that all the things I thought were true about the game were largely wrong or only half-understood.

    If anyone wants to try the Allies no bid G40 2nd, I am ready to go on the league or PBEM.

    My Stukas are warming up!


  • Couldn’t say it any better!

    P IV’s warming up!!

    Screenshot_20180308-092113.jpg


  • A good standard Germany strategy for an aggressive Germany at least from what ive read on the forums and will probably  gain you those axis victories, is turn one, take out the British navy, France, and east Poland. If you wait on Russia for just one turn, thats almost 40 extra ipc you have to deal with. Build a major on turn one and place it in  Romania. You will also do the standard Yugoslavia strafe. Move your forces from Berlin to Poland. you can put in like seven guys and up to six tanks in east Poland. Then make the decision to either go north or south. You can do a mix which is the move your initial forces from Berlin, Poland and Czechoslovakia to Leningrad. Then usr your romanian factory to pump out tanks and mechs + your southern German forces you strafed from Romania into Ukraine. After that, Moscow looks like a piece of cake IF you play correctly and bring your Luftwaffe in and dont waste em.

  • '17

    @DessertFox599:

    If you wait on Russia for just one turn, thats almost 40 extra ipc you have to deal with. Build a major on turn one and place it in � Romania.

    6 artillery / 2 inf or buy 6 inf / 3 artillery G1 followed by faster movers. I think the Major IC goes back to the 1st edition where Berlin had a minor IC.

  • '19 '17 '16

    @DessertFox599:

    A good standard Germany strategy for an aggressive Germany at least from what ive read on the forums and will probably  gain you those axis victories, is turn one, take out the British navy, France, and east Poland. If you wait on Russia for just one turn, thats almost 40 extra ipc you have to deal with. Build a major on turn one and place it in  Romania. You will also do the standard Yugoslavia strafe. Move your forces from Berlin to Poland. you can put in like seven guys and up to six tanks in east Poland. Then make the decision to either go north or south. You can do a mix which is the move your initial forces from Berlin, Poland and Czechoslovakia to Leningrad. Then usr your romanian factory to pump out tanks and mechs + your southern German forces you strafed from Romania into Ukraine. After that, Moscow looks like a piece of cake IF you play correctly and bring your Luftwaffe in and dont waste em.

    You won’t find experienced Axis players doing such moves. G1 DOW is not preferred, for a start.

    Normally: G2/G3 DOW, focus on USSR, don’t fight UK much after G1 (perhaps SBR G2). Italy can opens. J1/J2 DOW in the Pacific.

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @Karl7:

    @Arthur:

    The data from lots of League games suggest that an Allies +40 bid is now necessary to balance the game.  That doesn’t mean that Allies have no chance: a bad first round for Germany alone could result in a -40 outcome compared to expectations.  A bunch of planes could crash and burn going after the UK fleets, or a bunch of fast movers could be blown up in the Paris attack.  It doesn’t take too many tanks or planes to reach a 40 TUV swing.  I have had such horrible dice rolls that I gave up after G4.  Almost all of my air force was gone despite being relatively conservative in attacks.  Issues tend to compound themselves, making bad luck turn into horrible luck.

    ABH speaks the truth.

    Where are all these opponents who are giving the Allies +40? I want to play some of those.

    Marsh


  • Veritas, thank you for reminding me of the only anime I watch. I still need to finish watching GuP.  Basically WoT animated ha.

    Getting back to the topic, I find Axis to win about 60% of the time.  Interestingly, statictics repeatedly show that the Axis do better with reduced luck variants.  For some reason, it always seems that getting diced on an attack is worse than a poor defense (assuming the attacker is not purposely going against odds).  Theoretically, as long as the Axis don’t make any mistakes and the dice come out 100% as expected, the Allies will lose every time.  Now that is a long stretch because we are all liable to make mistakes, but the lower the luck, the more I see Axis winning.  A j1 attack that swings out of Japan’s favor is much more influential than a J1 attack that is overwhelming in Japan’s favor.

    The Axis advantage is largely based on concentrated force and straightforward goals.  It takes a certain discipline and cool-headedness to play as the Axis.  It’s hard to ignore the same temptations that ruined those great powers.  We never use bids here but rather add house rules.  There is a pervasive mentality in my group that it is no fun to win with a typical Axis strategy.  This results in unique and interesting wars that aren’t as imbalanced as OOB.  Am I saying that the Axis purposely play poorly and that is how the game is balanced for me?  Well, yes.  The script for Axis victory is very precise, but the real fun is finding out how you can alter or (from the Allied perspective) halt this.

    And then there is the dice—the gem that makes those georgous messes.

    I have never been a fan of letting players add a unit of their choice (a bid).  I need to have a firm foundation to build strategy on, not just a reaction based upon a pre-game unit placement.  If you feel the game is out of balance, a very simple and easy way to fix that is by adjusting NOs, particularly the U.S.'s.

    I should also note that alternate setups are the best thing you can consider.  There is only so much you can do with OOB.  Larry’s 1942 made Russia need an entirely new approach.


  • Thank you CdG.

    Interesting read.

    @Charles:

    Veritas, thank you for reminding me of the only anime I watch. I still need to finish watching GuP.  Basically WoT animated ha.

    I should also note that alternate setups are the best thing you can consider.  There is only so much you can do with OOB.  Larry’s 1942 made Russia need an entirely new approach.

    Isn’t this alternatively like a bid?

    Triple a is like a box of chocolates, you never know…. 8-)

  • '19 '17

    @Marshmallow:

    @Karl7:

    @Arthur:

    The data from lots of League games suggest that an Allies +40 bid is now necessary to balance the game.  That doesn’t mean that Allies have no chance: a bad first round for Germany alone could result in a -40 outcome compared to expectations.  A bunch of planes could crash and burn going after the UK fleets, or a bunch of fast movers could be blown up in the Paris attack.  It doesn’t take too many tanks or planes to reach a 40 TUV swing.  I have had such horrible dice rolls that I gave up after G4.  Almost all of my air force was gone despite being relatively conservative in attacks.  Issues tend to compound themselves, making bad luck turn into horrible luck.

    ABH speaks the truth.

    Where are all these opponents who are giving the Allies +40? I want to play some of those.

    Marsh

    In league? Check the statistics for the top players, and check the bid for playoff games.

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    @Adam514:

    @Marshmallow:

    @Karl7:

    @Arthur:

    The data from lots of League games suggest that an Allies +40 bid is now necessary to balance the game.  That doesn’t mean that Allies have no chance: a bad first round for Germany alone could result in a -40 outcome compared to expectations.  A bunch of planes could crash and burn going after the UK fleets, or a bunch of fast movers could be blown up in the Paris attack.  It doesn’t take too many tanks or planes to reach a 40 TUV swing.  I have had such horrible dice rolls that I gave up after G4.  Almost all of my air force was gone despite being relatively conservative in attacks.  Issues tend to compound themselves, making bad luck turn into horrible luck.

    ABH speaks the truth.

    Where are all these opponents who are giving the Allies +40? I want to play some of those.

    Marsh

    In league? Check the statistics for the top players, and check the bid for playoff games.

    Adam is being modest.

    He IS the guy you’d need 40+ for allies in regular G40 2nd.  :lol:


  • I would need at least Allies+60 to have an even chance against Adam.  He will find that small strategic mistake somewhere on the board and ram it down your throat.  A couple expensive units here or there, or a few high-value territories and he now has the advantage as Axis.  Furthermore he will never make a big mistake to let you back into a match.

    With your additional Allied starting units you will get strong control of a couple theaters of operation on the board (Africa, Russia, Atlantic, Med, India, Money Islands, China, Pacific, Siberia, Middle East), but that still leaves a bunch of other theaters where he can press his strategic advantage to ultimately win late-game victories.  Just because the Allies controls Moscow and India on G7 and J7 in a PBEM game doesn’t mean that the Axis can’t create enough threats to prevail.  That is a huge difference compared to a face-to-face match where usually one side yolo’s it and gets in a big fight because they have become bored during the many hours of play.

    Eventually the Axis mobility will allow Adam to quickly pivot faster than you can foresee, pressing a killer attack while maintaining just enough defense to stall or delay the Allies’ plans.  You are celebrating that the stack in Moscow is holding strong and all of a sudden there is sufficient fleet with Luftwaffe support to crush Egypt.  You think that the combined forces in the Middle East will provide adequate defense against the Italians+Germans when all of a sudden he gets his Japanese forces to swing the difference in odds.  You think that you have appropriate ship blocks in the Pacific and he will bring in German bombers to force your Allied forces to consolidate into a non-strategic sea zone.  He will find something and you will lose.  Soooo many great people have learned that lesson the hard way.  The Axis have control of the momentum and can maintain it throughout the game if the player has sufficient skill and the dice don’t wreck havoc.

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Agreed.  Bids are a little overrated.

    The one unit per terr. limit dumbs down the effect pretty good.

    Not to mention, 40 is only 4 ftrs…… not a huge difference, which is why the bid is usually dumped in the unit starved middle east where it can more impact.

  • '19 '17 '16

    Bids allow some opening Axis attacks to be blocked, such as SZ111 and Yunnan and also allows some allied attacks to be strengthened (Taranto, Ethiopia).

    This differs from Balanced Mod’s approach which is to strengthen the allies later in the game. Both approaches have weaknesses IMO.

    I’m struggling to find a counter to strong Axis play in either version. If Axis play well and dice are even, they should win easily.

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 12
  • 1
  • 7
  • 66
  • 8
  • 8
  • 13
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

34

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts