• 2007 AAR League

    I’m not a huge fan of the artillery, I only buy a few in a game.

    It’s true that the same amount of money spent on Inf/Art will pack more punch than that amount spent on Inf/Arm. However, the Arm with their ability to blitz and move 2 spaces means they exert influence over a considerably larger area - a large stack of German Arm in Eastern Europe can strike at either WE or Ukraine, which will affect Allied play in both of those areas, even if you can’t do both it will deter attacks from both.

    Also, if you are attacking with 8 Inf 8 Art (56 IPCs, punch of 32), every casualty means you lose 2 in punch. With 7 Inf 7 Arm (also 56 IPCs, punch of 28) you can take 7 casualties before your offensive strength really starts to decline. Of course you have 4 less punch to begin with, so maybe the Inf/Art are still superior offensively for that reason.

    However, defensively an Inf/Art combination has 1 less punch than an Inf/Arm combination. And as I noted above, your Armor can add its potential punch to two different fronts. I love having a bunch of Armor in Ukraine, the Allies land in Eastern Europe, and the Armor swing back from Ukraine and wipe out the invasion force supported by Inf from Berlin.

    Finally, if you are limited in production by the IPC value of a territory, you get more value building Armor. If Japan has a bunch of transports and ICs in India and FIC, they can build 6 Arm on the mainland and shuttle 4 Inf to Persia every round, which puts a lot of pressure on Russia.

    With Germany though I usually buy 1 or 2 Arm per round as needed so I can buy maximum Infantry with the rest without having any money left over. Then, once you have a substantial amount of Inf to start moving forward, I start buying more Arm than Inf.

    Mostly it’s the tactical value of the speed that makes Armor much more useful than Artillery.


  • @froodster:

    Mostly it’s the tactical value of the speed that makes Armor much more useful than Artillery.

    Which is why artillery can be so good for Russia.  Let the Germans get close and then … wham.

  • 2007 AAR League

    That’s true - Russia doesn’t really need the speed. I’ve played Axis 3 times in a row now, so that skews my thinking.


  • @froodster:

    Mostly it’s the tactical value of the speed that makes Armor much more useful than Artillery.

    Plus the rest of that post in general.

    As Russia, I do not get artillery until German and/or Japan get on the doorstep (i.e. any adjacent territory) to Moscow.  Then I buy a lot.

    For the Axis powers, my belief is that artillery GENERALLY suck.  They have their place on Southern Europe transports or for early game placement.  But that is about it, IMHO.  I rarely purchase artillery with Japan, perhaps one or two combined total every four or five games that I play.  There are exceptions to that latter case, but not many.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Occasionally I’ll use an Artillery to retake a territory held by 1 Inf, if I only have 1 Ftr available for support, attacking with 1 Inf 1 Art 1 Ftr increases your odds of killing the lone inf. Cuz I don’t mind sacrificing the artillery (it will get blowed up on the retake). And then usually only if there’s a tactical reason to make sure I hold the territory, such as to make way for Armor to move through or to block enemy Armor.


  • I have played games where ART purchased as Japan made ALL the difference.  A nice steady INF mass my Japan pushing on Moscow, with ART along to add punch (you get an extra 2 points on your total attack for each INF that is upgraded to ART, a nice boost in combat power for a single IPC spent).

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    As America?  Artillery is mostly a joke.  Sorry, but they take up the same amount of room as a tank. 
    As England I like to do closer to 5:1:1 infantry/artillery/armor
    As Russia I like to do closer to 6:2:1 infantry/artillery/armor

    As Germany I like to do closer to 12:6:1 infantry/artillery/fighter
    As Japan I like to do closer to 8:2 infantry/armor (again, artillery is mostly a joke.)


  • I really only build artillery as Russia and Germany.

    With russia I wait until the axis inch in then counterattack.

    With Germany I alternate buying between infantry/artillery and infantry/armor so the first wave and the second waves tanks arrive at the same place the run after the tanks are built.  This makes for a few very powerful waves of forces that I direct straight to Caucasus, and If I can take Caucasus, that probably means I have a lot of forces nearby and Im able to take Russia 2 or 3 turns later.


  • just finished a game (ftf) and decided to go heavy art w/russia-very successful
    as long as you keep your suply lines tight and short they really chew germany up

  • 2007 AAR League

    Just make sure you use them to attack - otherwise they are just overpriced infantry on defence.

  • 2007 AAR League

    A strategy I have used effectively as Germany calls for a fairly heavy ART/INF mix with lots of FTR.

    Essentially, rather than going for an all out kill of USSR, Germany instead treats the Eastern front as an active defense zone.  Only send enough forces east to keep the USSR in active contention for KAR, BEL and UKR.  Germany should be in possession of these territories at the end of each turn with minimal forces and plenty of INF and ART lined up for the counter attack.  This keeps German supply lines short and holds the USSR army some distance from defending MOS.  The IC point count for the Eastern Front remains relatively static but USSR is losing turf to Japan every turn.  ARM is held back (in EEU) for the times when it is really needed and then it should be in a stack with a lot of INF as fodder.  Keep your eye open for the lightly defended ARC.  Nothing sweeter than an ARM push to Moscow.  You will probably lose more IC in ARM than you get in captured IC but it will certainly refocus an over extended USSR.

    Turning the Eastern Front into a war of attrition with the German playing defense really chews up USSR resources.  BTW, never let the USSR player keep a FTR long.  You can’t afford the mobility it gives him.  He has to be forced to commit ground forces toward Germany so Japan has a fast track to Moscow.

    I’ll leave to your imagination what those extra resources not dying in the fourth retaking of CAU can do to the UK and US.  Personally, I love African diamonds, Brazilian women and Cuban cigars …

    INF and ART on the Eastern Front is definitely an viable option.

  • 2007 AAR League

    As first and second turn ground unit builds for Japan, they are quite nice.  They fill up the transport while adding offensive capability to the infantry and travel with the infantry.

    Essentially, 4 transports gets you 4 Inf and 4 Art.  Do that for two or three turns and then start churning out 4 Inf and 4 ARM.  The ARM can rush up to the front line and the INF just plods along to take its turn as replacements.  That first group of ART, with INF fodder and FTR support is the beginning edge of the Japanese offense.


  • Exactly!

  • 2007 AAR League

    @Baghdaddy:

    As first and second turn ground unit builds for Japan, they are quite nice.  They fill up the transport while adding offensive capability to the infantry and travel with the infantry.

    Essentially, 4 transports gets you 4 Inf and 4 Art.  Do that for two or three turns and then start churning out 4 Inf and 4 ARM.  The ARM can rush up to the front line and the INF just plods along to take its turn as replacements.  That first group of ART, with INF fodder and FTR support is the beginning edge of the Japanese offense.

    You can also just build all Inf, and have more money for more tanks later on, or more transports or whatever. I’ll have to reconsider Art a little though.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Art are important for Germany and Japan, They are helpful and deciding factors in any siege attempt against a Russian Wall.
    everybody seems to there own idea on a ratio of units.

    From experience I just know you need about 6-10 Art when your doing your major assault. I tend to get that in the first 4-5 rounds of the game, after that it’s mostly infantry + Arm

    You can run your own simulations (30 ish Infantry attacking at 1 will hardly get you any hits) 15-20 infantry will get you roughly the same amount of hits but if the rest are added with Artillery now your talking.

    Artillery are good for Russia on the allied side to help in the trading of territories. but besides that I don’t find UK or USA needs them nearly as much. the UK will have shore bombardment + fgts and perhaps 1 bmb to help trade the few territories it’s trading with Germany.

    I guess basically what I am saying is Artillery are good for assaults and not for trading territories nearly as much unless your Russia. all the other countries will be using mostly Fighters teamed up with Infantry to trade territories

  • 2007 AAR League

    Well from my experience (Moscow sacked 3 games in a row) you don’t need any artillery, because none of those assaults involved more than maybe 3 artillery, and that was the most. 1 or 2 for the others.


  • The trick with artillery, as has been posted earlier, is that it is valuable for an attacker, and a waste for a defender (overpriced INF).

    So, the question as to whether or not to buy ART over ARM to add to your INF is a matter of 2 questions…
    1.  Available Cash
    2.  Whether you are predominately attacking, whether you are actively trading, or whether you are defending.

  • 2007 AAR League

    That 2nd question is not as simple as it seems though - Russia’s role is to defend, but a good way to defend is to counter-attack. So I wouldn’t write artillery off for Russia just because it has to play defence.


  • russian artillery if you are trading single countries (holding the one you took while vacating the one you took it from)  if you are ‘nibbling’ then inf/air is vastly more cost effective.

    i also used to just buy the art when i had the extra buck, too piece meal.  either art and mean it or save the buck for next turn


  • @froodster:

    That 2nd question is not as simple as it seems though - Russia’s role is to defend, but a good way to defend is to counter-attack. So I wouldn’t write artillery off for Russia just because it has to play defence.

    umm this is suppose to be how russia can win not how Germany can win. rember my maxum “Russia: germany can’t take moscow if your march to france.” i sya build inf and artillery unitll you can take addvantage of tank movement.(2 spaces from and ic)

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 14
  • 15
  • 2
  • 8
  • 10
  • 5
  • 9
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

40

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts