3 Key Allied Territories (Epl, Per, Novo)

  • Moderator

    It might go without saying, but I think these are the 3 territories the Allies should look to hold as soon as possible.

    Defense is cheaper than offense, so if you can hold these you can survive a slight economic disadvantage and then use your superior position to even the game.

    Epl is probably the toughest to control, given the G/Ita 1-2 and you’ll almost always need UK cover to help defend.  That means you probably won’t get a chance to stack until rds 6-8.  That could be a long time of Russia playing solid defense.

    Per is tough as well with a stong Japanese southern push, but with bidding and tactical retreats you can muster a solid initial UK force and you should be good for the first 4 rds or so.  Russia might be able to supply an inf or two.  By Rd 5 or 6 you should have UK/US support coming in b/c of a round 2 landing in Alg.  At this point you should be able to partially match what Japan can bring.  Again, defense is the key.  Your UK/US inf are fine with just a couple arm or maybe ftrs.

    Novo is probably the last piece that falls into place, but is crucial for cutting off Japan’s central and northern stacks.  The top priority is protecting Moscow, so you might have to build up a while in Mos, to hold Ger at bay while deazoning Novo before finally being able to move a stack there in defense.

    Stacking Epl or Per starts making the other objectives easier.  With Epl the Germans are no longer a threat offensively and with Per you have a steady supply of Allied reinforcements from the south as well as the UK reinforcements that should be hitting Kar in about round 5 or 6.  Epl also puts the big Russian NO in play.

    Russia should be played fairly aggressively (that doesn’t mean you waste units), but you can trade inf/rt for German inf/arm.  Spread out Germany if you can.  They start infantry light so try to get them to commit some armor in retaking the boarder spots.  Tactical retreat in the East once its clear Japan can pound your northern inf stack.  That’s a nice bonus of inf that can be exactly what you need to hold Novo in rd 6 or so.

    UK should focus on early navy and land in Alg in Round 2 and 3.  Mid East units should look to hold Trj on UK 3 so you can sink the Ita navy before Ita 3.  Then you switch to holding Per.  By rd 4 you are looking to get your navy to Sz 6 to provide the token threat on Ger while you start your landings in Nor and march to Kar.

    US sets up a shuck to Afr, lands in Afr from Rd 2 on.  This shuck can consist of anything from 1 to 4 or 5 trns.  In the 1 trn shuck you are going Pacific Heavy meaning you are only sending 2 units to Afr per trun.  With a middle shuck or 2-3 trns you can still spend about 30-36 ipc on the Pac for defense while still sending 4-6 units to Afr and providing a token threat on Ita.  With a heavy shuck 4-5 trns, you’ll probably be going all out KG(I)F and relying on placing 10 units per turn on Wus to cover your back side.  The Heavy shuck provides a major threat to Italy and will ultimately get expanded to a 3x3 or 4x4 to Northern Europe or it sets up a Med Shuck where you can go from Sz 12 to Sz 14 to Sz 16 and send units directly from Alg to Cauc.


  • To Cau, hmm? I think a bigger threat to the Axis would be Bulgaria. Two spaces away from either major industrial hub, a location to grant Russia a 10 IPC bonus, and really, can Germany set out to take their 7 IPC territory back (19, if you include the Allied imbalance of resources).


  • Epl: wrest from Ger, very hard
    Per: our standard UK 1
    Novo: interesting, never played, we use Yakut S.S.R. with US Figther over Alaska

  • '16 '15 '10

    Interesting post.  It’s difficult, however, to construct even general guidelines, as strategy in AA50 depends so much on how events unfold.  For example on UK2-3 I could be landing anywhere…France, Norway, Algeria, Karelia…depending on what Germany decides to do.

    @DarthMaximus:

    Epl is probably the toughest to control, given the G/Ita 1-2 and you’ll almost always need UK cover to help defend.  That means you probably won’t get a chance to stack until rds 6-8.  That could be a long time of Russia playing solid defense.

    Round 6 would actually be the latest I think…Russia should be moving forward before then.  If Russia is only getting E. Poland on R6, then Japan may be able to stack Persia on J6.  E. Poland is key but to win the long game Allies need to push farther and take Poland as well.

    UK should focus on early navy and land in Alg in Round 2 and 3.  Mid East units should look to hold Trj on UK 3 so you can sink the Ita navy before Ita 3.  Then you switch to holding Per.  By rd 4 you are looking to get your navy to Sz 6 to provide the token threat on Ger while you start your landings in Nor and march to Kar.

    Problem is the difficulty of getting UK units to Persia in time to register an effect.  As Axis, I’m finding more and better ways to delay and destroy the Allies in North Africa…to the point where if the Allies want Persia, it’s up to Russia plus Allied fighters for support.


  • My 3 key Allied territories are:

    EUS
    GBr
    Rus

    No, seriously, Zhukov is right when he says it depends on what the Axis are doing.

  • Moderator

    Certainly it depends on the Axis and how the game unfolds, but I was thinking of some general guidelines so you can judge how you are doing.  I think economics in AA50 are a bit harder to look at (both IPC count and unit count).  It isn’t like Revised where there are a fixed number of IPCs available every turn, AA50 has NOs and it could be hard to predict or guage future incomes.  One UK/US landing in Fra or the big Russian NO might be enough to really swing income values but I don’t know if you can count on that future income when you are trying to look 3-4 turns down the road.

    I thing these three ter give you realistic achievable goals, that should lead to other things.  I agree Pol is huge for the Allies, BUT Epl completely cuts off both a northern and southern Ger advance it puts Pol and Bul in play for the Allies.

    Likewise the combo of Novo + Per makes things extremely difficult for Japan especially if they have been marching arm through China and more troops through India.  The split forces make it possible for the Allies to hold firm with less units.  Novo protects Chi, Eve, and Kaz and Per can alos help in Kaz while making it hard for Japan to link up any split forces.

    The main idea behind the combo of the three is to completely control the center of the board and eliminate the threats to Moscow.

    On the flip side, you want to avoid letting Ger get a (meaningful) stack in Epl and Japan getting a stack in Per.  Deadzoning is fine, but these seem like the territories of no return.  If one side can push that far and hold them for a full round or two it seems like the rest of the dominos will fall as well.


  • @DarthMaximus:

    I agree Pol is huge for the Allies, BUT Epl completely cuts off both a northern and southern Ger advance it puts Pol and Bul in play for the Allies.

    On the flip side, you want to avoid letting Ger get a (meaningful) stack in Epl and Japan getting a stack in Per.  Deadzoning is fine, but these seem like the territories of no return.  If one side can push that far and hold them for a full round or two it seems like the rest of the dominos will fall as well.

    I don’t think EPL is the panacea you see it as.  If I were Germany, I would be perfectly happy to own Karelia and Poland and trade all those border territories, especially since Germany can now be taking findland on their turn to prevent the big Russian NO.


  • @axis_roll:

    I don’t think EPL is the panacea you see it as.  If I were Germany, I would be perfectly happy to own Karelia and Poland and trade all those border territories, especially since Germany can now be taking findland on their turn to prevent the big Russian NO.

    I agree.
    I’ll go one further.
    Karelia (or Cau, of France for that matter) is probably more important than EPL, Per, or Nov

    Heck, Chi is probably more important than Nov.  It’s the chokepoint, and entry/exit between Russia and China.

  • Moderator

    Trading the boarder territories is one thing, but I think as Russia I’d rather give up Kar if it ment I can stack Epl.  And by stack I mean with enough force to hold vs. a Ger/Ita attack.  Kar/Nor/Fin can be attacked by UK/US and with Epl, Russia can strafe Pol (or trade if feasible) cutting off any reinforcements for Ger.  All they’ll get is 2 units per turn.  Again depending on the period of the game UK/US can really wear G down in Kar (or Pol).  I don’t think Germany can hold Kar long term if the Allies have a stack in Epl.  Now if Ger controls Epl, I’m not sure how long the Allies can hold Kar.  Any reinforcements need to go through Arch (or come from UK/US) but Russia still has to protect against the can opener.

    I equate it to Wrus (in Revised).  Wrus was a lot more valuable then Cauc, even though Cauc had the IC.  A Wrus stack cutoff the Germans from going to Kar or Ukr, thereby protecting Cauc as well.  And if the Germans ever got Wrus, it meant they got Cauc as well the folowing turn since Russia woulld likely have to fall back to protect Mos.  In AA50 I think Epl does the same thing and allows the consolidation of forces into one territory.  If you can stack Epl you thereby are potecting both Kar and Cauc.

  • Moderator

    @gamerman01:

    Heck, Chi is probably more important than Nov.  It’s the chokepoint, and entry/exit between Russia and China.

    Chi is slighlty weaker than Novo, b/c Japan can go around it.  A J stack is safe in Eve.  They simply move to Ural and the forces in Chi are wasted.  A decent Novo stack forces either one Massive J stack coming from the Central or North, OR TWO Large stacks.  And two large stacks takes more time, time the Allies may need to set up their UK/US shuck.

  • '16 '15 '10

    For me, the Russian lurch is a simulateneous advance into Belorussia and East Ukraine, followed by an advance on East Poland.  Sometimes, depending on circumstance, they will go to Ukraine instead of E. Ukraine.  The important part is stacking Belorussia to make German stacks in Karelia or East Poland vulnerable.

    However it’s hard to actually hold Novo (beyond the 6 dudes retreating from Siberia) and Persia and also accomplish this offensive in the Eastern front.


  • @DarthMaximus:

    @gamerman01:

    Heck, Chi is probably more important than Nov.  It’s the chokepoint, and entry/exit between Russia and China.

    Chi is slighlty weaker than Novo, b/c Japan can go around it.  A J stack is safe in Eve.  They simply move to Ural and the forces in Chi are wasted.  A decent Novo stack forces either one Massive J stack coming from the Central or North, OR TWO Large stacks.  And two large stacks takes more time, time the Allies may need to set up their UK/US shuck.

    I’m not talking about stacking, though.  Your post is talking stack this, stack that, stack everything.  Do you play no tech or something?  The only time I see stacking going on is in no tech.
    I wasn’t talking about stacking Chi.  I was saying it has strategic importance, and moreso than Nov.
    But if your play style ends up with you and your opponent with huge stacks everywhere, that’s not the kind of game I play, so you’re talking apples and I’m talking oranges.

    Maybe you’re like an opponent I’m playing right now who buys like 10 infantry every single turn with Russia no matter what the situation is (slight exaggeration, but not much).  So yes, depending on how you play, I think which territories are strategic is actually not a static thing.  It depends on the players, and whether you’re playing with tech or not.  Don’t you think?


  • @DarthMaximus:

    A J stack is safe in Eve.  They simply move to Ural and the forces in Chi are wasted.  A decent Novo stack forces either one Massive J stack coming from the Central or North, OR TWO Large stacks.  And two large stacks takes more time, time the Allies may need to set up their UK/US shuck.

    Are you talking about huge stacks of mostly infantry lumbering around?  I have no idea what you’re talking about, because in my 30 games of AA50 so far, I really have never seen “huge” stacks of Japs trudging around Russia and India and what not.  I guess I play more “lightning war” than huge stacks of infantry.

  • Moderator

    @Zhukov44:

    For me, the Russian lurch is a simulateneous advance into Belorussia and East Ukraine, followed by an advance on East Poland.  Sometimes, depending on circumstance, they will go to Ukraine instead of E. Ukraine.  The important part is stacking Belorussia to make German stacks in Karelia or East Poland vulnerable.

    Yeah, Belo is a nice spot if Germany is going after Kar, and if you can move to Belo and Euk (or Ukr) all the better.  :-)

    @Zhukov44:

    However it’s hard to actually hold Novo (beyond the 6 dudes retreating from Siberia) and Persia and also accomplish this offensive in the Eastern front.

    I usually have to wait for Allied help in Europe.  I try to stop the Ger/Ita advance, while Russia retreats out East, and I usually end up building up in Moscow for a bit.  But if all goes well the UK/US start to take over the heavy lifting in Europe and I’ll then pull back the some of Russian forces and eventually turn them all on to Japan.  Persia is a bit of a wild card, if you can hold together your initial units you can delay long enough for Allied help, usually via North Africa.  But if Japan goes all out for Ind/Per early you might not be able to hold there, in which case maybe you can set up the US shuck to Cauc if you are dire need of troops.

    @gamerman01:

    I’m not talking about stacking, though.  Your post is talking stack this, stack that, stack everything.  Do you play no tech or something?  The only time I see stacking going on is in no tech.
    I wasn’t talking about stacking Chi.  I was saying it has strategic importance, and moreso than Nov.
    But if your play style ends up with you and your opponent with huge stacks everywhere, that’s not the kind of game I play, so you’re talking apples and I’m talking oranges.

    Correct, I play no tech.  But I was just using ‘stack’ as a generic term.  Heck, a stack could be as little as 2-3 inf.  It only has to be as big as what the enemy can threaten you with.  If Japan can send 4 tanks at you then you only need 4-5 inf in your ‘stack’.

    @gamerman01:

    Maybe you’re like an opponent I’m playing right now who buys like 10 infantry every single turn with Russia no matter what the situation is (slight exaggeration, but not much).  So yes, depending on how you play, I think which territories are strategic is actually not a static thing.  It depends on the players, and whether you’re playing with tech or not.  Don’t you think?

    Tech makes a difference, but there are strategic territories that will hold true for most games.

    Much of my play revolves around controlling the center of the board.  90% of all A&A games will be determined by the fall of Moscow or the fall of Berlin.  Almost all major action of the game takes place in Europe, the Med, and Western Russia.  Everything else is a byproduct of how good/bad this is going.  Bad for the Allies, then more trns in the Atlantic for the UK/US to help, or threaten Japan, etc.  Bad for Axis, then Japan better step up and help and either take out Mos or threaten the US, or threaten Afr, etc.

    The reason I like Epl in Europe is b/c I think if I can get it then the threat to Moscow from both Ger and Ita is gone.  I don’t have to worry about defending north or south, I can simply pump units into one spot Epl until I have enough for a 1-2-3 attack on Pol or force Germany to deadzone Pol.  Either way good for the Allies.  Once Pol is deadzoned you can go 3 on 1 vs. Japan if Berlin is too well defended to take b/c you now have the economic adv and time is now on your side.

    Obviously if something opens up in Fra or Ita you can take it, but I really like the ability of having 1-2-3 attacks and if you focus on Fra too early you run the risk of the Axis isolating Moscow then turtling in Berlin/Rome.  But if Germany can keep the Allies out of Eastern Europe long enough then it is likely Japan will take Moscow and now you better be able to take Belin/Rome down or else the yellow monster will get you.

    @gamerman01:

    Are you talking about huge stacks of mostly infantry lumbering around?  I have no idea what you’re talking about, because in my 30 games of AA50 so far, I really have never seen “huge” stacks of Japs trudging around Russia and India and what not.  I guess I play more “lightning war” than huge stacks of infantry.

    They don’t have to be huge stacks, just enough to either deter an attack or deadzone the nearby territories.
    Inf are one of the best ways to counter “lightning war”.  Your opponent spends 5 ipc on tanks and you are only spending 3.  It is cheaper to defend so if you can hold a terrirtory, any territory that you think is key you should do so b/c at that point (the point at which it is safe to move your army) for every 3 ipc you add in defense, your opponent will have to spend 4 ipc to make you move.  A generic small example is, to kill 3 inf (9 ipc) your opponent needs to commit about 13-14 ipc (3 inf, 1 rt or arm) worth of units.  But the ratio of 4:3 (attacker ipcs:defender ipcs) holds true, particularly for larger scale battles.

    My theory with the 3 territories in this thread is you can try to create a ‘secure zone’ for Russia while you try to level the economic playing field elsewhere on the board and ultimately turn it in your favor.  You try and grab superior position first then worry about the other stuff.  I guess you could probably turn this into a side debate of position vs. economy.

  • '16 '15 '10

    @DarthMaximus:

    The reason I like Epl in Europe is b/c I think if I can get it then the threat to Moscow from both Ger and Ita is gone.  I don’t have to worry about defending north or south, I can simply pump units into one spot Epl until I have enough for a 1-2-3 attack on Pol or force Germany to deadzone Pol.  Either way good for the Allies.  Once Pol is deadzoned you can go 3 on 1 vs. Japan if Berlin is too well defended to take b/c you now have the economic adv and time is now on your side.

    What are you assuming the Allies control at this point?  Economic advantage depends on the situation in Africa and in the Pacific.  Once Japan has Siberia and China, Allies are hard pressed to hold the economic advantage even if they control Africa.

    Time is not necessarily on the Allies’ side…actually I think the opposite is the case, and Allies need to be aggressive.


  • @Zhukov44:

    Time is not necessarily on the Allies’ side…actually I think the opposite is the case, and Allies need to be aggressive.

    This has been my experience, as well.  Kind of the opposite of the old games.

    Axis can often hold onto 6-8 NO’s at once.  Too many turns of this spells death for Allies.

    I understand your “center of the board” idea and key territories of Epl, Per, and Novo assumes that Russia is the end all - be all.  As you said, 90% of games hang on whether Berlin or Moscow falls.

    This has not been my experience.  Many of the games I’ve been in are decided before any capital falls.  If the Allies can’t get enough of their NO’s going, and can’t stop the Axis from getting 6-8 NO’s per turn, it doesn’t matter if Allies hold EPl, Per and Novo.

    As Zhukov said, time is not necessarily on the Allies’ side.  The days of hanging onto Moscow at all costs until the US and UK save the day, are over.  Now it’s more like the Axis try to hang on in Europe until Japan saves the day, many times.

  • Moderator

    I agree with both of you that time is not on the Allies side to start or for much of the early game, but they can flip it, usually when Russia is able to get her big NO.  If you can get it by turn 3 or 4 that is great (but not likely to happen in the vaste majority of games), but if I’m doing well, I usually see it come into play in maybe rd 5-7 or so.

    I also agree that the Allies need to be aggressive, you can’t just sit back and wait for help early on.  But that doesn’t mean you can’t target key territories.

    I guess my question to you guys would be, how are the Allies winning in your games?  You can assume whatever bid you want for a fair game.

    Do you see loading up going for Fra or Nwe with heavy landings?
    Taking Rome first?
    SBR raids of doom?
    KJF?

    I’ve just found it much harder for the direct landing in Fra or Rome plus I don’t like to separate the 3 Allies.  Even if the Allies are winning ‘quicker games’ how are they doing it???


  • @DarthMaximus:

    I guess my question to you guys would be, how are the Allies winning in your games?  You can assume whatever bid you want for a fair game.

    Do you see loading up going for Fra or Nwe with heavy landings?

    Sometimes.  I think it’s sometimes most effective for the UK to build up a landing force that is greater than 8 ground units (the maximum building capacity) to threaten multiple territories.  It’s often not a good idea to land 6-8 units a turn, but to build up more than that so a major landing can take place (sounds like I’m describing D-Day - I guess that makes sense)  Sometimes Berlin itself can be taken, without piddling around with NWE and France.

    Taking Rome first?

    A so-called KIF - very rare in my experience.  No, Allied wins in my games are usually what you described - Russia getting the big NO for a few turns (or more), usually with the UK taking over Scandinavia, and Russia picking up Bulgaria, or the UK getting Poland, or Balkans.  Although, this is much, much easier in '42 when Britain comes after G and before R than in '41.  I don’t play that much '41.

    SBR raids of doom?

    Heh - not usually.  As Allies, I don’t do much SBR, and as Axis, I’ve only been the recipient a few times.  Once, I was playing a champion player, and he sent in quite a few American bombers every turn early, but my AA never hit him.  Obviously, when AA never hits, SBR works great.  I think it’s risky, and not my method of choice.

    KJF?

    J is almost never K’d.  :lol:
    But I have the minority opinion that there is a LOT of money at stake in the Pacific, and that leaving Japan alone is a mistake, unless you have some unstoppable KGF strat.  The NO for UK is very significant, and the one for USA as well.  It is not uncommon to undo J’s NO for the 6 territories, and sometimes reclaim the Phillipines as well.  It doesn’t take that much for the USA to dance with the Japs in the Pacific and make some progress, and cause some headaches.  I am loathe to let Japan off the hook and just do whatever she wants to terrorize the UK and Russia, and sometimes even the USA.

    I enjoy the thoughtful discourse and ideas you put out here, Darth.  I hope my experiences are helpful, or at least interesting to you, too.

  • '16 '15 '10

    @DarthMaximus:

    I guess my question to you guys would be, how are the Allies winning in your games?  You can assume whatever bid you want for a fair game.

    Do you see loading up going for Fra or Nwe with heavy landings?
    Taking Rome first?
    SBR raids of doom?
    KJF?

    Assuming fairly equal competition, Allied wins typically require either dice luck or Axis errors, even minor ones.

    Common traits of Allied wins include an aggressive Russia, and aggressive landings in France and/or Italy before Western Axis can build up their defenses.  If Allies gang up on Germany/Italy, they don’t necessarily need to make 1:1 trades…they can afford to takes losses for positional and NO benefits.  It ought to be hard for Axis to stack Germany, France, and Italy and still hold Poland and the German NOs.


  • Not sure about Epl. Certainly its great if Russia can hold Epl but I dont think its a reasonable goal in most games. Its too hard to hold Epl against a good Germany player and if Russia is ever able to hold Epl it means Axis are on the fast track to losing.

Suggested Topics

  • 68
  • 8
  • 9
  • 19
  • 17
  • 4
  • 65
  • 60
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

41

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts