What kind of player are you?

I have a expansion set in my closet that I bought in probably '94-'96 that starts around '40 and has rules for how and when Russia and US enter the war.  When Germany takes France, you roll a die to determine whether French territories + troops are either Vichy or Free French, and whether the French Navy is Vichy, Free or scuttled.  ( I think the Free French are played by the UK).  Haven’t played it in years.  I think it was by Xeno Games and called “The World at War”.  Also had destroyers and some other cool changes.

@KindWinds:

Thank you very much!  Do people play AA 50 on this site as well or no?

Yes, not 1941 and 1942.

hi,

if you are still interested i am willing to introduce you to triplea lobby play in real time?

bye
ole

Personally, I think that both options have their advantages.
Sure, playing one on one has something ‘chessy’(and I mean the game :lol:) about it. It’s like you’re trying to get inside the mind of your opponent, deducting his strategy as he/she makes moves and try to make his plans part of your masterplan. It’s fun, it takes a lot of mental work but it’s worth it.
Then again, playing 2 vs 2(I’ve never played with 5 people, and for this I apologize  :wink:) has a lot of good features too. Two minds see and think of more than just one. Putting your ideas together will often result in a better plan than either of you thought of, and defeating 2 of your friends(who are your intellectual equals, at least concerning A&A :roll:) gives an enormous satisfaction. Beating two people who think together to defeat you is something special, at least to me.

To sum up. There will always be people who prefer one or the other, but I believe that each has its charm, and therefor such discussions are a bit pointless. And to end with a golden oldie: “Live and let live”(Unless your opponents are playing on the Allied side, in which case, kill the bastards :evil:)

Thank you so much! =D

My opening German move to attack UK fleet is ussually kinda like this (the availability of my fighters depends on russian player of course…)

Sub z8 attacks z2 along with Bomber from germany, fighter norway.  (a bit risky move i know…)

Battleship z14 to z 13 along fighter from france

Transport z 14 to z 15 along fighter from balkans,

What i buy is situated to the actions of the russian player, but either i go a battle ship and 3 tanks, or 8 tanks or 6 tanks and a transport to put in italy…  Option on 4 tanks and a transport (italy) and a destroyer (baltic sea) have crosed my mind…

Any thoughts?

i like 5 since i dont get to play very often and this makes it more of a social event where we can all talk friendly trash to each other.  we also avoid blatant suggestions “buy 3 transports and two infantry, move these pieces here and these there” because then they become nothing but a dice roller.  it is more like “hey jap buddy, get your butt into asia as fast as you can, i’ll meet you in moscow!”

@Revelade:

Okay, two more questions…

After you attack a territory with an air unit and you kill all of their units, must the air unit that you used, land back to any friendly territory within one space or does it go back to any territory within its movement range?

They can move to land in any friendly territory within the limit of their movement

@Revelade:

If air units can not capture land territories, what’s the point of leaving men in territories like Yakut SSR?  Wouldn’t the game just be about stationing all men at the borders?

You can try to do this, and many folks do.  The risk is, once a break-through has been made in your front lines, you might not have any reserves to seal the breach.  Also, no nation (except Russia) has an IC on the frontier, thus all builds have to work their way to the front from an IC.