• Which country, in a five player match, would you assign the ‘weakest’ player?

    By weakest, I’m saying inexperience and little knowledge of WW2.


  • @ABWorsham:

    Which country, in a five player match, would you assign the ‘weakest’ player?

    By weakest, I’m saying inexperience and little knowledge of WW2.

    A&A games including revised has little to do with the real WW2, but as for playing experience, or the lack of it, US or Japan is my suggestion. Russia and Germany are the easiest powers to screw up by stupid decisions, but UK must also help Russia a lot against an experienced German-player.
    US&Japan takes some rnds before they can make a real impact compared to Russia, Germany and UK which are at full war from rnd 1, but Japan must also do the right first rnd moves, if the allies do things right. If you have a real weak US-player, you could possible play with no bids if no experienced allied player give any advice to the rookie US-player.


  • Our group gives the US to the weakest player.

    It seems to me that the US can get away with the most mistakes.  We also play with no bids, so having the weaker team as the Allies generally seems like a good idea.


  • I give the weakest to eitherJapan or the US. The US is the obvious choice becaue it has the biggest economy and can take the most mistakes, but my personal favorite is Japan. They have a great starting position and relatively obvious buys throughout the game (i. e. ICs, navy) so they can be easily played by a player of any experience


  • US because

    1. Large economy
    2. Biggest room for error
    3. Small chance of major battles around VCs (Unless Japan plays Kill America First)
    @The:

    A strategy employed to annoy the USA is to land units in Alaska and take the pressure of Germany so they can take Moscow. But why not take this one step further and focus on taking LA/San Fran?

    This is an alternate Japanese strategy to that of the Moscow/Berlin race that is seen in most games. This could be taken over to global '40 but it would be a lot harder to preform. Also could be used for spring '42.

    For this strategy to be implemented you will need to following things to have happened:

    • Allies play the standard KGF

    • No UK factory in india

    • No US factory in China/Sinkijiang

    Here is the standard move for J1 on this strategy:

    India capture with inf in FIC and Shanghai transport used to move inf from Shanghai to FIC and air support.
    Move 2 inf from Japan to Shanghai with sz60 tran.
    Build:
    2 inf 6 Ipc
    2 Art 8 ipc
    2 Trab 16 ipc
    total 30 ipc

    Earned 33 Ipc

    J2

    Shanghai tran that will be close to FIC moved to sz 61 and move 2inf from Japan to Manchuria and move them into Shanghai.

    You will have in:
    Shanghai: 5 inf
    Japan: 2inf, 3art,1 arm, 1 Bmr and maybe 1 fighter
    India, FIC, Manchuria 2-3 inf and maybe 1 fighter in each

    Build:
    same as J1

    Ipc earned 33 left over from buy 3 total 36

    J3
    Take china with air support 2-3 fighters and 5 inf in Shanghai
    Only if no SU forces in it and 2-3 inf plus fighter in it.

    Build
    Same as J1

    at the end of this turn you should have:
    Japan: 4inf, 5art, 1arm
    SZ60: 1bb, 6 tran

    J4 this is the important turn

    Invade Alaska with 3 tran carrying 1 inf + 1art each. Use your BB bombardment to kill the inf. If Alaska has to large a force in it use all 6 tran and take all units out of Japan or use your trans to shuck units onto the mainland and push for Moscow. You shoudn’t have to do this as Britain and the USA will be focussed on taking Berlin and preforming D-DAY.

    After you have taken Alaska you will be earning 37 IPC per turn.
    You have 36 IPC to spend

    Buy
    3 inf 9
    2 art 8
    2 tran 16
    total 33

    end turn IPC total 40

    Japan: 4 INF, 4 ART, 1 ARM
    SZ60: 5 tran
    Alaska: 3 INF, 3 ART
    SZ 63: 1 BB, 3 TRAN

    J5

    4 TRANS shuck 4 inf + art to Alaska
    3 trans in sz63 return to sz 60

    Build
    4INF, 4 ART

    12 ipc to do what you want with

    earn the 37 plus what you didn’t spend

    J6

    same as J5 build and move 4art+inf to Alaska
    Move 4 tran back to sz60 from 63

    J7…
    same as J6

    when you have a big enough force probably J6 move units into Eastern canada. Every NCM move units that landed in Alaska to EC and strike at LA and place build units into there and try and hold from the American counter. If succesful build up your force and strike at Washington. Even without taking Washington you will win as the US forces will be trying to take LA back from you and with Calcutta and LA under your control if you and Germany have lost no VC’s you have 8 if Germany take Lenningrad or Moscow you win if Playing LHTR. If not and going for 10 vc’s Germany should be able to take Moscow and win. If playing 12 you will attack Washington and Germany will attack London. You should still win with both of you sending forces through the former SU and through Africa to collect IPC for yourselves and take them from UK.

    This seems easy in concept but is hard to pull off but if successful you will win easily. Because of its diffuclty to be successful players usually stay in Alaska/EC and threaten LA rather than attempt to take it.


  • i would say give japan to the newest player OR Usa too . İ dont know why. but i  have a feeling that USA should be someone who can see 5 turns later from now.So someone good should be USA mybe.But again… i might be mistaken because im not experienced enough compared to others that replied


  • @Battal:

    i would say give japan to the newest player OR Usa too . İ dont know why. but i  have a feeling that USA should be someone who can see 5 turns later from now.So someone good should be USA mybe.But again… i might be mistaken because im not experienced enough compared to others that replied

    With the Axis having only two powers giving Japan to the newest player is handing the allies the game because Japan must help Germany take the SU plus take Calcutta if the Axis can win the also need to draw the US forces from the Atlantic to the Pacific to give Germany some breathing room and so they can attack the SU. If Japan doesn’t take Calcutta or forces UK to spend IPCs in Africa/Asia they can focus on D-Day. If Japan doesn’t force US into moving some units into the Pacific US can focus on building units for D-Day. If Japan doesn’t help Germany attack SU and then the Western allies preform D-Day Germany is forced to withdraw units from the eastern Front taking the pressure if SU and then allowing them to take Germany’s Eastern territories and then Germany will end up being surrounded. Resulting in a German turtle which eventually gets destroyed.


  • In Revised, if it is a 1vs1 game, and also if it is a 5 player game, if all players are pretty experienced, a bid of 8-9 ipc in preplaced units is needed. but if the players are not so experienced, there is no (certain) need for a bid, but anyways, a US pacific strategy is gonna lose the game for the allies, if the axis players are decent. A US pacific strat where US spends everything against Japan is a sure loss against any semi decent player(s) if the axis get a decent bid of 8 ipc.

  • Official Q&A 2007 AAR League

    I’d say the Soviets and absolutely not Japan or the UK.

    They only need to deal with land units for the most part and they don’t need to deal with transports to get troops to the battles. Less room for error maybe but more battles and less ‘logistics.’ Their purchases are essentially limited to fighters, infantry, artillery and tanks.

    With the US a newb can get to feeling left out by lots of waiting to move something or for a chance to even just roll some dice. And they really need to deal with all of the units and trying to manage some sort of transport system. The US might be best for the team in that game as they supposedly can’t make big blunders (and are you sure about that?) but if you want them to keep coming around you need to give them more to do.

    Depends on the newb of course.


  • @frimmel:

    I’d say the Soviets and absolutely not Japan or the UK.

    I’d say absolutely not Germany, b/c they will get attacked by 3 powers, at least if the allies conduct an efficient strategy 🙂

    With the US a newb can get to feeling left out by lots of waiting to move something or for a chance to even just roll some dice. And they really need to deal with all of the units and trying to manage some sort of transport system. The US might be best for the team in that game as they supposedly can’t make big blunders (and are you sure about that?) but if you want them to keep coming around you need to give them more to do.

    Depends on the newb of course.

    I didn’t think of the psychological aspects, but it won’t take more than 1-2 rounds until the US lands in Africa, and from there the US player will see some conflict, or at least get closer and closer to some important dice rolling.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 9
  • 6
  • 7
  • 21
  • 2
  • 4
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

34
Online

15.4k
Users

36.6k
Topics

1.5m
Posts