Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
I play every weekend on the table top when we get bored with the latest Alpha we’ll change it up and do any one of the different versions, original OOB from the first release to Oztea’s 41 set up, theres also games like fortress America….or the old classic. I dont think I’ll ever get bored with the games.
@taamvan though I agree that crippling Germany is challenging you really can slow it down if UK builds up a fleet in Canada and Air Force in London. Than you convoy any where possible and continuous bomb the factories. You will take loses but your spending your income delaying and slowing down Germany’s offensive which buys Russia more time and allows US to get involved. That’s about the only ways that I know that is effective against a powerful German player. You have to keep your fleet off the GB coast line to protect against a air assualt. Need to be able to scramble.
My issue with that is you can’t hit Germany, only W. Germany from London and Germany can leave 4 fighters there to put make repeated bombing runs unlikely.
Also, typical is Moscow being threatened about G6. Its tough to build a fleet that can worry Germany at all with UK when UK1 is building inf and a fighter, then a lot of your air power shifts to the Med to sink Italy’s fleet, can make it back for combat on UK4. So buys on UK2 and 3 are around 60ipcs. Do you really devote that to transports and ships to keep them afloat?
I’m usually a factory in Persia and UK3 and UK4 I spend 60 ipcs on fighters for Moscow. So UK1 is a London buy so no Sea Lion, UK2 you spend 12 ipcs on a factory and then maybe 25 on… it depends. Fighters? Bombers? Troops and a transport for S. Africa? UK planes can land on Russia’s Karaellia if its safe to make it to Moscow in 2 turns…Or shift South if Italy’s a problem.
You wouldn’t happen to have some drawing on that you would be willing to share?
What’s the out to out dimensions?
What’s it standing on? is it a table that sits on anther table or is it a free standing table too?
How deep is the board set down?…etc, etc?
I’m working on some tables for the AA game group I run but we are tossing around the idea of elevating the table with a “lip” under it for trays and stuff rather than too the sides, the idea being this way the board stays as narrow as possible.
any info you would be willing to share would be cool, if you share none, that’s cool too…just seeing it is help enough. Thanks for sharing the pics, seeing your board is really inspiring!
i don’t have a drawing. i just laid the gameboard and pieceboxes on a piece of 6x4 board. then took a pencil and drew their outlines. i built up from there.
the table has no legs. its actually sitting on another table. its more stable that way.
the table looks wide but when you sit along side it, you can see the whole board. i wanted to make sure i wouldnt have to stand up every time it was my turn.
i’m happy to help anytime i can. any other questions, feel free to ask or pm me.
can you measues the amo boxes(lxwxh)and the space between the sapcers in the containers
i will, but they are the boxes from the FMG ammo box
There is a major IC in Paris. This isnt possible with A2 rules. Captured Major IC turn into a small one.
Really. I didn’t see that one in the rules I downloaded. No Majors in non native territory can be built. but France falls to a minor? Didn’t see that one at all.
Holy crap your right. I guess it only mattered for France since Britian did not fall or russia. Not sure if we placed that many forces there anyway. Because the Germans did not build that many forces there throughout the game. The italians moved troops in, well maybe before berlin fell late in the game the Axis player on turn 9 may have built more forces there, but largely he used the Italians to defend western Europe and built germans in West germany to defend Denmark.
Ultimately I don’t think it impacted our game or its outcome, but will note that for the future!!!
Allowing a brief digression, if we were to compare AA50 to AA42, we find AA50 adds:
More board spaces
[liA nicer looking larger board[/li]
An additional power
Better rules for China
Cool new factors such as NOs and technology
AA50 is a better game with more bells and whistles, but some might prefer the relative speed and simplicity AA42 has to offer.
Back to the topic at hand, if we were to compare AA50 to AAG40, we find AAG40 adds:
More board spaces
A nicer looking larger board
Much better rules for China
Cool new factors such as Politics, bases, neutrals, and convoy disruption
Tactical bombers and mechanised infantry
New rules for ICs
expanded rules for 2 hit warships
AAG40 has more features above and beyond AA50 than AA50 has over AA42. Some people still might prefer the relative speed and simplicity of AA50, but you have to decide if you think you’ll be one of them.
Me, I think AAG40 is the best A&A game ever! It obsoletes AA50 more than AA50 obsoletes AA42 (though all three are highly playable solid games).
One more thing, although AAG40 is new and optimal strategies are nowhere near having been refined, it looks like AAG40 has more viable strategic options than previous versions of the game.