• @Gargantua:

    I’m going to back up Cool Runner here…

    Thanks Gergantua

    It is also a team game for the axis powers. The Allies first priorty is to stop the axis advance with saying you come to this point, but not further. After that they have to switch between the pacific and the europe map. This takes serveral rounds, and you need patience. If you fokus to much on one side the other side will be to powerful. If you have two equal teams you have a game that take 24+ hours…

    The allies must always look for the weakest point in the axis advance, and attack there. But it demands pactience…

    Maybe you have a huge pressure on russia, but then western europe is almost un defended, with few units or no units at all… It is all about where you put your fokus… Ofcourse you can take russia, no problem, but the cost can be so high that you loose the game. The same can happen with Sidney.

  • TripleA

    Nope, you are wrong coolrunner. Axis are meant to take russia or win in the pacific. Usually allies will try to stop the pacific to a point where further investment is not required to keep japan from winning and then defend london/egypt. It’s supposed to be a race. If the axis aren’t racing then they are bad.

  • And that by the time us gets a strong transport fleet in the atlantic, germany is building alot of of france and wger.  This is usually by round 5 or 6 and new german units made in germany wont reach moscow in any reasonable time.

  • TripleA

    I don’t buy it. Show me you can stop japan from winning without investing in the pacific hard. I got enough pacific wins under my belt being japan to know that usa can’t just spend 30-40 a round to stop japan. Japan starts banking hard fast.

    All I am saying is, if usa has a large amount of naval in the atlantic, and japan is not poised to strike for the pacific victory, then japan is not doing his job.

    Don’t knock someone for trying to have a decisive victory, ie a VC win, it is what the axis are supposed to try and achieve. The only time allies win is when axis surrender because they don’t stand at ever mounting a comeback. If you lost russia when japan is down to 6 ipc… then all you got to do is hold egypt / london and germany has to go for it, he is outproduced at that point.  That is one of the tactics people do. Some people like to take italy. If you defend italy, russia holds. allies are fine with that. As axis I would gladly trade italy for russia and then kick out allies after while I try to blow up in europe.

    France only makes 3 units a turn you know.  germany and west germany produce 10 each and with russia’s income, surge it and done.

    Fighting a two front war is bad. Basic strategy of germany was always to fight a one front war. Clear west europe, then all in for russia, that is what germany should do. Takes time for allies to recover, meanwhile they still have to deal with italy while you push for russia. The axis have the initiative, you won’t get russia on time if you waste it.

  • TripleA

    anyway back to the topic.

    personally, I prefer to buy primarily inf in global. Unlike revised and aa50 where tank purchases and counter attacking were common place, armor units cost 6, making infantry better attack units than tanks (due to cannon fodder factor). I buy artillery if I forsee myself attacking. I don’t like doing multiple battles, because germany has all the air. I buy mech/tanks if I need to utilize their movement to attack the next round.

    Still one solid stack is better than two mid sized stacks. imagine you have 40 inf. you split 20 and 20. one 20 size stack dies to a 40 size stack from germany and you inflict maybe 10 casualties, now germany has a 30 size stack left.

    That is the reason why you see the super stacks.

    Another reason you see the super stack, usually at bryansk is because there is an impassable terrain seperating north and south german stacks. So germany has to super stack up south or north next to you before causing you to retreat. If he moves a mid size stack, you all in or strafe it (hit it and retreat).

    The slugfest works in your favor as it takes time for germany to move up to you. Usually everything germany has to attack russia has already been bought at the end of G5, with the exception of ukraine and novgorod armor units and bombers from west germany/germany.

    Every single unit is critical for the showdown at russia.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Super Stacks have their place, so long as your stack is superior.

    Medium stacks, are the worst thing you can do in Axis and Allies. Ever.  With the exception of leaving transports out to die.

  • @Cow:

    Nope, you are wrong coolrunner. Axis are meant to take russia or win in the pacific. Usually allies will try to stop the pacific to a point where further investment is not required to keep japan from winning and then defend london/egypt. It’s supposed to be a race. If the axis aren’t racing then they are bad.

    of course the axis are meant to take russia. but it fails if Germany only fokus on russia, and forget the british and the americans. You are right that the most critical point is a succesful sealion, but if Germany gambles too much with it, they can have big trouble to take Moscow… Germany is much stronger than Russia, I agree with you on that, but a pressure from Uk and america, germany needs to spend ipc in the west… the same happens with a still increasing american pacific fleet. Japan need to deal with it, which opens up for the british to re-capture calcutta and DEI.

    If Russia play germany on german terms they loose, not doubt about that, therefore super stack in Moscow, so you force Germany to play Russia on russian terms. count the areas from a german major complex to moscow… it is a long way

    That team who is best to maneuver win the game…

  • TripleA

    most of what germany buys for russia happens on G1-5. after that is it just tanks from nov/ukraine.

    How much money can you force germany to invest on the allies, when usa 1 only makes 50 and takes 2 turns to ship it (thus the impact starts being felt on G3 at earliest). You are buying something in the pacific right? so that is even less.

  • TripleA

    Oh and coolrunner.


  • @Cow:

    There is nothing a russian player can do to save itself but pray.

    Communists don’t believe in God.  But thats ok God doesn’t believe in communists either.

  • Nope, you are wrong, Cow.

    Haven’t you been to sensitivity training?

    If this were D&D, you’d be -3 Diplomacy…  :-)

  • @Stalingradski:

    Nope, you are wrong, Cow.

    Haven’t you been to sensitivity training?

    If this were D&D, you’d be -3 Diplomacy…   :-)

    Whats the point?

  • In an earlier post he said to someone “nope, you’re wrong”… something very few people would say if they were face to face with someone. But in forums, there are few social consequences. It’s just a pet peeve of mine. I tried and failed to deliver justice. It felt good in the moment, though.

    That was the point.

    Plus, he disagreed with me about building more than just infantry with Russia. I apparently hadn’t gotten over that yet. Russia needs artillery, and a few armor. Cow is wrong - it’s clear. I’m right. That’s clear too.  :-)

  • '15

    Hey Stalingradski,

    You’re wrong! :P

    Seriously, though.  It’s totally OK to say someone’s ideas are wrong, bad, or even badwrong.  That’s what we do here.  If you have a problem with it, bring it to the table- prove them wrong.  Now, if Cow were saying that “That guy’s a moron” or something along those lines, I’d see your point, but he’s just saying the ideas are wrong.  I say that to people’s faces all the time.  What’s odd about that?

    Now, back on topic, I agree with Garg’s main point about stacking up in Russia and ignoring everything else being a poor strategy.  It was actually an opponent of mine that inspired the thread.  The thing is, though, sometimes that’s the one strategy available!  If Germany bought heavy land  right from the start, it doesn’t even matter if you put a few guys in his way.   He’ll roll right over them.  You’d need 3 Inf to kill one of his, and you don’t slow him down at all unless he bought a lot of Tnk/Mech.

  • TripleA

    Yeps, I gave up on russia a long time ago. I just don’t see russia surviving, when I am axis and when I am allies… unless some serious threat looms over europe from uk/usa and in those games Japan ends up winning. If Japan comes to play there is only so much USA can put in the atlantic. If UK/USA don’t deal with italy while they have an upper hand then a 30 ipc italy will take over the defense of europe while Germany pushes russia anyway. So Germany has enough breathing room to rush for russia. It’s one of the reasons I like the pacific first plan. If I still have calcutta, I have a second russian power, it can make 30 ipc if things are going well, that’s 10 inf, which is like what russia would have made.

    Still sometimes russia can be saved with fighters flying in. If Germany can’t get russia it up to Japan to win. That’s global is so Japan centric.

  • What I like to do with Russia is put a stack north and one south, then retreat the one where the main German stack goes and attack with the other. If Germany splits his stack up as well you can reinforce one of yours and in a few turns have enough to kill it. The main goal of Russia is to defend itself, but it needs money to do so, which means you can’t just retreat everything every turn.

  • I’m quite impressed with the reactions to the minor border skirmish we almost had, and I mean it. Cow, you just kept moving forward, like a shark!  :-D

    All is well.

    I’m over my minor irritation, and I hear what you’re saying Shin Ji. We settle this in the arena! I’m cool with taking things less seriously. It is a fault, I have.

    Cow - I hear what you’re saying. Russia is able to be taken by a solid and determined Axis player, almost no matter what, barring crappy dice. However! I really like to make the German/Italian player have to pause, and worry, and think. Garg’s premise was that the Russian player who builds all infantry, and fails to counterattack, and relies on the stack, will lose… and I agree. I also think that  Russian player who builds less units, but builds teeth, causes more sweat for the Axis. More sweat = more chances to make mistakes, or hesitate. We all know that a single turn of hesitation can mean the difference between winning and losing.

  • You guys realy dont help Russia out at all with US,Anzac,British airfoce then I assume? The 3Anzac fighters MUST be in India/Russia, elsewhere is just a waste of potential.

    Russian units in middeleast can be a good thing. They can:

    1. Take Iraq and Africa (+3each)
    2. Swing up to prevent Japan from airstriking china. (trow Axis of balance is good)
    3. Swing down to make India hold vs Japan. (to bad Cow ;))
      Send 1mec and 1tank to Kazakhstan and 1mec Turmekistan round 1, good base.
      Make sure your planes can be used to save India if needed.

    Its not like your going to stop germany anyway… Units reach back before the final battle r5-7. If Russia saves India first then India can save russia later :)

  • Russia always falling is just wrong and those who play allies good know that :-D

  • TripleA

    if germany is going sea lion, sure I’ll hold romania, hell my last game I attacked berlin with russia with 18% odds, sure I lost that battle, but was good fun.

    Anyway. The point is, axis are very focused in global, germany just needs to go take russia, luffewaffe some naval early on but nothing serious in terms of air casualties. just count the spaces, everything has to hit round 7 if inf don’t make it, start getting mech and armor, when that don’t make it,get bombers.

    It is not hard dude.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures