What was the common factor why the Allies won in your games?
SAVE RUSSIA! I’ve lost alot of british air units but Moscow held.
Russia stay alive, usa and uk fight on two fronts.
Playing my first game tonight and I will be the Axis. My plan is to drive very hard after Russia with Germany. Do you think it is wise to by a carrier for Germany?
What was the common factor why the Allies won in your games?
I like America’s turn 1 buy of 4-5 DD. That (plus the Panama cruiser) parked next to Britain will allow UK to drop a fleet by UK3. Until then, lots of air for UK. Russia is a LOT harder to defend in this version (compared to Revised, the last version I played), so it needs LOTS of support.
After 3 games played, the Axis win easily all the time.
Germany buys tanks, infantry and some planes
Germany wips oout the UK navy
Germany attacks SUJapan invests in warships and transports
If you were playing 41, then I would agree this is easy for the Axis, but I think 42.2 should be an even split.
Playing my first game tonight and I will be the Axis. My plan is to drive very hard after Russia with Germany. Do you think it is wise to by a carrier for Germany?
i like inf plus bomber on G1, tanks on G2 and 3 depends on how it’s going. get a russian factory and drop artillery there
What was the common factor why the Allies won in your games?
How and when to prevent India from falling to Japan, either if you are going for KGF or KJF.
If you are playing Allies, for the first five rounds your goal is to stop the Axis from raising their combined income from more than 80 IPCs. Achieve it and you’ll be on your way to victory.
It sounds like buying a carrier for Germany is not a good idea. I read some post on here that some players were buying the carrier for the Baltic sea. Â The carrier would take away the hard push towards Moscow.
You know, I played chess a few (3 times) and white won every game.
Clearly it’s imbalanced, and black needs an extra pawn on the board.
You know, I played chess a few (3 times) and white won every game.
Clearly it’s imbalanced, and black needs an extra pawn on the board.
Very true. I’ve had that experience with chess myself.
I bid a Queen for black.
I’ll take white and give you 2 pawns.
@Vance:
I’ll take white and give you 2 pawns.
Deal. I place the black pawns on d3 and e3. You may start the game.
@_@
Well, the opener is extremely dicey, even with low luck. I don’t mind the standard opener being a bit of a gamble, but it is going to ruin lots of low luck games.
2 subs don’t always beat a destroyer… I really hate the setup. It is such a big swing, you send 2 subs to get dd 2x tran… you lose or draw -12 for 0 or 8, you win -0 or -6 for 22. I mean come on.
Don’t get me started with egypt. Say you win, fighter + bomber hits bship, which is a huge risk for both players. Say you lose, 2 fig + bomber, say bye to your africa dreams, and thanks for playing.
Say egypt fighter is still around, hits the east indies jap fleet with 60% odds. It is so polarizing how that turns out.
Say you go to gib, your bomber would have to take out the destroyer, otherwise dd + bomber vs bship,
The whole game is just flipping coins, if I want to play a real war game, I’ll pull out aa50.
The first round pretty much decides how the game goes.
you know two pawns could be really bad if white choose where to put them.
Playing my first game tonight and I will be the Axis. My plan is to drive very hard after Russia with Germany. Do you think it is wise to by a carrier for Germany?
i like inf plus bomber on G1, tanks on G2 and 3 depends on how it’s going. get a russian factory and drop artillery there
Agree with Cow…had the US knock out both my subs, lost the BB, then my Ukraine stack got rolled…it is dicey. Â But still would hit that US fleet everytime. Â
5inf/2art/SS/Bomber G1…hope Russia is dumb and doesn’t hit Ukraine.
No complaints here on 42.2’s balance, per se. My gripe is that my opening options feel so limited-moves like attacking the US fleet with subs/UK going kamikaze at East Indies/Russia taking Ukraine & WRus feel more like forgone conclusions than true “options.”
If I bought naval for germany it would be for africa, rather than coin flipping for egypt. I shuffle guys there. Oh wait, Europe is worth more money, so I am buying ground and pound for russia… thanks for helping me make that decision easy larry harris.
You will win or lose this game at either caucasus or india. How egypt turns out determines who is winning or losing the game. Obviously if uk totally misses, germany gets africa and THANKS FOR PLAYING. or if the other result happens and germany totally misses, BYE GERMAN NAVAL AND HELLO TO IRON MOUNTAIN INDIA.
Real talk, this game is bad.
~
Honestly, transports defend, armor @ 5, -1 cruiser off of australia, +1 armor for libya.
transports defending just helps the allies get on their feet and shipping men into the fight and nerfs the 2 subs attacking opener to the ground. to make up for this the axis get an armor to take egypt and a cruiser is lost off of australia.
The armor change helps axis strategies tremendously, be it a surge strategy for defending europe or japan’s armor blitz to russia.
Now, you can all have fun, roll dice, have a back and forth close game. Instead of win or lose off the bat. yay everyone is happy.
@Vance:
I’ll take white and give you 2 pawns.
Deal. I place the black pawns on d3 and e3. You may start the game.
I concede. sigh.
@Cow:
If I bought naval for germany it would be for africa, rather than coin flipping for egypt. I shuffle guys there. Oh wait, Europe is worth more money, so I am buying ground and pound for russia… thanks for helping me make that decision easy larry harris.
You will win or lose this game at either caucasus or india. How egypt turns out determines who is winning or losing the game. Obviously if uk totally misses, germany gets africa and THANKS FOR PLAYING. or if the other result happens and germany totally misses, BYE GERMAN NAVAL AND HELLO TO IRON MOUNTAIN INDIA.
Real talk, this game is bad.
Exactly. Deciding how much to send exactly to conquer or liberate Africa is one of the key decisions for both the Axis and the Allied player. Send too much and you’ll be overspending for the income you get back.
With the R1 move of the Moscow fighter going to Egypt it pretty much solves this issue of a risky G1 attack on Egypt. At the same time Germany can attack the cruiser on SZ14 with a sub and the Battleship… or place a destroyer on SZ15 to block the UK destroyer… plenty of options.
It’s a matter of choices for both sides. If Germany sends too much to Africa then it will take it longer to secure Karelia and go for Caucasus, while the same time the UK either defends Africa or holds Japan on the Indian Ocean. Japan, on the other hand, either goes for India or, if it’s too well guarded, bypasses India and goes after Russia by sending all of its starting units through Kwangtung-Szechwan-Kazakh. Or tries to hold out the Americans on the Pacific. And the UK/US need to decide whether to go KGF or KJF…
Lots of different choices here. Much better than Revised/Spring 42 where you basically had to defend/conquer Russia and that was it.
What are you guys doing with your CA in G1? Does it attack SZ7 with the 2 SS (and optional Bomber/FTR )? If the CA does and survives it seems like that sets back UK sending fighters in route to India or help killing the German BB if it killed the UK CA SZ14 (off Gib). I’d want to send a FTR, Bomber and maybe the surviving DD from ECanada to clean out SZ7.
The Altantic seems totally owned by the Axis now and it seems you have to plan your US/UK3 drop to perfection in order to even have a meaningful shot at invasion.
In the Pacific I don’t see the US being as effective as they used to be with having to commit so much to the Atlantic. Picking a KFG or KJF and sticking with it holds more true now it seems. Not that much room to balance with the US, which I believe was previously available.
