WILD BILL - do you play with an optional rule that damaged BB’s take until the next turn to repair after taking 1 hit? In the 1942 Rulebook it states “If a battleship survives a combat having taken one hit, return it upright to the game board.”
You know we missed that. We’ve been playing it auto repairs in the beginning of your next turn (G40 hangover I guess). With the correct rule you stated above killing the UK cruiser and taking Gib makes even more sense. They would be facing a 2 hit BB (even if your BB takes a hit).
Do I paint over the plastic pieces that come with the game?
You can but the small, soft plastic miniatures aren’t ideal for taking paint. The ones like the boats with flat surfaces should do fine. You can prime them first, but its hard to do detail at this scale unless you’re really good. Another consideration is that you will have to mass produce quite a few minis in order to have full sets for most of your games, otherwise you’ll end up mixing painted and unpainted stuff which is kind of confusing to the eye.
-What if I mess up? Do I just wash the paint off and start over?
Not after things dry. You can use the technique of wiping wet paint (I use cotton gun cleaning rag) away from unintended areas, this works like an eraser. If you recoat/re-dip a small mini like these all your detail will be lost in layers of paint.
-What is the purpose of buying the expansion miniatures?
for fun. FMG sells a lot of cool sculpts but they are not universally used in AXA, primarily in other similar games (eg Global
-Are expansion miniatures already painted?
No, unless you buy them that way eg Axis and Allies Miniatures Game
-Can expansion miniatures be used to play my 1942 2nd ed?
Yes, but they are only variant sculpts (eg different halftracks, different tank models) or house rules.
-Is it difficult to learn?
Yes, though not for a wargame. Rules are fairly simple though subject to much interpretation if not read carefully. Should take 3-5 games to get good then 3-5 years to get awesome.
-How long does a came last on average?
42.2; About 4 hours to surrender, a bit longer until victory conditions. G40/G42 take more like 10 hours-14 hours. WW1 5-7 hours.
-How does A&A compare to say, the hexagonal war games of the 70s and 80s?
It is much less complex than a chit game. Logistics and “rock-paper-scissors” unit balance aren’t in AxA. Combat and movement are dramatically simplified. Where chit games (aka Avalon Hill) games are a detailed, complex and abstract slog, axis and allies is a lighter, more “army men” sort of game with the depth coming from repeat play and learning from mistakes. The quality of the pieces and the layout of the map are a huge draw in comparison to large paper maps, hundreds of similar, boring pieces and rules that are incomprehensible outside the context of each game. Games like Memoir 44 and AxA try to capture strategy, tactics in a more playable and engaging format than a realistic, unit by unit, “order of battle” style game, but try to be much more in depth than games like Risk where there are no unit types and every team is essentially the same.
Now that I understand the rules properly (well some of them anyway :lol:) I can see a whole new set of options for the UK, in Egypt, India & possibly the Med, perhaps including SZ37. wittman’s G carrier in the Med is also making a whole lot more sense. And my use of R fighters looks set to change. I will just have to be sad enough to play one more solo game to test these out I guess.
I can not think of any previous game I have ever had which would have interested me enough to be as sad as that!
I’ve played about 30-40 games, and won against some other pretty experienced players. Axis is favored on this map. My personal view is that a bid of around 7-11 is fair among experienced players. This is a newer game, so it’s not surprising that people haven’t come up with an exact amount.
Among beginning players, this bid probably needs to be bigger because players don’t recognize deadzones and leave pieces in the open. Germany has many more offensive pieces than Russia, and Moscow is at serious risk of falling early if Russia loses a stack. This is less true if Germany loses a stack because 1. germany starts with more pieces (compared to Russia), and 2. UK and US aren’t a threat until round 4.
There’s already great threads on bid placement to have the most impact. I won’t go into depth, but inf in cauc, karelia, egypt ; uk sub off egypt or india are likely have the most impact per IPC bid. Among beginning players, I would probably give uk 1 inf in egypt and ~6 infantry for russia in moscow. That’s my suggestion for a dynamic game among beginners of approximate skill.
New on the forum, just curious as to what you all think about an opening move I use with UK pretty often. On the first turn, build a factory in India. I consider the UK pacific fleet pretty much useless against Japan, I say let US deal with it since they have the money, so i abandon it in favor of a land based strategy. I’ve seen people try building a factory in India where they move the one inf over from persia and pull the plane in from the carrier and try and defend it. The problem with that strategy is that if Japan wants India bad enough on the first turn, the math says they can take it. (They will lose some fighters, but having a factory on the mainland seems like a worthwhile trade). Here are my moves (only on the Pacific side) for turn one.
1. send the carrier in India to get the unprotected transport by Kwangtung.
2. Send the Australian sub to get the Japanese sub
3. Put 2 inf from Australia onto a transport and attack New Guinea (Not a huge part of the plan, but technically the math is in my favor)
4. Move inf from Persia into India
5. (here’s where things get dicey) send everything in India, plus the fighter from the carrier, into southeast Asia. Unless the Japan player catches on to what I’m doing, the first two units he allows to be killed will be the infantry there. I don’t really care so much about getting the plane, so unless i’m doing really well I just retreat after I destroy the ground units. This way, Japan has no ground units in range to capture the factory, and next turn I can reinforce it with 3 tanks, and from there just send ground units up the coast until Japan is kicked out of mainland Asia. Then I would use the factory to reinforce Russia from the East.
On the 1st Edition of 1942 this is almost suicidal because the Japanese player should focus everything on preparing to attack India from J2 onwards and he’ll be able to do so unless you commit the Soviets to defend the IC. Which is almost suicidal as well because Germany should also be pushing hard into Russia and it will usually mean that the Soviets will lose Caucasus.
You’re also leaving Africa to Germany if you follow this.
My humble opinion is if your J strategy’s top priority is about capturing India, consolidating J Navy is perhaps a better option than PHGL so that you have 100% focus on Middle East.
Looking forward to your battle report :roll:
Thanks innohub. Good to hear that I might be on the right track, as you always wonder whether your “lessons” are just blind alleys created by basic newbie errors elsewhere.
Just to register the value of Pearl Harbour light, I can imagine playing it if G has control of the N Atlantic. BM probably uses PHGL because he always achieves that. Then there is value to reducing the US fleet that will challenge G. Plus there is a little more time for J to get to Moscow before the Allies get across the Atlantic. So not given up on it yet, just trying to place it within the strategic “map” of the game.