• knp7765

    Axis and allies has changed over the decades I have been playing. Probably 30 years. But one thing has not, the basics. And it makes sense since they are trying to stay true to what happened, in the sense of what the situation really was at a given point in time. Thereby, the fact remains that the real action is in Europe and whoever wins Europe wins the war.

    Britain and Russia cannot, unless playing a weak German player hold off the Germans long enough for Japan to be neutralize much less defeated. And if they could, then the resources spent on neutralizing Japan only means the allies would have won much earlier if those resources were spent in Europe.

    Now before everyone goes crazy on me and makes arguments that you just can’t completely and totally ignore Japan and give me all kinds of examples on how the old KGF strategy would not work in the newest editions, understand, I am not arguing a complete ignore of Japan, only enough resources to help Anzac, India, and China slow them down. Essentially, defensive in the Pacific and the offensive in Europe.

    That part of the game has not changed EXCEPT, that with the Victory cities only requiring Japan to hold 6 of them, forces the US to go offensive in the Pacific.

    That is why I do not like it. It forces in unrealistic and ineffective strategy.

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 11
  • 10
  • 6
  • 3
  • 3
  • 5
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

46

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts