I also like Zero’s approach. The Americans usually end up reinforcing the British in the south, while the Brits and Yanks drop infantry into Karelia (if indeed, the allies are strong there). This gives the Russians a chance to move some stuff east.
Indications of problems/failure/errors in play
A&A is a fairly rich game with lots of variations of play, but it seems to me that there are some events which clearly indicate: bad play, a false move, a turning of the tide for one side or the other.
- Losing any of your original 4 tanks.
- Losing both of your original planes.
- Both Germany and Japan control a territory adjacent to Moscow.
- Losing control of both South Africa and India
- If the RAF is reduced to less than 2 planes.
- Losing control of Western Europe
- If the Luftewaffe is reduced to less than 3 planes
- Being forced completely out of Africa
- Losing control of the sea of Japan
- Airforce reduced to less than 3 planes.
- Navy reduced to less than 3 ships.
- Navy reduced to less than 3 ships
- Losing control of Alaska and either Panama or Brazil.
- Enemy ships occupying either U.S. coastline for more than one turn.
Am I off my nut with these? Would anyone let to add more.
Being forced out of africa as Germany doesn’t always spell certain doom if it happens late enough in the game. The loss of Alaska it’s always all that bad for the US either, it can usually create enough infantry in a short amount of time to kill the invaders quickly. This might prolong the game a little, nothing more (although prolonging the game may be just the thing to win it for the axis, it isn’t always the case).
All depends on the strategies being played out by all sides really. For example Russia taking Norway on R1 and losing a tank is unfortunate, but not fatal. Similarly retreating the eastern front forces back to russia is in most cases unavoidable. The trick is to be having an allied party in europe by the time the japs arrive - then just build loads in russia, and let UK/US finish off germany - If (sorry, When) you can take and hold Eastern Europe with russia, germany’s going to have an awful problem defending Ger and SEu from ground attack, and WEu from a amphibious assault.
Similarly UK losing SAF and IND are both unfortunate, but in some cases unavoidable. It is possible (if Germany takes AES on G1, so UK cannot reinforce IND) that UK will lose IND on J1 if the Jap player is so inclined.
It’s future is kind of limited unless you gamble on buying an IC for it. With further german support in africa SAF won’t last.
However, the loss of both IND and africa isn’t too much of a problem for UK. You need to bear in mind that africa is only ever “borrowed” from UK. Africa is too large to be held by german forces, and if they do there will be insufficient units in Europe to hold off russia. Result = Russia takes germany.
In the case of the US, the japanese navy doesn’t worry me - let them have the pacific, and load up some transports and invade - it’s all too slow, too easy to defend against, and if you’re really worried, buy 2 or 3 bombers just before he strikes or a pack of subs loitering around the shores - 1 turn’s build protecting against the entire Jap strategy.
As for Japan, I can safely lose the SOJ sea zone, providing I have sufficient IC’s on the mainland, but hey - if I buy 3 bombers, I can destroy that entire US fleet and he’s got to send another one over (which will take about 3 turns - 1 build, 2 move). Losing the pacific fleet is okay provided it’s mutual destruction at midway. (What surely must be an error is allowing the US Pacific fleet to get to the Atlantic) count the squares - US can get there through the Panama Canal before Japan can get there through the Suez (3 turns as opposed to 5).
All depends on the strategies being played out by all sides really. For example Russia taking Norway on R1 and losing a tank is unfortunate, but not fatal. <<
Okay I should have said lost 2 original tanks. Russia can ill afford to replace any armor, and it needs all 4 to mount effective counter strikes. In short, I think the loss of any tanks by either Russia or Germany shows a poor use of resources that over time will cost that player the game.
Similarly retreating the eastern front forces back to russia is in most cases unavoidable. The trick is to be having an allied party in europe by the time the japs arrive - then just build loads in russia, and let UK/US finish off germany - If (sorry, When) you can take and hold Eastern Europe with russia, germany’s going to have an awful problem defending Ger and SEu from ground attack, and WEu from a amphibious assault.<<
IF Russia can take and hold East Europe, the game is over. I am more interested in subtle indicators of bad play. Like having a bad pawn structure in chess that inhibits your other pieces more than it helps them.
Similarly UK losing SAF and IND are both unfortunate, but in some cases unavoidable.<<
In my opinion, if both fall it is a clear indication that the allies do not have a cohesive strategy for defeating the axis. The allies are clearly dumping everything into Europe at the expense of losing territory in Asia and Africa. The end result will be a battered Germany able to survive because of the African IPCs, and a Russia falling to Japan.
However, the loss of both IND and africa isn’t too much of a problem for UK. You need to bear in mind that africa is only ever “borrowed” from UK. Africa is too large to be held by german forces, and if they do there will be insufficient units in Europe to hold off russia. Result = Russia takes germany. <<
Germany has great avantages in Africa. At the start of the game. Africa is nearly allied free, so Africa can be conquered quickly. The Allies will have to fight hard for every 1 IPC territory. A small German airforce in central africa will destroy any poorly defend allied fleet that lands troops in Africa thus stalling the US. A Europe based bomber squadron can sink undefended American transports on the East coast of the US. The US invading Africa or Europe faces all the logistical problems that Japan faces in attacking the US. A good German player will never let the allies build a substantial fleet in the Atlantic.
I>>In the case of the US, the japanese navy doesn’t worry me - let them have the pacific, and load up some transports and invade - it’s all too slow, too easy to defend against, and if you’re really worried, buy 2 or 3 bombers just before he strikes or a pack of subs loitering around the shores - 1 turn’s build protecting against the entire Jap strategy. <<
The whole point of the Japanese attack on the US is not to conquer the US but to force the US to spend IPCs on the Pacific front where they are less cost effective, and to give Germany a break. It is Japan’s duty to force the US to spend IPCs in the Pacific otherwise theAllies will will every time.
Japan can build a convoy route from Japan to Alaska that is just as efficient as any that the US can build to Europe. The key to Japan is to know when to stop dumping all your IPCs into Asia and start harrassing the US. The Japanese force that will take Moscow lands/is-built in Eastern Asia 2-4 turns before the assualt on Moscow. Adding more IPCs into Asia at that point is a waste. All attention should turn to dumping 6 to 8 inf into Alaska per turn, and a factory in Alaska to put out 2 tanks per turn. The US can’'t ignore this threat, or it will lose. Can the US stop it? Sure, its easy, but can it afford to stop it with Moscow teetering on the brink? Probably not.
As for Japan, I can safely lose the SOJ sea zone, providing I have sufficient IC’s on the mainland, but hey - if I buy 3 bombers, I can destroy that entire US fleet and he’s got to send another one over <<
If you lose SOJ it means you didn’t commit enough resources to the Pacific theatre. Building 3 bombers to try and clear the fleet is a waste of money, that will likely fail to liberate the SOJ. A US AC with 2 fighters and 2 transports or subs will kill your bobmers, and you will have wasted an entire turns income (if your lucky enough to be earning 45 IPCS!) to accomplish nothing. You have lost the game at that point. IMO
It may also mean that the allies are playing the Japan first strategy, in which case you probably can’t afford 3 bombers.
Your income will be in the 8-12 range, and you will be fighting for your life.
(What surely must be an error is allowing the US Pacific fleet to get to the Atlantic) <<
Do you play Russia Restricted, or Bid?
I usually bid for axis, but if you play RR the balance is tipped a lot against russia, effectively neutering the russian Behmoth and making the allies more reliant on an effective US strategy.
The difference is apparant from Ger T1. With RR, the British fleet is sunk, and germany retains probably 5 FGT, 1 BMB for the airforce, and might even be able to evacuate the armour in NOR on the TRN.
With russia able to attack, the baltic fleet dies, sometimes even the atlantic sub as well, and NOR can be taken losing the lutwaffe a fighter. Thus with only 4 FGT, germany is hard pushed to kill TRN in LAB, fleet in UKSZ, BB in GIB, and make a successful assault into AES in T1.
The odds are that germany will lose another FGT, but succeed in all those ambitions.
Thus, with only 3 FGT, 1 BMB, I am wondering how you are going to remove the second turn british fleet consisting of an AC, 2 US FGT, and 2 TRNS (all standard moves) without mutual destruction?
Bearing in mind that on Russia T1, there will be 16 INF, 2 FGT, in Karelia, and on Russia T2 there will be 23 INF, (at least 3 ARM), and 4 FGT (2 RUS, 2 UK) in Karelia. How are you going to hit that if your planes are busy (dying) in the UKSZ, or indeed defend against the Russian assault on R3 with no planes?
If you do as you suggested, and devote an airforce (at least 12 IPC’s) to africa (worth 11 IPC’s a turn for the mainland), firstly, where are you getting this airforce from? and what are you sacrificing the defence of to acheive this african airways?
You might want to bear in mind how much material you are committing to defend territories that aren’t worth all that much, besides without a german IC in africa, both US and UK can land about 6 INF each into africa on turn 3, now 12 INF is going to cause a problem for your 1 FGT and (say) 4 INF. If you had more stationed there, I would simply land those troops in NOR/KAR to push to the eastern front, but the troops would still be in range of landing in africa.
I should also draw your attention to the fact that in a battle between 2 TRN and 1 BMB, the BMB will return alive less that 50% of the time, so an “undefended fleet” of two TRN isn’t so easy to pick off afterall.
As for an allies 1st Strategy, considering the amount of allied material present in the asian theatre at the start:
7 INF, 1 ARM (RUS)
4 INF, 1 FGT (US)
2 INF, 1 FGT (UK) - can be reinforced from africa via TRN
vs 7 INF, 2 FGT (with 1 BMB & 1 FGT in JAP)
The allies hold a considerable upperhand which I prefer to exploit slowing Japan down, whilst still going for a Germany first strategy.
We play Russia restricted, 2nd edition.
The pattern for Germany lately has been to build 1 trans on G1 and all inf otherwise for several turns.
The Germans attack Karelia on G1 for one round to do some damage and then fall back to E. Europe. that liberates the tank from Norway. The trans goes into the UK SZ to act as fodder.
Germany sends 1 fighter per turn to Africa along with 4 inf. Th bulk of this force heads east into Persia to threaten india Caucases and Southern Russia.
Japan is eating up China, Russia, and possibly India depending on how much UK puts into defending it.
Germany play a controlled retreat strategy in Africa against the Allies. Letting them take it back slowly never allowing a tank blitz. At 1 IPC per territory its no big deal.
The German force of inf and planes hits Russia from the south, the Japanese hit from the East, and German Armor hits from the West. If Russia isn’t taken, it usually is well contained.
Germany then sends its armor to the West into Europe or South through Persia into Africa to push the Allies back.
Japan is usually in Alaska by now to keep the US player spending IPCs on defense.
We find most of our games are really close for 8 to 10 turns, and then somebody makes a mistake, or the dice make a decisive battle.
Yanny last edited by
Bad Play = US goes into the Pacific
Bad Play = Germany overextends itself (Early Karelia attack)
Bad Play = Britain overextrends itself (ICs in both SA and India)
Bad Play = Russia not prepared for the Japaneese
Bad Play = Japan Not performing Pearl Harbor Turn 1
Again, just my opinion for each country.