Infantry vs. Artillery vs. Tank Builds

  • Customizer

    On the other hand Britain can usually afford a tank stack while France can rarely do more than replace basic units to hold the line.

    Think of tanks primarily as the best means of finishing off a crippled opponent who cannot afford to counter-attack, but still has a strong defensive position. Use them in strongly contested areas so you can absorb casualties if there is a counter-attack, then attack with tanks again when you’ve reinforced.

    If you attack enemy held areas with tanks and a few infantry you’re just throwing money away.


  • @Flashman:

    On the other hand Britain can usually afford a tank stack while France can rarely do more than replace basic units to hold the line.

    That’s true - I was just using that as an example of coordinated multi-national attacks. A better example may be an attack by Britain on German-occupied Belgium, followed by the US coming in with primarily infantry to mop up and defend Belgium against a counterattack. Both nations could afford tanks, but in this case Britain would have significantly more use for them.


  • I recommend mainly infantry arty buys. Make sure, if you are the aggressor, to have more planes than your opponent. It is good to have 1 tank in each area on the board with each power. This is in case you want to move forward into a territory with your mass stack and he puts 1 guy there as defense.

    So for Germany that would mean 2 tanks. One for the Russian side and 1 for the French side.
    Russia probably shouldn’t build any tanks.
    Austria should probably only build one for the Italy front.
    Ottomans shouldn’t build any.
    UK should only build them in India, and only 1 there as well.
    France shouldn’t build any.
    Italy shouldn’t build any.
    US is the one that can build more than 1 tank if he wants to hit Spain on T5.


  • What`s with this Spain-inavsion-obsession? This is one of the dumbest things to do with the US.

    The four IPCs you may gain will cost you troops worth 12 IPCs statistically. Even more if its an amphibious assault and the spainards were allowed to strike pre emptively with their Artillery.

    Land the doughboys in Spanish Marocco, you get one IPC for free with the oob-rules and them send them to Italy/Turkey/Albania in the next round but please leave Spain alone.


  • Tanks will certainly not win you this game. They are expensive and perform horrifically when on defence. Seriously. It’s sad. Weep as your precious 6IPC tin can gets decimated in the least glorious way possible…. Furthermore, they come into play so late that the war is all but over before they can make it to the front lines to prove their usefulness! Okay, okay, I think you guys get the picture I’m not a huge fan of these things.

    That being said, they do have their uses:

    British stacks of tanks that are adequately shielded by French and American troops are “OK,” and can help to wear down the Germans. I have seen this tactic used somewhat effectively to tip the number balance on the western front. Of course this will only work if they participate in multiple offensive combat rounds. However, a lot of things can go sideways very quickly in this game and it can be easy to see your tanks suddenly in a vulnerable position… You will be lamenting, “Why oh why did I waste six million of man hours on this useless piece of garbage that gets stuck in the mud, barely achieves walking speed and kills its operators with exhaust fumes, when I could have had two whole infantry battalions bravely fighting with machine guns?!” Sorry. Ranting again.

    I find tanks are the most useful for clearing up small scale and/or far flung nuisances. A couple of lone infantry causing you problems? Send in the tanks! Want to subjugate a few neutrals against their will to earn some extra cash but don’t want to suffer casualties? Send in the tanks!

    And of course… Are you ballin’ out of control with mad chedda? Tanks! Got your enemy on the ropes and want to display your hubris? TANKS! Go for it! You da man!/woman!


  • Tanks are most useful when combined with stacks of infantry, artillery and planes.  Six tanks, for example, can change considerably the math involved in a counterattack.  I think they are very much worth their cost.


  • Disclaimer… I don’t mean to bring down any of you tank fans out there. I’m just more inclined to spend my income on the usual infantry, artillery and biplane purchases.


  • @Admiral:

    And of course… Are you ballin’ out of control with mad chedda? Tanks! Got your enemy on the ropes and want to display your hubris? TANKS! Go for it! You da man!/woman!

    True that.

    I think it’s pretty clear that, in order to be effective, tanks
    A) need to be combined with a stack of other unit types
    B) have to be adequately protected from counter attacks

    I’m mainly wondering if there’s any statistical (or even anecdotal) reasoning for how many tanks you should have, especially for the big Western Front battles. I’ve played a couple games but I don’t think I’ve ever had more than 3 tanks at one time in a battle.


  • I’ve noticed that a stack of six tanks is formidable esp. when the Germans and Austrians are poised to sweep down on France.


  • When playing as the US, I usually have 2-3 transports waiting in New York Harbor for over-seas duty. I mix in 1 tank with the rest of the shipment because I find my US army gets involved in smaller battles of about 10 units (Africa, Mid-East, Eastern France etc). As I can only ship a limited number of units per turn, the tanks absorb hits every round and survives to be bolstered by the freshly arriving 2+ infantry.
    For everyone else I think tanks are money poorly spent.

    Anecdotal Evidence

    Starlight Sniper

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 11
  • 3
  • 5
  • 15
  • 34
  • 3
  • 3
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

45

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts