AA50 1941 w/NO - Allied Allways Win


  • Our gaming group in Kansas City has played 8 games of AA50 using the 1941 start with National Objectives and without technology.  The Allies have won every game.  Its never even been close.  What are we doing wrong?

    We generally do Kill Germany First, but have also done Kill Japan First and Kill Italy First.  We found that even when Japan is ignored, its just too far from Tokyo to Moscow for the Japanese to do anything to the Russians.

    Any suggestions?

    Craig


  • Japan needs to take out US NO money in the islands, Brit money in the Far East, and then turn attention to USSR. This is true regardless of what the US does IMO, but its FAR easier if the US ignores the Pacific and goes with KGF or KIF (in which case Japan should add nuisance raids against Alaska and the West Coast to her list of tasks). As soon as the Japanese player suspects the US is not playing in the Pacific (generally by J2, but a good US player can disguise it for maybe one more turn) they should drop an IC in Asia (more when you have India) and commence building Tanks there and Bombers in Japan. Japanese Bombers can get into action against the USSR pretty quickly and then the Tanks follow up.

    Also its important for Germany and Italy to understand what is happening. If the Allies are going with KGF (a bad idea IMO), the goal is simply to survive. They need to pressure Russia and try and retain NOs, but there is no need to push on heavily towards Moscow. Japan will be there soon enough and if the Japanese player is any good at all, the econ will be favoring the Axis, not the Allies. Time will be on your side.

    Finally, the Axis need to coordinate their efforts and timing. If Russia is the target, then Germany needs to be hitting in the North while Japan bombs and moves in the from the East while Italy threatens the South. If you let Russia respond to each in turn, its far easier than when all 3 are happening simultaneously! Ditto for fighting England. The quickest way for England to go down the tubes is for Japan to be taking the Far East (and/or Mid East and eastern parts of Africa), Italy to be fighting for North Africa, and Germany to be attriting Brit boats with air attacks. Brit money will drop fast and her ability to replace losses will go downhill fast.

    We’ve seen about 50/50 Allied/Axis wins. Usually its simply stronger play (or occasionally better luck) that determines the winner. I have yet to see anything definative that would make me think that one side has an advantage yet.


    • phew *

    Looking at the title, I thought this was gonna be another “I have a 100% guaranteed succes strategy”-topic.

    Just what Uncle_joe said. I don’t think Japan should be going to Russia full blown. Just invest enough in Asia to gain a territory every turn, slowly creeping up to Russia.
    Why buy 5 tanks on the mainland to gain 1 territory, when you can also do that with 2 inf and 1 tank? The typical path to Russia is that each and every country inbetween, has at least 1 infantry standing on it.
    So no matter what you buy, you will always be advancing only 1 territory.

    So, without spending every IPC on the mainland, you will have enough money to bug America, take Africa, or whatever. Just do everything in your power to cripple US and UK, take their income, make a threat to West US. You will soon find out that by turn 4 or 5, Japan is monstrous in cash, might just even have an IC in Alaska or Brazil or whatever, and the Allies are threatened from every corner possible.
    This will take the pressure of Germany, who can take it easy against Russia.

  • 2022 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 '12 '11 '10

    Unless the dice are completely CRAZY or your opponents have had 10 beers too many, the axis don’t have a chance.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    No, I think the Axis have a dang fine chance really, except when the dice go nutso like they did in our game, JWW.  (Also note, in our game I tried a 100% defensive posture as opposed to all out thermo-nuclear war like I normally go.)

    Germany needs to pound Russia EXTREMELY hard in round 1.  It’s your only chance.  So far, I’ve seen Germany win almost every game of KG/KIF if they take Karelia, Baltic States, East Poland and Ukraine on Round 1 (that would include sinking SZ 2 and SZ 12).

    The trick there is to hold two tanks back in Poland to blitz into Karelia.  I might even suggest taking all fighter losses to maximize defense there if you do well in round 1 of the battle. (You should have 3 Infantry, Artillery, 4 Fighters and a Cruiser after all.)  I’ve been lucky enough to hold with 3 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor and retreat one or two fighters, and I’ve been really unlucky and only had an Artillery and a fighter or two left.  But in all circumstances, if it’s taken hard, then Germany usually wins.

    Why?  Because you in essence take out most of Russia’s infantry and it’s the massive outpouring of Infantry that gives Russia its power.  If you crush it early, they have to rebuild giving you time to build as well.  Time is on your side in the Euro/Asian front.

    Likewise, Japan has got to kill both American NOs in the Pacific and take Austrlia to kill England’s NO as well.


  • I’m in the same Kansas City gaming group.  We may be making some mistake that may give the Axis a better chance that we have experienced, but when I read the comments on this board, I don’t see that mistake yet.  The comments supporting Axis chances don’t take into account the timing in the game.  Until they do, I remain in agreement with CraigBee: the Axis have no chance.

    Here are a few timing facts that impact my views of your comments:

    1. the allies will be able to land in Europe or Africa on Turn 2 (they may not be able to stay, and I suppose if Germany/Italy goes all out to defend, this landing can be stopped, but in that case, Germany and Italy have already stopped expanding).  Either the US will be able to land in Africa, or the US/Britain will be able to land in Western Europe.  Again, they may not hold it: but they’ve already slowed German/Italian expansion.
    2. There are 6 spaces between the Japanese front lines and Moscow (I believe-I’m at work and am going from memory).  That means, it is turn 6 before the Japanese can threaten Moscow (and realistically, this would be a minimal threat.  A true threat to Moscow wouldn’t be until turn 8 or so).

    Until your Axis plans really take these two timing facts into account, you will have failed to convince me.  Specifically:

    1)  “I don’t think Japan should be going to Russia full blown. Just invest enough in Asia to gain a territory every turn, slowly creeping up to Russia.”

    Again, that means you will be in Moscow on Turn 6/7/8.  Which means the western allies have been invading western Europe for 4 straight turns.  Which means Germany/Italy are done.

    1. “Japan needs to take out US NO money in the islands, Brit money in the Far East, and then turn attention to USSR.”  Doing all of what you say in the Far East will take 3 turns (minimum).  Turn 1, the Japanese take several Islands (including Phillippines).  Turn 2, perhaps, they could take either Australia or India.  Note that in either case, the entire fleet is then out of position to take the second (take India, and you are out of position to take Australia, and vice-versa).  So you are really looking at turn 4.  By turn 5, you can focus on Russia.  Remember the first problem?  America/Britain have now been invading western Europe for 2-3 turns, and you have just started focussing on Russia.  In 3-4 turns, maybe you will get to Moscow (assume you start in India).  But we’re now at turn 7.  Germany/Italy fell two turns ago.

    3)  “As soon as the Japanese player suspects the US is not playing in the Pacific (generally by J2, but a good US player can disguise it for maybe one more turn) they should drop an IC in Asia (more when you have India).”

    Try it.  Say you figure out the US is headed for Germany on Turn 2.  You build a factory on Turn 3. You can start building in the factory on turn 4.  You now have 6 turns (6 spaces) to get to Moscow-that’s turn 10.  Germany/Italy went down on turn 5 or 6.

    1. “Germany needs to pound Russia EXTREMELY hard in round 1.  It’s your only chance.  So far, I’ve seen Germany win almost every game of KG/KIF if they take Karelia, Baltic States, East Poland and Ukraine on Round 1…Because you in essence take out most of Russia’s infantry”

    This is exactly why the Russians back out of those spaces on Turn 1.  Their infantry survives, the Germans take a few spaces worth a few dollars, and the Russians counterattack on turn 2-just enough to force the Germans to continually refight for that front-line national bonus. The Germans don’t get closer to Moscow, the Russians save their infantry, and on turn 2/3 the allies start landing in western Europe. In other words, if this scheme works for ONE TURN, the Germans already have to start shifting reinforcements to the West (and away from Russia)

    In essence, your plans for the Axis have to take two facts into account:

    1. Germany will be on the defensive (in Western Europe and western Africa) to a limited degree on turn 2, and more solidly on turn 3.  It will be enough to limit expansion in Russia-thus Germany will also be on the defensive (or at stalemate) in Russia by turn 3.
    2. Japan, no matter what it does,  cannot threaten Moscow until turn 6.  Realistically, the threat on turn 6 is minimal (a few tanks, a few planes).  A realistic threat to Moscow from Japan won’t happen until roughly turn 8.
      Thus,
    3. Between Turns 3 and 8, Germany and Italy are effectively fighting the British, Russians, and Americans alone.  The Russian economy will roughly match the German, the British will slightly exceed the Italian (even with losses in the Pacific).  The American economy is the margin of victory.  Germany and italy either fall or are emasculated by turn 5/6.  No matter what Japan does.

    Until you can break the timing-geography facts*: Japan can’t get to moscow until turn 6/7/8, and Western allies can land in western europe on turn 2/3, the axis can’t win.

    *and maybe its possible-we just haven’t seen it, and I haven’t read an argument supporting it yet.

    Sk


  • off topic… 😉

    “KGF” or “KJF” should be just “KG” or “KJ”,right? How many axis players keep going after Germany is defeated or vice versa?


  • If USA try ignore Japan, Japan should go Polar Express by Alaska and make a full campaign against american mainland AND at the same time eat all at sight in Asia and Africa. That will stop USA reinforcements to Africa and Europe for ever. Economical advantage of axis (from turn 3-4) will do the rest. Easy win for axis. And I think that California could fall even before than Moscow if USA gets too uncared (it’s nearer, after all)


  • Polar Express: take Alaska.

    Once again, do the timing/math.

    Turn 1: Japan takes Alaska (note that they risk their fleet to bombers, and by doing so, fail to take islands elsewhere, so there are downsides.  But assume its done).

    Turn 2: (assuming Britain doesn’t take it back with forces and fighters in Canada). Japan builds a factory in Alaska.  Note that on this turn, US/Britain are landing, or threatening a landing, in Morocco or western Europe.

    Turn 3: Japan builds 2 tanks in Alaska.  Note on this turn, US/Britain can make a strong landing in Western Europe, and can conceivably threaten Italy.  Italy and Germany are now sending substantial forces to the west.

    Turn 4: Japan takes Western Canada with its two tanks in Alaska, and builds 2 more tanks in Alaska.  US/Britain have now landed in western europe at least twice, possibly 3 times.

    Turn 5:  Japan could threaten Western United States with 4 tanks (2 in Western Canada, 2 blitzing from Alaska).  This is a paltry force.  Meanwhile, US/Britain will make their 3rd or 4th landing in Western Europe.  They should be able to either take Italy or hold western Europe.  (in fact, by this turn, Germany will probably be in trouble-from the landings in western Europe as well as the pressure from Russia).

    The build limit in Alaska (2 units), as well as the time requirements (5 turns to even make a puny, easily defensible attack on Western US), make the Alaskan scheme irrelevant.

    Sk


  • Replies in red

    @Sk:

    Turn 1: Japan takes Alaska (note that they risk their fleet to bombers, and by doing so, fail to take islands elsewhere, so there are downsides.  But assume its done).

    First: USA goes after Japan, so I’ll not decide go Polar Express until J2, when I know if USA is going to face Japan in Pacific or not. Second: Polar Express starts setup round 2 anyway

    Turn 2: (assuming Britain doesn’t take it back with forces and fighters in Canada). Japan builds a factory in Alaska.  Note that on this turn, US/Britain are landing, or threatening a landing, in Morocco or western Europe.

    The same. And I would not buy the Alaska IC at least until I have a chain of trannies supporting it (probably round 3 or 4)

    Turn 3: Japan builds 2 tanks in Alaska.  Note on this turn, US/Britain can make a strong landing in Western Europe, and can conceivably threaten Italy.  Italy and Germany are now sending substantial forces to the west.

    5 starting trannies, additional buyed trannies or a combo of both will start ferry troops to Alaska. A chain of 4 x 4 is enough to setup the plan. Of course, western axis should be able of holding France this round

    Turn 4: Japan takes Western Canada with its two tanks in Alaska, and builds 2 more tanks in Alaska.  US/Britain have now landed in western europe at least twice, possibly 3 times.

    Japan will probably have at least 10 units in Alaska, and 8 more this round. A good time to build the IC. UK income will be struggling to reach even 25 if you try so massive D-Day so early without building SAF IC. And if you stack so much guys for D-Day, Italy will conquer Africa. USA will have to stop any attacks on Europe and center on defending west coast (were Japan’s attack is coming) or face losing California

    Turn 5:  Japan could threaten Western United States with 4 tanks (2 in Western Canada, 2 blitzing from Alaska).  This is a paltry force.  Meanwhile, US/Britain will make their 3rd or 4th landing in Western Europe.  They should be able to either take Italy or hold western Europe.  (in fact, by this turn, Germany will probably be in trouble-from the landings in western Europe as well as the pressure from Russia).

    8 guys from Japan and 2 from Alaska each turn is not a paltry force. Japan can still harass soviets and Africa because they have so monster income

    By round 5, Axis will have economic advantage, military advantage, Africa conquested by axis or soon to be, a Godzilla approaching San Francisco (western axis is able of holding UK and soviets and probably slowly defeating them). Pray for Japan not having Improved Industry (14 units each round to America… pain). Japan can buy a couple of bombers and SBR USA just for speeding the process

    And there is a new shiny VC in Ottawa. Japan can menace two VCs from West Canada if they take and hold it. If playing 13 VCs, Germany would only need take and hold one of the soviet VCs at this point to win (unconquered LA or Ottawa plus Whashington, London, Moscow and, say, Stalingrad)


  • Its not that hard to keep the Allies off the continent for a few turns. Sure, they can land in Africa and that can be a pain, but they cant do much to Europe for a few turns if you executed your first German turn ‘correctly’. Luck can play into it, of course, but by and large the Brits should have to spend the first few turns building the fleet and not invading. The US can get over there, but not till US3 or so at the earliest. And given that the 2 cant combine for an attack (and Italy can go between the two), it should be VERY hard for the Allies to do any serious damage.

    As soon as the Axis know the US is coming for Europe, Germany/Italy should downshift to a more defensive game. Build planes and infantry. Push Russia only far enough to get your first bonus or so. Your income should hover around 40 or so (a bit less once Norway and Finland are gone). But that is still sufficient for 8-9 Infantry and a Fighter every turn. Every now and then you can throw in a Bomber to increase threat range and power. Doing that means England cant afford to ignore navy investment.

    Also, while its true that Japan cant threaten MOSCOW for some time, they can still take income from Russia and more importantly they can still BOMB Russia into the ground. Bombers in Japan can hit Moscow 2 turns after production. If the US abandons the Pacific, an IC and Bombers on J2 are just fine. Its pretty easy to see the US commitment and if you cant, then its obvious that they arent pressuring Germany any time in the near future.

    What are your German players building on their first few turns? What attacks are they doing on G1? What do you typical see from the Amis on turn 1? What does your Japanese player usually do?

    All of that is extremely important IMO. I’ve played plenty of games on both sides and I just haven’t seen either side have an advantage that didnt come from luck or better play.


  • @Sk:

    Hi. This is my first post here. I hope I got it right.
    How does Russia back it’s troops out of these territories on R1? Germany goes first in the '41 scenario. These troops would be dead.


  • “How does Russia back it’s troops out of these territories on R1? Germany goes first in the '41 scenario. These troops would be dead.”

    I have to admit that I don’t know.  I’ve not played the Russians yet (I’ve always been focused either on Japan or the Atlantic, and have never paid much attention to Russia-my buddies have always played the Russian/German battle). I was basing that statement on what some of my colleagues said they do.

    Tonight, I play Russia.  I’ll let you know.

    Sk


  • No problem. I’m curious to see how it goes for you. I play Germany regularly and don’t usually take Karelia G1. (Save that for G2) This keeps me strong in Baltic & E. Poland with the only realistic R1 counter-attack being in Ukraine which is fine. Bring that Russian tank out there where I can kill it.

    After that, pump in the new tanks and keep the Russians plugging holes


  • Another game, another axis defeat.

    Broadly:
    Germans take all three front line russian territories on GT1 (they can’t take Karelia w/o using most of their air: that leaves the British fleet intact). Note that this only costs Russians 7 infantry.
    Russians BACK UP on GT 1, leaving a screen of 1 inf in the 2nd line.  With builds (3 tanks, 5 inf), they build up in Russia and Caucus.  If Germans attack into one (say, Karelia), Russians counterattack in the south and cut off German bonus. 
    Meanwhile, the entire American Pacific fleet moves to Panama (whatever survives-probably not the battleship in Pearl Harbor).  They build forces on the east coast to threaten western Europe/Africa.  The British build a fleet in the northwest.  They will be able to invade somewhere on Turn 2.  Americans possibly on turn 2, definitely on turn 3.
    The Japanese rampage, but ultimately it doesn’t matter.  In each game, Japanese end up around 50 (+ bonuses) on about turn 4/5, have taken India, all of the Pacific, possibly even Australia.  But they are too far away to make that count in Russia.

    As long as the Germans are stalemated in Russia (and they will be, by turn 3), and threatened in the west by US/Britain (and they will be, by turn 3), It is irrelevant what Japan does.  Japan gets to 50 or so, has bonuses to have an income of 60 or so, and has reached its high water mark around India/western China (while conquering all of the Pacific).  At that point, their next step-threaten Russia, isn’t viable because they produce too far away, or don’t have the transports, to have a strong threat.  Germany/Italy are being squeezed by this time, so Russia is able to start shipping ground forces east towards the Japanese front lines.

    By turn 5, its over-no axis is conquered, but Germany/Italy are shrunken, and Japan has maxed out.

    Sk
    Sk


  • 1)  “I don’t think Japan should be going to Russia full blown. Just invest enough in Asia to gain a territory every turn, slowly creeping up to Russia.”

    Again, that means you will be in Moscow on Turn 6/7/8.  Which means the western allies have been invading western Europe for 4 straight turns.  Which means Germany/Italy are done.

    I know that that will take you 6/7 turns to get to Moscow, that’s what I said.
    Regardless what Japan does, it will take 'em 6/7 turns to get to Moscow at least.

    What matters is what Japan is doing in those 7 turns, as it slowly creeps up Moscow.
    Is it threatening USA, so that USA can’t go all out on Europe?

    I notice you mention timing a lot, so let’s look at it from Allied POV.
    They need, what, 5 turns, before Berlin falls? And that is with a crappy German/Italian combo.

    By turn 5, Japan should have at least taken all of USA’s NO’s except 1, and Uk should be down to <20 IPC.
    Sure, there might be a big force in Europe, getting ready to smack some Axis ass, but that will be just one smack.
    There will be no reinforcements, as money is low, and the few units are occupied defending the homeland.
    And Japan should be threatening both the US, the USSR and maybe even UK if they managed to sneak one transport to Brazil and plant an IC there….The options are unlimited.

    Can I ask one question? How many rounds does it take the Allies in your 100% Allied win games for them to capture Berlin?


  • I think y’all might be giving up before its truly over. The Axis still likely have the econ advantage at that point and Japan is probably just on the verge of making her weight felt. You should have 2-3 ICs in Asia by this point with Japan and Bombers coming from home. The Axis econ should be every bit as strong or stronger than the combined Allies. And 2 of the 3 Allies have to be shipping stuff in rather than building ‘on site’.

    Unless Germany proper is about to fall, I think the game is not over if Japan is humming along at 65-70 IPCs a turn (not uncommon if the US abandons the Pacific.


  • @Uncle_Joe:

    The Axis still likely have the econ advantage at that point and Japan is probably just on the verge of making her weight felt.

    I’ve tracked the income on two of our games.  The total Axis income, including National Objectives, has never at any point in the game been greater than the allies.

    Craig

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Timing is an issue, which is why any defensive posturing with Germany or Japan results in defeat of the axis, at least in my experience.

    All out, total, thermo-nuclear warfare seems to work quite well.  The idea being to neuter USA/UK’s NOs, and plunder Russia and China with everything possible to knock them on their heels.

    The downside is you have to get over your reluctance to trade tanks.  Sure, in classic and revised tanks were the holy grail, you didn’t push them out until you had a good shot at keeping them, but the action in AA50 is so fast, so dirty, and planes are so expensive you don’t have time to build 40 fighters like you did.


  • If Japan is really pouring it on (which they should be if the US isnt fighting in the Pacific), I cant see how that is the case:

    Germany 26 (-5 for Finland/Norway), +5 for 1st NO = 31 (minimum - this is with NOTHING in Russia)
    Italy 10  - lets say they are being squashed in Africa and have nothing
    Japan 70 - Japan should have ALL of Asia, Alaska, bits of Africa and the Mid-East + all 3 NOs

    106

    US 36-38+5 = 41 to 43 (-Phil, Alaska, Hawaii and with 1 NO)
    UK ~25 to 28 They should have NOTHING in Asia, have no NOs and be missing bits and pieces of Africa
    USSR ~20-25 + 5 = 25 to 30 tops. Again, assuming the German have NOTHING and that Japan has not made major inroads

    94-100 or so

    And that is assuming that Germany and Italy are really rolled back on their heels which wont always be the case. Its hard to keep them completely down if they are playing a defensive game (which they should be from turn 2 on once they know the US is not playing in the Pacific). If they continue with a ‘standard’ game plan once the US is commited, yes, they’ll likely lose before Japan can intervene.

    Also, this is pretty far along in the game to reach this state. Germany and Italy should have enjoyed their bonuses a few times before being reduced to this. If the Allies are really pushing Africa, then yes, Brit money will be higher, but then again, Germany and Italy wont be being hit on the Continent as hard if Allied resources are going to Africa.

    At any rate, if the Axis have never gone above the Allies, then that would lead me to believe that the Japanese player is just moving too slowly. They can really explode out of the gate if there is no opposition. And they can easily threaten the US West Coast (forcing a response there) as well as moving to Russia and pushing into Africa/Mid East. They make a LOT of money if unopposed, but they have to be extremely aggressive and not waste time.

  • Moderator

    Even an unopposed Japan still takes 5, 6 turns to get to Mos.  That is a lot of time for the Allies.  Just because the Allies may initially ignore Japan does not mean they aren’t planning to confront them.  Remember the early Japanese push forces them to go three routes to pick up all the Asia IPC.  They have to go north, central, and south.  Well the Allies can have the option of picking off one or two of those stacks as they approach Mos if Japan doesn’t plan things right.  For example a Russian stack in Novo can threaten North and Central, while Cauc can threaten Per.  This alone could be a huge set back for Japan.  It is definitely not a gimmie that Japan can control the ME or even get to Afr in a KGF type game.

    I haven’t played enough games to say one way or another which side might have the adv from the start, but from an attackers pov I don’t really like the number of Germany and Japan attacks that must be done in round 1.  Yes for the most part they are all very winnable (Egy aside), but still the odds are pretty decent 1 or more go south.  I’ve already had one game where Germany got smoked trying to take out the UK DD/CA in sz 12 and even lost another ftr in Sz 6, another game where Japan got hammered at Pearl and the US BB lived, and yet another where Japan took a beating trying to sink the UK DD at Ind and US DD in Sz 56 and they lost 4 ftrs in those two battles alone. 
    The additon of Sud also really slows down the Axis expansion in Afr as well.


  • Yep, I agree that the Axis are very reliant on most if not all of their turn 1 attacks succeeding. If they pooch a few of them, they are going to have an uphill fight most of the game IMO. And yep, even if they are all 90%+ battles, odds are at least ONE of them is going to go poorly. I think in that sense, the Allies do have an advantage.

    But if you play the odds and dont get totally zapped, I think it balances out very well on both sides. It is amusing that popular consensus around here back in December was that the Axis couldnt lose in 41….

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Uncle_Joe:

    But if you play the odds and dont get totally zapped, I think it balances out very well on both sides. It is amusing that popular consensus around here back in December was that the Axis couldnt lose in 41….

    Which is precisely why I, and many others, rejected all forms of bidding or other changes to help the allies out and why I (and I think many others) am rejecting all forms of bidding or other changes to help the axis out now.

    As soon as you have 1000 games under your belt, THEN and only then, do I think you are qualified to say the game needs a balance adjustment.

    Right now the allies have gone 100% KGF.  This results in a 90+ IPC Japan before Berlin falls.  That’s a bloody aweful lot of power to put in the hands of one nation, IMHO.  It’s almost better to have 90 IPC in one nation than 50 IPC in each of two nations.


  • 90 ipc is probably enough money for japan to supress UK and russian income via strategic bombing, as well as sinking the atlantic fleets. As long as germany can turtle up and get a massive stack of infantry to hold off the current forces there may be no reinforcements.


  • Which is precisely why I, and many others, rejected all forms of bidding or other changes to help the allies out and why I (and I think many others) am rejecting all forms of bidding or other changes to help the axis out now.

    As soon as you have 1000 games under your belt, THEN and only then, do I think you are qualified to say the game needs a balance adjustment.

    Yep, I absolutely 100% agree. I just remember seeing those ‘How do we balance the 41 scenario since the Axis never lose’ threads and its amusing how the pendulum has swung. 😉

    Its just going to be strategy and counter-strategy for a while. I cant imagine changing the game based on a few games worth of play. I’ve played prolly close to 20 game and I still see new things EVERY game (especially if you play with completely different people).

Suggested Topics

  • 93
  • 5
  • 44
  • 29
  • 3
  • 15
  • 24
  • 18
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

25
Online

16.2k
Users

37.9k
Topics

1.6m
Posts