maybe try GIMP

1. Change combat phase so first battle doesn’t auto-start
2. Add “go back” from before any dice are rolled in combat phase to purchase phase
3. Add “go back” from end turn (after mobilization) to beginning of noncombat.

@Nosho said in Locked submarines:

And as soon as one of us selects a defence profile with the subs not submerging, the other will be able to see that he can move his sub out of the combat zone during the combat phase, and therefore should not move it, as he’s getting better odds at attacking than the defender. Pretty funny glitch. I’m submerging bye!

1. That movement happens during the combat movement phase, not combat phase.
2. You can check what defensive profile your opponent has set up?

@Kakarrot1138 You do know about selecting the sea zone during combat movement phase and toggling the sea zone to friendly / hostile?

I think there might be a submarine-specific issue that triggers separately that prevents legal movement; I sent a ticket in to the devs months ago. Don’t know if it’s resolved. I do know I played a game maybe a week ago in which glitch seemed to work, but maybe it’s just because opponent was bad.

Forming 1942 Second Edition and 1942 Online research/testing group for strategy/tactics. Writeups to be published as guides in time. Games will be played on TripleA v5 and 1942 Online and TripleA v5 (Larry Harris Tournament Setup) without bids.

Applicants must be comfortable with discussion of mathematics and exact details and are expected to contribute meaningfully. This is not a group for casual players, nor is it a group for players that want to develop “secret” lines of play.

Forming 1942 Second Edition and 1942 Online research/testing group for strategy/tactics. Writeups to be published as guides in time. Games will be played on TripleA v5 and 1942 Online and TripleA v5 (Larry Harris Tournament Setup) without bids.

Applicants must be comfortable with discussion of mathematics and exact details and are expected to contribute meaningfully. This is not a group for casual players, nor is it a group for players that want to develop “secret” lines of play.

@Midnight_Reaper said in Guides:

What third guide, you only list two…

-Midnight_Reaper

Will release third guide when it’s finished.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1837406041

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2246697776

Third guide is a basics strategy guide, breaks down strategy by nation, work in progress

Yes. BTW there’s errata for the game. Honolulu (Hawaiian Islands) is a VC; Axis need 9 VC to win, Allies need 10 VC.

Nice video. Had the piece and type counts for each nation, a United States of America dime to show scale on pieces on the piece closeups, edited so the presentation’s pretty sharp, doesn’t waste any viewer time.

Few comments:

1. There’s errata and clarifications at

https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/ah/AA_1942_2nd_Edition_FAQ.pdf

2. The rulebook looks nice but is terribly organized. (The .pdf I’m looking at anyways).

3. Four Russian battleships is probably way more than anyone ever needs, and two German and two UK carriers could be on the light side in some games. Same can be said for a lot of other pieces, too much or too little. Time was when I’d buy two sets of any Axis and Allies release to make sure I had enough pieces. Usually ran short on Japanese infantry; I think this version requires 15 of 20 for initial setup, then once you start pushing Asia and/or splitting to Africa, Australia, Alaska, well. I suppose I’d feel weird if I didn’t run short on Japanese infantry in an Axis and Allies game though, so eh.

These days I guess historicalboardgaming.com has official pieces so I don’t even have to buy two board game sets. Also has paper money which is nice. Haven’t ordered from them personally though.

4. Plastic bags and a single box of the small dice as shown are really the minimum, good thing you mentioned picking those up. No way do you want a bunch of loose pieces banging around in the box, that’s just a nightmare to sort through, and trying to roll for a hundred unit battle with just six dice, ugh.

Other useful things - separate chips (often the board game runs short), different colored dice (so you can roll attacking carriers, subs, destroyers, fighters, and bombers all at the same time, say), and cheap fishing tackle boxes - wee cheap ones with removable inserts (so you can fit the larger miniatures).

I expect probably you know all that and didn’t want the video to be overcomplicated. Still thought I’d mention 'em just in case.

@Brian-Cannon said in Crazy game: Should be titled when the dice reward stupid behavior, expect it.:

https://imgur.com/a/ljg5bRR

https://imgur.com/a/xy1HU7y

These screenshots show the US7 combat move and US2 purchase phases, respectively.

If you want to make a point of players having crazy luck, you should make a screenshot of the COMBAT PHASE showing what attacked, what was destroyed, and what survived, for that attack specifically.

BTW Black Elk wrote about Allied air power to “the center” and mass Allied strat bombing years ago on the 1942 Second Edition forums.

@DoManMacgee said in Crazy game: Should be titled when the dice reward stupid behavior, expect it.:

Sounds like people just used an Allied variant of the “Dark Skies” strategy that Germany likes to use in G40 lol. Once Air Stacks hit critical mass they get pretty nasty but you should be able to use keep tight stacks of land units to deter it.

I’ve read other of DoManMacgee’s posts and consider them good; I think he wrote another good one here. If you want more comments, searching for “Dark Skies” may be useful, and tight stacks of land are what you use.

@Brian-Cannon said in Crazy game: Should be titled when the dice reward stupid behavior, expect it.:

I lost count on the number of times he sent 3 Bombers and a fighter or two at a stack of 3 infantry and didnt lose a thing. He had absolutely no fear of sending in naked fleets of air at ground units and it paid off for him the entire game.

Nah, tight stacks or whatever you call it isn’t 3 infantry against 3 bombers and a fighter. Against such a force, eight infantry would be about right.

If you want to ask “how is that even possible” - some depends on dice results, sure, but there IS an Axis strategy that pushes these large stacks. Ask if you want more details.

Returning to 3 bombers and a fighter attacking 3 infantry - look at the numbers.

http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=1&aBom=3&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=3&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=&dBom=&dTra=&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat-Tra&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

23.52% 3 bombers 1 fighter
40.75% 3 bombers
25.7% 2 bombers
7.55% 1 bomber
0.9% no survivors
1.24% 1 infantry
0.29% 2 infantry
0.04% 3 infantry

As you can see, it’s expected the mass air attack survives. The median is one fighter lost, but 23.52% of no losses is hardly outside the range of reasonable possibility.

Having it happen multiple times in a game - suppose you’re digging for the 35.73% of 2 bombers or worse for the attacker resulting. You figure your opponent’s number has got to come up eventually, but you’re balancing that against 23.52% for best-case for the attacker, or 64.27% for best or second-best case for the attacker.

Considering 64.27% as “success” for the attacker over five trials, the probability of all five trials succeeding is just under 11%. Unlikely, sure - but not necessarily stupid.

Basic Axis and Allies is infantry chains. What the most effective transport routes are, how to maintain effective lines of reinforcement, and so forth. When you play Axis and Allies at that basic level, if you have one player that understands infantry chains and another that doesn’t, the player that understands infantry chains wins.

If you’re doing basic attacks, an infantry costs 3 IPCs, defending has 1/3 chance of destroying an air unit, cheapest air (fighter) costs 10 IPC, so expected 3.33 IPC (more than the value of the infantry) on defense. It’s just expected that you go plus.

But intermediate Axis and Allies involves thinking about multiple dice, threat multiplication, timings, and other things. As seen with that link to aacalc, often you can get surprisingly cost-effective results.

Think about it like this. With infantry chains with UK/US, say you build destroyers in case of enemy sub builds and for defense fodder, carriers, fighters, and transports. Only with that infrastructure can you move in infantry. By the time you move in that infantry, your opponent’s already been doing whatever they’ve been up to, so you have to play catchup. And maybe you won’t win that way.

With mass air, you don’t need anything but the air themselves. Escorts and transports are slow and hard to protect, but air is very fast. Your opponent may not have been able to harden targets early on, then any gains you make from added speed are often leveraged into additional income for you and less for your opponent. And you can reposition between different theaters at speed too. (Off topic, but bears mentioning German mass air against KGF can threaten both sea and land targets, it’s a big part of that strategy).

So think again about 3 bombers 1 fighter against 3 infantry. The median result is fighter lost, 3 infantry lost. Air loses net on the IPC exchange, but just by a bit. The timing against a strong Axis anti-transport-based KGF is US3 to Finland/Norway. But US3 air hits at about the same time, at higher strength, and is not limited to those targets. They can hit closer to the action, against targets in the interior of Europe, emptying enemy territories may let Russia take control of those territories for income - and Russian income is best of all Allied income. If US wants to reposition its units to hit Axis targets in Africa, transports just can’t get the job done well at all, only being able to reach French West Africa then slowly trundle through Africa. Air can hit points in Africa while still threatening targets in Europe, then return and hit Europe the next turn while still threatening points in Africa.

So - was your opponent really engaging in stupid behavior? Perhaps not. Lucky, sure, and willing to press his/her luck, sure. But mass air of itself isn’t necessarily an indicator of poor play.