Navigation

    Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    1. Home
    2. DoManMacgee
    • Profile
    • Following 2
    • Followers 6
    • Topics 22
    • Posts 895
    • Best 241
    • Groups 6

    DouchemanMacgee

    @DoManMacgee

    2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18

    Up and Down and All Around.

    306
    Reputation
    451
    Profile views
    895
    Posts
    6
    Followers
    2
    Following
    Joined Last Online
    Location South Island

    DoManMacgee Unfollow Follow
    2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18

    Best posts made by DoManMacgee

    • Kill Italy First - An Alternative Central Powers Strategy

      I’ve recently gotten into playing competitive A&A1914 (with the help of fellow user @Slip-Capone, who has helped me playtest extensively). After playing several games and doing research, we’ve noticed that the Entente is heavily favored by most players. We are not here to dispute this assessment, and we are also not here to disagree with the typical Entente strategy of “UK kills Ottomans, Russia defends, Italy fights Austria, France fights Germany, USA goes where it’s needed”. This Entente strategy works well because, if everything goes well, the resulting endgame will see the Ottomans bleeding IPCs, Russia being battered but still holding on, and Italy/France/USA winning the game for the Entente in Italy/Germany/Austria.

      What we do disagree with, however, is the typical Central Powers strategies that we have observed. From what we’ve seen, there are only two approaches typically taken for the Central Powers: “Kill Russia first” (where Austria/Germany/Ottomans gang up on Russia and go for a quick knockout before pivoting to France) and “Kill France first” (where Germany aggressively attacks France while Austria and Ottomans defend). After working together with @Slip Capone, we have refined a third Central Powers strategy that has viability, which is the point of this thread. As the thread title says, we are dubbing this strategy “Kill Italy First”. It should be self-explanatory at a high level, but further discussion is needed to make our point.

      What is Kill Italy First (“KIF”)? As the name implies, you direct the Central Powers to defeat Italy first. Italy is by-far the weakest member of the Entente, only boasting 14 IPCs of starting income, and having a very small standing army on the first turn of the game. Additionally, if you are playing under LHTR, Italy also boasts a pathetically low threshold for collapsing (7 Economic/9 Political). However, Italy’s geographic position, coupled with their powerful starting navy, makes them a serious threat to the Central Powers if the game drags on into the later rounds. Left alone, Italy can bridge units into the Middle East (mostly Smyrna/Trans-Jordan), and can even make a run on Constantinople if the Ottoman player makes a mistake. Furthermore, Italy’s meager economy is just enough to be an annoyance to the Austrians, especially once you consider that Tyrolia and Trieste, both worth 4 IPCs, are directly adjacent to Italian territory (Venice). Rome is also a mere 4 tiles away from Vienna (Rome -> Tuscany -> Venice -> Trieste/Tyrolia -> Vienna), making it a source of Entente units that’s extremely close to the front lines.

      I went through such lengths to describe Italy’s position above because I’ve found that most players regard Italy as an afterthought, dismissing their role in the game with claims along the lines of “they’re weak and have to harass Austria”. My point here is that, if the Central Powers, specifically Austria and Germany, can take advantage of Italy’s weak starting position and politically-collapse them early, the Central Powers can seize 13 IPCs (not 14, since the last pesky IPC is in Libya) of Victory Points and income, which almost makes up for the 20 extra income USA will bring to the table starting turn 3 (turn 4 OOB). Defeating Italy (under LHTR) also has the added benefit of removing the Italian Navy from the game, which takes a large amount of pressure off of the Ottomans and also opens up the possibility of the Central Powers gaining control of the Mediterranean (more on that later).

      Hopefully, my ranting and raving has given you an idea of why I’m advocating this approach. Next, I’d like to talk about what steps you can take as the Central Powers to achieve this. This is something resembling a recommended build order/opening move guide for Austria and Germany. I won’t be discussing the Ottomans here, since their only role in this plan is to survive the onslaught that Russia/U.K. will try to throw their way.

      Bid: Assuming you get a bid, throw it in SZ18 (Adriatic Sea, where the Austrian Navy is). Ideally, you want a 12 bid so you can get a Battleship there (mostly for the 2HP, but the extra bombardment helps your consistency in the opening as well). A 9-11 bid (to get a Cruiser in SZ18) is also acceptable, but not really recommended. You really should try for a 12 bid.

      This bid will enable you to keep the AH fleet alive, barring good dice by the Entente. This may seem a bit odd, but ensuring you can continuously amphib into Tuscany will cut off the Italian supply line to Piedmont and Venice, two territories that are mission-critical. Maintaining a strong navy in SZ18 will also protect Trieste from amphibious assaults by Italy/France/UK, and will also give you the opportunity to break out of the Adriatic and into the Mediterranean in the mid-late game, which will prevent the Americans/French from sending their fleets to harass the Ottomans or liberate Italy. This can make the difference between winning and losing in a tournament setting.

      AH1: Buy: 4 INF/2 ART/1 TT for 26 IPC. The extra TT is for SZ18, which will become important AH2 for ferrying as many units as you can into Tuscany. Everything else is going to head towards Russia to defend against whatever trick they try R1.

      AH1: Move: 2 INF from Trieste get on the TT in SZ18 and land in Tuscany. As stated earlier, the idea here is to cut off Italy’s main army in Rome from reaching Venice, guaranteeing its fall. Everything else from Trieste + everything from Tyrolia goes into Venice. If you’re lucky, you can kill Venice in one battle, but if you don’t it’s fine. Germany will pick up the slack.

      Meanwhile, send everything from Vienna and Bohemia + 1 INF/2 ART from Galacia into Trieste in particular. Trieste is within two spaces of several important territories in this part of the board (Venice, Piedmont, Tuscany, the TTs in SZ18, Serbia, Galacia) which is why you want a stack there.

      Finally, send 4 INF from Budapest to Galacia to hold the lines, but everything else into Serbia (the game rules demand you attack Serbia AH1).

      These moves accomplish the following:

      A: Clearly and definitively reposition Austria’s starting forces into a posture where Italy is being relentlessly attacked. Italy’s starting forces are no match for this force, meaning you can send most of your buys towards Russia to make up for the units you took away from that front.

      B: Fortifies Galacia against Russia. The hope here is that Russia overextends and attacks you, which will allow Germany to send its starting forces to attack G1. This, plus an about-face from the Austrian stacks in Trieste and Vienna, will totally destroy that Russian army. If Russia doesn’t take this bait, you can commit the Trieste stack to destroying Italy as-planned while playing out the Russian front based on what the Entente does.

      G1: Buy: 5 INF/2 ART/2 FTR. Germany is going to be buying the FTRs for the Central Powers. Air Superiority is absolutely critical to obtain in this game, due to it allowing your ART to roll @ 4 while also DENYING this benefit to your opponent. The latter is just as important as the former, if not more so.

      G1: Move: Everything from Munich + Alsace attack Switzerland. Yes, Switzerland. Switzerland is adjacent to Burgundy, Alsace, Piedmont and Venice. This positioning disrupts France’s first turn, as they now have to properly position their forces to prevent Germany from moving a large stack into Burgundy (which is adjacent to Paris), and also puts Germany within striking distance of Italy’s high-value territories (Piedmont, Venice, Tuscany).

      The troops from Ruhr will move in a strange direction. 1 INF goes to Alsace to prevent a walk-in by France. The rest go to Tyrolia. Yes, Tyrolia. Tyrolia is similar to how I described Trieste in my section on Austria. Tyrolia is within 2-spaces of Tuscany/Piedmont/Venice/Alsace/Ruhr/Galacia/Silesia/Budapest, all extremely high-value or strategically important territories.

      Silesia and Prussia leave one INF behind each and move everything else into Galacia to join the Austrians. Everything from Hanover goes there as well. We’re trying to hold the line against Russia with just enough to put up a fight while the bulk of the troops go towards Italy.

      Last but not least, everything from Berlin and Kiel move down to Munich. Munich, like Tyrolia and Trieste, is a good central location that covers all of your options for the second round.

      What you do in Africa is up to you. It’s not relevant to the overall strategy.

      NOTE: A lot of this goes out the window if Russia attacks Germany, Silesia or Galcia R1. If Russia makes such a move, which is an over-extension, you should absolutely abandon the “KIF” strategy and crush Russia as quickly as possible.

      Now, with those very-specific first moves covered, I will give a general overview for how the rest of the game should play out. No specific moves this time, as you’ll mostly be reacting to what your opponent does at this point.

      AH2: Finish off Venice (if you couldn’t break it AH1), defend yourself against Russia as best you can. Build all land units, leaning towards ART (Germany will give Air Support).

      G2: Push into Piedmont and Tuscany (2-move from Tyrolia -> Venice -> Tuscany). Defend yourself against France and Russia appropriately. Build at least 1-2 FTRs to maintain Air Superiority across the board.

      If you got lucky, or if France played poorly, Italy will Economic-Collapse after their turn. If you’ve accomplished this, you’re on your way to a win.

      AH3: Push into Rome if possible. If not-possible, move the Tuscany guys into Naples/Piedmont as appropriate. Don’t press combat in Piedmont, you want to minimize France’s chances of saving Italy from Political-Collapse. Continue building land units and sending them towards Russia.

      G3: Push into Rome/Naples if Austria couldn’t manage it. Most of your attention should be on stopping France from saving Italy/defending the Ruhr/Munich line from France’s assault. Keep buying FTRs.

      At this point, Italy should Political-Collapse. If you got Italy to die this quickly, you’ve basically won. If you didn’t manage it yet, you still have one last chance in round 4 to finish them before the Americans start really giving you trouble.

      AH4: You may want to build navy at this point, if your fleet is still alive. You should mostly be focused on attacking Russia at this point. Hopefully after 3 rounds of buys from Germany/Austria Russia will be on the defensive.

      G4: Same advice as G3. If you didn’t finish off Italy yet this is your last chance.

      After this point, Italy is dead (hopefully), and the Americans have arrived. Your objective at this point changes dramatically. Austria should start buying navy and attempt to dislodge the Entente from SZ17 in particular. Taking this critical Sea Zone will prevent the Americans from making any last-minute plays into the Middle East or Italy, securing the IPCs you’ve gained there. Meanwhile, do your best to evacuate the German/Austrian armies from the Italian peninsula and reposition them to beat the French out of Germany before the game ends. Between whatever gains you made in Russia while all this was going on, and the gains you secured in Italy, you should have done more than enough to offset whatever IPCs you lost in the Ottoman-U.K. front and win the game.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1914
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: [GUIDE] How to Climb the Ranked Ladder A&A 1942 SE Online Beamdog

      @Tahweh While your tips are generally helpful as a fellow top 200 plat player (got into top 70 as Allies at one point, but I haven’t been playing much lately due to life commitments) I’d give the following caveats:

      1. USSR can afford to build a Tank or two. The ability to move two spaces instead of one is sometimes vital for transferring forces from one part of the front to another.

      2. Absolute buys should not be suggested. There are multiple openers for each country that compliment different overall strategies. However, I can also see that you’re tailoring this guide towards beginners, so a basic, low-risk KGF/Russia Crush strategy is probably best for just starting out.

      3. Germany needs to buy Tanks to make up for the longer “supply line” (as you called it) between Berlin and the Eastern Front Vs. the Soviets’. Of course, you don’t do anything silly like buying all Tanks, but 1-3 Tanks each turn while you’re ahead is recommended, unless you’ve scouted that the Allies are going for a KGF and you don’t see yourself breaking Moscow anytime soon.

      4. India falling should not be accepted as a given. It’s a likely outcome, but if you go in with a defeatist mindset that India will fall, then you’re also effectively conceding the game, as once Japan takes India their IPC income usually hits critical mass. India should be fought for tooth and nail so that, once it finally falls, Germany will be near-defeat anyway.

      5. Pearl Harbor is not something you should do in 100% of your games. Over-committing to it means you’re not making progress in Asia fast enough and under-committing means whatever is still in the Sea Zone gets counter-attacked A1. Whether Japan does Pearl Harbor or not should depend on what the UK does B1. If UK is committing heavily to India you should ignore Pearl Harbor and focus on Southeast Asia before UK builds momentum there.

      6. The build you recommend is valid, but building 1-2 Factories in Manchuria/FIC is also valid. Capturing Moscow before Berlin falls to the Allies is the goal of the game, and you need to accomplish it as quickly/safely as possible based on what the Allies are doing. If the Allies are fortifying Asia, you need to take your time and build INF, but if they’re leaving Asia totally bare, then start building Tanks and make for Moscow as fast as you can.

      7. Ignoring Japan in the Pacific lets them turn into an IPC monster extremely quickly. Some naval presence in the Pacific is recommended. You don’t need to contest the Pacific, you just need to force Japan to actually spend some of their IPCs on Surface Vessels so they’re not flinging 45+ IPCs towards India/Moscow every turn.

      8. Japan can buy 1-2 factories a game. However I wouldn’t recommend that a beginner try doing such a strategy.

      9. Great article otherwise. Avoiding these common pitfalls + learning the optimal opening(s) for each country are the two biggest hurdles to “stop being bad” at Axis & Allies. The road to “getting good” involves learning how to play out the long game and not panic when individual battles go badly.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Renegade Con Virtual: Axis and Allies

      @thrasher1 Revived, Classic and the original Europe and Pacific weren’t even listed as options for the “favorite game” section. Does Hasbro not have the rights to them or something?

      EDIT: Spring 42 also wasn’t listed, although I can’t really blame them on that front as I can’t imagine there’s a soul out there who’d list that as their favorite (although 41 is listed so…)

      EDIT #2: Did the Lord’s work and plugged this site wherever I could on the poll. If enough people follow suit we might be able to get some of these guys to lend us an ear for future releases, events, etc.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • Shoutouts to the Graphics Team

      For having good taste and going with the Revised-style map instead of that atrociously ugly design they use in the actual 42SE game.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Why is Global better than Revised?

      @Argothair said in Why is Global better than Revised?:

      Very interesting, thank you. So, digging a little deeper, can anyone articulate what it means for something to be a “wargame” or why G40 would scratch the “wargame hunger” better than Revised? In concrete terms, why does G40 feel like a wargame?

      The gist of it is that G40 has a higher level of complexity and scale than Revised, in terms of number of territories on the board, distinct unit types, special rules/scenarios, how scripted the opening moves are (in the big picture, I mean), etc.

      Take your average wargame. Hex-based Grid, super-historically accurate setup (with minor concessions for balance reasons), Chits corresponding to individual unit/battalions/whatever (this differs based on the game). Wargames also typically cover the full timeline of the war, with certain historical events more-or-less pre-determined (i.e. France will lose to the Nazi assault in 1940 every time. Germany will need to declare war on the Soviet Union ever time, USA will enter the war on the Allies’ side after either Japan attacks them or certain conditions are met, etc.).

      Does this sort of thing sound more like Revised, or G40? Clearly the answer here is G40. Revised has a comparatively static initial board state set late in the war (~1942), that isn’t historically accurate (i.e. “Pearl Harbor” happens J1 despite the Germans already being more-or-less set up to make their doomed attack into Stalingrad, but somehow the Russians get to make the first move? Also Germany/Italy just gets to take Egypt at the start of the game?). Meanwhile, G40 starts you off in a relatively accurate representation of 1940 Europe, with things like the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Soviet-Japanese Non-Aggression Pact, America’s Neutrality, and Japan not yet being at war with most of the Allies all being present and accounted for.

      Revised, when played at a high level, looks nothing like World War 2 in terms of strategies used by the Players. G40 doesn’t either, but it comes a lot closer than Revised does. That’s why I call G40 “close to a wargame” rather than giving it the full distinction.

      But what else are you going to do? Either the action has a central focus (in which case people will complain that the only thing to do is go right for the center) or the action doesn’t have a central focus (in which case people will complain that it feels casual and screwy and ahistorical and winds up in stalemates where you trade the same peripheral territories forever). Maybe I’m feeling too philosophical today to talk sense. I’m just trying to figure out what makes A&A games fun and what makes them frustrating, at a really abstract and general level.

      What makes a A&A game fun/frustrating is a subjective question, I guess I’ll give you my take:

      • Fun - Relatively quick compared to other wargames.

      • Fun - Straightforward-enough rules, but not for babies like Risk or your typical Milton Bradley/Hasbro game.

      • Fun - Exciting World War 2 Action.

      • Fun - Decent-to-huge variety in strategic options available to the player. You’re not forced to follow history 1:1.

      • Fun - While luck is a factory, the better player will usually win due to skill.

      • Fun - Asynchronous Gameplay. The Axis start with more Power, but less Economy. The Allies start with more Economy, but less Power. The Axis have to try their best to gain the economic advantage over the Allies before the Allies’ superior economy allows them to overpower the Axis’ starting advantage. It’s like picking White or Black in Chess, but on a much higher level than just “who goes first”.

      • Fun - Ability to make custom scenarios easily, as the simple rules lend themselves easily to modifications, as shown by the hard work a lot of people do on this forum.

      • Frustrating - Once optimal play is found for a map, most games usually come down to arguments about bids and dice rolls.

      • Frustrating - Because of the OOB system, games can be decided by single rounds of combat if one side rolls well.

      • Frustrating - Grind Games. While some long, drawn out games can be breathtakingly exciting, more often than not you’re staring at 20 turns of swapping some clay in Ukraine/some territory adjacent to Moscow and waiting for something exciting to happen while looking at the clock. Face-to-Face rules that impose a strict turn limit do a lot to alleviate this, though.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Allies strategy

      @thedesertfox From a purely mathematical standpoint, you’re correct. 4 TANK (or even 4 INF+2 ART) is a better combination than 2 FTR. However, the purpose of buying the air units is because they don’t have to stay in the territory they attack. This is an important point because most of the action on the Eastern Front is going to involve you sending 1-2 INF + 1-2 FTR against Germany territories containing 1-2 INF. In the 41 scenario specifically, the USSR starts with zero air units, so buying them on turn 1 (while you still can reasonably afford to) is a good idea. After Turn 1, you should stick to purely INF/ART (with maybe the occasional TANK if things are going extremely well for you).

      posted in 1941 Scenario
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Renegade Con Virtual: Axis and Allies

      @imperious-leader Revised is fine lol. Bid at moderate/high level is 4 to Axis for an extra ART in Libya (in online play with on time limit), even.

      Tank spam as Japan is good on paper but a good Allies player will have things in the Atlantic relatively under control by time Japan is anywhere near Moscow. Transports in Revised participate in combat, which means Germany can’t reliably kill UK’s BB fleet G1, which in turn lets you just build 1 CV then ramp up to 4 Transports and start landing across any of West Europe/East Europe/Karelia to severely kneecap Germany’s troop train. No starting Karelia Factory for Soviets to worry about + no starting India factory for UK to worry about means you can get a pretty seamless setup going by around B3 and even have the spare funds to dump a FTR or two into Moscow if you need it for dice odds. Japan can still threaten a win by hitting Moscow on ~turn 6 but by that point Allies should be just about to take Berlin to set up a US/UK Vs. Japan finale, assuming the game doesn’t just devolve into an INF stack stalemate instead.

      EDIT: That being said I don’t want Renegade to touch Revised other than just forcing Beamdog to roll it into the AAO Client (which will probably never happen). If they want to make a “42” sized game they should just make a 42 3rd Edition instead of messing with an older version.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Bonus starting ipcs or other edits?

      IMO the change in OOL does nothing to prevent the main sources of imbalance in 42SE, namely:

      • Germany’s starting forces are too powerful and will overwhelm the Soviets every time.

      • The Soviet IC in Karelia is more of a curse than a blessing, as Germany will always seize it G1 and gain access to a free IC two territories away from Moscow, and adjacent to the main Soviet stack (West Russia). The most the Allies can do to oppose this is SBR the factory, but 4 IPC/turn is a small price to pay for the huge benefit that having an IC deep in Soviet territory provides.

      • The UK IC in India is in a similar position, as UK is forced to spend 9-18 IPC a turn stacking land units there to deter Japan from seizing the territory. UK is forced into this position, because the moment Japan seizes the IC, they will be able to pump out 3 Tanks/turn from it. India is two territories away from Caucasus, a vital territory on the board, and Russia cannot possibly survive the pressure of a Japanese push on Caucasus AND the Germans stacking Karelia.

      EDIT: Forgot the point of my rambling about the UK India IC. My point is that, because UK has to spend 1/3 - 1/2 of its income guarding India, its ability to send assistance to the USSR via re-assembling the Royal Navy is extremely impeded. This is especially troubling when you take into consideration the relative ease at which Germany destroys the Royal Navy on G1. It could take as many as 4-5 rounds for UK/US to just get into a position where they can start applying pressure to the periphery of the ETO (North Africa/Scandinavia), let alone actually do anything close to real damage. By G5 Germany will already have the Russians either dead or helplessly holed up in Moscow.

      The only thing the OOL change impacts is naval battles (which is why I did not list the overwhelming power of the IJN as a problem) and fringe cases where Fighters/Bombers were left guarding key positions (France, West Russia, etc.)

      tl;dr the key issues with 42SE’s setup arise from the land situation on the Russian Front, and land battles are generally unaffected by the OOL changes.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: All the Russian openings: For Begginers

      Just found this thread, so figured I’d throw my two cents in the ring, since Allies are more fun to play than Axis in this version (even if they have a much harder time winning).

      Under LHTR (AKA “Gencon 3.0” or whatever they call it in AAO), killing the German bomber is the linchpin of the entire Allied opening, as you need the following chain of events to occur:

      • USSR kills Germany’s bomber in Ukraine R1.
      • No Bomber for Germany = Germany can’t reliably kill Egypt G1.
      • Egypt surviving = UK gets an extra FTR B1 for use against the IJN off DEI (SZ37)
      • Extra fighter for UK against SZ37 fleet = UK trades its entire Pacific fleet to take down half the IJN B1.
      • Japan losing half its navy = Their offensive momentum is totally halted, giving the Allies a solid amount of wiggle room to play the game.

      This necessity, coupled with the necessity of taking West Russia R1, as it is the most important tile in Russia in terms of what it connects to, means that you can’t expect to hold Karelia. Thus, I go for the following opening:

      Karelia: FTR -> Ukraine, rest -> W. Russia
      Archangel: All -> W. Russia
      Moscow: Tanks + FTRs -> Ukraine, rest to W. Russia
      Caucasus: All -> Ukraine

      Despite this, you can and may lose the Ukraine fight. However, due to the default AAO Defense Profiles (WHICH YOU CAN CHANGE IN THE SETTINGS BY THE WAY, PLEASE DO THIS) being terrible, Germany by-default will lose the Bomber last, which means that pulling out after killing the Bomber is not usually an option.

      For the Siberia guys, there’s more flexibility with what you can do, but you at least want the Kazakh guy going to Szechwan, move the Ural guys to Archangel, move the Novosibirsk guy to Moscow and to consolidate the guys in Yakut/SFE/Bury. I like to stick them in Yakut, but you can go for Buryatia if you’re planning on a KJF for whatever reason.

      After the opening, as Black_Elk said, the strategy depends on the ebb and flow of the game. Things like how Germany/Japan are playing, how dice rolls are going, etc. This determines whether you build 1-2 TANKs with your land units, or all INF/ART. I don’t agree with the notion that the Soviets should be buying FTRs ever. Leave the expensive units to USA/UK.

      Finally, I personally find Strat Bombing worthless. Bombers are expensive and don’t pay for themselves until a point where the game has usually been decided one way or the other anyway. For the price of the Bomber you’re gambling IPC value on, you can buy 2 SUBs, 4 INF, 3 ART, or 2 TANK, based on your needs. All of these options are blatantly superior to a Bomber. The only thing that’s worse for you value-wise is probably a Cruiser, lol.

      EDIT: I’m specifically talking about purchasing a BOMB. Bidding for one is perfectly acceptable due to how the bidding rules work. An extra BOMB in Russia’s opener gives you much better odds in Ukraine, and you then have the ability to keep the Bomber alive for other roles on both sides of the map.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Feedback and questions for other players

      I haven’t played a PVP game yet, but I wanted to offer my take on the tutorial and the Vs. AI modes.

      Hopped in today. Game is going for a certain aesthetic. I’m not big on it as I prefer minimalist designs, but I can live with it. The UI is cumbersome and overdone, but that’s not an issue for the most part as I can disable the animations and mute the music/SFX via the options menu. So far so good.

      That’s where the nitpicks start for the UI, though.

      • The lines each unit leave behind to indicate that they’re advancing from point A to point B can cause a fair bit of clutter. This is especially painful on turn 1 for countries with denser initial setups, like Germany and USSR. At multiple points I ended up accidentally not moving a Fighter simply because I though that I’d already moved it. TripleA handles this by actually having the units move into the territory you’re trying to attack, instead of awkwardly hovering halfway between the origin territory and the target like this game does.

      • At the start of each new game phase, the camera warps back to the maximum zoom setting. I play the game zoomed out as far as I can by default, so needing to zoom back out for each and every phase of my turn was frustrating.

      • I can’t select multiple units from a territory at once when trying to move them. It’s time-consuming to have to click on a unit and then click the target territory for that unit multiple times until I clear out the stack. I was trying to finish off Moscow G4 with a 12 INF/13 TANK stack and it took me almost 90 seconds to get the battle setup. In TripleA I just have to shift+click West Russia and then click Moscow and boom, done.

      • Transports feel a bit clunky as well. First you have to click the transport you intend to load, then click on any units in any adjacent territories you want to load on the transport, then click on the destination for the transport, then click on the unload target. If you accidentally click on any other unit during this process you have to start over. It’s irritating. Additionally, you can’t click on a land unit then click on the transport. You have to click the transport first. It’s slightly counter-intuitive, but that’s probably just my years of reflexes from playing TripleA getting to me.

      That’s it for UI nitpicks, but I’d also like to add that the game takes a while to play out. Can’t really put my finger on why, but everything just feels “slow”. I know I’m not exactly being descriptive here, so I’m sorry about that.

      The tutorial mode was fine, loved the thick British Accent on the commander guy. It really needs sections on Naval Combat, Strategic Bombing, and Naval Bombardment, though.

      The AI is complete crap (I could use more colorful language but that’d be rude) at the game. I was able to beat it as Allies on turn 5. Yes, I won 42SE as Allies with no bid on turn 5 (for reference, I’m not the greatest A&A player out there, and the TripleA Hard AI actually gives me a pretty rough go of things on 42SE no bid if I take Allies). The Germans attack into bad situations in a desperate bid to take VCs (Leningrad in particular), and the Japanese fail completely at taking out the initial British Fleet and have a tendency to hang their fleet. The AI just kind of sucks at naval combat in-general. When I was playing as Axis, the USN let my starting Submarines basically roam the board and snipe all of their transports without even trying to stop them. One turn they even built 3 Transports right next to my submarines with 0 cover.

      Other than that, the game’s functional, and an accurate simulation of 42SE. Only issue I can see are the general balance issues for 42SE that have been talked to death already. Would appreciate it if the 42.3 balance patch was implemented and included as an alternate setup. It shouldn’t take too much effort, as it’s the exact same map and starting territories as the base game, just with different units assigned to each territory.

      One last note is that I got tons of random JavaScript exceptions while playing. Can’t replicate all of them, but I know for sure that one of them was caused by me pressing the “back” key on my mouse. Might want to look into that.

      Super happy to finally be playing this. Hoping to play some PVP tomorrow and provide more feedback.

      I’ll also be posting this on Steam to try to get discussion going.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee

    Latest posts made by DoManMacgee

    • RE: USSR1 submerging submarine or nah, G1 6 to sz7 or 5, 2 fighters to Archangel

      Thanks for posting this here. Discord is miserable for actually maintaining/archiving information to the point where I have no idea how it’s become top dog over the years.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Renegade Con Virtual: Axis and Allies

      @imperious-leader Revised is fine lol. Bid at moderate/high level is 4 to Axis for an extra ART in Libya (in online play with on time limit), even.

      Tank spam as Japan is good on paper but a good Allies player will have things in the Atlantic relatively under control by time Japan is anywhere near Moscow. Transports in Revised participate in combat, which means Germany can’t reliably kill UK’s BB fleet G1, which in turn lets you just build 1 CV then ramp up to 4 Transports and start landing across any of West Europe/East Europe/Karelia to severely kneecap Germany’s troop train. No starting Karelia Factory for Soviets to worry about + no starting India factory for UK to worry about means you can get a pretty seamless setup going by around B3 and even have the spare funds to dump a FTR or two into Moscow if you need it for dice odds. Japan can still threaten a win by hitting Moscow on ~turn 6 but by that point Allies should be just about to take Berlin to set up a US/UK Vs. Japan finale, assuming the game doesn’t just devolve into an INF stack stalemate instead.

      EDIT: That being said I don’t want Renegade to touch Revised other than just forcing Beamdog to roll it into the AAO Client (which will probably never happen). If they want to make a “42” sized game they should just make a 42 3rd Edition instead of messing with an older version.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Converting Revised To The Modern Era?

      @all-encompassing-goose Compared to the more “modern” games like 1914, G40 and even AA50 to an extent, Revised’s map is pretty simple (meaning games on Revised are a lot faster than those three).

      That being said, I would personally ignore the OOB Victory conditions (which are ludicrous, since Allies taking out Tokyo and Berlin is unfeasible in a realistic amount of time and Axis getting 2/3 Allied Capitals is similarly long and drawn out). Try something like the following:

      1. If Axis gain control of Leningrad (Karelia SSR), Moscow (Russia) and India, Axis win.

      2. If Allies take one Axis Capital while holding all of their own, Allies win.

      If you want to have the game done in ~5 hours you can use the old Face-to-Face tournament rules from the convention I used to play at that ran events from 2004 - ~2019. It’s a custom set of Victory Cities you can play with that adds a bit of depth to the game strategy wise.

      posted in Axis & Allies Revised Edition
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Renegade Con Virtual: Axis and Allies

      @vodot Funny coincidence. Revised is my #1 and AA50 is my #2 (so I just voted for AA50 in the poll). The real crime is no Classic representation though as that seems to be the 2nd most popular version other than G40.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Renegade Con Virtual: Axis and Allies

      @thrasher1 Revived, Classic and the original Europe and Pacific weren’t even listed as options for the “favorite game” section. Does Hasbro not have the rights to them or something?

      EDIT: Spring 42 also wasn’t listed, although I can’t really blame them on that front as I can’t imagine there’s a soul out there who’d list that as their favorite (although 41 is listed so…)

      EDIT #2: Did the Lord’s work and plugged this site wherever I could on the poll. If enough people follow suit we might be able to get some of these guys to lend us an ear for future releases, events, etc.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Ways to make the game better?

      @panther Ah, that’s right. Somehow I misread the board category since usually 42SE is the one with the bad reputation while most tend to ignore Spring 42.

      @All-Encompassing-Goose As Panther said, ignore the critics and play on. Most of the complaints about this version are about the lackluster components (money, plastic guys, etc.) rather than the actual gameplay. If that kind of thing actually bothers you or your friends just use the pieces from one of the other games (if you own any others).

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: Ways to make the game better?

      @all-encompassing-goose Try the LHTR. I don’t have a link on me but looking up either “Axis and Allies 1942 2nd Edition Tournament Rules” or “Axis and Allies 1942 3.0 Tournament Rules” (or something similar) should get you the info you need.

      Basically, it’s a modification to the starting setup that takes away the massive starting advantage the Axis have (which ultimately makes the game a lot more even, although it’s still a bit linear). This turn 42SE from basically the worst game in the franchise into a comfortably mid-tier one. Great for getting a game done in a reasonable amount of time or getting new players up to speed on the rules.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: More Announcements from Renegade

      If Renegade is limiting themselves to WW2, then a purely Japan Vs. China game would be an interesting one. Most WW2 games focus on USSR Vs. Germany (or the European theater in general) and the few that don’t usually devolve into USA Vs. Japan unless it’s on a huge scale.

      posted in News
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: [Game 8] TGC (Entente) v DoManMacgee (CP) -oob, no bid, RR

      @the_good_captain Rolled a desperation AH attack and it went about as badly as you can imagine. GG.

      posted in Play Boardgames
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee
    • RE: [Game 8] TGC (Entente) v DoManMacgee (CP) -oob, no bid, RR

      @the_good_captain 12 INF + 6 ART, regrettably.

      posted in Play Boardgames
      DoManMacgee
      DoManMacgee