I’ve played a couple of games of A&A Stalingrad and found it to be a stimulating and changing game. However, agree with the sentiment that the Axis player must execute with near perfection AND enjoy favorable die rolls.

Was thinking about how to balance the game without compromising the vision of the designer. Landed on the penalty that the Russians suffer in the first two rounds. In addition to “Not stepping back”, Russian units must attack as if unsupplied during the first two rounds. Note that the penalty would not apply during the German turn (Russians on defense) but only on the Russian turn when their counterattacks might be stymied by draconian orders from above.

I suspect that, on average, about 15 to 20 counterattacking Russian units would be so penalized during these first two turns. That might leave the Axis player with 3 more units to engage in the City by turn 3.

Also interested to know if there is a 2nd edition to the rules coming.

@DoManMacgee Thanks for your comments. Agree that the optional rules can be used judiciously to balance the game. Specifically, I think that the alternative deployment option can be effective for the Axis player. Haven’t tried that yet.

While my experience is limited, my friend and I have played with the “Bad Weather Sorties” optional rule allowing air units to fight during bad weather. This seems to benefit the Axis player as that side almost always has more air units in play.

Related note - I’ve thought about the strategy of bombing Volga river crossings. It is typically a risky strategy for German air to fly into the city board given the prevalence of Russian artillery. It seems that 3 conditions must exist to make a raid profitable.

1. The Volga should be unfrozen necessitating the Russian player to replace the ferry if it is destroyed. More importantly, the loss of the ferry crossing must put Russian units in the corresponding city zone out of supply if and when it is destroyed

2. The Axis player should be actively engaging several Russian units whose combat effectiveness will be reduced by the elimination of the ferry.

3. There should be a Russian unit on the ferry that will be eliminated in the event of a successful raid

In short, if the axis player risks sending air to bomb a ferry crossing, it should be coordinated with major attacks in the corresponding city zone that will benefit from Russian units being put out of supply.

@DoManMacgee I think you are right to assign additional value to a ferry attack if German units are engaged with a cluster of Russians in a high value zone such as a factory or a key fortress. Putting russians out of supply via ferry bombing may be a superior option to simply adding those air units to the attack. Reducing the value of the russian counterattack can save german land units. More land units could mean holding onto valuable city territories for longer.

Not sure what the indifference point is but … my guess is that if three engaged russian units can be put out of supply in a city zone, it’s probably worth it. Maybe two units could be the minimum to warrant a ferry bombing if the engaged zone was strategic as you indicate. Note - a russian counter could be to drop a supply token in one of the factory zones. That would limit the utility of that first ferry bombing in the north.

Wow! an all out air assault on a fortified position. Yeah, I could see sending in the Axis air force as a can opener in Spartanovka . Follow up with Tank/Mech attack on the tank factory next turn?

@DoManMacgee I think you are right to assign additional value to a ferry attack if German units are engaged with a cluster of Russians in a high value zone such as a factory or a key fortress. Putting russians out of supply via ferry bombing may be a superior option to simply adding those air units to the attack. Reducing the value of the russian counterattack can save german land units. More land units could mean holding onto valuable city territories for longer.

Not sure what the indifference point is but … my guess is that if three engaged russian units can be put out of supply in a city zone, it’s probably worth it. Maybe two units could be the minimum to warrant a ferry bombing if the engaged zone was strategic as you indicate. Note - a russian counter could be to drop a supply token in one of the factory zones. That would limit the utility of that first ferry bombing in the north.

Wow! an all out air assault on a fortified position. Yeah, I could see sending in the Axis air force as a can opener in Spartanovka . Follow up with Tank/Mech attack on the tank factory next turn?

@DoManMacgee Thanks for your comments. Agree that the optional rules can be used judiciously to balance the game. Specifically, I think that the alternative deployment option can be effective for the Axis player. Haven’t tried that yet.

While my experience is limited, my friend and I have played with the “Bad Weather Sorties” optional rule allowing air units to fight during bad weather. This seems to benefit the Axis player as that side almost always has more air units in play.

Related note - I’ve thought about the strategy of bombing Volga river crossings. It is typically a risky strategy for German air to fly into the city board given the prevalence of Russian artillery. It seems that 3 conditions must exist to make a raid profitable.

1. The Volga should be unfrozen necessitating the Russian player to replace the ferry if it is destroyed. More importantly, the loss of the ferry crossing must put Russian units in the corresponding city zone out of supply if and when it is destroyed

2. The Axis player should be actively engaging several Russian units whose combat effectiveness will be reduced by the elimination of the ferry.

3. There should be a Russian unit on the ferry that will be eliminated in the event of a successful raid

In short, if the axis player risks sending air to bomb a ferry crossing, it should be coordinated with major attacks in the corresponding city zone that will benefit from Russian units being put out of supply.

I’ve played a couple of games of A&A Stalingrad and found it to be a stimulating and changing game. However, agree with the sentiment that the Axis player must execute with near perfection AND enjoy favorable die rolls.

Was thinking about how to balance the game without compromising the vision of the designer. Landed on the penalty that the Russians suffer in the first two rounds. In addition to “Not stepping back”, Russian units must attack as if unsupplied during the first two rounds. Note that the penalty would not apply during the German turn (Russians on defense) but only on the Russian turn when their counterattacks might be stymied by draconian orders from above.

I suspect that, on average, about 15 to 20 counterattacking Russian units would be so penalized during these first two turns. That might leave the Axis player with 3 more units to engage in the City by turn 3.

Also interested to know if there is a 2nd edition to the rules coming.

Hey there, anyone interested in playing axis and allies 1940. I have second editions

Agree that the first UK move should create a seal to protect Egypt from Amphibeous landing.

Japan focuses on the chinese. Transports preparing to load in the Sea of Japan for offensive action later. The Chinese were able to reopen the Burma Road but the Japanese began to concentrate their air power in Kwangsi province. Note that the Russians loom ominously at the Manchurian Border.

The Australians focused on building their navy a bit and increasing their income.

There were three players to this global game. I played the Axis so most of my comments are from that perspective.

Germany build an AC, DD, TT in round 1 in prep for possible Sealion. In combat, the only unusual play (if that) Germany’s takeover of S France - useful for its port and IC. The initial sea attacks around the UK were met with mediocre success. Did a SBR with 2 bombers, a TAC and fighter. These would have been put to better use sinking UK ships. I wound up with 3 subs with a potential for convoy disruption in SZ 109. The UK had a surviving destroyer that my opponent did not put to use in turn 1 to sink my vulnerable subs. I think that I lucked out.

I decided early on that Japan would focus on China for the first two rounds and build 3 additional TTs for a total of 6. No attack of Russia. By Turn 3, there would be a major force with 3 TTs in the Caroline Islands. A task force with 3 additional TTs would be poised off SE asia.  At that point I would evaluate the disposition of allied forces to determine whether to go for Australia or go for the money islands.

The US focused its builds in the Pacific for the first 3 rounds.

Britain failed to do much damage to the Italian Fleet so I did an amphibious attack of Syria. Perhaps exploiting the Caucasus if unchecked by the British …. More narrative and photos later.

are seazones 109 and 119 west of the UK connected?

Would the UK obtain IPCs by occupying original french territories like Morocco or French Indochina?. Is there a difference if they were liberated from the axis or not?