thats y i like to have build transports at least 2 on the first turn if for no other reason then to reinforce norway if sealion doesnt happen and yes the ic in the ukraine is very nice if u do decide to go for russia
Obviously you would sink atleast one of the battleships, maybe even two. My point is if UK buys inf heavy you would avoid sea lion, if they build boats and/or big time in africa, send in the sea lion.
I mean really, if UK buys 9 men on turn 1, why even bother facing them as there no threat, its time to eat some russia!
I think I personally will purchase 1 trans, 1 DD, or two trans and 5 inf on turn 1, hiding atleast the trans in the baltic maybe even the rest of the boats while sinking all the UK boats I can without huge risk, probably leaving 1 BB, 1 Cru in the atlantic. Then on turn 2 if the UK builds say, a minor IC, or 3 tanks out of south africa, move up the fleet drop more boats and dance in London on turn 3. Keep in mind too, you don’t need all transports as your airforce is larger than the UKs, not only that but 13 IPCs gets you two inf and a trannie, 10 gets you a fighter. Yes the inf are better but the fighter is more versatile after you take London.
What I’m saying is, going hardcore sea lion isnt that great of an idea, but the threat of it forces the UK to react and gives you an advantage.
I thought that since axis and allies is a strategy game, that people here might be interested in another strategy game… The classic RISK game! This is a really fun online site that has not only the original risk game to play, but also many other different maps and variations to the game as well (one of the countless many being doubles). Along with tournaments and forums, it hosts over 20000 active members in it.
The war was complicated, and there were many ways that it could have turned out. This should be represented in the victory cities listed on the map. Besides the fact that no one counts the victory anyways and just play till surrender, and the fact that 3 more should be no trouble at all, no one plays this game who isn’t an avid strategy board game fan. We like complexity 😮 and that’s why we play this and not RISK. Hurray for more victory cities! Hurray for more powers! Hurray for more rules!
Well id like to see Italy only able to take one at the start of the game, because taking both would be risky becuase they might not win both battles. And if they dont win either, the remaining units become those of an allied power….and then get to act before italy gets a chance to attack again.
cool, thanks. And I knew that the U.S. technically wouldn’t earn any money with the Western U.S. taken, but I was really referring to the Global game where the Western U.S. wouldn’t be the capital.
Well there will be a new set of rules for the global game. It’s hard to say the impact that’ll have, though it’s good to get the question out early so them who make the rules will address it correctly.