Axis&Allies: Revised Edition

[Safe-Keeper]

I've brought the revised edition of the Axis&Allies board game off of its shelf, brushed the dust off the pieces, and decided to give it a go again, once I find a place to set it up and round up enough fellow players. It's such an awesome title, especially with the new rules and special optional "powers" for each nation.

I'll opt to play as the UK, and my goal for the game, in addition to winning, is to liberate and hold Norway.

Anyone else play this gem? Who do you prefer to play as?

[cobalt]

i have the europe edition


that game is sick

[Safe-Keeper]

I have the Revised edition of the original game, the Europe and Pacific editions, and D-Day. I also have Avalon Hill's Betrayal at House on the Hill, which is downright awesome (I might have played it half a hundred times already!).

The European theatre version has lots and lots of ground combat, the Pacific version offers plenty of naval battle, while the "global" version offers both and more. The new unit's abilities and national powers add to game-play, too. Before every game, you decide how many special powers, up to six, each nation is to start with. Each power is unique and nation-specific, based on historical tactics, strategies, units or events. For example, Germany can end up with the Wolf Pack ability, which causes Britain to lose one IPC (resource unit used for purchasing units) each turn for every German u-boat in operation. The US has Chinese Divisions, which gives the US a free infantry unit in China every turn. The cold-weather USSR can field the Russian Winter, which gives Russia extra defensive power for a turn designated by the Soviet player.

Additionally, the best additions from Pacific and Europe have been added to the game, such as how Battleships take two hits to destroy. Research has also been stream-lined, and the techs have been re-worked for balance and playability. All in all, the Revised edition makes for a lot of fun.

The D-Day version... I didn't feel much for. Too small a scope and too different from traditional Axis&Allies for my taste.

- - - - - -

We've now finally gotten started, with me playing the UK, my brother taking the reins of Japan, my cousin ruling Germany, and a friend of my brother's controlling the US and USSR (which still count as two nations, with separate turns).

The first round went down a bit like this:

The Soviet Union did little except invade West Russia, wrestling it from German occupation. Troops were moved to the West front from the western Russian interior. The Pacific front, unfortunately, was neglected, as a Japanese attack was not anticipated.

The Germans launched a large offensive against Causcaus, failing miserably and suffering severe casualties. Russia still maintained a strong grip on the region. Next, Germany's Battleship in the Mediterranean moved east, sinking the British Destroyer without taking damage. Finally, Norway was reinforced with two tanks.

The UK, played by me, invaded and seized Libya with an Infantry unit, a Tank, and a fighter plane flown in from a carrier in the Indian Ocean. Two fighters from England sunk a submarine in the Atlantic. Two Industrial Complexes were erected, enabling troops to be deployed in India and Australia.

Fearing enemy action, the UK moved its carrier battle group in the Indian Ocean west to the Eastern African coast, and its Battleship out of the Mediterranean, to the North-West African coast.

Japan carried out a major offensive in her first turn. First, three fighters swooped in over Australia, but were shot down without causing damage. Next, a fighter worked with a submarine east of Australia, sinking the British transport and submarine there. In Asia, the American-supported troops in Eastern China were obliterated by a Japanese push, leaving only one free Chinese province left. Meanwhile, just to the north, Japanese troops, supported by Battleship bombardment, seized a foothold in the Soviet Union by seizing the Buryatia S.S.R.

The USA, still recovering from Pearl Harbour, undertook no action other than bombing Wake Island with a fighter plane, killing the single infantry unit comprising the island's garrison. Eggheads in-land, meanwhile, made the game's first technological breakthrough by successfully researching the Super Submarines technology, which give US submarines an attack of 3 rather than 2. The US promptly ordered the construction of two new subs, bringing her total up to three. They'll be sorely needed.

The United Kingdom is a fun nation to play with, and it'll be interesting to see what I can do with her next turn. One thing's for sure, Japan's presence in Asia must be challenged. I plan to help comrade Stalin by placing troops in India and sending them into Indo-China, hopefully forcing Yamamoto to divert troops to the province to stave off my advance. It's an interesting situation as both India and Kwangtung (just beyond Indo-China) contain Victory Cities and thus important to victory (we're playing a short Minor Victory game, so the first side to hold 8 Victory Cities for a full turn will win the game). With the entire Japanese powerhouse next door, I doubt I'll be able to take and hold Kwangtung, but as a diversion it should do nicely.

As for what to do with the Third Reich in Europe, I'm not sure. I want to wrestle all of Africa out of Germany's hands, and the USSR will be sure to take Norway (Josef is massing troops at the Norwegian border), but I'm not by far ready to land troops in mainland Europe yet.

This has the potential to become a really good game, I think, if only everyone hang in there all the way through.

[Huxy]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

I'll opt to play as the UK, and my goal for the game, in addition to winning, is to liberate and hold Norway.

Thats a great tactic!

[Safe-Keeper]

Game over, Axis win. And a wonderful game, too.

I think one of the best parts of the game was the huge naval battle off Midway where half the Japanese fleet was sunk (two Battleships and two Transports full of ground units). I lost half of the US fleet, too, but the Super Submarines pulled the 'States through.

But yes, as I lost Leningrad and Calcutta, the game was over. Funny thing was, we kept playing as we thought you had to hold the cities until your next turn to win, which you apparently didn't have to. So, yeah, Axis won. And I failed my objective of taking and holding Norway.

Oh well, better luck to me next time, eh?

[JALU3]

You know, I read two strategies for Japan . . . the first is Second Pearl Harbor . . . where the Japanese catch the US off guard with their full naval and air forces, which leaves the US useless in the Pacific unless the expend major IPs to rebuild the fleet . . . or you hole up in the Pacific, infront of Japan, and amass an amazing naval flottilla which is near indestructable. And then make a drive east for India and Moscow.

I also noticed the old Russian strategy about dumping infantry into Western Russia isn't as effective, due to the removal of the IC in Northern Russia.

Australia/NZ still is in a weekend position if the US Sub is able to be taken out . . . and Germany still has to fight south then east to get out of the pocket . . .

US appears to have remained in the same position . . . as has the UK . . . am I missing anything?

[Heibges]

Has the game changed a lot?

I used to play a lot years ago, and the only time the Axis ever won was when Germany and Japan ganged up and took out Russia quick.

Japan has to get that Factory Built in China quickly.

[JALU3]

I bought the game for a cousin of mine, young, impressionable . . . basically I will be dooming him to nerddom . . . I am going to get him D&D books for Christmas (laughs maniacely).

The map has been adjusted . . . and it is harder for the Soviets to hold of the Nazi's push to the east . . . and make their actions far more critical in terms of gameplay . . . if they don't hold Stalingrad and Leningrad . . . game over man . . . game over.

Japan is in as pretty a position as ever . . . and it appears to be slightly harder for the Allies . . . but overall the same game . . . with some improvements.

[AG124]

I only have the original version of the game, which I haven't played in ages. I have been meaning to get the revised version, but just never got around to it (plus, I have been spending a lot on Axis & Allies War At sea Miniatures). I have seen and read a lot about it online though.

Originally Posted by Heibges

Has the game changed a lot?

Yes, there have been substantial changes, some of which you can read about on Wikipedia. In addition to a few changes in unit value and attack/defence value, each nation now gets "its own" national pieces (although they got lazy with some of those), and the map has been changed as JALU3 pointed out.

The unit pieces are now coloured as follows: USSR - Burgundy, Germany - Dark Blue-Grey, UK - Light Tan, Japan - Orange, USA - Olive Green. I liked the old colour brown for the UK from the original, but the rest are fine. Factories, AA guns, and the '1 unit' chips are now grey instead of white, which I also like. Also, there are two new pieces - Destroyers and Artillery.

I don't like the new design of the map though, in terms of its colours and appearance. The old one looked better; the new ocean contrasts too darkly with the land and there are no more mountain textures on the land (for some reason, the new map looks like something designed in the 1970s, IMO). I do like the new Eastern Eurpoean territories though, as well as the addition of Greenland. I would have liked to have seen Iceland added, Australia divided in two, and Newfoundland drawn on the map of Eastern Canada though.

As I mentioned, each nation supposedly gets its own units now, but sometimes the designers didn't bother. All nations get their own aircraft, but the USSR only gets UK and US warships. Plus, the UK gets US tanks (Shermans), US Destroyers, US Subs, and US Artillery (somewhat realistic, due to Lend-Lease similarities, but I would preferred UK pieces). The Germans, Japanese, and US get their own units, although I think that German subs and destroyers aren't modelled very well. I can post a list of what each nation has, if you like, although it can be found in the rulebook which is legally available for free online.

BTW - Larry Harris is now considering a Deluxe version, and is accepting ideas for it on his forum (I have already recommended some new unit pieces myself). Plus, a new game for Guadalcanal has already been confirmed, and it will include Cruisers as a new piece (although Larry forgot which units had been chosen for the cruisers). Here's a link to his forum:

http://<a href="http://www.harrisgam...61b45e4dea</a>

[Safe-Keeper]

What I like the most, actually, are the special abilities you can choose to play with. For example, the US has the ability to place one free Infantry in China each turn.

[JALU3]

I would argue that each nation does have its own units . . . although the UK does use M4s later on in the war, their tanks do look like Churchills . . . and the USSR has the venerable T-34 . . . but the game play is definatly different when it comes to the USSR.

Anyone willing to game in San Diego?

[AG124]

Originally Posted by JALU3

I would argue that each nation does have its own units

UK:

Fletcher ("Johnston") class DD - The UK didn't operate any of these; the only US DD's transferred to the UK under lend lease were Clemson, Wickes, or Caldwell class. Plus, some DE's were later transferred to become Captain class frigates.

Gato ("Ray") class SS - No Gato class subs were transferred to the UK; only older subs such as the S class.

Liberty class AK - AFAIK, at least most of the mass produced freighters transferred to the UK were of a different type than the Liberty ships used by the US (they were mostly Ocean class, and a split superstructure Victory class freighter). There might have been a few though - someone else can check on this.

USSR:

No Fletcher class DDs, Gato class Subs, or Illustrious class CVs ever served under the Soviet flag. I know the Soviets didn't produce or even plan a CV but the fact remains. Plus, they only operated one Royal Sovereign class BB and very few Liberty ships. There were better options than these available, IMO.

And although Sherman's and US artillery were used by the UK and UK and USSR, respectively, I still would have preferred it if each nation got its own design. I posted my thoughts on the matter on Harris Designs - I'm too lazy to write the rest of it over again so here is a copy-and-paste which only addresses warships:

Originally Posted by AG124

If I may, I would like to give some imput in regards to plastic naval units for any potential delux or advanced edition (I will assume cruisers will be added as a new unit class):

USSR:

BB - Sovietskaya Ukrainia class - Although none of the ships of this class were completed in RL, I think that a Soviet player actually building BB units in A&A would be analogous to the class being completed in RL. Thus, this would be the most appropriate class to include as a plastic unit. If it would be preferable to include a class which actually saw service, then maybe the Petropavlovsk class would be more appropriate.

CV - This presents a problem, as the Soviets never completed or even planned a carrier in WWII. The closest they would have had was seizing the wrecks of the Graf Zeppelin and Seydlitz after the war, so maybe using the GZ as a stand-in would work, the way the Illustrious has been used now. Or, a hypothetical unit could be used.

CA - Kirov class.

DD - Type 7.

SS - S IX Modified.

AK - Either Generic Transport, or UK North Sands Class (which I will recommend for the UK later in this list).

Germany:

BB - Keep Bismark Unit.

CV - Keep Graf Zeppelin Unit.

CA - Admiral Hipper Class

DD - Keep Friedrich Eckoldt/(Type 34) Class, but remold unit.

SS - Keep Type VII, but remold unit.

AK - Keep Danzig class.

United Kingdom:

BB - King George V Class.

CV - Keep Illustrious Class.

CA - Southampton Class.

DD - Tribal Class.

SS - T Class.

AK - North Sands Class.

Japan:

BB - Keep Yamato Class. However, Imperious Leader made a point that the Kongo class best represented most Japanese BBs in design, and I agree. It was also the most numerous class in service in WWII. However, if one adopted the principle I mentioned in my discussion of Soviet BBs, the Yamato class best represents new BBs under construction. In short, I think the Yamato class would work best, but the Kongo class could work as well. (Of course, if Super BBs were added as a special unit for Japan, both classes could be used).

CV - Either Shokaku class (new and very historically significant) or Unryu class as the only Japanese CV class planned to be mass produced, with the possible exception of the Taiho class. Unlike the Taiho class, 6 Unryu's were actually laid down though, and three were completed. They didn't see much action though, so the choice would have to depend upon what type of unit representation most people would prefer.

CA - Either Mogami or Tone class.

DD - Keep Fubuki class.

SS - Keep I58 class.

AK - Keep Hakusan Maru class, but maybe fix some details such as the cranes.

United States:

BB- Keep Iowa Class.

CV - Essex Class.

CA - Baltimore Class.

DD - Keep Johnston/(Fletcher) Class.

SS - Keep Ray/(Gato) Class.

AK - Either keep Liberty Class, or switch to Victory Class. But maybe fix the cranes to be a little more detailed.

Since there is a good chance that Italy could be included, I will list Italian ships as well:

Italy:

BB - Littorio Class.

CV - Aquila Class.

CA - Zara Class.

DD - Navigatori Class.

SS - Marconi Class.

AK - Can't think of any Italian transports right now - maybe a generic one which could be used for the USSR as well?

I just wanted to put these forward as suggestions for consideration - there are other units which would work as well.

[JALU3]

I stand corrected . . . but is anyone willing to play in San Diego?

[nikimcbee]

This would be fun for the subsim meeting!:hmm:

[Patchman123]

Does anybody know anything about that guy Imperious Leader? I hate HIM! I HATE HIM WITH A ROYAL PASSION, he is the biggest little bastard on the Harris Game Design server the way he has shunned my ideas that are historically accurate, such as for example, Poland fighting back against Germany for example and having the PZL P.11 fighter airplane as Poland's standard fighter plane, which he thinks is nonsense, when in fact it's true. He thinks that it's bull**** that Poland fought back with RAF squadrons in the Battle of Britain, when in fact they did. That bastard!

sorry about the language, guys. I hate that little bastard and wish somebody could kick his ass.