10

The dynamics of the game are based on the following: In "real life," Germany would have beaten Britain and Russia if the latter two did not receive American help. Overwhelming American power (almost that of Britain, Germany and Russia put together) meant that the Allies would be heavy favorites once America joined the war. In the game, America has a ...


9

Here's the snippet of map we're talking about: There are three spaces of interest here: England (a land zone) The water surrounding England (a sea zone) Western Europe (a land zone) These are three separate spaces, and must be passed through in turn; Western Europe is not adjacent to England. You can't just jump from Western Europe to England, you need to ...


8

Asking "preferred strategy" questions opens the door to individual opinion. I will try to avoid this by employing simple mathematics. "Germany First" is the most logical path to choose, but not by ignoring the Pacific theatre. The U.S. can typically build with impunity during the entire game, outside of the reach of German or Japanese strength. Once a ...


7

The game map does NOT emulate correctly the historical distances! Therefore it is far more feasible in the game to bring allied troops/equipment through Norway to Russia than it would in reality. E.g. unlike in the boardgame historically allied operations in Norway had no land-based fighter support coverage. The germans capitalized on it ensuring their ...


7

True, there are so many scenarios that the rulebook doesn't specifically cover But most of the points you ask are specified in the rulebook. Taking this rulebook (Anniversary: compliance with spring 1942 edition) for instance: A transport can move between one or two spaces that do not contain an enemy surface ship during combat or non combat phases. It ...


7

The standard way to create balance in Axis & Allies is to use secret bidding. For example, bid an amount of money that Germany would get extra at the start of the first round of the game (the one bidding lowest gets to play Germany). For example, two players bid in secret. Player A bids 20 and player B bids 25. This means Player A gets to play the ...


6

This is an excellent question! For a board game I love but never play now since me and my friends, all working, can never get the 50 hours needed to finish it :) (ok, it's more like 8 hours no kiddin') if we don't simplify the rules and/or shorten the terms. We have successfully used gentlemen's agreeements, as follows: Shortened victory conditions (...


5

This response is based on the rules. I've searched for "transport" and "offload" to find the relevant sections - but there is quite a lot of text. If you want the specific text to each of the rulings below, I can paste it here on your request, but for now you'll get the quick answers: A unit(s) is loaded onto a transport that has not moved yet, then the ...


5

Before the latest adjustments to 1940 editions, bombing has not been a favorite by players in tripleA and in A&A forums. Personally I disregard it as well as most friends I play with. I'd rather destroy a tank that cost 5 IPCs plus 3 turns to get to the front than to gamble on the off-chance that I could remove 6 IPCs in an Economic Attack. This ...


5

The fighters are considered, for the purpose of the game, to already be in the air, so the surprise strike will not put the fighters behind the casualty line. At the end of combat, defending fighters have a range of one. If at the end of combat there are no carriers with available capacity in the combat zone, or an adjacent sea zone, or an adjacent land ...


5

The defending Fighters are always considered to be in the air. From the rule book, under Unit Profiles (emphasis mine) Fighters - [...] A fighter based on a defending carrier must land on the same carrier if possible after the battle. If that carrier is destroyed in combat, the fighter must try to land elsewhere. It must land on a different friendly carrier ...


4

I believe that in the 1940 version of this game the USA starts with around 27 IPC's on the Pacific map and 35 on the Europe side, so a total of roughly 62(?, perhaps my numbers are wrong) as a STARTING income. Then they will have the 30 IPC's per turn added on once at war, which is their only national objective, so when they are at war, they will have an ...


4

I think that purchasing a transport in the Mediterranean with Germany is justified only if Russia's opening attack(s) went poorly. We are discussing the 'Classic Edition' of Axis and Allies as opposed to the newer Spring of 1942 edition, correct? If so, I often load up two infantry onto the starting Mediterranean transport and move it and the battleship to ...


4

Avoid unnecesary moves in the combat move phase Belive it or not, I found out that the typical source of confusion is that most players move units that are not going to fight (nor Aircraft carriers that won't provide a landing base to attacking airplanes) in the combat move phase. It's not against the rules but.. there is no benefit in doing so. In fact it'...


4

The game becomes very interesting when the Axis achieves its goal of 84, only to lose France, or possibly some African territory. They then take it back the next round, but only at the cost of expansion to other territories, and perhaps lose a couple of IPC's in the process. I have witnessed this on a few occasions! It mainly occurred because the Allies (...


4

Axis and Allies only works well if all five countries are in play, on their correct teams. If you have five players, this is easy to do. If you have fewer than five, here are the recommended sets: 4 Players Soviet Union, United States (Allied) United Kingdom (Allied) Germany (Axis) Japan (Axis) 3 Players Soviet Union, United Kingdom, United States (...


4

According to page 19 of the rulebook at https://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/axis.pdf Defending together - when a multiple force is attacked, the attacker fires first as usual. If a hit is scored, the defenders mutually agree which unit is chosen as the casualty (if they cannot agree, the attacker chooses). When counterattacking, each defender rolls ...


4

TLDR Retreats are possible for the attacker. Retreats are not possible for the defender, ever. Land and Sea units retreat as expected. They all withdraw to a friendly adjacent space. They only possible unexpected point is that even if they came from different spaces, they all retreat to the same space that at one of the "units" attacked from initially. Air ...


3

Axis and Allies when played with many players (one player per nation, usually this means five) can be a long game with a lot of down time between turns. A house rule we have used when we have a player for each nation is to rearrange the turn order so that allies move together (all the Axis, then all the allies). Yes, this does affect the game, some ...


3

For years a group of us in Michigan have played a set of house rules that includes a diplomacy system where you can pay for diplomatic overtures to neutrals to try to sway them to lean toward you ( adding their economy to yours 1$ for sumbness like Rio de Oro, 4$ for Switzerland) and letting you move through their territory or base there. If you get a ...


3

Tech Development is a gamble with very bad odds. The only Tech that wins is Heavy Bombers. On average you will have to spent 21 dice (105 IPC) to get it. In statistical terms in fact you should use the median which is 19 dice (95 IPC) because the data is not normally distributed. For ease we go with average. So on average even the US will need 4 turns to ...


3

The 1942 2nd edition does indeed list the German tank miniature as a Panther. This is the most recent printing. You can make out the text in the top picture. You can check the rule books from the official wizards site, unless you are talking about the older Avalon Hill versions, to discover if the units were changed from any of the different versions. If ...


3

The biggest advantage, as I see it, is that the effects of a successful economic attack are more widespread. So while throwing your bombers into battle at your front can help make that battle more decisive, throwing your bombers on a Strategic Bombing Run can impair the defender's ability to reinforce any other front on the map. If, for example, you're ...


3

Whatever works for your group. Only if multiple players want to play the same country is a "method" even necessary. Until your group knows the game well, handicapping is extreme; use random selection, but even then only to break contentions


3

As per the official FAQ here Q: Does Sea Zone 3 connect to the United Kingdom? A: Yes, If my memory serves correctly, that is Scapa Flow.


3

Yes, there are versions of Axis and Allies that allow building ships in the Caspian Sea. This is the exception tough. In Axis and Allies 1941/1942, the Caspian Sea is not considered a sea zone and you cannot build any ships there. In Axis and Allies 1940 Europe/Global, the Caspian Sea is a sea zone. Therefore, you can build ships there.


3

Yes, you can use your non-combat move phase to have a carrier move to a position so that those planes that were moved in the combat move phase can land. Fighters land in the non-combat move phase of the turn. When you move fighters in the combat move phase, you can only move them to squares where you can show that it is possible (even if it doesn't end up ...


3

Here is a 2 part answer to your question: From the Rules (http://www.axisandallies.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Axis-Allies-Pacific-1940-Second-Edition.pdf): Move as many of your units into as many hostile territories and sea zones as you wish. You can move into a single hostile space from different spaces, as long as each moving unit can reach ...


3

An air unit cannot capture a territory; since the territory is not captured it would retain whatever control marker was on it. There are no rules to "destroy" a capital or industrial complex. A territory cannot become neutral; the only neutral territories are already defined on the board. http://axisallies.com/rules/axis-allies-rules-1941.pdf


2

I have read and studied Don's essays with interest and appreciation. His analysis of the game mechanics and general strategic principles are masterly. However, I find myself in disagreement with him on both British and Japanese strategy. Ignoring Britain for the moment (a questionable proposition) I will limit my remarks to Japanese srategy. Historically, by ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible