Bad web advice for traditional game!!!

[weed131]

Just a note for everyone out there that was unaware. I have noticed that 90% of all strategies out there, no matter how amusing or interesting, are poor advice for play against competent competition. There are some definate exceptions, but if you want to learn to play well, go to the zone or join a club. I don't like the clubs, but that is where I learned to play. I thought I was the greatest player before going online a few years ago, now all I can say is my play is dramatically different and I have a great respect for many players. Most of us so called "experts" can beat these non online player strategies with very poor dice almost 100%. If I went back and played my old buddies that thought they were so great now, they wouldn't even manage 1 out of 10. You will learn what works and doesn't with more games and experience and seeing the different strats. I still see new things even after 1000 games, but most of these "gimmicks" don't work or are just pointless.

[ButchOHare1]

Anybody interested in meeting lots of fun online gamers please visit our website at www.balance-of-power.net. (http://www.balance-of-power.net.)

If you are interested in playing online you can find an Axis & Allies cd-rom on eBay for about $8.00 American. Don't get IronBlitz as it costs about ten times that much and no one really plays it.

To help you get set up there are usually about 100 guys playing Axis & Allies at www.zone.com (http://www.zone.com)

No doubt there are some great players in the online clubs. But give it a try maybe you are better than you think and have a trick of your own to show the world. smile.gif

[weed131]

I agree completely with you Grognads. When I play, I play to take advantage of whatever my opponent gives me, not to succeed do or die with any one strategy. I like opening with Russia, buying 1 armor and 6 inf, just to be flexible enough to attack EE if it is left weak. I play a flexible game with both sides, trying to keep the most flexible pieces alive to change as needed, let the inf do the dirty work until opportunities present themselves. Anyone that subscribes to a set strategy and can't flex will lose most of the time in the zone.

[DCareaAA]

Ok, but the old game was getting really stale, which is why they created the 4th edition. What we need now are: (1) a new club for 4th edition, (2) a new CD-rom for 4th edition, (3) a new odds calculator to accommodate 4th edition pieces. The old game was old beyond belief, despite the optional rules and all the rest. Thank goodness we have 4th edition. Now we just need a few helpful additions.

[weed131]

With all due respect to the creators and fans of the new "Revised" edition, the old game will always be the greatest. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. I own the new version and welcome it as well as Pacific and Europe, but I and others I know will always prefer the 3rd edition. I believe the new version to be way too slanted in the allies favor, I haven't lost with them yet and don't see it happening anytime even with national advantages. I will always enjoy seeing 9 *** armor per turn cranking against russia to beat the "shuck-shuck" that is strangling germany.

[axis_roll]

Originally posted by weed131:
... the old game will always be the greatest. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.
Many players will disagree as RR was used widely (and a bid of $6-8 ) to make the game more evenly balanced, giving the axis a chance to win.

I believe the new version to be way too slanted in the allies favor, I haven't lost with them yet and don't see it happening anytime even with national advantages.
what victory city level are you playing at?

[weed131]

With only RR, the game was even for skilled players, no bid. Bid of 5-6 is the most i play at. That's alot better than a 24 bid with no RR, which in my opinion greatly changes the game's dynamics. I've played over 1000 games of RR, 2htbb, 3rd ed. and still look forward to playing again and again. It is the only game I've ever played that has not gotten old at some time.

Second, I played more than 8 victory cities, otherwise, yes, the axis win very easily if they are decent. Once you increase it to 9, axis can't win without great luck. As for sealion, I stick one USSR fighter in UK to stop it every game, making it a high risk not worth taking. I would love for Germany to throw all their eggs in one basket for this gamble. I have better odds than Vegas Casinos at Blackjack of winning as allies against this strategy.

[Red Shirt Ensign]

Originally posted by weed131:
With all due respect to the creators and fans of the new "Revised" edition, the old game will always be the greatest. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. I own the new version and welcome it as well as Pacific and Europe, but I and others I know will always prefer the 3rd edition. I believe the new version to be way too slanted in the allies favor, I haven't lost with them yet and don't see it happening anytime even with national advantages. I will always enjoy seeing 9 *** armor per turn cranking against russia to beat the "shuck-shuck" that is strangling germany.Which is why we need more than 6 *** tanks smile.gif

[ March 26, 2004, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: Dan ]

[pagan]

I would like to make these comments:

1. Basic A&A game 1st, 2nd, 3rd edition is a BROKEN game. Allies favor from the get-go. look to game balance for more details: http://www.geocities.com/aa_4online/

2. Revised A&A game is fun. So far the Axis have won most of the games. Allies power has been reduced and the VP thing changes the game flow, which I think is good.

[ March 26, 2004, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: PAGAN ]

[kino_12]

i agree that so far, the axis won most of the game we played with the AH version of A&A

[DCareaAA]

Originally posted by PAGAN:
I would like to make these comments:

1. Basic A&A game 1st, 2nd, 3rd edition is a BROKEN game. Allies favor from the get-go. look to game balance for more details: http://www.geocities.com/aa_4online/

2. Revised A&A game is fun. So far the Axis have won most of the games. Allies power has been reduced and the VP thing changes the game flow, which I think is good.I imagine the Axis win most of the time if you play 8 VCs; if you play 10 VCs, I imagine the Allies win most of the time. In fact, in all the games I've played, the allies have won, but we never played 8 VCs.

I think they should go back to the old rules about capturing two capitals or winning an economic victory (for both sides), but make the number higher for an economic victory. Also, I miss the rule that allows you to invade neutral territories. I fail to see why they decided to get rid of this. If need be, raise the money required to invade neutrals--OR, place two neutral infantry in any neutral country that is suddenly invaded.

[weed131]

I agree with DCareaAA in that you basically have 2 ways to play, 8 vic city with an axis win, or 10 vic or 12 vic city with and allied win. At least the old way you could say RR, 2htbb and there was a semi equal shot, depending on skill level. The new game, I have played skilled and not so skilled, with the same outcome. Not that the not so skilled are terrible, but can't stand up to me 1 on 1 in a regular game. However with this version, they have a hard time losing either way depending on the vic city. It's almost a pre determined outcome. Just think about how much different stuff has been written about the 3rd ed game. All the stuff about this one is the same. One solid undisputed strategy for both sides with Sealion thrown out there but easily countered.