l feel this strongly. When it comes to Japan that's usually my play. But when i play Germany my fleet ends up as a one capital ship and destroyer submarine fleet because in my eyes i prefer taking out the soviets within two turns if possible. (1942 second ed) for my allied fleets i never buy a british capital ship but they will have the supporting fleet to the American fleet which will typically have one capital ship on either ocean
This is my first video from you. Instant subscribe. You're highlighting why I love naval play in these games and prefer playing Japanese. Fleet composition all depends on game state. Subs add an amazing punch, battleships negate the ability to trade efficiently, destroyers are necessary for any fleet, fighters are necessary for carrier fleets and defensive play. It really depends on what you need and when you need it and this decision making separates exceptional from average players.
Oh nice! I've got the G40 itch again and without a local playgroup, videos have been my outlet. Thanks for making these. I'm pretty casual in my games so I always tend towards balanced armies/fleets. Glad to see it did so well!
@mwt3579 Lmao, Im on the literal opposite corner of the continent in Alaska. Would've been happy to meet up for a game but 5000 miles is a heck of a commute!
You know you're being watched when you play your first game of A&A w/in a year and suddenly you finally pop up on my Notifications after all of that time! It's a friggin' board game! WTF? Anyway, great vid as usual. I tend to prioritize Destroyers and overlook Subs. I'll be changing that. I must say, although you're focusing on the Pacific; so much of it depends on which Nation you're using. I have yet to play "Pacific" where there'd be an even priority b/w nations. Europe, however varies. Yet the U.S, and U.K will always need Transports and Destroyers, and as you've clearly pointed out - Subs! Thanks for the great tip!
Great video! Even though it is really difficult to quantify strategic value of an individual unit because of the situational nature of the game, I absolutely love your analysis. Personally, my favorite is sea unit is carrier for it versatility. I think a seriously underrated ability is the jump start carriers can give fighters as they are getting built. Thinking of the 1942.2 map, an American carrier off the coast of DC allows for the mobilization of 2 fighters that can reach France or the UK on the next turn. Another example from the 1942.2 map, a fighters spawning on a UK carrier in SZ 7 can reach Moscow in one move. I am fairly confident this is the fastest way to get air critical support to Moscow and it has the added bonus of putting pressure on the western front. Again, congrats on another really well done video! Keep it up!
Thanks BGN! I can't believe I forgot to mention the tactic of springboarding fighters with the use of carriers! Doh! It's a very powerful strat, especially useful in the smaller games like 42.2 as you mention. Thanks a ton for the comment my friend
A similar tactic can be used for f.e. recapturing Hawai, fighters from San Francisco can attack the sea zone around Hawai and return to land on a new carrier built there.
Hit absorption matters a lot for a careful player, also 1 destroyer can take out many defending subs with air power. I've done it, more than once or twice
Wow, very well done. This video was very informative, and I can tell you spent some time making this masterpiece. I'm about to get started on my first video, and it's tougher than I originally thought. Again, thanks for a great video! Cheers!
I'm so glad you enjoyed the vid! It was definitely one of the more challenging videos to make, but also one of the most fun. I'll subscribe to your channel right now and will be looking forward to your content! Let me know when you drop your first vid
@@CorporalClegg oh man the pressure is on, but now you've definitely motivated me! It will be great to get positive and/or constructive feedback on the video. I shared your video on Discord as well. Again, premium content! And I've subscribed as well.
I buy large groups of subs and park them at strategic points in the Pacific as a deterrent to opposing fleets. A dozen subs that you can't quite attack but can attack you if you move can be quite scary.
Axis and Allies.....my dad and I played the napoleonic era one... He attacked me like 5-6:1 odds and got *absolutely* goddamn ANNIHILATED.....it was actually ridiculous.....
There are missing aspects. In a fleet vs fleet contest, you've nailed it. But what about after establishing naval dominance? The #1 fleet can't help with an amphibious assault. Also, there is a limitation to what van be produced from an industrial complex.
The two most important units in the game are infantry and transports. The game can be simplified down to these two units. It’s unlikely that anyone would ever purchase a battleship or cruiser in Axis and Allies because if you have the cash to spend on those kinds of luxury items, it generally means you have won the game already. The only nation that might purchase cruisers is Britain. They can only really come in handy if you want more one shot bombardment ships if you do an amphibious landing each turn against Germany. With AA guns being a threat, bombarding with more ships is a little safer than attacking with a huge Air Force if Germany is stacked with AA guns. Battleships may be too expensive to purchase to match all the transports that are landing. This is the only circumstance that cruisers may have a specific use that would be better than the other units. Otherwise, cruisers are just pieces the opening set up provides that you use and that’s it. No one would ever buy one unless they just wanted to build a pretty fleet. Japan and the US wouldn’t buy them for a Pacific fight because destroyers and subs are better ship to ship units and fighters are better than a cruiser in attacking land units on an island. The US has little need for cruisers against Germany also because when they land in Africa or Europe, generally UK has gone first already so the US is not going to be bombarding but just landing its own troops.
Battleship and Cruiser’s offshore bombardment definitely gives them a bump in usefulness. They can in fact attack land units so they are kinda the best when you consider that.
re-up the IPC values to 108 and give the carrier fleet 3CVs and 6 ftrs... you will find that they DOMINATE their counterparts and all you have to do is add another destroyer to those fleets to compare their relative values. I have played farrrr too many A&A games where a German carrier in the baltic turned the tide of the game to not realize that the carrier is the ultimate navel unit.
I think the battleship answers isn't so much an overestimation of their value per ipc, but more of an interpretation of the question not considering the cost of deployment
in all honesty, the importance of battleships is pretty much what tanks do in A&A 1914, in that they allow for more effective pushes because they take damage without actually costing anything first hit, the only real difference is that ww1 combat is 1 turn only and thus allows for more usage of tanks for that purpose. your video pointed out quite well this, and is one of the reasons i dont like that in 1940 you need to send battleships to ports to repair, even though it makes sense.
House Rules for Cruisers which make them more interesting and more historically accurate: 1 - Remove its bombardment ability. 2 - Increase its movement to 3. 3 - Have it grant transports the ability to defend on a 1 on a 1-for-1 basis like artillery does for an infantry's attack.
Why would a cruiser be able to travel longer than other units? Why would a cruiser be able to help a transport fight in a battle? Why can’t cruisers bombard?
A well rounded navy is clearly best. Submarines offensive abilities offset the defensive posture of carriers with fighters and vice-versa. Destroyers are a good value for the money and are needed to hinder enemy subs. A couple of battleships are great to absorb hits and help with amphibious landings. I agree that the weakest for cost is the cruiser. I also rarely buy battleships, because of cost, preferring to try to keep such a valuable unit afloat. In Global, while US and especially Japan, I buy lots of carriers due to the beginning number of aircraft each possesses and their need to exert dominance at sea.
He sums it up at the end, the combined arms fleet is probably the best because most players bring planes from land. Heck Germany primarily fights navy with air since they don't have a navy worth a darn and most the strong sea lanes around them are close enough that Germany can play that way. As Germany, you are probably better off buying air that can be used both in land and sea battles vs. ships.
the video is already very long, so you had to stop somewhere, but i would have liked some conclusions. not just "it depends". your data has shown so much, why not take one minute to state: "If you already have a balanced fleet and need to improve its power for a naval battle add subs and destroyers. If you already are ahead on the water and you want to further improve the fleets defense, but also add to its power against land targets add carriers."
Fantastic video!! Only thing I disagree with is how downplayed fleet actions supported by bombers are, I try to incorporate bombers in every large scale naval attack and so often they make the difference!....also I think battleships come with a certain amount of psychological impact, knowing that a battleship is guaranteed to soak up a hit and will more than likely score a het can definitely make players over commit to an attack on battleships...just a thought! But really great video! And I totally agree with cruisers, I wish they had some AA abilities or something like that
Thanks for the feedback man! I really wanted to focus on sea units in this video which is why I only touched on bombers (video was already sooo long, lol!) You're right about the psychology of BBs, good point! Really glad you enjoyed the vid!
Transports have to be the best unit. Everything else is only there to support transports. If transports didn’t exist then every other ship would be useless. Since they all derive there usefulness from the transport the transport is the best sea unit.
I think a strait summation of win percentage would have been better, the big point difference betwee win and draw at an arbitrary win percentage is skewing the results a lot. AirCraft Carriers gets a total of 490% Defending and 346% Attacking, while Balanced gets 444% Defending and 366% Attacking which then sum to 836% and 810% respectivly, which swaps the 2nd and 3rd place rankings. Likewise Destroyer&Subs are 421% Defending, 484% Attacking, for a combined 905%. Pure Destroyers are 372% attacking, 373% defending for a total of 745% which is much more distant 4th then initially indicated. Battleships are 181% defensive, 161% attacking, combined 342%, Cruisers are 104% attacking and 121% defending, combined 225% indeed complete trash level. So trash that their losses may be skewing the other fleets win rates. If we drop the Battleships and Cruiser battles entirely and look at just the remotely competetive builds vs each other then we get. Balanced 209% attacking, 273% defending, 482% combined. Carriers attacking 196%, 307% defending (best defence), combined 503%, again flipping the original ranking. Finally Sub&Destroyer 304% attacking, 261% defending, combined 565% keeping them in the lead by about 60% of a battle.
Your analysis is not surprising because of course submarines and destroyers are best in head to head fights. That's all they are good for. Other units can support land or air units or provide value over time. If sub's and destroyers weren't the best at that they would be totally useless.
To me, they all have some value. Combined arms fleets tend to be the best. Battleships can take hits, Carriers with Fighters are great defensive weapons and can support land, Submarines have the hit bonus on ships but suck against air, cruisers and destroyers are extra dice and screens/hits for your big ships. Also the versions that I play have cheaper Battleship. I have Anniversary edition and the old 1942 edition (Battleships are 30 in Anniversary and 32 or 34 in the 1942 edition). EDIT: Transports don't count because they are just a different purpose/unit than all other sea units.
I can't believe you missed the best sea denial combo, the sub/bomber fleet. You purchase mostly subs and back them with a few bombers. Then the subs hide on your turn and the bombers fly home. Really only possible for the AXIS. For pure combat power efficiency it's pretty unbeatable. But it does require an advantageous tactical situation.
Clegg, here’s a question: Does giving cruisers an AA gun improve them enough? I’ve seen your vid about them, but I don’t know what you concluded from it, as it was in the description.
I'd say yes, but it's really a matter of personal preference. AA guns shots are unpredictable. I would definitely get some cruisers in my main fleet if it meant the possibility of enemy planes shot down immediately in a sea battle. Also makes them great to defend transports against air. But whether giving cruisers AA and not battleships makes sense in the wider context of the game and historical accuracy is questionable. So again, personal preference!
@@CorporalClegg I do feel like cruisers lose a lot of potency than what they should have because they are overpowered by insane first round buffs like subs and DDs. It makes sense to have AA guns on most all vessels historically. However, if we modified the atk and def matrix for all ships to scale roughly according to Armament and price better than a 1-4 system, you’d see more advantages for CAs to back up fleets. I’d love to see how a scale would work based off 1-15. CAs on 11 or so vs BB on 15
Depends on your strategy, 6 cruisers bombarding for 3 infantry and 3 artillery is 5 hits against any enemy coast, it's a slight loss potential but...if Germany has a big pile that's not possible to conquer, cruisers may be just the tool for picking the lock. Eventually the amphibious units get a round 2 attack and soon they will be capturing western Europe or a softening blow before another ally attacks .ie.. eastern Europe
I analysed the cruiser bombardment in my cruisers video and found them to be suboptimal when compared to other units/builds for 12IPCs. They ain't bad, but they ain't the best. Thanks for the comment!
@@CorporalClegg I haven't played for years, lot's of changes I've been seeing. Battleships make a bigger dent in the same equation but lots more up front investing, I like the cruiser and destroyer combination in the Atlantic, I believe they combat submarines well enough to protect shipping, if England and USA each did the same attack every turn instead of sending it mostly to Russia, I think they could be giving more relief by destroying 10 German units each turn in France, both USA and England should have a small amount left to help the relieved Russian player annoy Japan, especially if France begins to pay the allies. This is a middle game strategy as it takes a few turns at least to put into action...gotta win the battle of the Atlantic firstly.
I have not played A&A in 30 years, but watching these I want to! Have you got home rules to best cost out units for cost / effectiveness? If for example no one buys a battleship because they are not worth it, then what should they cost so they are worth it. By adjusting cost or special rules.
Battleships for 18 and cruisers for 10 feels about right if you just wanted to lower price. But I haven't done any tests on this. I like what Sired Blood's rules did with battleships - same price but they get an inbuilt AA gun. Cruisers defend @4 when paired with a battleship. I've also considered giving cruisers just a single AA gun shot. You could also give cruisers a movement of 3. If you look in the description of my Cruisers video there'll be some extra ideas there too. Now's the perfect time to get back into A&A.. do it! 😁
The question was unfortunately too vague, should have been "what is your favourite "bang for buck" sea unit", cause definitely without the bang for buck it is the carrier or battleship (actually battleship) since i'd rather have 5 battleships vs 5 subs (same number), but again I'd rather have 16 subs vs 5 battleships (same IPC)
I agree that the question is vague. But that's usually how I like to roll as it gives me more to talk about. Every sea unit is unique and the best at something Thanks for the comment!
I WANT A RECOUNT.....(and a Rematch)! Anyway Carriers would be my 1st, transports 2nd (I Laugh at a Huge fleet Without them from the coast) and destroyers 3rd when building a Balanced fleet- BTW Without the Nolimit's input you would've Never achieved that last 491st response, and me thinks you did get a little (sea) Salty towards the end there!!!
They're a homemade customisation. I plan to make a tutorial on how to make them one day.. but probably not for a while. You can get premade ones from sites like Historical Board Gaming.. they're the best customisation for A&A in my opinion!
Ok... question, my game has no cruisers or destroyers, and the cost are different too. Oh and no free hits either, so now what ships are best? Battleships, carriers, and subs are the only unit besides transports... 😊😅😢
Definitely agree destroyers take it and I don’t actually think it’s that close. Although if you can you should avoid building ships at all as fighters are so much better than any naval unit.
@@CorporalClegg oh boy ok its a bit long. No price changes and it’s based off of global 40. All surface ships get 1 AA shot. Like an AA on land but only one dice and they can roll it while attacking as well. Cruiser can move 3 and roll two dice while raiding. Subs attack defend on 2s but they only fight once as a first strike with target selection. They can’t be chosen as casualties in normal rounds of combat. Destroyers now attack and defend on 1s. They now shut down 3 subs each stopping them from first striking and From target selection. They also get a depth charge attack if subs try to move through a space they are in. After combat surface ships can try to destroy subs. They get a depth charge roll equal to the opposite of their attack (ie destroyers 1/6 becomes a 5/6 cruisers 3/ becomes a 3/6 battleships get a 2/6) carriers and transports can’t and aircraft can equal to the number of destroyers you have ie if you have 5 planes and 3 destroyers you can have 3 planes take part. All planes roll on 3s to hit subs. Each roll is basically a one round attack. Afterwords the hostile subs can just stay on the territory. All units serve a purpose under these rules. Battleships are the best fighting unit but are weak to massed air or subs. Cruisers are fast raiders and can hunt down destroyers that are hunting subs. Destoyers are a cheep way to get lots of aa attacks soak hits or shut down subs but their attack is awful. Subs can raid, deal with lone raiding cruisers or even battleships but aren’t great for pitches battle or fighting destroyers. Carriers let you put two turns worth of builds on the water, they are great for dealing with lone cruisers and destroyers and have all their normal tactical advantages but subs take them out and they can’t outfight battleships. It’s not perfect and things should be changed around but it makes things much more interesting. Although I wish there was a cleaner way to do anti sub warfare.
I am not yet a convoy raiding fan, Gamers Paradise released 2 or 3 expansions for the 1984 MB Axis and Allies game. This was the first time destroyers were added, wolf pack attacks(3 subs in same battle get +1 on attack). Escort destroyers also added solely to escort transports, normal destroyers can't do that, instead they are with the battlefleet, cruisers are added also (3 ship types). Basically it has surface battle fleet, convoy escort (transports & escort destroyers, submarines. Special sub hunting rules apply for destroyers, escort destroyers and airplanes, submarines must first be found by dice roll. I feel the transport convoys represents convoy raiding because actual losses to shipping occurs, transports cannot be protected by anything except the escort destroyer, the attacking submarines decide what fleet is being attacked because the battle fleets and convoy fleets can share a sea zone and still be attacked separately by the submarines / wolf packs. This game uses square cardboard counters for the 3 new unit types ( cruiser, destroy and escort destroyers). Wolf pack using same units new rules.. I'd like to see how this works with the newer A&A games / $6 submarines.
I made it so my battleships roll two dice hitting at 4, I think that makes them more viable. I also made my cruisers cost 10 and gave them an AAA ability 😂
What about battleships hitting twice at 3 instead? Or is that too nerfed? Edit: and the cruisers allowing paired bombardment for destroyers? Not too many offshore bombardments happen and so that would be an easy way to entice someone to plus up their fleets of DDs and ACs for important amphibious assaults.
I think those cruisers sound a little busted even lol. I just made it so that cruisers can be upgraded with 2 tech researches; one to give them an AA battery, and one to give them 3 movespeed. Fast cruisers with AA at cost 12 after those researches come in seem fairly balanced to us.
I can definitely make a video for new players some point soon. 0 chance it will be ready in a week though unfortunately! There's some good resources on RU-vid, Board Game Nation has a ton of videos you might find helpful. Also go on Axisandallies dot org and do some reading there. If you know which nation and version you'll be playing you'll be able to find some opening turn strategies. Learn an opening by heart (write every move down if needed) and have a plan. You can also download TripleA for free. Its a bit clunky and outdated but once you get used to it it'll let you practice against AI. Good luck! Let me know how the game goes!
@@CorporalClegg very poorly 💀- I played usa with a few of my friends playing allies and we didn’t even play badly we j had the worst luck ever 💀. We attacked I think it was Libya with a 10-1 advantage and still lost 💀💀. It was fun tho, mb for not replying I forgot 😭.
@@CorporalClegg I finished watching it in sessions between work. Infantry is definitely still the best sea unit, this video is biased! xD But, I was slightly shocked to see how poorly Battleships were comparatively based on cost. It was obvious they weren't cost efficient, but taking into account the extra hit penalty, in sustained smaller skirmishes, I often see Battleships paying for themselves easily. They may not always get 3 or more hits absorbed, but they did frequently get 2, and sometimes 3 hits absorbed, so their real value was in extended conflicts per say. Without taking those into account, and simply just amassing forces for a quick fight, I figured they would perform poorly but still... Good to know! ;) (I recently came across our videos, I play this game on occasion, infrequently at best)
Such great content, yet the math is very basic. You don't add other elements. For example, most sea battles with this much strategy will be in the pacific. These battles are still close to islands and main lands. To not include the "math" of air planes and bombardments that are crucial to land battles takes away from the effectiveness of the navy. The navy is not just about the ocean. Those planes can assists and overwhelm on land. Those bombardments can clear the way for the occupation of a territory. And those same units that helped with the land war can go right back to focusing on defense for the navy. IMHO, that negates this whole video. A plane used to help control a territory is the same plane that lands and is ready for defense when the enemy attacks.
Thanks for the feedback! "Negates the whole video" is a bit extreme though don't ya think? Especially as the points you mention are ones I raised in the video lol
@@CorporalClegg My apologies if my comment came off aggressive. My thoughts were more about trying to understand a good strategy to this game as it seems to have lost its value with the lack of a stronghold in India. (Mostly because of the Japanese sea units.) I am always trying to find a better strategy, which is rare online, and I feel your video is very specific to the numbers according to your specific sea battles. (Also, one of the main reasons I seem to always win when playing my friend is that he tries to go by stats and I tend to throw stats out the window, because this game is all about reacting ... or... the counter offensive. Which is hard to stamp down with simple stats.) In other-words, I felt your video was more of a "control group" stat... which does nothing for me if I am adjusting to what my opponent does.
