What is the value
of having Weapons Development as part of a game of Axis & Allies? I don’t know
many gamers that like to use it. They think it’s a waste of precious capital,
it’s too hard to achieve, and most of the added abilities are somewhat random
and inconsequential to the overall outcome of the game.
I used to think
this way also. If my partner wanted to spend their IPCs chasing some “Wonder
Weapon” instead of spending it on vital units, I would try vehemently to convince
them otherwise. If an opponent wasted their time and resources on this
strategy, so much the better. I secretly smiled and planned my victory. While
they were throwing IPCs away, I was busy building the tanks and infantry that
were going to smash through their defensive line and march into their capital.
Yes, IPCs are at
a premium in the early rounds, and yes, usually none of the nations have the
time to embark on wasteful and misguided strategies. This is a little different in the 1940 Global
game, as certain countries are not actually at war at the beginning of the game
and can spend some of their resources if they choose to without leaving them ill-equipped
to defend themselves later. Still, even in those cases, most players I know won’t
buy into weapons development. There is always
a need for more infantry and things will always
look and feel a little bit worse after missing on an attempt to develop the
weapon you were chasing.
But I am trying
to cover lots any different strategy options here. And I have used weapons
development effectively in the past. And I am currently reading a book on
German secret weapons. So I have weapons development on my mind.
Different weapons
have extra value for certain nations because of units on the board at the
beginning of the game or because of where most of their battles will take
place. Heavy Bombers will do you no good if you don’t start the game with a
bomber. Chase the wrong weapon and ruin your chances. Learning what each does
is crucial for understand what to develop and when to do it.
Rockets
Currently I am a
major proponent of trying to develop Rockets, so that will be the focus here.
Rockets are a way
to take away IPCs from your opponent. They can work in conjunction with Strategic
Bombing Raids, or a player can rely on Rockets alone and use their IPCs on
other units instead of bombers.
Players can
debate the value of Strategic Bombing Raids vs. units to help invade
territories, but that is a different subject. I, for one, always find some
value in taking away my opponents IPCs, no matter what my other strategies are.
Rockets vs. Strategic Bombing Raids
Rockets in the
game are supposed to approximate the V-Weapons that Germany developed and used
to attack UK. Historically, V-1 and V-2 Rockets were mostly used against UK
cities and citizens and much of their purpose was for terror bombing. Germany
could only produce a limited number, and only a partial number hit their
target. Rockets also weren’t used until after D-Day, so they were never going to
be an effective weapon in winning the war.
But in the game things can be different. In the game, Rockets are used to strike at your opponent’s factories and IPCs. Rockets can also be developed by any nation. So while it’s hard to say whether any amount of rockets would have really decided the war, in the game, Rockets certainly can.
The way they work
in the game is that an anti-aircraft Gun is used to fire upon an opponent
territory with a factory in it and inflict one die roll of IPC damage. The
rules vary between editions of the game. In some, you are damaging the factory’s
productive capability, in others you are taking away IPCs that have to be
turned over to the bank. In essence it’s basically the same thing – you’re
costing your opponent IPCs, but the play dynamics are a little different so
make sure to check the rules.
Strategic Bombing
Raids achieve the same goal, but you must own a bomber, and your opponent can
defend against a Strategic Bombing Raid. Again, this process varies slightly
between editions.
Benefits of Rockets vs. Bombers
The biggest benefits
of Rockets are:
1. Once developed,
an anti-aircraft gun is cheaper to purchase than a bomber.
2. Even better,
you usually start the game with more than one AA gun. AND if you are playing in
the European theater of war, countries are already in range of each other and in
range of hitting multiple surrounding factories.
In contrast, each
country usually starts the game with only one or even no bombers at all. So in
order to attack the same number of factories, additional bombers will have to
be built (see benefit #1).
3. Best of all, a
rocket attack cannot be defended against, whereas a bomber can be destroyed by
anti-aircraft fire and in certain editions by defending fighters.
The Problem with Rockets
This is a pretty
simple one – you have to spend IPCs to develop this.
That is, unless
you and the people you are playing with have some special agreement in place. I
have an agreement with another gamer where when we play the 1940 Global
edition, each nation gets to roll for one free weapons development. This
ensures that there is always some randomness to our games. This is also where I
first started using Rockets and truly gained an appreciation for their power. But
not everyone plays this way, so the real question here has to be one of IPC
value comparing Rockets to bombers.
Is it better to
spend the IPCs on one bomber, or on chances to develop Rockets? The cost of
bombers and weapons development does vary from game to game, so be sure to
check and make sure which one really is more cost effective.
I am currently playing
through a game of the A&A – Revised Edition (2004). In this edition, a
bomber costs 15 IPCs, whereas weapons development costs 5 IPCs per die roll
used in the attempt to get the sought-after weapon.
For 15 IPCs Germany
can have one bomber, which can attack UK or one of the two USSR factories on
their NEXT turn... OR for 15 IPCs Germany can roll three dice and hopefully
roll a “2,” and develop Rockets. If successful, Germany already has three AA
Guns, AND can actually USE them on this turn.
So it’s a now vs.
later choice on top of how lucky you are with the dice.
One purchase is a
guaranteed new unit; the other is nothing but a chance to have the odds go your
way. Still, as long as Germany can afford the IPCs, it seems like a great and
powerful weapon to have. And it is one that can be used immediately.
Final Thoughts
I fully support using
rockets to help in the European land war. UK, USSR and Germany can all benefit
from their use. But if you are playing a game based on naval strategy, Rockets
aren’t going to do much for you.
I have had rockets
work out well in the past. They will not win the game for you, but they can
seriously destroy your opponent’s economy. And weakened opponents will pave the
way to victory. If you are playing Germany, they can also serve as a great way
to weaken UK and delay any counterattack from them while you focus on invading
USSR.
You will have to
beat the odds and not spend very many IPCs on this strategy. But 15 IPCs can also
be lost instantly if an AA gun destroys a bomber, so 15 IPCs lost on Weapons
Development isn’t that different.
I will admit to having wasted a lot of IPCs trying to go after this “Wonder Weapon” and having this strategy backfire.
I will admit to having wasted a lot of IPCs trying to go after this “Wonder Weapon” and having this strategy backfire.
Spend the IPCs at your own risk.
Some links for further reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment