Weekly Trash - Axis & Allies

Ken B. wrote:
She hasn't aged all that well, she's still too long for the depth she yields, but hot damn, you still can't open that box without going nuts over the bits, or remembering "that game" you played that time in college where you were grinding out Russians with a wave of Panzers, sweating as Great Britain got on her feet from your early raids, and hoping the Japanese fleet could hold off the Americans long enough for you to achieve your goal.

Never worked out that way, but hey...

This game is the father of a lot of modern AT. It was the Risk-style game that bothered to differentiate units and give you a little bit more to do than just toss the bones against each other. The production scale was ramped up to "11". No one forgets the first time they laid eyes on A&A. Nobody. It was the first time I had any idea there were games like this out there.

So a nod to the old girl, even if she is too high maintenance for these modern times.



Weekly Trash is a series of discussion threads in the F:AT forums. Each week a comment from the recommendations database is highlighted here. Don't be shy about posting further comments, questions, answers, funny stories, pictures, "this game sucks", or anything else related to the game.

She is a Sexy Beast. This game is so big it almost doesn't make sense. Games from FFG have more bits, but they have a lot of extra bits--money needs bits? Can't we just write that down? Each life point needs bits? Okay...

But AXIS & ALLIES--those bits are all planes and boats and stuff. We used to have some EPIC A&A games at my frat house in grad school. Two boards, even--with recon missions and what not. Good times. I haven't played enough other wargames to pooh pooh this thing--it's a blast.

I loathe this game. And it has nothing to do with being a simulationist wargamer or anything. I could give a shit about that. I think it is a bad game, and is definitely a reason the average guy thinks wargames suck so bad and are BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING (besides many wargames being boring, of course ). I've bitched about it before, but I can't help it. I hate it because:

1) Game is over in 1-2 turns, but lasts hours after

2) Turns last forever, pure IGO-UGO

3) Horrible game for more than 2 people, with powers varying significantly in important decision making

4) The most horrible casualty decision method possible: player chooses. The meat shield element means the attacker survives with every awesome unit, defender loses all his awesome units.

5) Very few real decisions

I won't play it anymore. There are few (no?) games I would say that for. I can't believe people like this game as much as they do.

Risk for adults? I don't think so.

When I used to be into this game, I originally thought of it as Risk for adults. Now, I think Twilight Struggle fills that gap far better. I have some fond memories of Axis and Allies and many not-so-fond ones. Could that set-up time be any longer?! I remember starting to play it on PC just to avoid the set-up and that's where I realized how average this game really is.


This game is UNPLAYABLE with anyone that suffers from Analysis Paralysis (*looks in mirror* **waves back**). There are so many decision tree points in this game that I really gotta think. In the end, I forced myself to only play as Russia cuz the decisions were easier.


I tend to be a bit of a gaming judge as well (I don't know why, it's just natural) so many times during games I become suspicious that a player removed or did not remove enough units during a battle. This stuff drives me nuts.

And once again (as in my review of Settlers of Catan), you can easily find better games that have the same mechanics and same themes as this one:


You like the whole area movement aspect of units? Play War of the Ring, it's INCREDIBLE.

You like WWII games? Play Combat Commander Europe if you like something heavy, or Memoir 44 if you like something lite.


You like wargames? Twilight Struggle it up, yo.


The one aspect I LOVE about Axis and Allies is the economics. I LOVE economic themed games. But of course, the Euros always handle this better. Both Agricola AND Puerto Rico have more fun economic-themed gameplay. Heck, Power Grid and Caylus as well.


Axis and Allies does many things good but is not excellent in ANYTHING. And for that, I'm happy I gave away my copy of the game (never been played) to my brother-in-law.

I remember when I first heard about this game. A friend of mine mentioned it. So I gathered my paper route money and bought it. I can't say that I was disappointed. it was like risk but there were planes, tanks, battleships, aircraft carriers and that cool cover. I remember looking in awe as the board was set up. You see those snarling Germans looking Eastward towards the Russians and vice versa. The Japanese fleet coiled up and ready to strike the weakened fleet in Hawaii.

The first few times we played the game, it was fun but at some point it dawned on us that if certain early battles didn't go well for one side, it was going to be a long slog.

I think the revised edition somewhat took care of this issue. The Europe and Pacific editions are much better.

I've played this game over 1,000 times, and it's not even that good. What the hell is the matter with me?

Well, it's familiar, so it's easy to find opponents for...

GarySax, did you play with the No Soviet Attack house rule? This is actually built into the game now, but when first released a Russian turn 1 attack on Germany was just overpowering. Seriously, without this rule, the game sucked. I think the new edition sticks an extra territory in there to prevent it.

No, I didn't. I'm not that proficient of a player or anything.

Every game should have a history of playing Axis and Allies. I'd say it is THE quintessential Ameritrash game simply because it was so easily available.

There were a lot of things about A&A that I loved: the economics, the unit diversity, the research tree and different countries that offer different gameplay styles.

Unfortunately the gameplay just doesn't hold up anymore. After lots and lots of replays, almost every game plays out exactly the same. Germany hammers Great Britain in the beginning then conquers Africa and mounts an epic Russian assault. Russia sits there and builds lots and lots of infantry. America and Great Britain try to build up stuff and get a foothold on the continent. Japan blasts the Hawaiian fleet. The outcome is solely based on those first couple of battles. I'd much rather play something less scripted.

The game was just too scripted after several plays. The only real decisions players had to make were:
-when to land in France for the US or Britain
-build an industrial complex in India for Britain or not
-Japan could build IC in Manchuria and go for USSR
-Germany could go for Africa or ignore it
-buy tech, hoping to get heavy bombers?

though once you figure out some decisions are better than others, there are almost no real decisions anymore. The whole game just becomes scripted and you roll dice to see who wins. The older edition had those ridiculous heavy bombers, too; if the US or Britain got them, it was auto-win for the Allies. If Japan got them early, Axis wins.

It's a great game. It really captures a lot within the rules, while not being complex. I think it's a model for "playable complexity".

Yes, the game is pretty much fixed for the allies if the allied players know how best to play. The easy fix around this is to have bidding for sides. This is how it's done in online/tournament play and works fine.

I played a TON of A&A in junior high and high school and got burned out at some point in college. Still, I can see having a blast with my copy again when my son gets old enough.

Also, it's a great tool box for making up either your own expansions/games that run on the A&A rules, or just using the pieces to make up your own wargame with altogether different rules.

It's not a perfect game, but it's longevity and appreciation both my the casual gamer and the "hobby" gamer speaks volumes I think. I'd guess a LOT more people got into so-called "serious" board games via A&A then Settlers.

I'd also add that I completely understand where people are coming from with the "the game is over in 2-3 turns" comments. It usually is with inexperienced players. However, if you have people who know what they're doing on both sides, then the issue tends to stay in doubt much longer.