You can ignore the subs, but if Japan scrambles a fighter the subs can fight in the sea battle.

Very good points ItIsILeClerc, although I don’t think its wise to ever do a Sealion and a J1-DOW.  The plan above which I stated is very situational would be very risky with a J1-DOW.

Great, thanks for the info! I thought I was missing some information.

Thanks again!

Russians need only ATTACK Korea.  They don’t have to take.

Having Mongolia in play can be just as good for Japan as Russia.  Units can cross from Russia to China freely, and you can duck out of North China at any time and be immune to the Chinese

@Young:

… but 100 transports defending against 1 attacking sub are all toast within a single combat round… right?

Yes, because transports on defense can’t retreat.  That’s the huge difference.

Good answer by Marshmallow.  I remember wondering the same thing when G40 was new, but Krieghund* set me straight.  Dizzkneeland is correct that you can still disable an air base and then attack the adjacent sea zone free from scrambled aircraft, but it must be on separate powers’ turns.  Marshmallow said it perfectly, that the scramble decision is made at the beginning of the conduct combat phase, so the aircraft are scrambled before the base is bombed.

*(Krieghund is the official A&A answers guy, and one of the writers of the rule book)

@ItIsILeClerc:

I usually do this to protect a big fleet in the SZ directly behind the blocker. Or as a (usually) 1-turn preventive measure against invasions.

Example: Japan wants to delay the USA from reaching a critical zone during a ‘KJF’. For the sake of simplicity, lets assume the USA wants to reach SZ6 with a much bigger fleet than the IJN.

Put a blocker in SZ16, now the USA can only reach SZ6 with air -not enough to be of any problem for the IJN. IF a Japanese counterstrike from the IJN + IJAF is a concern for the USN, this blocking tactic may work for a couple of turns in a row, even indefinately…

This is precisely what I do as Japan, particularly mid-game if the USN is holed up in Hawaii (which they usually are) and the IJN is split into several task forces operating in different SZs.  It lets Japan use SZ 6 as a safe placement to mobilize new naval units.  The DD block is critical in keeping the USN threat to a minimum while preserving Japan’s ability to split its fleet to deal with multiple threats (or to consolidate disparate naval builds) - not to mention keeping the US honest and unable to send in a few subs to cause havoc around the Japanese home islands (a common “tactic” or sometimes “strategy”  I’ve encountered from US players looking to stay engaged while they focus elsewhere (usually Europe)).

@ItIsILeClerc:

What Barney said will probably work fine, since you seem to have a pretty solid plan.

I can give two answers to your questions though, but please keep in mind those things work for me, not necessarily for you too.

1. I never ignore the Siberians. I kill them, chase them down, or screen/defend against them, depending on what Russia did and what my own plans are. Since Russia moves before Japan, I adapt accordingly. Sometimes it’s even worth it to allow them 1 or 2 turns into Manchuria/Korea if you can kill them/force them to retreat later on anyway (no later than 3rd turn after), because this keeps them away from Moscow and ‘upsets’ Mongolia.
Good thing to know: Japan can take down China + India completely without the troops from Manchuria/Korea. IJAF has 21 airplanes and it’s OK to sacrifice ~4planes if this means killing the entire Chinese (or Indian) army.

2. Use them when you can ;-). Use them to deny USN shorebombardment or to strengthen the IJN if it comes under threat of an attack so stage it off Japan and/or Philippines.

I usually let russia go to korea, but make sure I can deadzone manchuria.  Especially good idea since korea is easily convoy raided.

Hi alecug,

Hey, we were all new once.  ;)

A list of acronyms that are thrown around this site quite a bit can be found here:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27430.0

I hope you find that info useful, and welcome!

@Gamerman01:

What about airbase on Normandy/Holland

Not sure about it but I’m saying that I think that spending enough for protection of the Kriegsmarine (in general) may just be inviting Russia deeper into the Fatherland, regardless of the interesting differences between defending with an additional 2AB or 2CV or even going 1 of each?

@Whitshadw:
All strategy for both sides is indeed largely hypothetical, since a large part of the game (for both sides) is more dynamic than a fixed strategy can cover for: action and reaction dominate the field! That is so educational about the forums: strategies being discussed assume a certain action already. Discussing the (possible) reactions to the assumed actions is what makes it so interesting.

Having said that, Axis are largely the side that plays a certain action. The allies then need to come with a proper reaction. And even that is a lot harder than it looks.

@ChocolatePancake:

That’s right, you can be at war with France all you want, but attacking French Indo-China, even a failed attack or an attack against just some British units, even if it’s just planes, counts as an attack.

Yep, the idea is that you are always attacking the territory, never just the units inside.

Who are you playing Base2ball? What is your game plan?

Thanks……will definitely be ordering them.

Agree with a lot of what Anonymous has to say.

Let me reiterate: I’m saying the game is 60/40 at most. The only reason I give the Axis an edge is they have more room for error.  For example, a disastrous G1 roll on the British ships doesn’t necessarily spell game over for Germany.  On the other hand, an early game disastrous roll for the Allies (i.e. a Taranto raid that goes horribly wrong) probably spells doom for the Allies.  If the rolling is even early on I’d be inclined to call it an even split.

Thanks Krieghund, you explain it much better :)

Ummm, yea it is trapped.  The Japanese (as knp said) generally move fleet to sz 36 J1/J2 which would include carriers (you’ve heard of them right, planes fly off and sink ships etc……). Japanese bmrs could also be with-in range as well  from Kwangsi. If the Brit BB goes to Hong Kong UK1, Japan can get into position on J2 to kill it anywhere it moves w/o question if it wants to. Even if the Japanese keep their fleet home in sz6, or move it out to the Carolines J1, they can move to sz 36 J2 and trap it.

@SS:

:cry: KISS  :cry:

Said otherwise, to lose IPCs in Convoy Disruption Phase, the enemy need to capture one of your originaly held valueless Islands AND put in the surrounding SZ a single submarine (-2 IPCs) or warship (-1 IPC).
Those penalties cannot be cumulative, even if there is more units in SZ, it is either -2 IPCs or -1 IPC, no more no less.

For instance, once Guam taken by Japan and having as many IJN Subs as you want in the surrounding SZ of Guam, it will cost 2 IPCs to US until all IJN Subs move elsewhere or are sunk by Allies.

A different NO, simpler but probably costlier to original owners, based on my suggestion made earlier:
All valueless Island groups controled by at least one stationed unit (Ground, Air, operational Air Base or Naval Base) gives 2 IPCs.
But cost 1 IPC to any original ex-owner, this penalty applied during Convoy Disruption Phase of this ex-owner.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34839.msg1355089#msg1355089

@MeinHerr:

@ChocolatePancake:

Yeah, the main problem I see with this strategy is it doesn’t matter if the Allies capture Tokyo first. The Allies win condition is to capture all 3 Axis capitols, and the Axis can still win on the Europe half if Tokyo is in Allied hands.

So, it doesn’t really matter if it takes Germany a turn or two after Japan falls to take Egypt.

I must confess, truly, i was in error.  Never saw the rulebook on that one. The games I played, usually if G to Moscow… or US took Tokyo… the other players conceded…  Thought Victory conditions of Allies mirrored that of Axis  (either Berlin+Rome or 8 VC… in Europe… or Tokyo or 6 VC in Asia).

It is laughable… i agree, but honest confession is proper here.

I agree that the allies win conditions are laughable. I’d like to see a win condition that states either Germany or Japan in allied hands is a victory, but I still don’t see how the allies could win with this strat. It would take too long to take Tokyo. Egypt would be in German hands at least 2 turns before tokyo fell. Like many have stated, all Japan has to do if he see’s Russia doing a crazy tactic, like you described, is all out defense. Then Germany takes Egypt turn 10-12 100%.

wittmann is right, the Italians can’t participate in the German attack so they are bystanders. By rule the German transport should endure one round of combat, then it can retreat if still alive (unless you are playing a friendly game and allow the German player to rethink his move based on the new info).

True, my bad! I mixed it up with liberating!  :roll: