I have no problem sacrificing Russia if it means you get Japan, but I would not go into a game planning on losing Russia without seeing any rolls or any turns and certainly not before Japan and Italy go. What if they get bad dice or make what you deem as a poor move, you’ve just cost yourself a turn with a bad Russian move in retrospect.
Also, if Mos does fall to the Germans, I would not count on them chasing down the Allies in Asia (maybe they go to Ind to pick up the IC). But Germany is going to go after London. Remember Germany often has build capacity issues early so it is not uncommon for them to boost their ftrs and more importantly thier bomber core. This means I would not be surprised to see Germany SBR London in anticipation on Moscow falling and then as Mos falls Germany will either go the fleet route or SBR London until they get them to 16 damage. Ignoring the SBR thing and going strait to the fleet, since Ger should have 4 ftrs (at least) by rd 4-6, once you sack Mos all you need is 60 ipc to place 4 dd, 2 ac (with 4 ftrs) in Sz 5. How do the Allies sink this?
And how do the sink the followup fleet of AC+ ftrs + dds?
With the SBR campaign you’ll probably see a German CA fleet to take advantage of the UK needing to make sure they can always place inf in London. Finally a German IC on Fra could come into play and Germany drops its fleet directly in Sz 7 or 6, again they should have ftrs so I could even see a 3 AC + 3 DD buy which would only cost 66. And if the Allies lack DDs the Germans can open up a moster Sub campiagn until they clear the Atlantic and then put down its fleet. Also an Axis flett in Sz 12 threatens both Washington and London.
My point is the game is not necessarily over if Japan would end up falling esp if Ger/Ita have Mos, Kar and Cauc, which they obviously should.
yes but i know that this straight forward rush to japan will fail. u cannot take japan without sinking their navy first and that one tough job. really tough.
just beacause its a new idea doesnt make it good. typical western thinking imho. its NEW! its GREAT! its BIG!. it MUST be good…
look up “inner line”, look at the board setup. japan is the richest nation. it has a huge fleet. without trannies thats 3 full US turns of naval production + 3 replacement planes.
turn 2 35-40 income. turn 3 50 - 55. there is NO WAY to kill japan against any decent player by turn 6 or even 8. or 10…
look, the 7 inf will either get crushed J1, or will be ignored and get crushed J2. russia has no option what soever going on offensive against japan.
Japan’s “huge” fleet can’t be everywhere at once. Sure, they can do any of what you describe, they simply can’t do ALL of it. And they will have large income for only a turn or two, before it starts rocketing down again.
The Japanese fleet can’t simultaneously menace East Asia, hold off the American Fleet, AND protect newly built Japanese ships.
I’m beginning to suspect that the last is critical. If US has a big stack of Bombers on Alaska/Stc/Sui, it can simply decimate anything Japan builds. Perhaps a Sub/Bomber fleet, even.
The Japanese fleet can’t simultaneously menace East Asia, hold off the American Fleet, AND protect newly built Japanese ships.
I’m beginning to suspect that the last is critical. If US has a big stack of Bombers on Alaska/Stc/Sui, it can simply decimate anything Japan builds. Perhaps a Sub/Bomber fleet, even.
I solved a problem of that kind in one of my last games with an IC on East Indies. Additional 15 IPC, sure, but it saved the japanese fleet and the whole game.
The US player had a big fleet in strike distance of japanese sea zone (Okinawa, Wake or Iwo Jima, I’m not sure), but not enough trannies to march into Japan. My fleet was at sz 35 (before India) because I had amphibious (re)take the IC there. The US fleet couldn’t reach East Indies at the turn I build the IC there, and next turn I move my fleet in and build additional navy pieces.
I have a question. I was reading in another post that its a legal move to reinforce with land units in your NCM a teritorry you have just captured during the combat movement. For example if I invade finalnd with russian soldiers and take it over then I could move in my non combat movement some tanks that didnt had any action before in the turn as long as they are within range?
I have a question. I was reading in another post that its a legal move to reinforce with land units in your NCM a teritorry you have just captured during the combat movement. For example if I invade finalnd with russian soldiers and take it over then I could move in my non combat movement some tanks that didnt had any action before in the turn as long as they are within range?
Reading under Non-Combat movement (page 21):
@AA50:
Land units can more into any friendly territories. A just conquered territory is a freindly territory.
The AA50 rules even point out that this is a good move:
@AA50:
This is a good time to gather your units, either to strengthen vulnerable territories or to reinforce units at the front
Why don’t you just say Russia gives itself up to support a 3 unit producing India?
I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.
If I think a strat is vastly inferior, then I could possibly be interested in playing reg dice, eventually good dice rolls can only bring you so far.
This strategy is basically the same as my “Russian Sacrifice Strategy” that I wrote about in early January. As I mentioned in my thread, Germany’s best chance of defeating it is if they get a good tech early on. Also, in my thread, I assumed that Germany was going all out against Russia by building tanks and bombers so that Russia will fall as quickly as possible (probably turn 4). This strategy keeps India and Australia in UK hands and keeps the Chinese alive. It even keeps part of Russia alive (although admittedly they can’t collect income while their capital is occupied).
Now, I know that most people in my thread stated that it wouldn’t work against a good player. I see the same thing being stated in this thread. Even if that’s true, remember that both Wodan and I are assuming that Russia falls quickly due to Germany building a bunch of tanks and bombers. Every turn beyond turn 4 that Russia survives makes this plan even more effective. If I encountered a German player who built mostly infantry/artillery on turn 1 AND if I were in control of all the allied countries, then I would seriously consider trying it. In fact, I think that against a G1 inf/art build, it’s almost a guaranteed strategy, barring continuous bad dice rolls and/or Germany getting heavy bombers on turn 1. Who knows, the next time I play the allies, I might give it a try.
Wodan set a premise for his theory, tech is off and NO is on. If it was a strat with tech then it would not be a serious theory. His statements are actually serious because, just like using the method of science, if a theory can be disproved, it can also be proven.
Personally, I would not play with tech anyway.
The main reason why this strat is inferior is because it assumes Jap will be taken down pretty fast.
I also suspect that axis may have advantage in AA50 -41 with NOs, but I’m not sure.
@Subotai:
I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.
Indeed. I wanna play it. Play by Forum would give me carpal tunnel syndrome.
@Subotai:
I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.
If I think a strat is vastly inferior, then I could possibly be interested in playing reg dice, eventually good dice rolls can only bring you so far.
There’s un anstable version, but it works perfect.
http://triplea.sourceforge.net/mywiki/Forum
The only thing I noticed so far are some error messages in History. But you can ignore them, and still look at it.
For the rest, it seems to work great.
