Well china will have an income of 0 if it doesnt have any territories. So at that point it doesnt really make a difference if it gets 0 or doesnt get 0.
A Nameless but Effective China Strategy
-
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Now, in regards to Japan threatening Calcutta, I feel that the most common way they would take the city is by Amphibious Assault instead of trying to force their way through Burma and Shan State.
I would agree that the most likely avenue of attack, at least for an early capture of India, is going to amphibiously.
Now, this ones gonna be a longshot, but hear me out: If Japan has no viable transports or ground units poised to attack Calcutta, then why keep ground troops there? I think that if the UK Pacific can build up a large enough airforce (courtesy partially to the UK Europe), then they can prevent Japan from just leaving transports out in the open for the taking. In the Good Captain’s J1 video, he moves 3 of his transports that he purchased on J1 down to Indochina on J2 and put an airbase there with no other ships protecting them. In my test run, I was able to bomb the airbase, then destroy the transports with no worry of a scramble happening.
I wouldn’t base a strategy on hoping my opponent made a mistake. If the US had a bomber within range of FIC and FIC had an airbase on it protecting lone transports, and UK or ANZAC had a plane that could hit the FIC SZ, I would think most people are going to consider the very real possibility of a SBR attack to take out the airfield. And even if they don’t once it happens to them they won’t let it happen again. Therefore, it is not a strategy it is a gambit.
-
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Do you always scramble into Taranto as the Axis? I always do especially if I plan on coming down into the Med as Germany but I don’t know if other people do as well.
I would only scramble if the UK Player did not bring sufficient forces into the battle.
What do you mean… plan on coming down into the Med as Germany
You mean build ships out of Southern France?
-
Understandably so, however it’s sort of the same concept with Germany. Germany wouldn’t have to protect their Coastline with lots and lots of units if there was no sign of an amphibious assault from either the Americans or the British. If you can save time and units and money why not do it? Not to mention even if Japan does pull transports outta their pockets, the UK in India have the benefit of being able to move their units back rather quickly in the event that an invasion of Calcutta is on the horizon.
I understand what you mean with Persia, it’s just I feel like the UK Pacific should do everything in their power to try and make as much money they can and prevent the Japanese from jumping the money islands.
As for Russia, I’m glad you agree that it can be beneficial to leave troops behind. There’s definitely something to be said for taking troops to Moscow, but Russia could undoubtedly prove useful to the Pacific Allies by keeping their troops in Siberia. It will prove to be all the more beneficial if they can get a fighter or a strat bomber out there as well (assuming Moscow is not under any threat and the Russians are holding firm).
What I mean by Germany coming down into the Med is Germany actually taking units and ships down to the Med and helping Italy in North Africa.
-
- If you want an example of a orthodox COW J1 opener, here is a save file against an opponent who spent his bid in Europe so gives a perfect reference for Pacific allied strategy. About average luck overall in the battles.
How are you preventing Japan from getting the rest of the money islands next turn? Sure you could stack everything on Java and Japan takes Malaya J2 and then Java J3… not a big distraction for how much the Allies have to sacrifice. You can prolong the game with constant sacrifices, but eventually the Allies will find themselves down hundreds of TUV.
- Germany needs to be laser focused on getting troops East during the first few turns as supply chain becomes too lengthy. I do inf+art on G1, mech+tanks on G2. Then pivot to mostly planes as they can simultaneously project power in multiple directions. Dark Skies is overpowered and will wreck the Allies if they don’t have an amphibious landing by turn 6. Skip the Med fleet unless you are truly a top player as overbuilding Axis ships is the most common reason that side fails.
-
When I do an Afrika Korps strategy as Germany, typically I’ll only ever building a carrier and a destroyer, then use my pre-existing boats to send down there and that’s the navy. Everything else will go straight to Barbarossa. Granted of course, halting Japan from taking Java with 2 infantry and a transport is indeed a sacrifice, and too many sacrifices will result in the Allies losing, but sacrifices need to be made in order to win regardless. Typically should the Japanese position their fleet in Sumatra/Java would be the optimal time for America and ANZAC to start advancing forward.
-
Taking Java with 2 infantry does not deter Japan at all in this save file. The allied troops in Java get killed on J2 at the cost of perhaps a Japanese infantry. Allies gain 4 PUs and lose 13 TUV. Axis loses 3 TUV. Not a great trade compared to the other options of heading west with the India transport and to New Guinea with the ANZAC transport. This is my complaint about your strategy. Same for Andrew. You post suggested moves that make absolutely no sense.
In this match that I posted J1, the Allies stacked Java with 3 infantry, 1 AA, and 2 fighters. That was sufficient that I took Malaya on J2. Minor nuisance for so many resources spent.
My opponent traded away too many units to start the game, making it easy for the Japanese to stall the Allies while Germany cruised to victory in Europe. Moscow feel on G6 and there was insufficient Allied forces to stop the march onwards into the Middle East and then Egypt.
Now check out the games of top players who win as Allies. They don’t need to make significant sacrifices and don’t get into risky battles. See this match that Andrew is playing where Moscow is holding firm on turn 8 and the Allies are out-earning the Axis by a significant amount. Still so much to happen in the game, but it certainly is a reasonable position for the Allies to be in at this point. 27 Allied planes in the European theater, giving them considerable flexibility to project power in multiple directions. That stack in Greece is a major nuisance.
2022-oob-playoffs-r1-andrewaagamer-x-vs-oysteilo-a-60 (10).tsvg
-
Not Java sorry, Sumatra. But I wouldn’t doubt that the result would be similar. Regardless, I only meant to devote 2 infantry to take the island and hold it atleast for a little while before Japan comes in and takes it. Any time the Allies can buy is time that is needed while they can continue building up Malaya and not be so far behind on IPCs.
-
@thedesertfox you arent spamming cruisers - they are too expensive a unit. also you shouldnt ever purchase a single cruiser anyways - they are very much not the best unit for the cost. subs and destroyers should be the backbone of your navy while your loaded carriers do the heavy hitting. Also Andrew is correct about battleships not ever being a great purchase either.
-
@andrewaagamer i think the (except for turn 1) is a big point you cant gloss over. as Japan if you are stacking amur turn 1 with the russians i am going to wipe out your army in one big attack when i have the units in position and then can gobble up your territories immediately following the big attack. also the russians can keep units in Tsaka to project a threat if the Japanese want to grab SFE for free with a sinlge transport turn 1.
-
@theveteran said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
@andrewaagamer i think the (except for turn 1) is a big point you cant gloss over. as Japan if you are stacking amur turn 1 with the russians i am going to wipe out your army in one big attack when i have the units in position and then can gobble up your territories immediately following the big attack. also the russians can keep units in Tsaka to project a threat if the Japanese want to grab SFE for free with a single transport turn 1.
Yeah, I admit I was tired of typing and I probably should have gone into more detail as to why you can’t be in Amur on R1 for all the newbies out there that have not learned that yet the hard way.
I am not crazy about going to Sakha with the Russians. Buryatia is the spot for me. If you go to Sakha the Japanese can get 17 ground troops into Amur and their entire airforce into position to wipe you out since you are trapped there. As Japan I would forego an early DOW on the rest of the Allies and go after Russia if my opponent did this.
-
Should also add there is no guarantee even 20 can stay in Amur the whole time. If Japan ever has enough units in position to wipe out that stack they have to pull back to Buryatia until the danger passes.
-
Then I suppose it accomplishes its mission fairly well in stopping a J1 attack from happening.
-
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Then I suppose it accomplishes its mission fairly well in stopping a J1 attack from happening.
Which would be great if the Axis had to win on both sides of the board, but they don’t.
After wiping out the Russian stack Japan can push through the now almost empty Russian eastern flank and gobble up Russian income which makes an early Moscow take a certainty. Since the ground troops they lose are not that much more than what would be pinned anyway in Korea they can still go for a J3 DOW that a) limits the US response to a hard charging German Moscow push and b) have enough of a threat that they can force India and the US to combat them and still stalemate China.
If Moscow goes down on G7 that is bad news for the Allies.
-
Exactly. Moscow is the only problem. The Allies in the Pacific to include Russia can stop Japan, the problem is stopping Germany. That’s why I’ve been trying to make some kind, any kind, of a floating bridge for America work because it’s the only hope the Russians have of survival.
-
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
of a floating bridge for America work because it’s the only hope the Russians have of survival.
First, I would recommend giving up on that Floating Bridge idea. The infrastructure cost is just too great. Look instead at trying to capture or place minor IC’s (mIC). Normandy and Southern France have existing mICs. Greece and Norway are great places to put new ones.
Second, as for Russia; Moscow falling early is a problem. Moscow falling late is not. Taking Moscow does not win the game for the Axis. Taking Moscow and then taking Cairo does. Therefore, the key for the Allies is to have made enough progress against Germany/Italy and built up an Egyptian Wall that Germany still cannot win the game once Moscow falls.
-
russia can survive without an american bridge strategy. fly all the fighters you can spare if possible to moscow - even anzac fighters ive seen in moscow to help hold or british fighters built in persia can fly to moscow in one move.
-
@andrewaagamer said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Second, as for Russia; Moscow falling early is a problem. Moscow falling late is not. Taking Moscow does not win the game for the Axis. Taking Moscow and then taking Cairo does. Therefore, the key for the Allies is to have made enough progress against Germany/Italy and built up an Egyptian Wall that Germany still cannot win the game once Moscow falls.
Don’t forget that the Allies can’t just endlessly defend, defend, defend. At some point, they’re going to have to take the initiative and go on the offense. If there’s a method to defeating Germany while they’re still in the thick of war not having seized Moscow, then I’m all for that method since I think we could all agree that the Allies would stand a better chance against a Germany still fighting Russia then a Germany that’s already destroyed Russia. If the Allies try to just defend their victory cities there will be no thought of them winning at all.
-
Goal #1 for the Allies is first to stop the Axis. Then, with an advantage in money, build up a superior force and then finally push forward. Throwing resources away for not enough value is not something the Allies can do and still win.
-
@thedesertfox I have posted a standard J1 opener that is an exact copy of Cow’s final version. I would like to see what moves you propose for USA1 through Anzac 1 for your super amazing and effective China strategy. Feel free to ignore the European theater portion of the strategy, although it would be nice to see the units that you would place as the United States for the Atlantic side.
You talk in so many hypotheticals, but let’s see what it means in practical terms as you will quite often see good players have moves similar or identical to those that I posted. If your plan has gaping holes after just 1 turn, it will age even worse by the mid-game.
-
@andrewaagamer Throwing resources away for not enough value doesn’t work in a TripleA match but can sometimes work in face-to-face match against poor opponents. I have a feeling most of this strategy is designed for people who eventually make mistakes when faced with threats in multiple locations.
Suggested Topics
