There is no rolling versus defenseless transports. By definition, transports that can retreat are not defenseless, so combat would be conducted normally.
Perfect. Thanks!
So how do the Allies win again?
-
Look at the Amap module (slightly wrong but a good start) TUVs are:
JPN: 464 land / 177 naval
US: 180 land / 91 naval
China: 46 land
UK: 136 land / 54 naval
An: 59 land / 21 navalAllies total TUV: 421 land / 166 naval
Income: 26 to 55
I don’t know, doesn’t look all that one sided to me. Perhaps if someone would show me a game online I could gain a, clearer understanding.
-
Yeah, that’s EXTREMELY one-sided considering all of the advantages Japan enjoys in coordination and position. On top of that, many of Allied assets are going to be killed quickly to little cost for Japan. Finally, the econ, while 2 to 1 at start will not stay that way for long. The Allies will outproduce Japan for a while, but the margin becomes slimmer and slimmer with which to counter that initial advantage.
A quick example would be the UK forces. There is no way to ‘save’ the UK navy if the Japanese want to kill it. That means that the UK will be out 54 IPC worth of ships at a likely cost of under 20 for Japan (losing subs, DDs, or Fighters and less if they take hits on the BBs). Once that happens, the UK econ becomes virtually non-existent as Japan can quickly secure the DEI and then leave a few subs to blockade the bulk of the rest. Unless the US can mount a credible threat in that region (which I dont see how), Japan WILL kill the Brits as a combat-effective force within the first 4-5 turns with minimal losses. And a 2 to 1 loss ratio for the Allies is not acceptable when they already are trying to play catch-up.
-
There is nothing in range other than bombers of the UK fleet turn 1. After turn 1 UK could have purchased a carrier, an AB on ceylon, or many other things to keep her boats alive. And no matter what the econ spread becomes even larger after turn 1. Japan can get at most around 7 extra without declaring war. China gets 6 from burma road, UK can gain 8, plus 5 from her NO, or get ANZAC there NO for an additional 5 there, plus the US gets 5 for her NO. If she does declare war US income goes up by 40, compared to an extra 5 or so Japan gets. Japan cannot gain eco advantage until turn 3 at the latest, more than likely turn 4 or 5.
And the US can load 2 more carriers with starting plans if desired.
-
There is nothing in range other than bombers of the UK fleet turn 1. After turn 1 UK could have purchased a carrier, an AB on ceylon, or many other things to keep her boats alive. And no matter what the econ spread becomes even larger after turn 1.
Yeah, we thought the same thing. The UK even bought TWO carriers over 2 turns and had 4 planes, an additional DD and 2 subs. In the end, it cost the Japanese a bit more, but the UK was finished and China was doomed too (since a lot UK money was going to the sea, not the land). Japan was able to bring 4 CVs, 2 BBs, 2 CAs, 3 DDs, 2 SSs and some LBA to the party. The UK rolled well and Japan was really hurt, but still nothing compared to the Brit losses (which were total) and then from there the UK ceased to be a factor. Japan can afford a trade like to for a knock-out blow to the Brits.
Where was the US you might ask? Well, Japan still had a few other CVs and a LOT of LBA to deal with the US forces (which were largely pinned outside of the Carolines). The Allies thought they had an opening when the Japanese fleet was so far West and so damaged, but in the end the US simply couldnt dent the Japanese money without risking annihilation.
Was is perfect play from the Allies? No, not hardly but it certainly proved to us that there is NO WAY the UK can keep the fleet alive if the Japanese are intent on killing it. BTW, the Kiwis had 2 CVs fully loaded supported by a few DDs and SSs, but again, the lack of coordination between the Allies is a KILLER.
-
Well, it looks like you are a very good player of A&A.
I had asked how many rounds, because some have said they played 4 rounds and think they know the outcome of the game.
With so many more territories, this game will take longer.
Just think, if there were 5 territories and 3 sea zones, and only 100 IPC of units on the game board–-the game would be shorter. If there were 500 territories and 250 sea zones with 4000 IPC of units the game would be very long. It looks like now that we will have Papa Bear, Momma Bear, and Baby Bear (1940 Global, AA50, and AA42) to choose from.
-
The UK even bought TWO carriers over 2 turns and had 4 planes, an additional DD and 2 subs.
You are leading us on the right path, with trying different purchasing options and strats for the Allies.
Many were applying their Revised strats to AA50 with wild claims one way or the other with regards to balance. Then, after some time, people started to try new things a few with success, most not.
One we figure the timing and general strat of Japan, then the Allies can look for weaknesses.This map is a new puzzle, and where would be the fun if we figured it out in the first 10 times we played it?
+1 to Uncle_Joe for his thoughts
-
+1 to Uncle_Joe for his thoughts
What is this by the way? I see mine is going down for some reason? Is this just some sort of way that people can ‘snipe’ at you without having the stones to say something that you can refute?
-
+1 to Uncle_Joe for his thoughts
What is this by the way? I see mine is going down for some reason? Is this just some sort of way that people can ‘snipe’ at you without having the stones to say something that you can refute?
Pretty much, although +1 means someone gave you a good karma.
-
Please see my new post about playing the game as the Allies (lost) 1 on 1 with a familiar opponent, without national objectives.
-
Please see my new post about playing the game as the Allies (lost) 1 on 1 with a familiar opponent, without national objectives.
-
Its the National Objectives that make this game so great. Playing without them is like bathing without your rubber duck, man.
-
Hahaha…Just mentioning IL and he gives me a smite for revealing what goes on.
Well I’ll give you +1 and we’ll call it even.
(And now I’ll drop stealthily to -21 I’m sure.) :-D
-
actually i won as the allies today. all i did was have the UK buy nothing but infantry. and china take and hold the burma road. Japan cant replace all the planes they will lose. as america I pretty much bought fleet after fleet and threw it at japan. They cant defend their island AND take calcutta. I have learned it never really matters what anzac does.
-
Have played 5 games so far, with the two of us switching sides each time. Japs 5, US 0. Small sample size, sure. Is it early in the game’s life? Sure. But it is shaping up to be an Axis game to us.
-
I think we need to be patient before we all start jumping on the Japan bandwagon. First off, I think a lot of folks are bringing too much baggage to this game, trying to play it the way they played the original AAP or the way they play Revised or something. For my part, I started by looking at the victory conditions. As long as the Allies hold 3 victory cities they are still in the game. In the earlier AAP, the Allies had to get moving or japan would overrun India or win on VPs. I think US can wait a little to gather a competent navy before throwing itself on the Japanese.
Next I looked at the NOs. I suspect playing well requires you to maximize your income from the NOs while denying income to your opponent(s). The NOs do have a tendancy to force you into a particular line of play which follow some historical timeline. I hope that making the most of the NOs will allow ANZAC to make a difference, but who knows?
Third, I think these new rules regarding submarines, destroyers and convoy zones will create a new angle on the economic model inside the game. We can’t sub-stall anymore. Now we have to “destroyer-stall.” But Destroyers cost 8 IPCs. And we can’t use trannys as cannon fodder anymore. I think there will be a lot of revelations in how certain objectives may be obtained. Look at the game as a marathon and not a sprint. Maximize the income from NOs and learn how to use the new units and tactics this game introduces. And if all else fails, we’ll come up with the Mother-of-all-House-Rules!
Merry Christmas guys!
-
I believe swiss is on the right track with buying a lot of ground units with Britain. Buying infantry, artillery, and maybe an occasional mech infantry will strech Japan thin fighting both China and Britain. This will allow the U.S. and ANZAC to build and move against Japan.
-
actually i won as the allies today. all i did was have the UK buy nothing but infantry. and china take and hold the burma road. Japan cant replace all the planes they will lose. as america I pretty much bought fleet after fleet and threw it at japan. They cant defend their island AND take calcutta. I have learned it never really matters what anzac does.
Yeah, that is our next try - a UK ground heavy strat. Trying to build a navy is folly at this point. And in my experience, Japan doesnt NEED to ‘defend their island’…I mean, from what? The US isnt going to have anything in the first 5-6 turn to threaten Japan. Heck they can barely threaten TRUK in that time period. Given that, I think the Japanese have PLENTY to take Calcutta with little issue. Buying a horde of Brit troops might change that though (at least delay it). Japan always seems to be tight on boots on the ground in China despite building a factory and shipping in men from Japan. Still, if the Brits dont make any effort to the navy then they will soon be making single digit income and I’m not sure how useful that will be either.
I think we need to be patient before we all start jumping on the Japan bandwagon. First off, I think a lot of folks are bringing too much baggage to this game, trying to play it the way they played the original AAP or the way they play Revised or something. For my part, I started by looking at the victory conditions. As long as the Allies hold 3 victory cities they are still in the game. In the earlier AAP, the Allies had to get moving or japan would overrun India or win on VPs. I think US can wait a little to gather a competent navy before throwing itself on the Japanese.
Next I looked at the NOs. I suspect playing well requires you to maximize your income from the NOs while denying income to your opponent(s). The NOs do have a tendancy to force you into a particular line of play which follow some historical timeline. I hope that making the most of the NOs will allow ANZAC to make a difference, but who knows?
Well, we are also 5 games in (switching up sides and player mix) and so far the Japanese have won every time and each successive time has been easier as they refine their strats. The Allies are still thrashing around trying to come up with ANYTHING to annoy the Japanese and so far are batting 0.
IMO, the ‘winning’ point for Japan is when they are outproducing the US and they completely winning when they are outproducing the Allies as a whole. To do that, they can afford to ignore 3 VCs (Australia, Pearl Harbor, San Fran). Sure they’d need to take one of those to get the ‘official’ win, but the game is over before any of the three fall if Japan has taken out the Brits.
As far as the NOs, in AAP40, they dont really drive you to place you wouldnt be going anyways. The only Japanese ‘stretch’ goal is the Coral Sea area and IMO it’s simply not worth the bother. 5 IPCs is not worth trying to spread out to take that area IMO. If the counter-balancing NO went to the US not the Aussies, then it MIGHT be worth bothering with at least denying it to the Allies.
Third, I think these new rules regarding submarines, destroyers and convoy zones will create a new angle on the economic model inside the game. We can’t sub-stall anymore. Now we have to “destroyer-stall.” But Destroyers cost 8 IPCs. And we can’t use trannys as cannon fodder anymore. I think there will be a lot of revelations in how certain objectives may be obtained. Look at the game as a marathon and not a sprint. Maximize the income from NOs and learn how to use the new units and tactics this game introduces. And if all else fails, we’ll come up with the Mother-of-all-House-Rules!
It sounds like you are coming from a pre-AA50 background. Sub stalling died with AA50 (as did TR ‘armor’ etc). And personally I think the game IS still a sprint for Japan. If they can take the Brits and Chinese out in 6-7 turns, the game is effectively over from what I’ve seen so far. If they take longer, they might have problems but even there I’m not sure. In the end, any version of A&A is about economic power. Japan starts with a considerably weaker econ but a massive advantage in forces, position, and coordination. She has to trade on those advantages to overcome the econ disadvantage within the first 8 turns or so or things will start to go south. Everything else is simply window-dressing IMO. That makes it very much a sprint IMO.
Merry Christmas guys!
And the same to you :) Hopefully you get a chance to play a few games and see what you think. Dont get me wrong, we are still having fun and it’s being an interesting puzzle trying to think of ways for the Allies to a have a chance.
Have played 5 games so far, with the two of us switching sides each time. Japs 5, US 0. Small sample size, sure. Is it early in the game’s life? Sure. But it is shaping up to be an Axis game to us.
Ditto, and as I said above, I think the game is going to be at least slightly slanted in favor the Japanese at this time. But when the global game hits, it’s going to be a LOT tougher going for the Japanese.
Some thoughts on that:
-
The Brit Indian Ocean squadron will be able to RUN to avoid any massed Japanese fleet. Right now, the Brits are forced to sit at the edge of the board and take it in the face. In the global game, you can bet your butt they’ll be running for the Cape and if Japan pursues, that leaves the rest of the Pacific wide open for the US. Currently in AAP40, the Japanese can kill the Brits and then turn and deal with the US.
-
Japan can COMPLETELY leave Manchuria and all of conquered China ungarrisoned. I’m going to guess that Russia wont mind taking those high value provinces if Japan leaves them open. :)
-
Japan has no ‘global responsibility’. In all other global A&A’s, Japan needs to be taking out the Russian econ from behind. She also needs to keep the US occupied at least to some degree in the Pacific. I’m not really sure how easy the latter will be in the global game, but if Russia is completely untouched the Germans might have a rough time. I do hope there is some rule for the US in the global game that prevents them from simply dumping that 55 IPC’s/turn into Europe though. Initial experience with AAP40 is that the US struggles to make a meaningful impact on Japan with that money. I’m going to guess that the same is NOT true in Europe. And the US has nothing vulnerable in the Pacific once they lose PI anyways. They dont have another island bonus to lose as they did in AA50 so there is little use in defending in the Pacific if those extra IPCs can be used to crush the Germans and Italians.
-
The UK and Anzac players will be combined. At least I think I remember reading that somewhere. Now whether that means that they’ll be able to 100% coordinate or not I dont know but if so, that will make life harder on the Japanese as well.
All of the above should combine to make Japan’s life a LOT harder in the global game. Given that, it’s not unreasonable to think that she is having an artificially easier time in the theater-level game.
-
-
Mmm… not sure if this can save allies but at least can cancel a gamey strat: ignore that rule that limits China’s movement (the one I call ACME wall)
I’ll explain a bit: economics mean Japan just have to toast both China and India to win, while keeping Dutch East Indies. DEI are not very difficult to hold for Japan if it’s true best USA can do by round 5-6 is menace Truk, so a gamey strat for Japan would be sending all to India, keeping only token forces in China. Since China cannot, for some strange reason, attack Japan out of China, Japan can left Korea and FIC ungarrisoned and focus 100% in India. Only units that cannot early fight India should be left to annoy chinamen. Since Burma Road will be covered by your offensive and Manchuria is easy to hold (with reinforces from Japan), Japan can shift to China after toasting India, and can do it whitout fear of losing Indochina or Korea. Allow China attack their enemies in any place, as it should be, and prevent this gamey approach: if Japan is forced to fight both countries at the same time, they could have a chance of holding enough
-
US can start trading in Indies turn 2, or turn 3 if desired. Perhaps only Java but still a distraction.
-
@Uncle Joe:
This is supposed to be a stand alone game. So waiting for Europe to come out in 6 months to make this game work is BS. This could be someone’s first AA game and like it or not if we want games to keep coming out in this genre we need new blood. If this is their first, it could very well be their last due to the broken nature of the game. $90. $90 dollars for a board game it should work. There shouldn’t be pages of omissions from the rule book, “wrong inserts” included, TYPOS galore, and boxes half full of plastic pieces to put on a shoddy quality board.
Suggested Topics
