I usually use the Aussies to trade islands with the Japaneses, while building mostly navy with the Americans. I’ve seen an Australian navy used very effectively in a couple of cases, anyone have better success with one versus the other? Which is better?
Anzac Shuck Into Europe
-
Yes direct message was what I meant. And sending saved games is easiest
-
@FranceNeedsMorePower hm it depends on where the US is focusing. If US goes into europe then i would go Pacific with anzac and leave Brasil for the US. If US goes for japan then this can help putting some nuissance in europe.
But i think giving Persia to anzac is more efficient then. Gargantua has a youtube video called the Anzac Express. -
Well you certainly stirred up some discussion :)
I have heard of ANZAC in S America and seen it a few times in other’s games. None I’ve been a part of.
As crockett said and Fox and Stucifer as well, I think the best use of ANZAC resources are a “ANZAC First” policy.
Cornwallis also points out to where, situationally, it may offer the oppurtunity to do it.
-
@barnee Thanks for your thoughts! I do agree that maybe under very specific circumstances that this may be a possible option.
-
France already does that. ANZAC is redundant in that case.
-
The issue is if you do that there’s not enough frosting for the Pacific cake.
ANZAC going off into Europe means there’s less resources for the Pacific, which means that Japan has a better chance of winning.
As everyone else has said, it’s far more efficient for ANZAC to concentrate on the Pacific.
If you want more power in Europe, just have the US spend more money in the Atlantic. As a bonus they can cooperate with all the other American units that are likely to be in North Africa or Europe anyway.
Meanwhile, ANZAC sticking to the Pacific means shorter supply lines which means they can reinforce their troops more easily (without the cost of building more facilities). This is especially helpful to defend their capital.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato France does what? I’m not understanding.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato I love this cake frosting metaphor we have been using, it’s a banger.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato That makes sense the way you put it.
-
France already serves as a canopener in Europe between Italy and Germany. ANZAC isn’t needed for that purpose.
-
WOW, so much comments on an old topic.
What I was saying, was rather simple.
Taking 2 IPC more in Brasil, and stuck 4 / 5 troops in GBTR, would be of help.
Then I would not spend much more time there.
Meantime ANZAC should grab any chance to disturb the JAP on the money islands, and building ships, ships, ships
SZ54 is in the range of 1 move, from Hawai, so Anzac fleet can join with US, and viceversa.
This would be of help against the overhelming JAP fleet.
When playing on TripleA, I am usually able to get back Philippines with ANZAC, with great benefit for US.
ANZAC has a lot do (as a support); even if it start with very low income and very less units. -
@SuperbattleshipYamato The only issue with that is France does not have enough of troops to do that at any minor or major scale. Unless if we are landing French troops into pro-allied nations which is not smart at all.
-
@Marco-Luti So your saying just have Anzac take it and not build there?
-
@FranceNeedsMorePower
Yes, unless you have money to waste there, or UK need support in north Africa.
Otherwise just collect +2 from Brasil; + 5 from Guinea + 5 from Malaysia, +3 Celebes, + 4 from Java
With +/- 30 IPC each round you can build a decent navy and bother JAP in the Pacific.
I usually prefer to build a second MIC in Queensland -
@Marco-Luti Thanks for letting me know! :)
-
Can-openers between Italy and Germany are actually pretty useless anyway.
ANZAC and France are literally the only powers that go between Germany and Italy. What point is there in can-opening for the bigger Allies if Germany can easily fill it next turn?
Unless ANZAC is blowing holes for France (an incredibly difficult and unlikely move to pull off), can-opening after Italy and before Germany doesn’t really do much.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato france has almost no offensive power and no naval projection. But for anzac to have offensive power they should transport the arti to europe which means they can only reach gibraltar on Turn which is too late to make a difference.
My conclusion is that it might be a fun game to do that but not the most efficient use. Same with giving persia to anzac which might be even better than the Brasil move. -
If I am playing Japan, I am happy if ANZAC is doing anything other than building submarines, transports, and infantry.
-
The frustration is that even with all of the Anzac resources pouring to the PTO you don’t see it for a long time. You don’t see the progress, especially if your fleets are just move counter move with no ground gains and the other problem is you don’t have offensive momentum Until like round five
-
@Cornwallis I like the Persia idea but that would cancel a British factory there. The only time France has power is either the endgame where the Allies don’t need there help or in a 1939 setup or something.
Suggested Topics
