China is China…… I would have done the same.
Watching your UK1, you have proved my point about taking out the 109 destroyer, without the destroyer your subs could disrupt convoys and there would be nothing Britain could do about it (they would submerge when facing a lone cruiser).
Your landing in sumatra would be better in the Celebes, as you can bring 1 infantry back in UK2, and land in sumatra that turn, for a total of $7 by the end of UK2 (that way your transport will be closer to home with the extra $3 in hand).
I totally disagree with your evacuation of the Med, you are giving Italy way to much room to do what they wish (refer to my UK1 blue print for what I would have done). You are not putting any pressure on them and as soon as they take out the French boats and land in Trans Jordon, they will get a $5 NO for no boats in the Med (unacceptable), and your fleet will be cut off from ever entering the Med sea again. This kind of evacuation strategy is exactly what the Italians want, if you force them to attack your units, they will lose ships and planes with only $10 to spend. My advise for UK players is to grow a pair, and make Italy fight for their cash… not give it to them in a golden envelope. Why don’t you just give Calcutta to the Japs… I would understand your strategy if you would have put the American fleet in a position to help India when they enter the war.
Watching your first round Italy and right away, I wouldn’t have purchased what you did. A fighter or even a destroyer has more attack kick and flexibility than a sub, even my 3rd choice would have been a transport.
I can’t even watch Italy turn 1 any more… this is not how a lot of my games are fought.
Sorry to be a jerk ROCmonster, but you have claims like “Japan is too strong for the US, and can keep the Philippines for 7 rounds” and “I have played hundreds of games and am undefeated” and to me thats unfounded arrogance. how about we just start over without all the “my way is better” crap and agree to disagree?
The reason I didn’t attack taranto was because I did at first. Italy got lucky and scored 4 hits. Britain got unlucky and scored 2 hits. And the battle ended in Uk loosing everything and Italy having a BB left… This was why I changed up the move.
@Young:
Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.
Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.
The reason I didn’t attack taranto was because I did at first. Italy got lucky and scored 4 hits. Britain got unlucky and scored 2 hits. And the battle ended in Uk loosing everything and Italy having a BB left… This was why I changed up the move.
Bad luck won’t strike every time, i think with UK you need to go for it in the Med, the pay-off is too good (in Alpha3 at least). You will throw better next time!
You don’t have to attack Italy to put pressure on them, just stay in the Med and scatter your navy (like blockers) and force Italy to attack you. It’s to much for Italy to deal with your ships and the French boats. They will lose ships, planes and they will still be stuck with $10 which should slow them down for a while, tough to recover and when they do, the states will be contributing a few warships on Italys front door.
@special:
@Young:
Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.
Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.
Basing purchases and positioning startup units in a way that creates a one round bluff is silly IMO, maybe I exaggerated when I said that I would have no problem disclosing my strategy, but the first few rounds are so limiting for the states, adding deception as a reason for purchases is minor compared to spending and doing things to max limited capabilities.
@Young:
@special:
@Young:
Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.
Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.
Basing purchases and positioning startup units in a way that creates a one round bluff is silly IMO, maybe I exaggerated when I said that I would have no problem disclosing my strategy, but the first few rounds are so limiting for the states, adding deception as a reason for purchases is minor compared to spending and doing things to max limited capabilities.
I guess that’s true, the huge size of the map sorta negates short term deceptions (although in some cases it can sill work). And pre-war USA doesn’t have that much.
Still, I used to like to play with placement (this is an example) 4 planes for E-USA, ground troops in Central, and the next turn buy 2 AC’s and TRP’s W-USA, moving the ground troops to W-USA, ready to board next turn, and landing the planes on the AC’s. Due to the big distance on the board between east and west USA, this is sorta easy to keep the enemy in the dark.
Even starting this pre-war, you can give the impression you’ll focus on the Europe side, then switch Pacific with a larger than expected force (obtainable in 1 turn)
I know the Pacific is big, and the result will not be much, but it can have a certain impact, and sometimes even 1 turn can make a difference.
(also you still have the option to go europe with this, so it keeps your options open)
Back on topic: US buy 1: fighters/tacs for E-USA and ground units C-USA may not show your muscles right away but keep a lot of options open, for either side of the map.
Not a bad strategy, interesting, but I need capital ships against Japan so I buy 2 carriers and a battleship. I would consider bluffing by saving all my money turn 1, but it’s a little pointless when you can only build a maximum of 9 units when your not at war.
@Young:
Not a bad strategy, interesting, but I need capital ships against Japan so I buy 2 carriers and a battleship. I would consider bluffing by saving all my money turn 1, but it’s a little pointless when you can only build a maximum of 9 units when your not at war.
Ah yes, Alpha IC limitations, good point there. I guess this was more of an OOB thing.
As for saving money, that’s an ANZAC thing ;)
Let’s just say i’d buy planes first or carriers first depending on what message i want to give Japan (which will depend on J1’s actions and my mood of the day…) carriers are obviously a good buy.
I maybe should add that normally as USA i expect a J2 DOW to happen (at least with my usual opponents)
I love this game because I am constantly learning something every game I play, lately I have been convinced that transports and land units to fill them is ideal for ANZAC. I have also learned to keep America out of the war for as long as possible.
@Young:
I love this game because I am constantly learning something every game I play, lately I have been convinced that transports and land units to fill them is ideal for ANZAC.
Anzac transports are indeed quite useful now yes, you let USA clear the , ehh… road, and let Anzac take territories. And troops are much closer to the action compared to fresh americans.
Even putting an anzac inf on a US transport has good options now that USA plays before Anzac. In my last game i had USA destroy a jap blocker and move their TRP in non combat to (i think it was either) Java or Sumatra, to have the anzac unit take the (in this case) empty island.
I have also learned to keep America out of the war for as long as possible.
Are you talking from an american point of view or as Japan?
Speaking for Japan of course, if I’m America, I want in the war as soon as possible as it closes the axis economic window of opportunity sooner.
The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.
@Vance:
The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.
Usually not an issue. Thing is, if you wait too long to strike India, you cannot strike India. Without India, personally, I don’t think you can win with Japan.
@Young:
Speaking for Japan of course, if I’m America, I want in the war as soon as possible as it closes the axis economic window of opportunity sooner.
that’s what i thought, but you were talking about Allied stuff right before so i wasn’t entirely certain :)
@Cmdr:
@Vance:
The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.
Usually not an issue. Thing is, if you wait too long to strike India, you cannot strike India. Without India, personally, I don’t think you can win with Japan.
I generally see J2 as the ideal balance between keeping USA calm and not letting India/Anzac get too comfy.
@special:
@Young:
Speaking for Japan of course, if I’m America, I want in the war as soon as possible as it closes the axis economic window of opportunity sooner.
that’s what i thought, but you were talking about Allied stuff right before so i wasn’t entirely certain :)
Keep in mind, unlike Japan, America’s authorized to park their fleet right next to SZ 6. (Japan cannot park next to SZ 10, it’s a violation of the rule that America has to be the most powerful entity in the game FOREVER and that any tactic that can kill America has to be banned IMMEDIATELY! And yes, this is a sore point for me, I like to see America burn in fire and rubble while raising the Japanese or German flag.)
@special:
@Cmdr:
@Vance:
The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.
Usually not an issue. Thing is, if you wait too long to strike India, you cannot strike India. Without India, personally, I don’t think you can win with Japan.
I generally see J2 as the ideal balance between keeping USA calm and not letting India/Anzac get too comfy.
You cannot block the fleet! They can coexist with your blocking unit and disengage to attack SZ 6. Keep it in mind!
@Cmdr:
@special:
@Cmdr:
@Vance:
The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.
Usually not an issue. Thing is, if you wait too long to strike India, you cannot strike India. Without India, personally, I don’t think you can win with Japan.
I generally see J2 as the ideal balance between keeping USA calm and not letting India/Anzac get too comfy.
You cannot block the fleet! They can coexist with your blocking unit and disengage to attack SZ 6. Keep it in mind!
well eh… i wasn’t claiming that i could…
This rises a question, can Japan, when declaring war, move out of a shared SZ to attack another one?
Yes they may.
Not only can they do so, but they may load transports in the newly hostile sea zone and conduct combat elsewhere.
