I have to concur with the others who have posted. A combined transport and infantry build for Japan on turn 1 is the way to go. If Russia took Manchuria on round 1, and if the UK executed the “Kwangtung Maneuver”, the only place left for Japan to build is Southeast Asia. While initially it MIGHT be safe (the US can take that factory using China and Sinkiang forces one time in 3, and later will threaten it with a southern island hoping fleet), it is too far from Russia to do any good, and forward progress against Russia proper is easilly blocked by Novosibirsk infantry units. Japan HAS to focus on gaining IPC’s in round 1 in order to sustain a transport invasion of Russia through the back door (Manchuria to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia). Also, as Japan builds a transport navy (protect by heavy naval forces that were NOT sacrificed against the US at Hawaii) the US has to garrison Alaska heavilly (that japanease transport fleet ferrying troops to Manchuria is a single move away from an all out invasion of Alaska too). That reduces the number of US dollars that can be spent on the European war, allowing Germany to maintain the frontal assault on Russia that eventually leads to Japan taking Russia. So for an opening move, Japan re-takes Manchuria, takes Australia, blasts the results of the Kwantung Maneuver (if executed) or takes China using air force and Kwantung infantry. If Japan still holds Manchuria, they assault Yakut and take it. If the UK builds in India, that simply takes more pressure off Germany and allows THEM to take Russia, aided by the threat floating through the Siberian lands… too far from India for UK to do a darn thing about. YAKUT is the key for Japan. Take it and hold it, you have one territory with all of your west-marching forces to defend it from the Russians, and you force Russia to try to defend TWO territories against your massing forces. The drain on Russia: defending Evenk AND Novosibirsk plus holding Karelia and the Caucuses with an income of only 20 or so IPC’s is FATAL, REGARDLESS of UK and US support. And with Russia gone, the Alllies WILL lose (economic victory is immediate on taking Russia, world domination only a few moves away)
No attack between Russia and Japan
-
Since Russia did not declare war on Japan untill 1945, after the first atomic bomb, what about reflecting some of this in A&A? I was thinking of not allowing Russia and Japan to attack each other for some number of rounds. I also wouldn’t allow Russia to liberate territories taken by Japan. Although I see it favoring the Allies it could bring some unexpected twists with the US having to spend more on home defence. What are your thoughts?
-
it DEFINTIELY helps the allies. just about the only way for the axis to win is to hold africa and have germany stay strong on defense and maybe attack russia a little, and then have japan mop up asia( and eventually moscow ) and go for the IPC victory. that would defienitely tilt the scales WAY towards the allies; the game would be over before it even started.
-
I played a game once with Russia unable to attack on the first turn and Japan and Russia not at war. Russia was only able to attack Japan if Germany was defeated and for Japan to attack Russia they had to capture Sinkiang, China, India, and Australia. It didn’t really seem to even things up too much for the Axis as it eliminated any realistic chance for an IPC victory.
-
exactly, it just makes it that much easier for the allies to win. russia dosent have to worry about japan for awhile, so they can use even more of their troops in germnay.
-
You could do something like Japan can roll ( like a free tech roll ), to be allowed to attack, while russia must pay for this kind of roll.
Maybe you have to change the chances, like to 2 or 3 in 6, though.
-
I was also contemplating (while not doing the work I am supposed to be doing :-? ) with a rule like this, one may want to raise the values of the pacific island? Making them essential objectives for the US to keep the Axis from economic victory. My objective was to find some way to make the US be much more active in the Pacific.
-
it would be nice if the US was somehow forced to spend some of their IPC’s in the pacific, b/c they always just use all of their $ to build stuff to take out germany.
-
Axis and ALlies is not a celebration of WW2 realistically, it is a celebration of the craziness of a world war
-
yeah, it’s not the most realistic game, but it’s a hell of a lot of fun
-
I aggree with Yourbuttocks also (boy did I have a hard time typing that with a strait face :lol: ) It isn’t that I’m after things to be more realistic as much as adding more options to players stratagies. But I do love it when six armor attack three infantry and the armor gets obliterated. That can really change your stratagy.
Suggested Topics
