Pointlessly Broken

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

If I recall correctly, in most games where I stack the Aleutians I used the arrangement of 3 inf +AA.

Clearing out the blockers does have an effect on Japan, But Japan has 4 DD’s and 2 subs to start out with, and USA/UK, if they want to use all 7 blockers, will need to throw 3 DD, 2 CA, 1 BB, and either a US Carrier or Battleship. The problem for the Allies is that for most of those blocking situations, Japan’s AF is able to show up to each in overwhelming numbers, to the point where in most or all of the block clears, the Allies will only be able to roll once in defense.

(Note also that now I am starting to be fond of leaving 1 tac 1 ftr on carolines with 1 DD in 33 J1)

The most difficult locations for Japan to attack the allies while the Allies a blocking Philippines, Alaska, and Aleutians are, from what I can tell: 19 (or 18, possibly, there isn’t much difference, I suppose I would go 19 myself), 21, 4, 7, 8, 9, 15.
(EDIT: note if 15 is blocked instead of 16, it may not be that big of a deal, but Hawaii is then open from 6)

EDIT 2: Japan can prevent a block of the philippines by leaving a cruiser in SZ 20. The UK battleship could face 6 kamikazes and a surface ship if it attacks 20, which it has no reasonable expecation to survive. The US DD cannot move to 19 or 20, which leaves its blocking options for the Philippines as 18 and 21. For 18 to work, UK needs to be in 19, which is not possible with the 20 block. Thus The US DD would need to be in 21 to try to block. Thus, the only hope for the block is for one battleship to survive 6 kamikazes and 1 cruiser. Japan will know whether or not they want to use the Kamikazes based on whether or not USA blocks Aleut and Alaska.

IMO 15 is much better for the allies than 16 because ftr/tac from Japan have to find a carrier if they go there. Japan still has 2 bmb though.

The reason why it is worth killing the blockers in my opinion is that when combined with the aggressive southern move, Japan has the option of going the “traditional” route, except to save itself, USA had to sacrifice almost every ship. When Japan moves south, they can still back up and go for the USA, or keep going south. That puts UK/ANZAC between a rock and a hard place because they have both strategies to consider when doing buys/moves.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Here is the situation J2 with my attempt at combining the Expert moves with my experience testing this a couple dozen times.

Note that if USA stacks the aleutians with only 1 trn, Japan has a 2 in 3 chance of taking it with at least 1 land unit left, and on average Japan will have 1 plane in addition to that land unit left. That’s why there are 4 land units on the Aleutians, as ridiculous as it seems. 3 land units does take Japan below 50%, so I am considering just taking 3.

Pacific Test 2-7 J2.tsvg

[atease]

Then every Axis and Allies game ever made is broken.  Do you really expect the designers to come up with a setup that is exactly even?

Dude, even in CHESS you don’t have a 50/50 chance of winning.  White has the advantage because it moves first, even though it can only move one piece and all the pieces on both sides are the exact same and in the exact same position.

By your reasoning, chess is broken.

Wow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess
Great comparison Gamerman! I love it.

[Zhukov44]

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

Here is the situation J2 with my attempt at combining the Expert moves with my experience testing this a couple dozen times.

Note that if USA stacks the aleutians with only 1 trn, Japan has a 2 in 3 chance of taking it with at least 1 land unit left, and on average Japan will have 1 plane in addition to that land unit left. That’s why there are 4 land units on the Aleutians, as ridiculous as it seems. 3 land units does take Japan below 50%, so I am considering just taking 3.

I had a look and it doesn’t look promising for Allies.  Japs can destroy virtually all of the American fleet on the next turn.  They can land in Hawaii, having destroyed enough American units that they can’t be blocked from either landing in Canada or attacking Western United States on the next turn.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Note where I moved the ANZAC cruiser, this has been a typical move for me for about a week now. This can potentially contribute to a block of Alaska J3 depending on what Japan does. But that block would require the sacrifice of yet another captial ship and cruiser.

[Zhukov44]

Here’s what I would likely try if I was Japan.  In this case everything went pretty much according to plan except for the dicing in Kwang…

One of the advantages of using blockers is USA could always hit one of these 2-3% outcomes and a blocker would survive, which could potentially foil the entire plan.  But in this deployment I didn’t leave a whole lot to chance…in any case this would be nigh unstoppable in ll.

Did I miss anything?  With this deployment, Japan should be able to land in British Colombia with 24 units, and USA will have only a 5% chance of successfully countering.  If they don’t successfully counter they are screwed because the Japan airforce will have landed in Hawaii.

test_game_usa2.tsvg

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

I like your take on it, I might’ve done a little different but now I’m not so sure. With this one you are still threatening ANZAC too,although the your navy is more vulnerable than mine would be, but the trn’s are of course safe and the BC invasion is totally in business. Do note that you are 1 unit short for your SZ 6 trns, and are potentially out of position for the next wave, but those are things you can do while still keeping the same attacks in the sea. I’ll look a little deeper later.

Since you didn’t want Philippines, there was no need to leave the cruiser in 19 on my J1, so that is something that you can change too, and that extra ship would of course be a big help somewhere.

Very nice moves!

[Zhukov44]

Thanks.  Here’s a more pared down version to maximize the odds a little better.

It seems like Hawaii must also be held on J2.  Probably hard to hold both Hawaii and Aleutians.  Tough problem.

Got a feeling there is no surefire counter but it’s worth a try.  Worth noting that the game also seems to be easy for Japan if it goes the mainland route so it’s not clear yet which way to victory is actually more broken.

With regard to possible rule changes I wonder if it would make a big difference if Japan’s pre-war sea movements were restricted to a 4/7/16/24/23/33 border.

[Zhukov44]

revised map

1_improvedjap2_test.tsvg

[gamerman01]

@Zhukov44:

Worth noting that the game also seems to be easy for Japan if it goes the mainland route so it’s not clear yet which way to victory is actually more broken.

That’s what I’ve been trying to say.  If going straight for USA is not measurably more successful than the traditional strategy, then this strategy is no great revelation, even in 2nd edition.

It was definitely less viable in OOB than it is now.  USA has 2 less bombers and other changes have shaken it up a bit, but I will be surprised if you conclude that KUSAF is the best strategy without argument.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Gamerman01:

@Zhukov44:

Worth noting that the game also seems to be easy for Japan if it goes the mainland route so it’s not clear yet which way to victory is actually more broken.

That’s what I’ve been trying to say.  If going straight for USA is not measurably more successful than the traditional strategy, then this strategy is no great revelation, even in 2nd edition.

To me this sounds like you are trying to find a face-saving way to back out of your stance coming into the thread, where all that needed to be done was to give you this USA crush strat and you would quickly save the day by solving it like you say you did with a version of it in OOB, which since it sounds like this person DOWed J1, it probably wasn’t worth much anyways.

You have yet to explain any possible means by which the Allies can win if USA is taken before the Allies can actually threaten a landing on Japan. Every resource they commit to helping defend the USA is something less to be used to actually play offensively. As you can see from Zhukov’s move, the Japanese Navy is not too hard to keep very much intact while obliterating most of the starting Allied ships.

You keep trying to say that this doesn’t matter at all, the game needed a bid anyways, etc., yet for the bid you recommended 3 infantry for the USA. Are those infantry going to significantly help the Allies with countering the more traditional strat? Not really, if we are honest, so this strat does need to be addressed.

Note also, as I have said, is that as part of this move to 14, Japan can simutaneously threaten USA and the traditional means of victory.

Until proven otherwise, which even an expert with his best possible Allied moves was unable to show, that outside of ridiculously bad dice, Japan’s ability to take (or at least threaten) the US makes this game (the actual, official game, the only game that I have been talking about), pointless to play if the goal is both sides having a decently even shot at winning. Bids may work great in the daily situations, but as long as the designers are up for trying to get a solution that doesn’t require bids, there is no need to be against supporting that effort, even if in so doing one can save face.

I really don’t see any other threads discussing 2e balance, so to act like this is not a big deal is either not looking at what is in front of you, or trying to not have to face the overconfidence you came into the thread with.

[gamerman01]

Oh, shut up.  You are such a blowhard.  Did you even comprehend what I just said?

You are unbelievably arrogant.  You think you’re the first one to think of KUSAF in P40?  What hubris.

You just can’t stand that I said your strategy isn’t the bees’ knees.  How proud is that?  You’re not considering my arguments and points.  I’m not wasting any more time on you.

Zhukov just said it “also seems easy for Japan if they go the mainland route”.

Hello?  He just said the same thing I did.

Now I’ll let you get back to kissing yourself.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Gamerman01:

Oh, shut up.  You are such a blowhard.  Did you even comprehend what I just said?

You are unbelievably arrogant.  You think you’re the first one to think of KUSAF in P40?  What hubris.

How ironic. Go to the very first post in this thread. Talk about not even comprehending what other people say.  :roll:

We go from “Just give it to me and I will stomp this”

to “Whatever, this game needed a bid anyways, just put 3 inf in W USA”

to  “This is hardly a revelation.”

It sounds to me like you are more upset at the fact that someone other than you found this strat for 2e, and that someone other than you brought it to attention. You can’t stand the fact that a player in his first game of Pac opened the door for this one in 2e, and that you, the vaunted expert Gamerman, did not. Once it became clear that you could not “trash” it like you claimed you could, you try to avoid facing up to your claim. After several tests I came on here convinced that if J
Japan did this 14 move, it broke the game. You come on, act like the 4 pages written is beneath you, demand that I supply you with the strat so you can save the day, demand that the game be played as you want, and then don’t even put up a respectable resistance to the strat while claiming they were the best moves the allies had. And then you call ME arrogant!

Cool, Japan has a good chance of winning going mainland. So what? Where did I say differently? What I have shown, and what Zhukov has even more clearly shown is that it is too easy for the Axis to win with the 14 move. As I have said from before you entered the thread as the savior of Pacific, the with the 14 move, Japan either gets the USA or

The USA crush cannot be ignored, even though you came into the thread acting like after you easily trashed one noob, it would be a non-factor.

You still have not addressed why you simultaneously said this strat is not a big deal but then say that the US needs more inf.  You still have not shown (forget showing for now, let’s try even a SUGGESTION from the expert for starters), how the Allies can hope to win when against it’s already been shown that Japan can not reasonably be stopped from taking the US by J5 with the IJN  and a good chunk of air still very much intact. And you still haven’t admitted that if this strat isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, you have no reason to say that it is not very, very close to being that good.

You are making it sound like the USA crush is irrelevant because Japan can win anyways by going mainland. Wha-?

[gamerman01]

Save your typin’ fingers.  I’m not reading another word you write, including that last one, or most of the previous one.

I guess it’s therapeutic for you to rant, though.  It’s all you do.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Gamerman01:

Save your typin’ fingers. Â I’m not reading another word you write, including that last one, or most of the previous one.

I guess it’s therapeutic for you to rant, though. Â It’s all you do.

Cool. I only put up with your condescension and arrogance this long because I thought you might have a counter, but now that you have shown nothing that could actually stop this strategy about which you are so jealous of Sword for starting, and even though you talked big, your potential to be helpful to fixing this strat (that according to the evidence definitely breaks the game) in any meaningful way is pretty much at zero.

Hopefully someone out there with the talent and/or A&A intuition exists that can come up with something that can stop the optimal USA crush in Pac 2e AND Japan’s responses to the attempts to stop it. I have a feeling that since it was a player in his first game on the map who started this, if it is going to be solved, it will be similarly be by someone who isn’t stuck in complacency that a self-assigned title of “expert” might bring.

It would also help if the person who was trying to find a counter was more interested in actually making the game balanced than in trying to “trash” some “noobs” who dared to bring up an important balance issue before he, the “expert” did.

If anyone would like a game, PM me to set up a time. There are a few examples already posted, but seeing it in action is sometimes more helpful. Just give a little respect and you’ll get plenty more. Please read what has already been written, you will probably learn something and I can guarantee that with a little investigation you will realize that a USA defense has it tougher than it would look just by looking at the starting setup. The time spent reading can actually save time, since it might help you avoid some mistakes that would mean wasted games.

I think it’s safe to say that regardless of Pac 2e’s problems when Japan goes mainland, all the evidence we have points to there being an at the very least equal (probably greater) problem when Japan goes after the USA. The evidence is very strong for the 14 move showing the game to be quite broken. Addressing balance definitely needs to take the USA crush into account, whereas before Sword opened the door for this strat in 2e, if there were any balance concerns voiced, they were about the traditional strat. Neither the traditional nor the crush should be ignored during the attempts to fix this game, and the chances of it not needing a fix have declined much recently.

Whether or Japan’s traditional moves bring too easy a victory doesn’t change the fact that the evidence so far clearly shows an attack on the USA brings too easy a victory. Regardless of whether or not it was an issue in OOB, and regardless of whether or not it was discovered during OOB, it is almost assuredly a MAJOR issue in 2e right now. The whole situation is  “darned if I do, darned if I don’t,”  for the Allies, but perhaps there is still hope for a reliable counter.

[Zhukov44]

Ok here’s me messing around with J1 and Allies1.  This opening at least blocks Hawaii and gives poor odds on Aleutians.

I’m messing around with a Samoa airbase, possibly followed by a Samoa naval base.  Krieghund mentioned this idea and its probably been discussed but the thread is 9 pages long lol.  I’m dunno whether it’s more important for anzac to seize a money island or get 2 inf out to Samoa.

I’m iffy on sacrificing the 3 inf aa to prevent the J2 Aleutian airbase.  But that potential airbase is definitely an issue so in this game Allies are defending it.

Feel free to follow up with a Japanese response!

anotherpacifictestgame.tsvg

[Zhukov44]

Here’s an improved version, less errors on both sides (hopefully).

anotherpacifictestgame2.tsvg

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Yeah I think check back around page 2 for Krieghund’s samoa idea. I believe it was only an Airbase, not a naval. Downloading the files now.

[Eqqman]

@Zhukov44:

Ok here’s me messing around with J1 and Allies1.  This opening at least blocks Hawaii and gives poor odds on Aleutians.

I’m messing around with a Samoa airbase, possibly followed by a Samoa naval base.  Krieghund mentioned this idea and its probably been discussed but the thread is 9 pages long lol.  I’m dunno whether it’s more important for anzac to seize a money island or get 2 inf out to Samoa.

I’m iffy on sacrificing the 3 inf aa to prevent the J2 Aleutian airbase.  But that potential airbase is definitely an issue so in this game Allies are defending it.

Feel free to follow up with a Japanese response!

I’m not sure the Naval Base is worth it, mainly for the reasons you stated.  But the Air Base seems like a must, especially if you think you will delay Japan long enough for the UK air to make use of it.  If the UK air don’t head for Samoa, then you’re basically spending 15 IPC to get 1 more 10 IPC ANZAC fighter over to San Francisco.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Not sure if you wanted comments on the first one, but it looks like by going North Japan can get to aleutians.

On to the second game.

I like the naval split as Japan. Keep in mind this USA move does not block Hawaii, though. 14-13-26. and it’s yours.
Aggressive in china, but one thing to remember is that if you are going for the J5 attack on USA, you will need a lot of the mainland troops to fill your trns. I’m not saying that isn’t possible with your moves; not every transport needs to head to USA once it is built, J3 your trns in 6 can move to 19, pick up a few guys, and back to Japan, ready to land Canada J4. It’s just something to be cautious of; IMO you don’t want to have to build any land units on Japan if you can help it until the turn you attack USA (and only if Allies are threatening Japan).

For about a week I have been moving the ANZAC CA to 27, but with your naval split, that might not be such a good idea anymore.

I don’t think you need to spend the money on the Samoa airbase yet; UK goes before ANZAC so it can be there when it is really needed.

I would also recommend not spending the money on artillery for Japan rd 1; this prevents you from getting the 6th trn rd 2.