Y'all need to add some relevant posts for AAP

Now that I have AAP40 and AAE40, I want to spread the joy of Axis and Allies with my brother and his friends.  The problem is that I have all my pieces from several games in a set of Plano boxes (cheap tackle boxes).  To reconstitute the original AAP game, how many pieces of each player do I need to send?

This is what I guessed …

Japanese
16 inf, 8 artillery, 8 tanks, 12 zeros, 6 bombers
6 CV, 6 BB, 10 DD, 8 SS, 10 Trn

United States
16 inf, 12 marines, 8 artillery, 8 tanks, 12 P-38s, 6 bombers
6 CV, 6 BB, 10 DD, 8 SS, 8 Trn

United Kingdom
16 Inf, 8 artillery, 8 tanks, 12 Spitfires, 6 bombers
6 CV, 6 BB, 8 DD, 8 SS, 8 Trn

Chinese
12 Inf

Please let me know ASAP if I really missed something.  I’d hate to give him too few but I have painted many pieces and I don’t want to give thiose away.  Thanks.

If I add cruisers to the game, I will go to a 12-sided die roll to increase the differentiation in combat abilities between destroyers, cruisers, and battleships. With respect to AA fire, the Japanese were pretty bad when it came to ship-borne AA weapons, while the US cruisers were on par with the battleships.  I allow for shore-bombardment by all ships, but only in support of an amphibious invasion.  No battleships standing off shore and clearing the area without an invasion. No aerial attacks on infantry either except in conjunction with an infantry unit, whereupon the infantry get a plus 1 on their attack roll, similar to artillery support.

As a side note, the US refitted an older British Light Cruiser with an armament similar to that of a Fletcher-class destroyer, but with less automatic weapons due to top-heavy problems.  The British rated it as an Anti-aircraft Cruiser.  Just something to think about when defending against air raids with US destroyers.

“And if you screw up just this much, you’ll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog [crap] out of Hong Kong!”

James Tolkan, “Captain Stinger” to Tom Cruise, “Maverick” in Top Gun (1986)

Effective Use of CAP

Don’t worry.  While Maverick’s captain may have threatened him with cargo plane duty, no such penalty awaits you if you make a mistake while using CAP and by the time you’ve finished this essay you should be well on your way to using CAP as one of the tools for victory in AAPacific.

Combat Air Patrol (CAP) is a special feature of AAPacific that is not present in any of the other versions of Axis & Allies.  As such, for new players of AAPacific, CAP can cause some anxiety due to uncertainty with how to properly implement CAP for maximum advantage.Â

Let me start by saying that you can very easily play an entire AAPacific game and never use CAP.  In fact, you could probably play several games and never have ocassion to use CAP.  In most cases, you won’t suffer any adverse consequences from not taking advantage fo the CAP rules, but there are circumstances where carefully planned use of CAP can help either Japan or the Allies hold an advance position on the game board that would be a dead zone without the extra fighters that can be put in the air by the use of CAP.

Basic Rules of CAP

First, let’s talk about some of the basic features of CAP.  In order to effectively use CAP, it is important to know how it works.

-  CAP is launched during the Non-Combat Movement Phase using fighters from land territories.  CAP fighters cannot have moved or attacked during the Combat Movement phase.

-  CAP cannot be launched from Aircraft Carriers.

-  CAP cannot be launched into a sea zone where the presence of enemy units would result in combat (note: submerged submarines don’t count)

-  CAP fighters prevent enemy surface vessels from passing through the sea zone that they occupy.

-  CAP fighters must land during Phase 2 of your next turn.  They can land on any land territory adjacent to or within the sea zone they are occupying or on an Aircraft Carrier in the same sea zone.  Once the fighter lands, it can move as normal.

-  Airbases do not extend the range of CAP fighters.  The can only be launched into a sea zone that is adjacent to or surrounding the territory from which they start.  For example, a fighter on Formosa cannot fly CAP in sz38.  It can only fly CAP in sz45.

Sea Zones where CAP is most effective

Now that you understand how CAP works, we can discuss where CAP can be most effective.

For Japan, CAP will be most useful in sz45 or 46 early in the game and in sz38 late in the game.

For the Allies, CAP is most effective in szs29, 32, and sometimes 28.

Use of CAP by Japan

In a VP game, by J2, Japan is usually busy capturing the last of the Pacific Islands and moving as many ground units as possible to reinforce French IndoChina.  At the same time, it is important for Japan to have a strong presence in sz28 to discourage the Allies from advancing too quickly into the Central Pacific and taking away the IPCs Japan needs to maintain 4 VPs per turn until at least J4.  This means that Japan will often have to split its forces, with most of the fighting ships needed in sz28 and most of the transports needed to ferry ground units to FIC.  While the sz28 force is usually strong enough to withstand any Allied attack, how can you protect those lonely transports in sz45 or sz46.  The answer is CAP.

On J2 (and J3) combat movement phases, make sure that you have at least one fighter on J2 and preferably two fighters on J3 in FIC that you will not use during Combat.  During J2 or J3 NCM, move all of your transports that are ferrying troops to FIC into either sz45 or sz46 and launch the fighter(s) from FIC into that sea zone.  On J2, the US can attack with, at most 1 Ftr and 2 Bmrs.  With 5 or 6 transports, 1 DD and 1 Ftr, the odds of the US killing all your transports is not good.  Likewise, on J3, with 2 ftrs in the sea zone, the US would likely use up all of its airforce killing transports and leave the Japanese fighters untouched while greatly reducing its own offensive punch.  In most cases, the US player will not take the risk.  CAP fighters have permitted you to accomplish two things at once, namely, have a strong presence in sz28 while still effectively transferring ground units to FIC without exposing your transports to excessive risk.

Later in the game, Japan will be forced back to sz38 and must hold there as long as possible to ensure that it maintains 3 and then 2 VPs for as many turns as it can.  With only 4 ACs at its disposal, a maximum of 8 fighters can defend in the sea zone without using CAP.  To hold off the Allies (and the US in particular), CAP launched from the Philippines can be a particularly effective tactic.Â

By J4 and J5, Japan is running out of targets that it can safely attack with its air force.  By this time a direct assault on the combined Allied fleet is usually not favourable to Japan.  Often, Japan is left with picking off single allied ships (usually transports or subs) that are floating around in front of the main body of the Allied fleet.  As such, there are plenty of fighters that can be held back from combat in the Philippines.  On NCM, Japan can launch these fighters into sz38 and greatly enhance the defensive power of the sz38 fleet.  I once had 5 CAP fighters in sz38 along with 8 on ACs for a total of 13 defending fighters, along with 4 ACs, 3 BBs, a few transports, a DD and a couple of subs.  The Allies couldn’t touch that fleet all because the defensive strength was enhanced with CAP fighters.

Use of CAP by Allies

The Allies can also make good use of CAP to push their fleet forward in the face of what would otherwise be overwhelming Japanese strength.  As the game starts, the US has 2 ACs and 7 fighters on the east side of the map.  The UK adds a further three fighters and no ACs.  Usually, the Midway fighter will die in the J1 assault leaving the Allies with 9 fighters and only 2 ACs.  Sometimes the UK will purchase an AC but not always.  With this relative abundance of fighters and a shortage of flattops, how are the Allies supposed to accumulate sufficient defensive strength to discourage a Japanese attack on the Allied fleet early in the game?

Essentially, there are two options.  First, the Allies can hang back and build up enough strength in ACs and Destroyers to counter the Japanese force.  Unfortunately, this is a losing strategy because all Japan needs to do to win is buy time.  If the Allies don’t press forward as soon as possible, Japan wins be default.  Second, (and not surprisingly, given the topic of this essay), the Allies can use CAP fighters.

At the end of Allies 1, if all has gone well, the US and UK will have a fleet in sz14 that includes most of the starting naval units from the east half of the board.  In addition, the Allies will have dumped at least 3 UK and probably 2 US fighters into Queensland.  This defends against a Japanese attack of Australia and positions the Allied forces for early movement into the Central Pacific.  Here’s where the CAP comes in.

If the Japanese fleet can be forced out of sz28 for fear of an attack by the US on US2, the combined Allied fleet can be moved to sz32 or sz29 and the five fighters from Queensland can be launched into that sea zone as CAP.  In conjunction with 4 US fighters on the 2 US ACs and with blocking units to prevent a direct assault by the mass of the IJN, the Allied fleet is able to push forward where it could not go if the CAP fighters were not available.

Another possible location for CAP is in sz28.  If Japan has not positioned itself to take Papua with sufficient strength on J2 (sometimes because of a failure to take Midway or New Britain), the Allies can move fighter reinforcements to Papua on Allies 1.  Combined with a 9 Sub buy on US1, the Allies can make sz28 an impregnable maritime fortress on Allies 2 by moving its entire fleet, including the 9 new US subs to sz28 and by lauching up to five CAP fighters from Papua.  This will result in a defensive force that either cannot be safely attacked by Japan or will cause so much damage to the IJN that Japan will not be able to recover for the rest of the game.

In summary, CAP is not a game breaking strategy but it can be an effective part of a player’s arsenal in AAPacific.

Saburo Sakai

Wow!  I am flattered!  Thanks for the vote of confidence on the articles.  Really, I prepared the essays hoping to get more players interested in the game, so that I would have more opponents.

I still have 1 or 2 more essays ideas to finish but have been too busy to complete it.  I’ll try to get to the last ones in the next few weeks.

SS

I still come around once in a while.  I claim some expertise for AAPacific but none at all for the other A&A games.  I have played most of them, but there are many players more able than me who you should look to for strategy tips on AAR, 2nd Edition or the other versions of the game.

SS

I have posted these essays to three message boards (Wargamer’s Club, A&A.org and Flames of Europe) and they can be used in whatever manner the owners of those boards choose provided that they are properly accredited and any alterations are properly noted.  I look at them as “scholarly” essays that are now in the public domain.  So, by all means, whatever is of use in the essays can be used as a resource in whatever manner is thought appropriate.

Thanks for the feedback on the essay.  I intend to write several more before I’m finished.

SS

Sun Tzu said:Â

Carefully compare the opposing army with your own,
so that you may know where strength is superabundant
and where it is deficient.

When a general, unable to estimate the enemy’s
strength, allows an inferior force to engage a larger one,
or hurls a weak detachment against a powerful one,
and neglects to place picked soldiers in the front rank,
the result must be rout.

In order to carry out an attack, we must have
means available.

For experienced players of AAPacific, it will soon become apparent that the Out of the Box rule permitting a Japanese victory upon reaching 22 Victory Points (VPs) unbalances the game in favour of Japan.  With the option of going for an India or Australia capture or playing to 22 VPs, Japan has too many avenues to victory for the Allies to overcome.  Therefore, as Sun Tzu says, it is necessary for the Allied general to carefully compare the strength of his army to that of Japan and acquire the means to carry out an attack.

Generally, a bid comes in one of the following four forms:

1.  VP Bid
2   IPC Unit Bid
3.  IPC Bid
4.  Inverse IPC Bid

The VP Bid

At 22 VPs, Japan has the advantage.  In a future essay, I will discuss the tactics used to achieve a VP victory but suffice it to say that with the OOB rules (even using the corrected setup), Japan can usually count on a VP track of 3-4-4-4-3-3-1 = 22 which will result in victory by J7.  A victory is quite achievable by J6 if Japan can get 4 VPs on J5.Â

A VP bid stretches out the VP track to at least J8, giving the Allies one more turn to set up an SBR base from which to rob Japan of VPs or capture territories or convoy routes taking Japan below the IPCs it needs to stay in the game.

The mechanics of a VP bid are simple.  Both players secretly record the number of VPs at which they would like to play Japan and the higher number wins.  If both players bid the same, the Japanese player is chosen at random.Â

VP bids usually range from 23 to 26.  In my view, the game is fairly balance at 24 or 25 VPs.  At 24, the game slightly favours Japan.  At 25, the game slightly favours the Allies.  However, this slight advantage can easily be overcome by the dice or superior play, so the game is essentially balanced by the VP bid.

There is, however, one problem with the VP bid.  If the Japanese player chooses to initiate a KIO attack (see previous essays), the bid has no impact on the game and Japan may have an insurmountable advantage.  The KIO attack assumes the game will be over by the end of round 4 which means that VPs will never come into play.  In some cases, a Japanese player who wants to go for a KIO attack will enter a bid of 99 or some other impossibly high number to ensure that they will play Japan.  After that, it is really up to the dice to determine the outcome of the game as the counter to the KIO attack is so difficult and dependent on a significant amount of luck.

To counteract the disadvantages inherent in the VP bid system, various IPC bid systems have been created.

The IPC Unit Bid

An IPC Unit Bid is an equivalent number of IPCs bid by the Allied player that he will be able to immediately place on the board in Allied units prior to the start of J1.  IPCs can also be saved to spend on Allies 1.  The VP target for Japan remains at 22.  The Allied player can only place units in territories already controlled by the Allies or in which the Allied player already has units.  US units cannot be placed in China.  The player who bids the lower number plays Allies.

As will be clear considering the type of bid, the combination of bid amounts and unit placement are many.  In most cases, however, the Allied player should place his new units in a way that will provide the most assistance to India.   Bids will range from 16 to 24.  Some Allied players prefer to place all of their units on land in Asia (4 Rtl in Burma is popular) while others look to enhance the naval strength of their UK forces by the addition of submarines in key locations.  The most important point to remember is to not waste your bid units by placing them where they can be easily hit by a J1 surprise attack.

The IPC Bid

This bid adds IPCs to the Allied total that can be used to purchase units on Allies 1.  The IPCs can be divided amongst all Allied nations.  The lower bid plays Allies.Â

As the units purchased with this bid cannot be placed until the end of Allies 1, bids will tend to be higher using an IPC bid only.  Bids in the 20 to 28 range would be typical, with the majority of the extra IPCs awarded to India, a few to Australia and sometimes 1 to the US.

The large purchasing power for India usually prevents the Japanese player from attempting an India Crush as India will be too strong for a J3 or J4 attack to be successful.

The Inverse IPC Bid

In an inverse IPC Bid, both players bid for a number of IPCs to be awarded to the Allied player.  The player that bids higher will play Japan and the Allied player receives IPCs equal to the Japanese player bid that can be distributed amongst the 3 Allied nations and spent on Allies 1.  The game is then played to 24 VPs for Japan.

With a 24 VP target, bids using this format tend to be in the 12 to 15 range.  This is just enough to provide India with enough defensive units to discourage a KIO attack but not so much as to unbalance the game in favour of the Allies.  This bidding method was adopted by Days of Infamy AAPacific Club after their 2005 tournament “Battle for India”.Â

IPCs tend to be allocated mostly to India with some players providing 1 to the US (to permit a 2 Sub, 4 Bmr A1 purchase) and 4 to Australia (for 3 subs).

In my view the inverse IPC bid creates the right balance between the two sides while at the same time creating many strategic options for the playout.  The bid tends to push the game in the direction of a VP victory although it does not preclude an opportunistic India or Australia capture.  What this bid system does do is generally eliminate the KIO option for the Japanese, which, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Saburo Sakai

ok, thanks fer clearing that up guys…it really helps :D