HOW TO PLAY AS THE ALLIES PROPERLY

@Vance:

I prefer the term “experimental”  :-P

1. I hardly look at the names for players I’ve played against before . . . I’ve come to recognize several avatars. You however have switched your picture at least twice today and it’s confusing!

2. Maybe you need to go back to the drawing board for some of your moves.  :wink:

@Gargantua:

ANZAC  Build ground units, Build Ground units, Build Ground units,  until there’s no point in building more ground units.  then build fighters. or subs later.  Anzac’s primary job, is to turn into FORTRESS ANZAC,  If the Japanese can’t take the island,  suddenly their only path to victory, is the capture of hawaii.  If you are doing VERY well economically, build a factory in queensland, so you can build MORE ground units.

Crazy Garg. First you want to turn prussia into a naval power and now you’re advocating a land power aussie. So what exactly is Japan doing if the aussies have so much cash that they can afford to build a spare IC? This likely either means US has a fleet that’s protecting the cash islands OR Japan is concentrating mostly on China/USSR and haven’t really ventured south much. I just don’t see many situations where anzac is getting that much income and where they are under threat of a naval invasion by Japan. Yes, they need a couple of ground pounders just in case, but their main shield will typically be the USN sitting in sz54 or whatever it is.

16+ ipcs for me usually means fighter + 2inf. That’s not a bad build if you’re facing an invasion. Especially if you’ve been doing it for some time. If the USN can’t effectively screen australia, then I love to land any carrier fighters I have and sail the USN away to safety to load up some more fighters. You can get 10+ fighters defending that capital fairly easy. That plus some fodder units means that only a very serious effort will take the capital, and something like that will be seen turns away and prepped for. It’s much much easier to get US help against a hostile takeover then it is to get help in India.

Usually it doesn’t come to that though and personally I fall into build navy/air with australia in most cases. Anzac fighters are so nice to fly into a recently captured AB or onto empty US carriers. Not only do they help keep the USN afloat, but they can mimick the Doolittle raid. Nothing beats killing some unguarded/lighty defended trans by moving the host US cv 2-3 spaces and then flying from there. The aussie navy will never contend with the USN or IJN in size/strength. But that’s not what they’re there for. Anzac dds make great blockers after the USN’s made it’s move. Which means the USN can keep more of it’s strength together and not fritter itself away as blockers. And lastly anzac units make great cannon fodder pieces whenever the bigger navies clash.

90+% of the time the allies must contend with the IJN on the high seas. So much of Japan’s income is easily accessible by sea, they have to have a navy in order to win the game. Once their main naval strength is gone they’re toast. It might take some turns, but it’ll happen. Most axis players recognize this and will try to keep at least near parity with the allied fleet in order to protect it’s cash flow. By automatically building infantry you take away a HUGE asset and make make Japan’s life that much easier. Force the IJN into building more navy. Get them into an arms race on the seas and they won’t have as much to deal with India/China. Keep those two around and kicking for some time and Japan WILL lose the game.

well what is the current allied strategy? convoy 97, fly stuff into russia, exploit russian NO off of afrrica, stop japan from winning.

It is okay to lose russia, as long as no further investment is required of the USA for the pacific, because atlantic presence becomes required at that point to prevent london or egypt vc win.

Check Italy, give Japan *#^^, Kill Germany. Keep Russia alive at all cost. As long as Russia lives the Axis can’t win. (figuratively speaking)

Anzac has the ability to take Java, take Dutch New Guinea, inflate the economy large enough to build a Carrier, add a fighter or two when possible, and then sprinkle in a sub or destroyer as possible.

I’m a huge believer in one major force, rather than a defensive multinational force, so I use Anzac to kill Japanese screens, transports, and lone subs when possible. Keeping the US force as large as possible is the goal.

I’ve found that 4 US Carriers in the Pacific, an Anzac Carrier, and the Brit Battleship forms a nucleus of an Allied navy that can take and hold SZs almost at will.

Yavid is funny.

Hey…

Good topic for me as I am playing USA ( orig global40 rules ). So my question is, how to get Tokyo and secure it?

( In in reverse to be open ), how does Japan get Western USA, leading onto Washington?

I think the Pacific theatre is a cat and mouse game for both USA and Japan. With the wide open Pacific sea with no IDC on any islands. Tokyo is heavily protected, same with San Fran the momant both see’s an attack ( incl Alaska, BC, Mexico ).

Playing either side PROPERLY is fine, but if bad dice rolls, then you’re buggerd.

Cheers, BH

What? It works everytime if done right.

you basically just said, the allies strategy is to win everywhere, just win. lol. As long as the allies are bi winning they should win!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QS0q3mGPGg

So and it works everytime. Here I’ll give a more detailed version of the Basics, Keep Russia alive at all cost if this mine moving in an Strong American of ground troops than so be it. Remember 2 inf. a turn from America is worth almost as much as the Lead-Lease NO. And it’s not hard to make 2 a turn into 4 a turn. Axis can not win without taking out Russia it was true in Classic and it’s been turn ever since.

I agree. 25 years ago my Axis plan was always to eliminate Russia using Japanese help from the East. Once Russia  goes the Axis are undoubtably more than half way there. Buying Inf as the Russians and buying time is your best bet. The introduction of Italy, however, has changed things. Taking the war to the Med and knocking out Italy helps the allies tremendously and as the Axis I am always worried about my weaker Southern neighbour.

@Yavid:

Axis can not win without taking out Russia it was true in Classic and it’s been turn ever since.

Uhhhhh multiple victory conditions?

any reactions for the allies on the india crush? What to do when India is captured by the japanese? I don’t really know how to recover from that because the Japanese are making more a turn then the US… So even if the US spends all his money on the pacific side, they still have less then the Japanese…

@Rhey:

any reactions for the allies on the india crush? What to do when India is captured by the japanese? I don’t really know how to recover from that because the Japanese are making more a turn then the US… So even if the US spends all his money on the pacific side, they still have less then the Japanese…

India crush generally refers to a dedicated Japanese assault on india starting turn one. Yes they may get a couple islands along the way, but the whole goal is to remove India in the first couple of turns. Generally speaking, the allies have a hard time stopping this crush. Best way to defeat the crush is to buy all ground, fly air in from the anzacs turn one via sumatra/java, and pray. Japan should not be making enough that they have more ipcs then US at that point in the game.

If you’re talking a later game sack of India, then the best course of action at that point would probably be to defend Hawaii and aussie cap as best you can and hope you get a win in Europe. A Lack of India IC makes it that much harder to wall off the middle east if Russia falls though. Remember, you don’t have to win on the pacific side, you just have to ensure that Japan doesn’t win.

You should have some early position advantage right after India’s fall IF they had to move the bulk of their air/navy towards india for the capture. Take advantage of this by staging a forward defense somewhere like the Carolines and hold there as long as you safely can, but be ready to fall back if needed. Break Japan’s island bonus if you can and try to deny them that money. You’ll be much better at D then attacking since you’ll have a multi national fleet and a lot of pieces have better D then attack, so fort up somewhere where Japan has to come at you and use that to your advantage.

Keep a careful eye on where his Japanese air is though and don’t get stand and fight unless you’ve got good odds. Don’t sacrifice the bulk of your fleet for little/no gain since at this point it’ll be harder for you to make good your losses. And build some navy in the pac even if the majority of your money is being spent on the atlantic. You’ll need to replace blockers at the very least and adding some more fodder to your fleet’s always great as well.

I got a couple pacific victories against full pacific usa, most axis wins come in europe though… the under 10 rounds wins come in the pacific. europe is a bit later, because it does not end when russia falls. Stopping a pacific win while having an atlantic fleet is easier said then done.

I am a Japan guy so maybe I am biased, but as allies against good japan players, it is rough. ideally usa wants to get air units into russia. some bombers and fighters. convoying 97 with usa/uk is easier than dropping men on normandy while constantly dealing with italy adding naval pieces… it does allow for more air units to get into russia as well. that is the nice thing about the egypt minor.

Things I’ve learned:

Taranto is better than Tobruk attack.
Russia should build inf, art and mech- maybe add a tac.
18inf, 2AA should go towards Moscow, better than Korea.
India will fall in round 4-6, consider India falls past round 4 a blessing, fall back or stand and fight.
ANZAC should stack with ground units, watch the Jap TT builds- if low you can build navy otherwise stack.
Hawaii should also be stacked.
Game is won in the MidEast, Cairo, Med region every game.
IC on Egypt is sweet- stack it baby.  Fly those planes there.

Things I wanna try:

US bomber campaign- there are a couple of approaches to this depending on how Axis opens.

@questioneer:

Things I’ve learned:
18inf, 2AA should go towards Moscow, better than Korea.

Finally, you came to reason !  :wink:

Ok i’m realizing that my hard line opinion that the war is won and lost in Russia is alittle outdated now. For Germany the war is won and lost in Russia. Now Japan has choices to be made.

@Axisplaya:

@questioneer:

Things I’ve learned:
18inf, 2AA should go towards Moscow, better than Korea.

Finally, you came to reason !  :wink:

yeah, had to test it out a few times.  US really doesn’t have the time to advance that far.  I mean they can take Korea and build an IC but you will neglect other needs on the board.  I tried the fighter shuck too, again I can get 12 planes there but then you weaken your ACs and Pac fleets.

Play is not exausted for the 18inf to Korea- it is playable- for example- in a Sealion it will be somewhat effective- Russia can afford to do this, US however then can’t.

I think the strategy is open to a few tweeks, but in the long-run they just don’t seem to payoff as well as having the ground units in Moscow for defense or counterattack.

What is seems common for US is to invest a good portion of their income in the Pacific then rd3 on mostly Europe.  Stack and protect Hawaii and ANZAC and advance on the Euro side.  Tricky to do b/c they are logistically and economically stretched to the max.

@questioneer:

@Axisplaya:

@questioneer:

Things I’ve learned:
18inf, 2AA should go towards Moscow, better than Korea.

Finally, you came to reason !�  :wink:

yeah, had to test it out a few times.  US really doesn’t have the time to advance that far.  I mean they can take Korea and build an IC but you will neglect other needs on the board.  I tried the fighter shuck too, again I can get 12 planes there but then you weaken your ACs and Pac fleets.

Play is not exausted for the 18inf to Korea- it is playable- for example- in a Sealion it will be somewhat effective- Russia can afford to do this, US however then can’t.

I think the strategy is open to a few tweeks, but in the long-run they just don’t seem to payoff as well as having the ground units in Moscow for defense or counterattack.

What is seems common for US is to invest a good portion of their income in the Pacific then rd3 on mostly Europe.  Stack and protect Hawaii and ANZAC and advance on the Euro side.  Tricky to do b/c they are logistically and economically stretched to the max.

It’s worth keeping them there IMO. I like to send 6 inf back to either reinforce moscow, but more often hook around Mongolia and help out the Chinese. The others I keep somewhere in between Bury/Sak/Amur depending on Japanese threats to that stack. If I see an opportunity I’ll take Korea and/or Manchuria, either in force or with a stray dude. Taking Korea in force or reinforcing a US take allows you to land a buttload of planes there. Bombers from the west coast can land there as well. Suddenly anything Japan builds in sz6 is under threat from a massive air strike. Japan will probably do one of four things.
A) Keep sz6 stacked to protect builds; potentially allowing the allies better freedom of movement down south where the money is
B) Will build naval on a minor elsewhere; meaning those minors aren’t building ground pounders and that means less pressure on China/India
C) No naval builds or perhaps just subs; meaning Japan’s fleet will be short blockers and weak to air attack without dd fodder.
D) Japan will build up an invasion force/shift ground units in asia north to remove that threat; more units gearing towards Korea means fewer that India/China have to face and the longer they’ll be around.

You can always fly your air out of the danger zone if you don’t like the odds or aren’t ready to lose all that air. I know in our game I was constantly worried about sz6 and I think at one point you were positioned to fly in 10-12 air into Korea and that really would’ve changed my deployments/buys. Instead half of them continued on towards Moscow and the others refilled your empty cvs.

Anything that can relieve pressure off of India/China is a good thing in my book. It’s not something I do every game though. Sometimes I might grab Korea once and then pull back. Sometimes Japan’s positioning is so strong that he can afford to finish/neutralize both China & India and still deal with the Russians. So you have to play it by ear and be ready to fall back if the situation warrants it. The threat of that stack alone can force Japan to keep troops north just in case. And at the very least it dissuades Japan from picking off Russian terr knowing they won’t get very far without a massive troop commitment.