@argothair yes that indeed is an issue. That is why i stop doing taranto but this form of Gibastion. This way i save the fleet and carrier. So UK 2 i move them (UK fighters from the Med and London who are now in algeria) to Egypte and there on to Moscow. Togethee with the Anzac fighters this gives Russia a bit of breathing space.
The factory in Egypte buys subs and a fighter turn two and from turn 3 on fighters abd Land units .
It is not the perfect plan but wirh a US going 75% KJF you can’t invade Europe direct.
Aggressive UK Pacific Strategies
-
Hello Axis and Allies Global 1940 Community,
I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version, and have moved through the different versions to the 1940 second edition global for the last 2 years.
I am curious to hear about some aggressive UK Pacific strategies. I currently have been playing with a Europe attacks Taranto, stabilizes Africa, builds in Persia and South Africa strategy, while maintaining a defense in Calcutta with my Pacific power. In this strategy, UK Pacific essentially tries to move its remaining Indian ocean fleet out of reach from the Japs after a J1, builds infantry, and essentially just holds on for dear life (for the first 5/6 rounds at least).
I want to try something more aggressive. I have been contemplating using the transport in the Ceylon sea zone to either drop 2 infantry in Sumatra (and return to the protected waters in the Ceylon seazone), or 1 in Sumatra, 1 in Java round 1 (which most likely a sacrifice of the transport). And build an aircraft carrier and land Burma and India fighter on it in the non combat. I play as Japan 50% of the time, and any of the Axis 75% of the time, and taking the money islands is essential… and even a single infantry defense on a few of the islands makes the whole ordeal a much more difficult endeavor.
The goal would be to set up for a round 2 where I purchase infantry for defense, land my 2 fighters back in India for defense, however, immediately start using my navy based around the aircraft carrier to set up a perimeter in the money islands. I would in turn have the Anzac land 2 of its fighters on the British aircraft carrier, and if its destroyer is still alive, have it join the armada as well.
Any thoughts on this strategy? Any examples of similar moves and their outcomes? And any additional ideas would be appreciated.
-
I could be wrong but I think the only way UK can be aggressive early in the game against Japan is if they do it on the land. If you try to go up against their navy you will lose it all quickly and end up with nothing on Calcutta because you bought expensive ships. You could pull your boats out of the Med and use them but then you’re leaving Italy with a chance to contest Africa and the Middle East instead of knocking them out of the water in the first 2 turns.
This strategy works very well for me. It allows me to support the UK Pacific forces and keep control of the Med and Africa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4vpY_DGQJY -
Definitely step on Sumatra. Sometimes if there’s no J1 DOW I might position the US DD as a blocker on SZ37. You should also buy a fighter UK1 to stop SBR for a while if you’re playing OOB SBR rules.
You can’t land on Java and Sumatra as UK though. Once a transport unloads, it can’t move or unload to another territory.
-
Watched your strategy. You have some interesting ideas. With a J1 it may well be worthwhile to step on Persia instead of Sumatra with the SZ39 TT.
I’m wondering if the 3 transport shuck is overkill though? For the 15IPC cost of the naval base you could put an IC on Iraq. You could put the naval base on West India if you want to support Calcutta although Calcutta has to pay for that.
You don’t activate Brazil as UK with the Atlantic TT from SZ109? Does getting to SA two turns earlier help that much?
-
Unless there’s a real reason to do otherwise, Java should be left for ANZAC. It’s the only money island within one turn of Sydney.
-
I think you have to see whether its J1 or later, there is a fine art to making India look intimidating and picking off japans ground forces vs. being ready to abandon the position altogether at a crucial moment. When you do Per/Iraq MiC+India, the point can sometimes be to save Russia, not India. If japan wants india, its going to happen–-the question is how much do you force them to concentrate on it and lose units/position vis a vis America in the process
In G42, a lot of our guys are building the UK1 Persia and putting beefy $$ there so that there are like 7-10 fighters on india by UK3-4 and then Japan struggles to take it at all with less air and less navy
But in G40, most of the time your income gets torn to shreds and you are on the defense (if Japan is all over you),
OR if Japan lets you rage, then you are setting up to intervene in China/FIC by staging into Burma with the stax
-
I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version.
The 1984 MB version of Axis and Allies isn’t anymore the original version of Axis and Allies than George Washington was the first President of the United States, but most people believe both to be true, so I guess we’ll give you a pass! :wink:
-
I am playing a 6 man game this weekend, playing as the UK and Anzac, and have had 2 weeks to discuss strategy with my fellow Allies. Depending on whether it looks like the Germans might go for a Sealion strategy, and as well depending on how far south the Japanese navy goes (with a 95% chance of a well executed J1), I am going to buy the aircraft carrier in Calcutta and attempt to play through my strategy that started this thread.
I’ll update the message board with the results.
With all of my experience playing as the Japs, and playing a very similar strategy to the J1 depicted by Young Grasshopper, I have found that the Japanese navy in all its might, is not replaceable unless they have managed to expand successfully into the money islands, and at least onto the doorstep of India by around round 3/4. In the early rounds it is all about building transports, minor industrial complexes, and ground units in Asia. The Americans on the other hand, can out-build the Japs, and sustain that growth until the Japs have reached the goals above.
The Japs must expand to that $60-$70 IPC income before they can start hammering out battleships and aircraft carriers. Therefore if the British and Anzac fleets cause a prolonged battle over the money islands on turn 2/3, the Japs will have to either bring their entire fleet down to take care of the threat, and ensure they get the money islands, or they will have to guard against the entire round 2/3 American fleet (which becomes scary quickly).
Prolonged battle for money islands in early rounds, split navy, decimated main fleet without money islands all equal eventual defeat for the Japs…
The aircraft carrier with 2 ANZAC fighters, plus Ceylon destroyer and cruiser, and Anzac destroyer and cruiser in the sea of Java (S42), or at the port of Singapore (S37) at the end of round 2, is going to give the Japs more of a fight than they can handle. It is going to allow the Americans to Smash the ��� navy early, give the Allies naval dominance, and result in an early halt to the Japanese expansion in the Pacific, and inevitably
their eventual total destruction.… That is the goal at least.
Cheers!
-
America can indeed grow that fast, and the primary reason is the J1. J1 has many advantages, but the downside is that America’s power vs SZ 6 is not in Japan’s favor, at least until some fleets straggle back home and you build some new stuff to supplement it.
I think the objection is that you’re trying your UK strategy on the water. Japan is going to have 10+ planes that can strike Burma, India, etc, so they can also probably blow up/ward off your navy. You could really save a bunch of sea junk from Taranto and gather it all up there, but IMO its actually easier for japan to kill that navy than kill a huge stack of turtle troops supported by planes (esp. b/c were talking J1 and you lost your battleship). No matter what, were not talking about a UK sea force that can step to Japan unless japan is off on some other adventure on the other side of the pacific.
In our games, it has become popular to abandon india, since it is a lost cause, and then attempt to retake it, or at least try to save something of those assets rather than just fortifying up and waiting to die.
once you lose that fleet, that’s where you’ll be at, japan takes Africa too.
"2 ANZAC fighters, plus Ceylon destroyer and cruiser, and Anzac destroyer and cruiser in the sea of Java (S42), or at the port of Singapore (S37) at the end of round 2, is going to give the Japs more of a fight than they can handle. "
Only if they J1 and stretch themselves all over the place. If they wait, the entire fleet/air fleet marshals up, and they can easily kill all that stuff.
-
I agree with taamvan. I have one thing to add. If you do a max 3 fighter Taranto but keep the CV out, there is a good possibility of a scramble. You can then send the CV east on the NCM.
Buying a CV virtually assures SBR on Calcutta J2. You might only produce two more inf the whole game out of Calcutta. I strongly advise you reconsider this buy.
I think you should consider house ruling SBR fighters to be A2 D2 as in Balanced Mod.
I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version.
The 1984 MB version of Axis and Allies isn’t anymore the original version of Axis and Allies than George Washington was the first President of the United States, but most people believe both to be true, so I guess we’ll give you a pass! :wink:
Really! What was first?
-
Watched your strategy. You have some interesting ideas. With a J1 it may well be worthwhile to step on Persia instead of Sumatra with the SZ39 TT.
I’m wondering if the 3 transport shuck is overkill though? For the 15IPC cost of the naval base you could put an IC on Iraq. You could put the naval base on West India if you want to support Calcutta although Calcutta has to pay for that.
You don’t activate Brazil as UK with the Atlantic TT from SZ109? Does getting to SA two turns earlier help that much?
Good questions simon. Rather than highjack this thread I’ll start another one to answer that and lay out my UK strategy.
-
I want to try something more aggressive. I have been contemplating using the transport in the Ceylon sea zone to either drop 2 infantry in Sumatra (and return to the protected waters in the Ceylon seazone), or 1 in Sumatra, 1 in Java round 1 (which most likely a sacrifice of the transport).
hi, just noticed this one.
Are you planning on using one transport to take two islands in a single round? that is not allowed in the rules. The transport has to stop its move once it unloads. :)
-
In my experience it’s worth going to war with Japan in the Pacific on UK1 IF you will set Japan’s ability to take the money islands back by at least an entire turn. That is typically the case when Japan’s southerly transports are only lightly guarded.
If this is true, then you gain ground by going to war early because Japan is in no position to take Burma until J3 and India is collecting it’s NO for at least one full turn, China holds onto Yunnan for an entire extra turn (another 6 IPCs for the Allies), and ANZAC is collecting it’s NO for at least three turns.
In short, this is really only good when Japan screws up on J1.
It gets even better if Japan really screws up and doesn’t even build transports J1.
If Japan goes to war on J1 or J2, you must be aggressive with the China, UK, and ANZAC. You have to take and retake money islands with ANZAC and the US, and do whatever it takes with China and the UK to drain Japan’s ground troops on the mainland and kill planes. Doing so creates a situation in which Japan finds it extremely difficult to stabilize its income and also defend itself against a constantly growing US threat. If you just lay back and turtle up against J1 and J2, Japan has already beaten you.
Marsh
-
You often have the opportunity to try to hold Yunnan on turn 2/3 with China recapturing the territory, UK moving infantry in if Japan does a normal J2 DoW, and then Russia sending in a few fast movers + fighters on R3. If you can hold that pivotal territory for one round, you might be able to hold it for the rest of the game as China builds another 4 or 5 infantry a round and UK Pacific rushes mechs to support.
Japan losing hold of Yunnan early in the game usually means a loss for the Axis.
-
SH: I agree that losing the money islands for a few rounds is devastating for Japan unless the Allies are spending massive amounts to hold them. Usually they are throwing away a two or three destroyers a round to ship block, or building large stacks of fighters to hold the island. Either way getting and keeping a money island for the Allies in the early game often is not a massive economic net gain. Obviously if you can get one and keep it against a novice opponent, you are going to do well as Allies.
-
UK should almost never declare unprovoked war. This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.
Apologies if that is not what you meant
-
UK should almost never declare unprovoked war. This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.
Apologies if that is not what you meant
I disagree.
I do a DOW on Japan w. Anzac everytime when Japan has empty TT’S on Hainan and me having my UK Pac. DD parked in Hainan as well.
So i get at least one time the NO in the early game for Malaysia and Kwan.
Also the Money Islands are secured one full turn. -
AeV
Thanks for reminding me about that exploit.
-
UK should almost never declare unprovoked war. This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.
Apologies if that is not what you meant
UK1 DOW is bold but times I’ve had it done against me it hasn’t been as bad as I expected. Normally with a USSR assists against Japan strategy. With the correct support it can be a strong move.
UK2 DOW represents a net gain of normally 15IPC OOB against the Axis. I think it’s the same in BM3. There are reasons not to do it but money isn’t the reason. The major reason to keep peace UK2 is to encourage a J3 DOW and release the USA in the Atlantic.
-
Finaly someone that agrees :D
Hey Shadow, let’s do an online game (league or non-league, I don’t care) after I get back from vacay next week. it’ll be interesting playing against someone who has similar ideas.
Marsh
Suggested Topics
