Best Feeling in Round 1

I do agree that beginners should stick to the London factory.  It does require skill pulling off the india IC.  But It just depends on how you and your allies play the game.  If each of you are gonna do your own thing, the game will certainly be over quicker than usual.  Thats the key…… Teamwork and persistance.  Control the game by limiting the enemy of options.  Do this and you’ll win no matter who you are.

the thing i like about tripleA is that i have a history in a saved game file.  after entering all the moves (and editing), i can go back R1, step through each move and purchase and study the position.  once i see the clever moves in round 4-5, i can go back and see how they were setup.

i pretty much have to do it this way since many of the allies moves aren’t obvious at first glance.  it takes a few turns of the allies coordinating together (for me) to see why things were done several turns ago and why certain things were not done.

can abattlemap do that for me?  or will i just have to use my memory?

I move the TRN in SZ 40 with the two troops to India where if the timing is right I build an IC.

As far a s Russian troops I mass all the troops from SFE (2 INF) and Buryat (2 INF) in Yakut (2 INF for a total of 6 INF. Maybe move a tank from Moscow. It works but be advised it’s a temporary solution. It will only work a an effective barrier until Japan has a bigger force next to it.

It’s important to hold China as long as you can. The reason for this is you want Japan to have a multi front with your territories. If you hold China they will have to defend and hold French Indo-China, Kwengt…, and Manchuria, as apposed to you holding up in Sinkiang and Japan only having to defend China.

That’s what I do as far as Japan goes. Axis countries have a lot of assets and a smaller economy base. For them to have any hope of wining is to match or exceed the income of their allied rivals. In order for you to prevent that you need to contain them in a timely manner.

-LT04

@Sankt:

Yes, in that respect we will have to agree to disagree. But I think that I feel that in “the average situation” the axis are favored, while you think the allies have the advantage.

Exactly how I see it as well.

There is no doubt that if you can sail the atlantic fleet through the suez the allies are very strong. My experience is that Japan will contest africa for most of the game by staging in sz34.

Sorry I don’t have a map available at the moment.  (don’t have TripleA on my computer at work, and I don’t have a board at work either.)  But if sea zone 34 is near Africa, then Japan still must contend with America building a naval fleet at the Pacific.  If Japan stays near Africa, just one transport, a carrier, and two fighters can really mess with the South Pacific.  Of course, if Japan does NOT stay near Africa, Japan has to spend time sailing west, during which time America can reinforce its navy, and also control the Suez, to pass into the Indian Ocean.  My experience is that Japan in Africa is pretty good, until Berlin falls.

The suez should be closed if not controlled by Japan, any allied med fleet should never be let through. But even that is a very defensive assumption, don’t you think Caucasus usually falls and is controlled by Japan before Moscow falls? That means Japan is building fleet in sz16 before the allied fleets can even move out of sz5. (Assuming Berlin falls by using units shipped from London.) Any us-algeria shuck will be too weak to enter the med alone, even with 5-6 trns for fodder. Any ships in sz14 will be attacked by Japan’s fleet supported by the fighters surviving the Moscow strike.

It’s clear that you and your opponents have quite a different style of play than I and my typical opponents.  In the games I play, Caucasus usually falls to the Germans, while the Japanese attempt to bulk up at Novosibirsk (or one of the other eastern territories adjacent to Russia).  The Japanese will often fly fighters in to reinforce German-held Caucasus in my experience, but having Caucasus USUALLY fall AND being controlled by Japan is something I’ll typically only see in a game in which the UK build an industrial complex in India, and in which I took India early with Japan.  As for entering the med, the typical MINIMUM I typically have will be 11 transports (6 US, 5 UK), UK battleship (from London), US carrier (built in Eastern US), and extremely likely US battleship and US destroyer from Pacific/Panama.  That’s 11 trns 1 destroyer 1 carrier 2 fighters 2 battleships.  There will typically be a few Allied fighters and bombers around as well.  Because the fleet is multinational, it is poorly suited to attack, but the fleet can base in the sea zone adjacent to Anglo-Egypt and Trans-Jordan quite well, because Japan will probably have a hell of a time attacking it.  (Although Japan CAN build naval reinforcements with an industrial complex at India, and WIN a fleet battle, the Americans should also be applying pressure at the Pacific after Germany falls.

Since we can’t agree on any “standard variables” we can argue this back and forth. My point is simply that the axis have some tactical advantages that will pay off more than an ipc advantage. We can probably agree that w.russia is a strategically much more potent territory than e.eur(or similar) in the early front between russia/germany. And similarly africa is “made up” in such a way that it favors Japan. The high ipc territories are along the eastern coast, making it very easy for Japan to take/trade. The BBs will pose a substantial threat to the allied movements. Egypt is a choke point, while the allies can only hit Egypt with troops from libya Japan can hit Egypt with troops from fic/india/t-j/persia/iea. For the allies to reach s.afr, congo etc their supply lines are that much longer.

I think probably one of the key differences is that in your scenario, Caucasus is controlled by Japan, and in my scenario, the Allies control the Caucasus.  Further, in your scenario, the Allies do not control a fat Atlantic fleet, while in my scenario, the Allies have quite a few ships.  I think that if Japan DID control Moscow, and DID have a solid grip on the Caucasus, and DID have its fleet already in the Mediterranean, and DID have lots of tanks in Moscow, while the Allies had really minimal forces in Berlin and throughout Europe, then the Axis WOULD have the advantage.

Empty territories just get blitzed into and out of by Russia for free cash.

The idea here is to stack the territories where they have to either attack with significant resoures or yield them permanently.

sure, I’d play ya IRL.  But I’m in NYC and you’re around Chicago, I think, yes?

OH wellz, what can ya do?

We have strayed into House Rules.  Further discussion along those lines needs to be moved to the House Rules area.

“Che is a fool’s hero.  Qutoing him with admiration demonstrates ignorance, moral confusion, or both.”

I fully agree with that statement! excellent sig BTW.