Additional Playing Pieces

@MarineIguana:

First of all, I want to say that USA committing any purchases to the pacific is a mistake. For the same amount of resources, the USA can always pressure Germany more than Japan. This is from my experience playing hundreds of revised games, many at a high level.

That said, assuming the US commits to the Pacific…

1. Japan should always sink the US fleet at pearl harbor. If this is done, Japan generally starts with a 1 battleship, 2 carrier, 3 fighter advantage compared to the USA that will take 5+ turns of buildup for the US to overcome.
2. The US can’t make significant advances unless the Japan fleet is destroyed. The best way to stall the USA is to place your fleet in the sea zone off the phillipines or china and deadzone all sea zone within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. Have the carriers filled with fighters AND try to have an equal number of fighters in a land territory that can reach all the sz within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. For example, 2 carriers can support 8 fighters attacking a sea zone.
3. Japan can continue pushing land units into asia, even with all US purchases going to the pacific. My typical purchases are like 6 inf and 2 fighters. With the Japan fleet off of China

From what I have seen when the allies does a KJF is that, PH really isn’t that easy. If UK commits and is lucky, PH can be very difficult. Complete UK commitment would be  UK india ftr attacking the J sub in 45 with the australia sub, and then landing on PH. The Australia TT taking 2 infs to papua, the indian TT taking 2 infs to borneo, The UK CR attacking the japanese TT in 59 and the India CW either standing in 36 or 49.  At this point, taking PH might be difficult for japan. If they do it with air only (5 ftrs + bomber) they will lose about 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs, 1 cw, and 1 sub. The good news is that they will not lose boats to a counterattack, and can use their boats to deal with the british fleet, the bad news is that they are spread out, will be in trouble on land and will take 3 ftrs in losses for only 36 US ipcs (+ 10 UK).  If they try to do a heavy PH, alot of the uk fleet survives and UK will keep borneo until J3.

I still feel it is a bad move, since you are handing africa to the axis, but japan will be in trouble.

what I prefer to do is this;
3 inf + 3 tanks on R1, hit ukraine with 2 tanks 2 planes and 3 inf, everything else on west russia, stack bury, and mover everything else west. turn 2 I prefer to buy 1 ftr, 1 art and 5 inf, this is to be able to scirmish on a front that is 3 terretories wide.

on UK1 my first priority is to retake egypt if possible,  to do this I use the bomber,  the india ftr, 2 inf from india, 1 inf from jordan, this should usually at least be enough to kill all the german units, even tho you lose all your infs (depending on defending luck turn 1)
I usually land in algeria, because germany are usually not capable of counterattacking the combined UK an us fleet, If this is not possible, gather the fleet west of UK with my new AC.
if for some reason germany has done a quite common mistake to only have 2 inf and 4 ftrs in france, I attack it, if egypt is not possible i often land in borneo and papua, while using the ftr + sun against j sub, and land the ftr on pearl.

US will usually buy AC + trs + inf/art tanks (if I buy 6 units it will be 4 inf 1 art 1 tank, and long game, more tank than art)

the overall gameplan from this point will be for US to land 8-10 units in africa each turn,  UK build 6-7 units + 1 ftr and at some point swich to landing in norway, when strong enough. USSR keep on scirmishing germany.

If I have a successful game, the US in africa will make it to persia, and be able to match the japanese there, possibly making it to cauc. I once had more than 150 units in cauc, only 50 was ussr. then the win is plain.

if japan manages to be fast enough, I will move all my us trannies to the med (8-10) and start landing the units in africa in s europe (16-20 / turn). I will lose it a few times, but germany will not be able to build more than 10 units / turn, at the same time UK will land in france each turn, and if USSR are not able to hold moscow from the japanses, the entire russian army will start walking towards berlin, doing a final suicide charge to kill german units.

I have had a more than 80% successrate with a bid of 8-10 (set in libya) with this stratigy.

on, and people seem to forget that trannies are prolly one of the best fleetunits on defence, UK/US fleet is often 1 BB 1-2 AC 2 DD and 10-12 trannies. you need a pretty good attacking force to deal with that. And that is before you add the ftrs on defence.

btw, I also 400 games in an insane amount, with some intelligent research, and planning, you should be able to figure it out in much less, especially playing online.

Or give all 5 nations 2 NA’s each, but let the Axis have ONE random technology, and once selected the option to determine which nation (Japan or Germany) would receive that technology.

That would pretty much even out the NA issue.

I was thinking about this the other day and I thought it would be pretty cool just to make the game look nicer.  With AAM: WaS coming out next year, every piece in AAR could be replaced with minis on a board.  Theyll look way better than the regular pieces.  Of course some of the rare miniatures are a bit too large for the regular sized boardgame, but you can fix this problem by making a bigger board at Staples or something.  The only major problem I see is planes, since the War at Sea planes are going to be very small and the AAM planes are fairly large.  Anyways, what do you guys think about it?

Thanks!

Russia - Build Infantry - Defend until relieved

I have to agree with Duke that Germany is the hardest to play :D

I wonder how this poll would go if redone today….

Sounds like a new poll idea!