Posts made by Advosan

@eddiem4145:

Any strategy regarding the US mounting anything on Japan with ships is an automatic loser.

Of course, but a US Pacific strat is nothing like assaulting Japan itself, this is pure  madness… It is about chopping off 12 south pacific IPC from Japan (EIN+BOR+GUI) and keeping it pinned on a fleet race that it cannot win. That way the US prevents a japanese thrust to Moscow (even if Japan captures IND+PER+CHN+SIN+BUR+SFE+YAK+ENO it will still be at 30 IPC, rendering impossible to seriously threaten Moscow from the east).
And finally, a US Pacific strat is actually a way to pacify Japan, but not a way to win the game.

Even if I didn’t wipe them out and just held them off with planes, even losing an island or two, for every $1 spent, they would have to spend $2.

Actually, the US would have to spend 1.7, but victory doesn t come cheap for the Allies… Besides the US can afford this fleet race.

You really have to have a poorly played Japan for this to work.

Actually, imho you must have a poorly played US pacific for this to blow up in the Allies’ face :-)

The US navy has to be used against German operations.

And when Japan hulks up (42 IPC by J3, potentially 51 IPC by J5 if left unchallenged in the Pacific)? Can the 3 Allies combined take out G before this?

As far as an IC in Sinkiang, if you could hold it, but you can’t. Not unless the Russians give up the high IPC territiories even faster to the Germans. I suppose if Japan made some early mistakes, (hence a poorly played Japan) or got really unlucky with their roles.

If Japan really wants that IC there s no way to stop them. But japanese intentions about SIN are demonstrated by J1, before any US buys.

@Nix:

So SZ29 will be the go to place in UK1

Imho UK1 has so many things to do with tha India/Oceania fleet than to hide it.

1. Destroy the unescorted Japanese TT.
2. Counter AES.
3. Position SS to threated Japanese unescorted TT’s.
4. Invade FIC.
5. Invade BOR.
6. Reinforce the 6 R inf in BUR.
7. Invade GUI.
   8 ) Attack G Med fleet.
   9 ) Escort ANZAC to Africa via Cape Horn.
8. Escort ANZAC to Africa via southern Indian Ocean.
   It would be a good thing to keep that fleet safe in SZ29, but still UK (and the Allies in general) have to do more than sit tight and wait for mighty America to KGF so that everyone can go home happy and safe :-)

We always play Bosporus closed for all sea units. And we also play defend/escort fgt. But especially the Dardanelles rule is imperative imho.

If Japan fails or merely pulls off a J1 CHN invasion, a US1 SIN IC is a very good choise.
First of all, the China pass (CHN-SIN) is forever closed for the Japanese who will not only miss some valuable IPC but will also have to take the long road to Moscow (either IND-PER or BUR-YAK).
Russians (and even Brits) can easily reinforce SIN, making it a lost cause for Japan who can throw everything they can against that IC and still gain nothing.
And it gets even worse than this. If Japan stops building pressure against that SIN IC, USA can retake CHN and threaten the rear of the Japanese forces heading to Moscow, not to mention the results of a succesfull FIC/KWA/MAN expedition.
And finally, a SIN IC is the easiest way for the US to reinforce Russia, instead of having to cross an ocean or a desert to reach Moscow.
Even if Japan finally manages to capture that IC, a strong russian armored force can immediately counter.

Now, to the main theme of the thread, imho (and given J1 heavily assaulted CHN making it dangerous for a SIN IC to be deployed) US1 should be DD,AC,BB. If Japan has anything less than BB,AC,2 fgt in SZ52, counter there with BB, SS (submerged) 2 fgt and bmb. Land HWI fgt to BUR (if 6 R inf still exist there). I always go for US pasific strat, and the goal is to land in EIN (or BOR) by US3, thus stabbing Japan in its soft belly (south pasific) and being able to land in Africa and AES from the Red Sea side (avoiding those atlantic G SS wolfpacks).

@dustwhit:

@Advosan:

Att.
-CHN with KWN and MAN inf, ftr + JAP bmb
-SZ52 with BB CC SS AC 2 ftr
-Clear all UK surface vessels with the remaining BB AC and 2 ftr
-Unload to MAN inf and arm and land ftr+bmb to MAN, place 2TT and DD in SZ61, 2art in JAP obviously.

As R, I would be incredibly tempted to take my 6 inf in Bury and attack Man at roughly a 50/50 chance of winning, and if not, likely to destroy a fgt or bmb. I consider Bury a loss by J2 anyway, so I’d go on the offense and if I loose, I’d have a tank rdy to retake Yakut when J got in range (with an inf or 2 in Nov by that time) to reestablish the choke point. Why not send 2 fgt, bmb, Kwn, and 1 inf from FIC (particularly if B sent trans back to Egt leaving 1 inf in Ind) or only 1 from Man to Chi. A minor change, but safer for Man.

Imho, J1 CHN invasion must be massive, because the real objective is a J2 XNG invasion that cannot be delayed no matter what happens in FIC or MAN. That is why I need all that inf and airforce in CHN and that one arm in MAN. And if IND is almost empty, I would prefer to add a FIC inf to CHN assault and leave 1 inf in MAN, but I would never attack with less than 5 inf 2 fgt 1 bmb (a total 2.5 hits avg)…
The R 6 inf stationed in BUR can always try and assault MAN, especially if supported by 1-2 fgt. But what happens if that fails, what happens if J scores 4 hits and R only 2 (assisted by the 2 fgt, that is…)? Will there be a second round? Can R risk a total collapse of its eastern borders? Can R afford to be so reckless, just in order to kill a fgt or 2? Because MAN cannot be conquered with 1 bmb, 1 inf, 1 arm and 4 fgt stationed there, not even by 6 inf and 2 fgt, which is pretty much all that can possibly reach there by R2.

@dustwhit:

I’m intrigued about an IC on EC. I don’t see how that is an advantage for the UK. :?

Allow me to elaborate on this one. UK 's primary-by far- target is to press hard G on Europe. By the time UK has recreated a strong atlantic fleet they can begin assaulting Europe. The optimum assault package is a 32-cost 4 inf 4 arm, and the question is what to do with any additional IPC. Obviously, another IC is needed to divert some IPC, increase production and escalate the pressure. Three places are candidates for this “secondary” production line: AES, NOR and EC. NOR is the best choise, with land borders with Europe and 3 units per turn is the optimum spot; problem is that usually it is not safe. Second candidate, AES. Relatively safer than NOR, but with lesser building options (practically only bmb, unless you can spare a Mediterranean fleet…). Third option is EC. With 3 units per turn and at supreme safety, you can pop additional land units and immediately land them on NOR if you can spare a couple of TTs, or have NOR within bombing range. My first choice is NOR, my second AES, but if I have not completely pacified Japan, I prefer EC.

@Nix:

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. The Japanese can strike with a formidable battlegroup of 1 BB, 1 AC and 2 fgt that will leave none alive, maybe only the SS if it submerges.

Thus us incorrect.

If you look at map you see that sz29 is 3 spaces away from SZ37 so only 2 figs can attack.

You are right, UK1 can conglomerate its indian-pacific fleet only in SZ30, not 29. And in SZ30, UK fleet is within range of the japanese EIN armada. If you ever want to try the AUS IC strat we can set up a match and see how it works! :-)

@Nix:

Thing is there is no way Japan can take Aus IC if UK1 puts one there and sens India fleet to SZ29 and UK reunits fleet SZ29 to australia fleet, and puts down either a carrier+fig or battleship+destroyer. This coupled with an initial US build and japan is in full turtle mode.

Then UK2 Uk builds mostly in Europe to put pressure on Germany. US go island hopping.

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. The Japanese can strike with a formidable battlegroup of 1 BB, 1 AC and 2 fgt that will leave none alive, maybe only the SS if it submerges.
Plus, the British have a million more importand things to do to the Atlantic with an AC+fgt or a BB+DD than to play hide and seek with the Japanese in the South Pacific. UK simply cannot afford to dedicate those UK1 (build IC) and UK2 (buy BB, DD or w/e) resources against Japan; Germany will be left unchecked and will inevitably crush Russia. True, Japan will probably turtle, but this will be without any significance if Germany crushes Russia, an inescapeable reality unless the UK helps them anyway they can… 
UK is racing against time to build up in the Atlantic and start relieving Russia (ARC, KAR, NOR, maybe even WE and EE). And don t forget, an AUS IC means that you will have to support it in EVERY round, or it will be exposed.
Truth be told, any UK1 IC (except  maybe an EC IC…) is a safe trap for the Allies. Undersupported, remote and helpless, it will be a matter of time untill it becomes an Axis instrument.

@dustwhit:

I agree about the Aus IC, unless you think the J player would over-react to it, and divert more resources to counter it than necessary, thereby gaining a turn or so at the cost of 15 IC.

What are the thoughts about an IC in AE around UK4-5? That seems to me to be the best UK location if you can spare the IPCs: it threatens SE, Bal, Ukr, Ind (from Sz34); can resupply Cau, Per; and deter J from retaking Africa.

If the Japanese take over an AUS IC, africa is as good as gone for the Allies. Japan will be able to launch an immediate assault in MAD and they will just keep on coming, landing exactly where the Allies can’t reach, south africa.

I agree with the AES IC. If the UK has the resources to spare (that is more than 32 IPC/round) by UK4, an AES IC is dangerous for the reasons you said for the Axis, given that NOR might just not be safe enough for the British to set an assisting production line there. Even if a SE landing is not possible, Japan will definitely feel the heat in FIC and continental Asia in general. Not to mention that you can take Japan’s soft belly (EIN and BOR) by surprise, totally crippling the Empire’s war efforts…The options of an AES IC are pretty much endless.

Buy 2 TT, 1 DD, 2 art

Att.
-CHN with KWN and MAN inf, ftr + JAP bmb
-SZ52 with BB CC SS AC 2 ftr
-Clear all UK surface vessels with the remaining BB AC and 2 ftr

-Unload to MAN inf and arm and land ftr+bmb to MAN, place 2TT and DD in SZ61, 2art in JAP obviously.

The US1 cannot counter SZ52 if J holds it with (normally) BB,CC,AC, 2 ftr, it will be suicide.

I agree with Manstein, the thrust to CHN is imperative, even if that leaves FIC and MAN exposed.

The only problem is if UK1 has landed bmb in NOV. DD and (2+1) 3TT are within range in SZ61 and if UK2 is succesfull in killing them the japanese flow to the mainland will be severely crippled. If so, you can always switch to 2 DD, 2 TT and place in SZ60, so the flow will continue even if UK2 sink the (now unescorted) SZ61 TT.

@Nix:

So Advosan your thoughts on Australian IC?

Even if considered relatively safer, an Australian IC needs resourses to become dangerous, resourses that the UK simply doesn t have. My IC choises are either EC or NOR or AES, but always on a latter game phase, never UK1…

If J dedicates enough resources, they can roll the IC by J2 or J3 at worst, and there is no way for the Allies to retake it, unless enough Russians are stationed in Persia for a counter.

UK imho should’n build IC nowhere (not untill UK4 or 5), only maybe in SA in UK3 if the Germans still have a foothold in Africa by G3 and UK can’t launch a serious counterattack.

I recently realized that most people play Bosporus open. This is imho not only historically wrong, but also created a huge advantage for the Axis. How can the allies ever win if G med trannies drop units in caucasus directly from SE??

I know it is an optional rule to play Bosporus closed, but I think it should be the other way around.

And I think TripleA team should include 2 optional rules, a) Bosporus closed to ships and b) strategic bombing raid defending + escort fgt…

No?

@Zhukov44:

…… and place:

1. AC (+land 1 or 2 ftr on it, depending on SZ13 battle), TT in SZ5
2. CC, TT SZ14 (and move to SE 2 arm ->WE and 2 inf ->G)

2 fleets?

UK buys 3 figs, and USA buys 3 bmbs.  At that point, Germany had better give up its fleets for dead, because if G engages in another round of naval spending then the Russians will have superior TUV on land.

Also, in cases where R bought a sub/fig R1 and intends to destroy SZ15 on R2, they can go ahead and follow up with another sub(s) buy on R2 if all you buy is a cruiser for SZ14.

In every case both fleets are dead eventually (first the baltic, then the Med) but either UK will need 2 or most probably 3 rounds (buy 3 fgt , buy 2 bmb + 1 SS at best, attack the baltic) to destroy the baltic fleet, unless the USA helps a lot, which gives axis the time to lean on africa untill it cracks. As for the med fleet, we always play the Straights of Bosporus  closed to all powers for historical accuracy, so Russia will either have to go heavy on airforce that cannot afford, or the USA will go Atlantic just to chase those CC and BB or the British will deal with them after they clear the Baltic. In every case, G has 2 or 3 rounds to crack africa, reach 47-49 IPC and start building some serious pressure against moscow.

No?

And you  r right, G imho should never buy a second round of navy. The baltic navy is just to distract the british away from Africa, the med navy is just to ensure that at least 1 inf+arm crosses to africa in G2 and even G3.

I know we shouldn’t talk R1 in this thread, but imho attacking either NOR or UKR in R1 is very very risky and pretty much messes up the russian army, leaving it wide open to every G1 counterattack imagined. In most cases G1 will be able to reclaim WR, NOR and URK (and even KAR) and destroy the bulke of the Red army armor while they are at it.

Nonetheless, if one desides to do so, imho it pays better off to attack NOR than UKR, because the destruction of the NOR fgt assures that the SZ2 BB survives G1 which I believe is absolutely paramount for the Allies, either playing a US Atlantic or Pacific strat (especially the latter).

As for G1, imho must be (given R1 took WR and UKR)

1. capture KAR, UKR with minimum forces required
2. SS+bmb+fgt SZ2,
3. BB SZ15
4. 2 inf 2 arm 1 fgt AES,
5. 3 fgt SZ13
6. fortify WE + NOR with 3 inf, fgt each
   8 ) 2 SS SZ7

…… and place:

1. AC (+land 1 or 2 ftr on it, depending on SZ13 battle), TT in SZ5
2. CC, TT SZ14 (and move to SE 2 arm ->WE and 2 inf ->G)

“AC Graff Zeppeling reporting for duty”. :-P

I know it leaves Europe empty, but imho it messes up UK1 for good, because i) out of nowhere UK must consider a G2 “Sea Lion” (2 inf, 2 arm, 4 ftr, 1 bmb), ii) it assures the german flow to Africa no matter what happens to SZ14 CC or the SZ15 BB.
And G can afford an empty Europe so early in the game, with the US far away, the UK in trouble and the red army still underequipped.

What do you think?

Imho KGF is overrated. If J is left unchallenged, by J3 Moscow will have to look at NOV and KAZ. By J4 the British will be at 23-21. And by J5, 2 inf 2 arm can land in ALK while J has an insane 40-42 NPC/turn.
Can the Allies KGF before J5? I m not so sure they can, G can take a lot of punishment with min 28 NPC/turn…

1. If G1 has taken AES, UK1 should counter there with 3 inf, 1 ftr, 1 bmb + CC offshore while AC at 59.

My question, in this senario, is whether to go west or east with the ANZAC. J1 ftr can sink me either way, but I tend to choose east and (if survived) deploy the 2 ANZAC inf somewhere in Africa in UK3.
If I go west though, I can deploy them in AES in UK2, which is great, though J1 almost always sinks my 2 ANZAC inf…

2. If G1 fails AES, there are imho 2 ways to go:
       i) Fortify AES with 3 inf, 1 ftr + CC in 15 SZ, buckle up and wait for G2, while AC 59, or,
       ii) CC 59 while 2 inf +ftr (+ AC) assault BOR. It makes J1 go so ballistic!

I choose i)

Imho UK1 IC in IND is a no. By J3 it can be overwhelmed and the Allies are soooo in trouble, Hobbes is right.

@Hobbes:

@Advosan:

I m not saying G should let R keep those lands. If G cannot counter from EE and reestablish the Karel-Belor-Urk line it must abandon the anti-ship build (sub+bomb) for 1 turn, beef up in Germ and retake them. I m only suggesting G shouldn t press any further towards R, not before it raises 47-49 IPC from Afrika.

47-49 IPC is a long shot for G to reach, usually it will only get there to turn 4-5. Of the initial 40, G will usually lose Norway, making it down to 37. Africa has 9 IPCs (not counting Madagascar) and the UK can withdraw its forces to S. Africa and it will take a lot of time to kill those units. Plus, any units brought to Africa aren’t available to deal with the Russians. If R moves the bulk of this units to Ukraine and G can’t destroy then G will be squeezed. Africa is important for the Axis but focus too much on it and its forces in Europe will be overwhelmed.

You are correct, it takes G4-5 to reach 47 IPC (G1 fortify Algeria, G2 counter Lybia or blast AE, G3/4 blitz FWA and capture TJ and either BC or IEA, G4/5 move respectively towards Persia, attack other Afrikan lands). But still, this is the very quintessence of the Axis game. Axis has no initiative early in the game. By pushing towards Moscow you spread yourself thin.

The question that G has to answer is “how to protect the highly valued BB”. Yoy cannot allow the BB to die in UK1, the arfikan campain dies with it. The only way to keep it alive is  G1 capture Gibr, destroy UK Cr and either kill UK DD or buy a DD and block it (or choose the G1 capture of both AES and TJ, which leaves Algeria exposed and the UK Cr probably alive).

I know a lot of Axis players favor the strategy of a combined G-J push against Moscow, but it can never work unless the Allies screw up and let Moscow burn.

Then why do a lot of Axis players favor that combined G-J strategy? Because they like to lose?

No, Axis choose G-J combined push because the Allies can easily screw up. Most common screwing up is the UK not invading Europe in time, relieving the pressure off R. Allied micromanagement is quite challenging, but Axis cannot really hope to win by waiting for an Allies mistake.

Most times, the Axis strategy mistake is equalled by an even bigger Allies strat mistake, KGF. G can endure a tremendous amount of pain, giving J all the time in the world to grow to an impossible 40 IPC or even more. If J is left unchallenged by the US in the Pacific and it reaches 40, it can easily simultaneously a) invade Alaska, midway and hawaii b) start working its way to Moscow c) go for Arfica and d) go for Oceania, resulting to an inevitable blasting of the G combined pressure. If the dice go by the odds, J needs only to J3 to reach 40 IPC if left unchallenged:

• J1 china (3 Kwan+1 Manc inf), garrison FIC (with 2 Manila inf), buy 2 DD 2 tran
• J2 xingyang, Ind (+2 EasInd inf), counter Manch
• J3 Butyatia, SFA and Persia or Madagascar.

G can easily endure untill G3 everything the Allies can throw at it. And if J reaches 40, it it impossible to bring it down, it can only go even higher, J4 Aussie, maybe Africa, and Alaska or Hawaii, J5 Kiwi, even Brazil in J6 (trans from Hawaii), while pooring troops in Asia against Moscow.

@Hobbes:

@Advosan:

1. I don t stop USSR from advancing.

Against an aggressive Russia that is doom for the Axis. If Russia takes and holds Bielo, WR Ukr that’s 31 IPCs for her. By giving her the opportunity to take Norway, EE and Balk it raises to 40. To make things worse Russia can deal with any Japanese incursions in India and China with leisure.

I m not saying G should let R keep those lands. If G cannot counter from EE and reestablish the Karel-Belor-Urk line it must abandon the anti-ship build (sub+bomb) for 1 turn, beef up in Germ and retake them. I m only suggesting G shouldn t press any further towards R, not before it raises 47-49 IPC from Afrika.

2. I only hope the brits mass in SZ15

Strategies that rely on ‘hoping’ that the opponent does things in some way usually go out very bad if the opposing player is experienced. For instance, the Brits can simply attack the German BB and TRN on UK1 with the DD and the bomber. It is a close fight but the odds favor the Allies. If the transport survives then the US bomber can take it out.

If G plans to let UK DD alive, G must adjust G1 buy, get 1 inf 1 art 2 sub 1 DD 1 bomb and block UK DD

Germ loose ground in Europe, but it is easily retaken.

More important is that Russia gains the initiative to deal with Europe and Asia as it seems fit. G will force the Allies to deal with its fleet but once it is gone Germany is dead. And the US/UK can easily block any of the German ships by placing DDs to block them.

Even with Kar-Bel-Ukr , R has 31 IPC and G still gathers 33, 2 IPC more, not to mention that the closer R troops are to Germany the less IPC G needs to dedicate to their annihilation. The Axis and especially Germany lacks initiative at the beginning of the game, because of its low IPC (merely 40, against a combined 30+24=54 of its close opponents, not to mention an american atlantic army).
Arfika (whose capture will rebalance the G IPC to 47-49 vs a combined UK-R 45-47) is the only way to Axis victory, and the key to Afrika is an anti-ship Medit force that will keep a steady flow to Arfika.

I know a lot of Axis players favor the strategy of a combined G-J push against Moscow, but it can never work unless the Allies screw up and let Moscow burn.

@Krieghund:

As it stands, Northern Ireland is not a part of the United Kingdom territory.  There is no land connection, and they aren’t contained within the same sea zone, so they aren’t technically an island group.  This may be a mistake and may need to be corrected in the errata.  I’ll look into it.

Thanx for the answer!
It is grave to know wether Ireland, Iceland and Greenland are separate territories (for Green and Ice it was obvious, but not for Ireland).

The US player playing a Pacific Strategy, trying to bleed Japan out of Born, EInd and Philis, must always look if the UK is under threat. If it is, he must do a buy in EUS including 1 or 2 bombers and be ready to liberate the uk (i.e. a 40 IPC buy 2 tran, 2 inf, 2 art 1 bomb, more than enough to overthrow a weak Germ UK occupation force).

@Col.Stauffenberg:

How do you stop Russia from advancing with so little land forces Advosan? What do you do if UK drops their navy in front of Egypt and reinforces it? You’d never get Africa.

1. I don t stop USSR from advancing.
In R2 they will breach somewhere (Karelia, Belorus or most probably Ukr or in more than one territory) and I will counter from EasEur+Balkans->Ukr, or from EasEur->Belor or Karelia. If a counter is impossible, I retreat to Germany, leaving 1 inf in EasEur, 1 inf in Balk.
The G2 buy depends: If I can t counter, I buy 5 inf, 5 art , 1 arm (usually 40 IPC) and place all in Germ and the arm in SEur, thus preparing for a counter in EEur or Balk.
If I can counter and retake all three (Karel, Belor, Ukr) I repeat the G1 buy.

2. I only hope the brits mass in SZ15, they can put there 1AC, 2 fgt, 1 CR (and maybe 1 DD) and I can hit them with 1 BB (SZ13), 2 subs (SZ14), 1 bomb (SEur), at least 1 fgt (Balk or SEur) or maybe 2 fgt (if in G1 the Germ fgt lands in SEur or Balk).
If they lack the DD, there will be an onslaught. Even with the DD, Germ will crush them.
The only catch is that I have to select the planes as casualties to the UK planes hits, since the Brits lack the DD, but still I win and get the BB alive.
Normally Germ will lose 1 fgt and 1 or 2 subs. Worst case, they will lose the BB and they won t kill all the UK fgt. The UK fleet though is doomed.

Germ loose ground in Europe, but it is easily retaken.