First Game- Axis
OotB rules and setup. I won but it went to 16 turns. UK didn’t attack Italy at all, successful G2 Sealion, and Japan attacked Russia on J1. This was a huge mistake. Japan never could commit enough forces for the land war in Asia to turn the tide. But once Italian and German tanks started pouring into the Middle east and China, the Allies conceded.
This is funny, I bought two copies of the game and the shortage of Italian roundels and units (I refuse to use poker chips except as damage markers) was the reason I cracked open the second. No one attacked my Italians and I ran wild.
Krieghund,
In Global, do you still remove a Japanese built industrial complex when liberating a Chinese territory or just knock it down to 3 if it is a 10?
UK NO’s: Doe these only go to London? If it is occupied can the no u-boat one be collected by India?
Thanks
I’m somewhat disappointed by this oversimplified grand unified solidarity of true neutrals. Having them all act in unison is unrealistic and ahistoric.
An elegant solution if it works. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen the US relief fleet A Turn Too Far to keep Japan from winning the game. The obvious problem is it may swing the pendulum too far the other way.
Trackmagic, the US can’t do this as it leaves Honolulu open and doesn’t threaten Japan. UK/infantry strategy doesn’t work as it allows Japan to overrun the SW Pacific and SE Asia and then with their 60+ IPCs a turn over the next few turns build a tank army, rebuild their air force, crush India and defend Japan.
The problem is the Allies don’t have time to develop any long, drawn out strategy of island hopping or war of attrition. I usually don’t deploy the IJN against India, keeping them in reserve to deal with island hopping strategies. The Japanese quickly reach parity in income and are already ahead militarily. Once they shut down the UK/China front, they can focus on Sydney or Honolulu and the Allies only have enough forces to successfully defend one or the other.
The US was gearing up for war and the UK was already at war with Germany (although it was the “Phoney War” that didn’t end until April/May). As such most resources were focused on Europe. But if Japan had attacked earlier, I think more resources would have been made available for the beleaguered Pacific theater.
I agree with allweneed that since it is rapidly becoming evident there is no balancing Allied strategy to answer a J1 attack (or J2 for that matter) his balancing proposals deserve consideration. I think though instead of giving a IPC bonuses, that fixed units be made available that were earmarked for Europe/Africa/Atlantic in the deployment phase. US should receive naval and air units, the UK naval and ground units while ANZAC should get a fighter and some infantry. For the China airlift, they should get a free artillery unit each turn the US deploys a bomber in Szechwan.
I don’t agree with withdrawing the UK naval force at Singapore back to India. This deployment is historically accurate.
be cheap as the UK stop buying normal units ONLY buy people reinforce the burma road and shan state, take the dutch islands as america put everything in pearl harbor expect a loss thats fine, reinforce it with bombers
You obviously are not playing vs J1 attack. There would be no UK APs to take the DEI.
realize japan cant afford re resupply itself. if you hold out on the first three turns the game is yours JAPAN IS A GLASS CANNON. yes they are crazy strong but hold out. Stop thinking agressively
If Japan is a glass cannon, then the Allies are wisps of smoke. It doesn’t take long for Japan to achieve 60 IPCs with which to easily rebuild aircraft, ships, tank armies or to defend Japan.
As america you have 4 strategies
ONE: Buy bombers put them in queensland, have anzac pile its fighters to back you up. then defen the UK
This strategy has already been debunked. This only works if the Japanese player is dumb enough to linger around for this slow strategy to develop. The US can NOT spend its bonus IPCs from a J1 declaration of war until US2. With the loss of the US bomber in the Philippines, it starts with only two that can’t attack until turn 2 and it takes several more turns for enough bombers to be built to take on the IJN. By then the IJN is safely out of harms way or based at Truk with a nice big air defense umbrella. Sending US bombers to bolster India with their paltry defense is just throwing good money down the Black Hole of Calcutta. @idk_iam_swiss:
TWO: as america keep buying fleet after fleet japan CANT fight a two front war. never forget this. all you have to do is take the island tough to do i know, but YES it can be done.
I thought they were supposed to be buying bombers. I guess you could do both if the game lasts for 20-30 turns.
THREE: As the Chinese concentrate your attack in the north. it will force the japanese to make a decision. either attack china or the UK.
See below.
Four: worst of all but try it anyway…ignore the japanese navy defend where you need to of course, but let the water crash upon the rocks hold out for a few turns and THEN build you make more then them when combined.
Time is really on the Japanese side with a J1 attack. The Allies can’t afford the time lost it takes hoarding IPCs, unless the US is concerned about a US first strategy. But your better off building land/air defenses anyway.
OR just join UK and ANZAC…its cheap i know but treat them as one power…
Like to try to come up with a solid strategy before house ruling.
My buddies and i just finished our 7th game and have yet to have Japan win despite India falling.
These types of posts always baffle me. And then I read on and grow even more confused.
ANZAC strategy has revolved around liberating the phillipines and taking the DEI back from japan.
Uh, so exactly what happened to the Japanese navy/air force that they couldn’t take out a single DD and AP around turn two? And if your turtling in NSW, then what ANZAC forces are doing all this liberating? Is the Japanese attacking J1 or waiting?
China strategy has fallen away from defending the burma road and more becoming an economic nuisance.
China abandoning the Burma road just means the UK falls that much faster. Economic nuisance? By ordering Sushi and not paying? :lol: Japan has more than enough assets (that were going to get burned in Yunnan anyway) in the north to deal with any northern Chinese strategy.
With US control of the Carolines, it has been impossible for japan to kill china and maintain control of hong kong, phillipines, and shanghai. We have gotten very close to a Japan victory but still haven’t seen one yet. India has been the easy part but the US and ANZAC have turtled sydney and honolulu well enough to prevent the victory.
Sounds like you are letting the Japanese navy be killed off piecemeal. Heck, not even then. I’ve lost my entire IJN before and STILL won the game! Your strategies conflict, there is no way the US/ANZAC can go on the offensive and then suddenly “turtle…well enough to prevent the victory.” Unless your games are lasting more than 10 turns. Then that might be your problem.
Yeah, it was like that in the original A&A Pacific.
That’s your best bet. Plus you’ll get a lot of extra units so you don’t have to use poker chips.
Perhaps this thread should be moved to Europe or Global, since these factors do not pertain to OotB Pacific.
I used to think that was a viable strategy, but by the time the see-saw battle for the Burma Road is lost, China doesn’t have enough of anything left to provide but the most minor distraction.
Moving the Chinese army to the north early in the game only hastens the collapse of the UK. Japan has more than enough forces in the north to contain it.
ITs not broken. it just FORCES you to play a certain way if you want to win.
agreed you just have to figure out how to win against it.
Great! If you have done so, please feel free to detail these ways to win as the allies.
Yes, during the collect income phase meaning it is not available to spend until turn two.
Ok, if the J1 attack is to strong for the allies, learn to throw a dice. If you can master rolling a dice to get the number you want, you could easily make the J1 attack that of a suicide bomber. I know learning to throw a dice they way you want is harder than I make it sound, but if it works, the Japan will be reeling from their losses.
This game is so broke people now advocate cheating! :lol:
Per Larry the Soviets are starting with a total of 18 infantry in the pacific map, which is nothing to scoff at.
Meh, just more stuff for the Japanese to obliterate on J1.
Its gonna take a dedicated force to deal with the 18 inf in the Pacific. If Japan attacks Russia it will detract from forces going to India or China, giving them enough breathing room to hold out longer. Trust me- it will be balanced.
The real question is whether Russia will send its units west to the German front or hold them above Manchuria’s head- or split them even!! 18 infantry come in handy either way… :roll:
If they are divided up between 9 territories maybe not so much. There already is a dedicated force in Manchuria and a bucketload of planes that don’t get used on J1 to attack the Soviets. As things stand now, I don’t think this alone is going to delay Japanese execution enough to make a difference.
Trust me- it will be balanced.
I’ve maintained for some time now that it is apparent that Europe is going to be required to balance this game. Not that combining the games will create the balance because at that point, Pacific is no longer its own game. I’m interested in seeing what the makeup and distribution of the Soviet Far Eastern forces are and what forces are available to the UK in the Mediterranean and Egypt/Middle East and to the US in EUSA. Perhaps these can be introduced into Pacific to restore some balance.
@Yoper:
@The:
From what i understand, income from west India can’t be used in India. Europe income on the europe side and pacific on the pacific side. Blunt, inaccurate, and probably took about 10 seconds of time to create but that’s how it’s going to be (at least until I house-rule it.)
I and my playtesting group suggested that an adjustment be made in the Global rules such that the British Columbia IPC be shifted to the European UK economy and that the West India IPCs be shifted to the UK India economy.
In doing so, the units in West India would be under the UK India players’ control and any territory they take would then contribute to that economy.
Larry didn’t choose to go that way at the time and as far as I know it hasn’t changed.
I can understand this for the sake of simplicity, but I’m curious if your group observed the same balance issues as the rest of the community.
Admiral, the problem with the US attack strategies on Japan is the Japanese player sees it developing several turns out. By the time you get a fleet together and into home waters India has already fallen and Japan is already moving toward or attacking Australia.
Panzer, you make several assumptions that may be true for Anniversary but aren’t for Pacific 40, namely IC building and strategic bombing. Strategies that worked in other versions simply don’t have the time to develop in Pacific 40 because of the different set of victory conditions for those games. The J1 attack is vicious and robs the allies of assets they need to slow Japan which puts Japan on the fast track to victory. By the time the US has enough forces in position to contest Japan it’s already over. You’ll see when you get your copy and get a dozen games or so under your belt.
It gets to the point where you don’t even :roll: anymore you just plow on through.
Per Larry the Soviets are starting with a total of 18 infantry in the pacific map, which is nothing to scoff at.
Meh, just more stuff for the Japanese to obliterate on J1.
Are there any ACME invisible walls keeping those infantry out of Manchuria? Any tanks and aircraft to go along with that fodder? Maybe a paltry Far Eastern Fleet to prove a minor distraction?
BTW where did you hear/read this?
