Topics created by cb4

Nicely put! You hit the nail on the head from a historical perspective.

When we were on our A&A G40 kick, no one ever wanted to play Russia so we were forced to rotate. I would hate to see Italy become the new Russia. Then again, unless you can get 6 people to play it doesn’t matter  :-D

@Andy6049:

billinjackson

What free tech roll does Germany have?  I do not remember this one, did I miss something?

No free Tech roll. Consult the Tech Chart die rolls.
Unless you mean for the 35,000 page rules for the 36,39 game.

@cb4:

Thoughts?

Really ? Why 39 now when u wanted 36.

Take out London navy. You should have 5 subs (7or8) if you attack Canada navy 1st impulse and 3 surface ships if u don’t get diced. Or take Canada navy out 2nd impulse so they can’t build navy there UK T1.
Impulse 1 take UK navy, Reims, Warsaw, activate Hungry, Romania and Finland.
Impulse 2 take UK navy, Paris (no planes), Yugo, Narvik, German Cruiser take out UK tranny in SA, Vichy rolls, activate Bulgeria and land some figs in Romania so you can land them in Italy T2 in Torbuk.
T2 take Holland (collect 18 icp), Denmark and Norway.
This is the kinda normal moves in our games.

This is for the 39 1st Edition map.

[Much of this was posted as a reply in the Refusing the Dragon thread. I thought it appropriate to post separately for any follow-up.]

In my first game as Japan, I decided to go ‘all out’ against China and was quite successful. In a nod to Jinx1527, I call this the “Swallowing the Dragon” strategy.

It starts before Japan’s first move by getting the USSR to agree to the Japanese-Soviet Non-aggression Pact. That kills any possible USSR lend-lease to the KMT. It also eliminates the worry over border clashes and building up of troops in the north. Thus, the units in Manchuria are freed up to go south.

The CCP is hurting for money, so it seemed logical to go after the KMT first, especially the Burma Road to make sure they couldn’t buy artillery. I mobilized every available land unit and the entire Japanese air force against the KMT. I was able to take the remaining three ‘bonus’ territories (Peking, Zhejiang, Guangxi) and also Yunan by T2. That effectively ended any immediate KMT threat.

Although they are hurting for money, the CCP starts with 11 units plus they get a recruitment roll. After fighting the KMT, I still needed to reinforce my position against them. Initially, aircraft were used. In following turns, armor would be forthcoming from the two minor ICs, one in Henan and one in Zhejiang, placed at the end of T2. (These ICs will also be used to prepare for an overland invasion of the FEC.) With four additional infantry to be transported from Tokyo, there was really nothing the CCP could do so they stayed huddled in their two territories. Attack Communist China on T3. Note that we were also using the Fighting Railways expansion which gives Japan an armored railcar (8 movement) for transporting one unit into battle. Getting that extra unit around was very helpful…

From an IPC standpoint, Japan gets an additional 11 IPCs per turn by the end of T2 – that’s the same amount as all of the DEI without the hassles of being at war with the BC and France. Japan will get 2 more per turn for Communist China by the end of turn 3. This income will provide Japan a big boost in setting up for its next step, be it the DEI, FEC, Anzac, or Russia.

From a political standpoint, starting with this strategy has no significant consequences. Neither the British Commonwealth (BC) nor the US can declare war on Japan until Japan declares war “on another nation during the game”. So Japan can beat up on China all day with no worries. France is the only exception. While it can declare against Japan, it’s not realistic because France would have to pay 10 IPCs to do so. That’s half of its per turn income. It wouldn’t matter anyway because France cannot threaten Japan. It only has 2 land units and its navy is certainly no match for Japan’s. Other strategies, like Refusing the Dragon (see that thread for more), do have significant consequences.

Overall, Swallowing the Dragon gives Japan a good, solid, conservative start and it is very easy to implement.

You are right, my math was off too, can’t use averages with escorts. Here’s a table created from my spreadsheet for raiding sub vs. escorts with +2 modifiers. I shortened it because creating a table was a hassle, no copy/paste :-(

| raider roll - escort roll

| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |

| # ways

| 5 |
| 4 |
| 3 |
| 2 |
| 1 |

| expected IPP loss

| 0.14 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.25 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.14 |
| 0.98 |

|

The 2nd col is how many ways the raider minus escort roll can equal the 1st col (i.e. only 1 way to lose 5 from raiding: raider rolls 6, escort rolls 1). There is a 2.8% chance (0.17 * 0.17) for any combination of 2 rolls on a d6. The last column is the 1st col times 2nd col times 2.8%. So when both sides have +2 modifiers, the average IPP loss/turn/sub is 0.98, close enough to 1. If I understood you, it looks like we agree (you originally said 1.6, then said that was too high by 0.6-0.7). By the same method, I calculated 1.56 for 1 escort.  This is for no escorts returning fire.

If escorts get even one return fire, that loses Germany 3.3 IPP/turn for 2 DD escorts. The only way raiding can be profitable for the Axis is against unprotected convoy lines. So keep on raiding and hope your opponent doesn’t read this post.

Thanks! Lots of good ideas. HGB has a ton of options but we didn’t want to ‘go all out’ on pieces until playing it through at least once. Since they’ll be releasing a supplemental set, I may wait.

I like the place markers idea and already made some. After T1, Germany has 5 units on Luxembourg – it can’t fit half of one unit.

I should’ve bought the 4x8 map :cry:  Even so, I think the map still needs another rev. Squish all those empty USSR zones east and make some more room for Europe. Not accurate but…

Thanks.

How a cheaper Navy helps the allies is this. The US comes in after turn 4. With a cheaper navy, namely transports, Japan could be a real threat to Australia, forcing the US to pay attention to it, making it historically accurate.

The US paying some attention to Japan helps the Germans.

Lastly, IMHO, the game is close enough that these changes don’t ruin the game. But seeing your point, to go along with this, you would also have to fix the sub problem which is horrible. The advantage Germany had in the beginning of the war with their subs just doesn’t exist in the game. They need to make the subs more stealthy, like rolling the dice to locate them before attacking them, (destroyers would have a better chance than other units) and greatly expanding the areas they can convoy. Also giving the Germans a wolf pack advantage that the US copies and made use of much later in the war against the Japanese.

This whole incredible aspect of WW2 was somehow left out of the game.  A real shame. That would bring some balance.

That is as valid an opinion as mine.  :evil:

That’s okay, I would also increase the number of German submarines on the board and put some convoy zones out in the mid North Atlantic that hurt US Economy (and UK Economy)

But then, if we implemented my changes, the Germans would need a significant bid again probably.  So yea, in the case of game balance, realism does need to take a back seat (that is not to say forget it completely!)