Posts made by dustwhit

I saw an interesting R1 play last night that I’ve never seen done or discussed. He did not attack with 1 of his fighters, but moved it to Egypt after combat. I was actually happy to see it done (he couldn’t use it offensively and now I have an opportunity to kill one of his two knights).

Standard Egpyt odds: [89.7% Attacker, 9 IPCs lost]
Germany: 2 inf, 2 tank, 1 fgt
UK: 1 inf, 1 tank, 1 fgt

with the additional fighter: [52.6% Attacker, 8.7% Tie, 18IPCs lost]

What do you all think about that? In our game, I took the territory with 1 tank (kept my fighter as well), he than countered on UK1 and basically kept Africa afterwards. I think I’d salivate as the Axis every time someone did that, but if they sometimes keep their fighter, the territory, and at least weaken G enough for an easy recapture and hold, maybe I’m kidding myself.

@GCar:

For buyings I buy 8 Inf whatever the attack I’m doing.

Not meaning to read your whole post and only comment on 1 sentance  :lol:, but I don’t think purchasing 8 inf for R1 under, perhaps, any circumstances is the build I would make - not in Spring42. I did not play Classic but twice, but my understanding is that an all infantry build under Classic is, I’ve heard, somewhat standard. Whereas, in Spring42, R really can mess it’s ability to trade territories up and quickly crumble (No tank builds AND an assualt on Norway?).

@Bunnies:

You do want Jap tanks on the mainland early, but I think it’s best NOT to try to mass early on - the tanks just don’t have enough punching power against a good Russian player to threaten anything worthwhile.  Best use infantry plus air support.  You want a COUPLE tanks, yes, but best concentrate on infantry early; that’s all the more that will be knocking on Moscow’s door when push comes to shove.

I agree. Just like Germany, you’re going to want those infantry right up against Russia for when it really matters, and so you better start early and keep it coming. With the airforce there I don’t get concerned about not having more tanks (1 here and there keeps you ready). The one draw back is that with less tanks, you can’t do as Hobbes recommends and bring more of your airforce to G which is a significant trade-off.

@Bunnies:

1.  Noticed you moved transport from east of Japan to west of Japan.  My preference is to hit Burytia, grabbing an infantry from Wake Island in the process.

Yea, I’d rather hit Bury on J1 too (prevent a build up on SFA). I’ve been cautious with a no destroyer build, because I want to insure that the UK ships on 59 do indeed die, but I think it can still be safely done.

@Bunnies:

You put an IC up in French Indochina on J2.  My generic recommendation is to get 5-6 transports and a second tank in Asia ASAP.  Think, a J2 15 IPC investment results in an additional 3 infantry in French Indochina at the placement (end) phase of J3.  A J2 14 IPC investment results in an additional 4 infantry at any number of places at the combat phase of J3, with the added bonus that many of those infantry are free, having been pulled off the islands.

The J2 IC is two-fold for me. 1) Build the most pressure on the Asian front as rapidly as possible. This is debatable, but I think you’re right that in the short term, I can get more units on the mainland with more transports. 2) I become less vulnerable/set back by a successful “ah, what the heck” attack on my battleships/transports – after all, I’m making an aggressive play to keep my sea fleet minimal. I’m also still able to safely grab units off of Born, Phi, and EI to supplement the mainland.

Great thoughts and counter arguements. I did my 3 tran/3 inf buy last night with a friend, and things worked well, and I’d say I’m poised to win the game. While limited on ease of deployment locations, I retained enough flexibility to THREATEN anything. I still have not purchased a single destroyer, but arguably that is because he failed to counter appropriately.

R1: 3 inf in Bury, 3 in SFA, reinforced Chi with 2 inf
UK1: retook Egypt, CC to 59, SS/TT remained in 40 after moving 1 inf from NZ, NO bomber in Nov
US1: lost big in 52 and didn’t counter, moved BB/TT to 63 (Alaska) and unload 2 inf, fgt from WES landed in Alaska. He purchased 2 subs for the Pacific and moved SS in 52 to 60.

Thoughts:
I think the US can really put a hurt/stop to this if they buy 2 subs (as he did) and place a bomber in Alaska - particularly in regards to the transport fleet off Japan. With the TT and 2 inf to Alaska he got 2 inf into SFA and flew a fighter there, but he was a turn too slow to make it decisive. Regardless though, I’d simply make a destroyer purchase or two (what I’d have done anyways on J1) and now I’m a little ahead and US has had to divert resources my way.

@Sir:

So if I have an anti aircraft gun in england and someone sends over 3 bomber units, I roll three dice before the combat starts, and every “1” rolled, takes out a bomber unit straight away and they dont get to fight?

Correct

A few common examples of using the AA to your advantage (other than having them guard your ICs) is:

1. Russia moving the AA from Cau to WR if you fear the loss of the territory.
2. UK moving the AA on Ind back to Per along with remaining land forces, effectively reinforcing a more defendible choke point against Japanese fighters.

Essentially, why give someone else your AA?

–- ---- ----
Thanks, Calvin. You are correct about being destroyed while in a transport.

AA guns have a one time seperate roll against invaiding air units before normal combat and than do not participate in combat; units therefore preemptively destroyed by an AA never participate in combat. They cannot be destroyed. While not typically pivotal (it’s uncommon to purchase an additional AA), they make a player think through the consequences of sending air to an area to compliment a land force. Most importantly, without AA guns, there would virtually be no consequences/effective counter to strategic bombardments.

@lnmajor:

As a reminder, but the penalty is if purcheses and combat moves are not completed by the ding, no combat moves are allowed. this is usally enough insentive to move it along. i noticed when there is more than 3 people playing alot of side conversation and distractions come up especially when beer is involved. also wives calling"when you comming home?"

ha! like the comment about the wife. My wife was on me just last night! - God made no crucible more effiecient than the institution of marriage to grind character into a man; either grow or be ground up. Heh.

I like your thought about ten minutes. That ought to be plenty if you are thinking through things as the move before you plays out. I’m not sure I would enforce a no combat penalty, because that could very well mean the game in several instances - but I imagine that such a penalty rarely takes effect or only in regards to a certain territory that was waivering. I like the idea of giving the opposition  1 or 2 IPCS -minor in scope enough that you may just be willing to give a guy 1 so you can make your move in peace, and yet the other is compensated for his timely battle decisions.

J2:

Presumptions:
– UK Indian fleet destroyed
– US countered in sz52, stayed off WUS, or sailed to sz20. Maybe made a small Pacific purhase (subs?)
– US sent a bomber to Alaska, sub to sz58 and/or
– UK sent a bomber to Nov/Sink, sub to sz49

Purchase: (34-35 IPCs) IC, 5 Inf, 1 art

Combat:
– Bury with transport assist of 2inf/art and planes as needed

Non-Combat:
– 2 trannys to FIC coast and unload 1 tank/3 inf. Move battleship/surviving carrier and fighters to sz36
– move sz52 fleet to sz60
– place IC in FIC, ground units in Japan

Thoughts:
–If I can keep the 2 battleships alive, they can protect against the subs, otherwise time for destroyers
–The 4 trans can distribute ground units to Man and FIC as needed, and also move units off of Born/East Ind/Phi as needed and still have cover. Take Aus/NZ when discretion allows.
– FIC will begin to supply the southern route on its on. Ind can be taken on J3, ideally J2 depending on what UK does. The 2 trans in the south can take Aus/NZ, begin an African assault early, or remain in sz60 and pump Man with 8 units/turn.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Huh? India can’t be reached by 4 inf; only 2 inf can reach it.

Oh Fiddle Faddle, you’re right. Somehow I got to thinking that there was a transport in sz37 last night. I’ll revise and continue.

I’ve read through the threads on the Spring42 board twice now, and I’m suprised at the little attention Japan seems to get with starting strategies compared to the other countries.

I’ve been playing with the idea of an aggresive J build - 3 trans/3 inf: basically the most ground units that J could get on the mainland after 2 turns. The idea is to not waste money on destroyers, if possible/early on, by using the sz37 and conglomerated force on sz 52 as defense against the 2 Allied subs. I’d like your feedback. Here goes my thoughts:

Prerequisites round 1:

1. No UK bomber to Nov
2. UK does not attack FIC or Borneo, but recaptures Anglo Egypt - sends Car to Sz59. (I don’t see why an attack on Born or FIC prevents a no destroyer build, but for the sake of illustrating combat/non-combat moves, I’ll keep with this scenario)
   *) Presuming that tranny at sz40 attacks New Gui, otherwise I don’t think it matters.

J1:
Build:  3 trans, 3 Inf
Combat:
– sz34 attacked with carrier and battleship [98.1% Attacker]
– China attacked with 4 inf (3 Kwa, 1 Man) and 2 fighters (FIC and Man) [95.1% Attacker]
– Sz59 attacked with fighter (sz37) and bomber (from Japan) [98.1% Attacker]
– Sz47 attacked with fighter (sz37) - otherwise, if New Gui not attacked, attack sz59 and use the bomber at Chi.
– Sz52 attacked with 2 fighters (Jap and Caroline), carrier, sub, and battleship.[99.7% Attacker with 5 IPC lost if sub stays – I presume it would submerge though and go to sz58 later]

Non-Combat:
– Trans in Sz 60 to 61 and unload 2 inf to Man.
– 2 Fighters to Man, 1 fighter to FIC, 1 fighter to sz34 on the carrier, otherwise land in FIC, 2 fighters stay in Sz 52
– place transports in sz61

…… More to follow, my wife is ready to leave. And that means it’s time to go.

Does anyone play with a rule on how long a turn can take - particularly the purchase and attack declaration phase? I play with a great friend, who nevertheless takes foooorrreever to decide what he’s going to do sometimes. When you’re playing a game that is already a significant commitment of time regardless, I think it would be helpful to have some kind of time limit for making decisions. Like lose 3 IPCs if you go too long.

Great discussion. Insightful. Helpful.

@Mizark,

In one of the threads on this board is a link to printing out A&A money. Perhaps another may be able to make it easier for you to locate, nevertheless, I printed the money out and found it to be very useful and a rewarding addition to the 1942 edition. I recommend laminating the money with an easy to purchase, inexpensive “do it yourself” product that can be found at Office Max, Office Depot, etc.

There are also sheets that members have created for documenting a “saved game” on that come in quite handy.

[US IC in Sin: Pre-Requisite]

I’m in the middle of a game where J1 failed to take Chi in an attack, so on US1 I decided to build an IC in Sin now that there existed a 1 territory buffer (Chi) for my IC; moved the 1 Russian inf originating from Nov (on R2) down to Chi along with the 2 US inf in Sin to Chi. This seems to me to be the only reasonable basis for building an early IC in Sin - J has to fail to take Chi. Otherwise, you have to perform an all-in strategy centered around it from the beginning. Is this the general agreement on the forums?

@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.

@Advosan:

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. … …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.

I think that makes a lot of sense, Advosan. Nix’s thoughts would make for an interesting play when you’re wanting to mix things up though.

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

I’m going to post this question here instead of starting a seperate thread for it.

Can a land unit move 1 space to reach the coast line, be loaded in a transport, and than unloaded in an amphibious assault? ex: Inf from C.US to E.US with trans in sz10, loads, than is dropped off in G-controlled Alg.

Vice versa, if yes, can this be done in a non-combat move scenario as well?

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.

McLovin, that is probably one of the funniest posts i’ve read on this board. I’d add that perhaps Nutbar should put a few pieces in Switzerland and the Sahara; that should be helpful.