Posts made by Hobbes

@oztea:

Or “victory cities can scramble one fighter”

That solves a lot of the problems in the game for the allies, without giving them any more pieces.

• US fleet on the east coast has a better defense
• UK fleet near England is more survivable.

This house rule also adds more problems for the Allies during the initial rounds: Germany can also scramble 1 fighter to protect its transport on the Baltic or its Med fleet, basically any of its boats near Paris/Berlin/Rome and Japan also benefits from it to protect transports against bombers on SZs 60/61/62. You’d have to put a limit of 1 fighter per SZ as well, otherwise you’d be able to scramble 2 fighters on the Baltic if the Germans have Leningrad as well.

@Sean.C:

Say i park 15 Japanese subs in SZ56 (assume the US pacific fleet is gone), what can US do about it?

Lets say it’s a KJF game, or at least it starts out that way.  Japan takes India on J2 with it’s starting fleet and starting land units from islands and the mainland, and has been buying subs since J1 (5 at a time).

I have never seen a J2 conquer of India so far on any of my games and I don’t believe it to be something possible, unless both SZ37 and and the transport on SZ61 are intact.

Otherwise for a J2 you’ll have a max of you’ll have 7 ground units, plus 7 planes plus the bombardment but that just puts severe limits on Japan’s ability to hit anything else on J1. And the UK should have something like 9 ground units, plus 2/3 fighters, plus whatever help the Russians/US can spare and from a quick glance the odds should favor the defenders, plus if Japan lose there’s no units for a follow up attack.

What can US do to counter a mass amount of Japanese subs?  Then once the US fleet in the pacific is gone, and there are 15 Japanese subs parked in SZ56, how do you get back into the fight?  Do you just mass destroyers and pray for good dice?  What if your playing with LL dice?

I figure once the entire starting Japanese pacific fleet combines it will be enough to take out any UK fleet in the Indian Ocean.  I should also be able to take India with just my starting units off the islands and on the mainland.  Russia has it’s hands full with Germany.

What am i missing?  How do you counter this when trying to do a KJF strategy?

Assuming Japan was trying to go for India and had bought 5 subs then I’d focus really on keeping the Pacific fleet distracting Japan, reinforce India and start building an Atlantic fleet with the US. If India falls on J2 then the UK will have to switch to Europe as well and with a 2nd buy of 5 subs then Japan just wasted 60 IPC on naval units that can’t be used against Russia while the Allies start going after Germany.

Hello all,

Several players have expressed the need for the Allies to have a bid on Spring 1942, 2nd Ed. for reasons of game balance. I personally haven’t felt the need for it so far but I’m curious to see what may be the most ‘common’ bids, please feel free to add suggestions to where to  place them (1 UK infantry on Egypt, 1 artillery on Caucasus, etc.).

For an explanation of what are bids and the process work, check this thread.

@Koningstiger:

What do you all think?

On Classic/Revised/AA42.1/AA41.2 China’s role is to be a speed bump. On AAE/P/G and AA50 they aren’t.

The game is designed for balance, not reproduce WW2. Otherwise the Allies would start by earning at least twice as much as the Axis.

@Vance:

Try hugs not drugs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9TQj_hFybc&feature=related

I would but they keep making me wear this straitjacket… I even have to type with my tongue :P

@MistuhJay:

Can anybody say, “Divide by zero?”  =)

Dimension shift again: the world as we know would be transformed into a reality where none won and the Allies and Axis divided the world between themselves and have been into a Cold War since the end of WW2.

@wittmann:

I built IC on EI on J1 and have just lost. Took India on J2, but never built there as was retaken with all 4 Russian tanks. Then he placed 3 Uk ones. Could not take back with 2Inf and 2Art, 2 Bombards and 3 Air. Tried 3 times!(kept losing Air)lost Philippines on US4, so knew game was over.
That is why am trying IC in Philippines this time.

My advice is to build transports on J1 (you’ll need them anyways for an island IC) and wait to see what the US does first before deciding on building an IC on the islands. Even if the UK doesn’t attack SZ37, the US can still go  KJF and force you to choose between attacking India to protect the transports/IC.
That’s another reason to place the IC on East Indies instead of Philippines or Borneo. East Indies can’t be threatened by amphibious landings from US transports on the Solomon Islands, whereas Borneo and Philippines can.

@MistuhJay:

Your impeccable logic leaves no room for doubt.

Yes and it also reveals something quite phenomenal:

@Cow:

I understand why the axis usually win all the latest axis and allies game. We are the only dimension / parallel universe in which the allies won WW2. D

Which means that throughout Classic and Revised (where the Allies were favored) and up until 2008, we lived on a dimension where the Axis actually won WW2.

Then on 2008 AA50 came out, the Axis are now favored and thus we have an interdimensional shift and on this reality the Allies actually win WW2.

Mindboggling…  :wink:

@Mallery29:

There really is nothing to overlook…Hobbes is right.  If I played VC, then I’d probably keep a majority of the fleet at the Phillipines to keep the dog off my lawn while using E. Indies to crush India (1 turn from India if needed).  (keep aux ships to protect your transports).

You have to shuck from either E.Indies or Borneo (prefer E.Indies) to build up to take India ASAP… but if you go up the gut, just remember to account for India continually building…just don’t get caught with your pants down.

If you’re going to build an IC:
E. Indies IC for S. Route
Man IC for North or Middle

Definitely East Indies because it allows afterwards to lift 4 inf to India using only 1 transport fleet.

@Sean.C:

Yea but using transports for tanks n such from japan takes an extra turn.� You have to build, then transport, then attack with them.� Instead of building them on the mainland where the turn after building units you can blitz and attack with them.�

I’ve always built the IC’s on the mainland first turn to take this extra turn out of the equation and supplement those units with extra units from japan.

With the map changes it’s takes almost the same time for a unit build on either Manchuria or Japan to reach India or Russia:

1 INF on Manchuria/Japan - 2 rounds to reach Yakut
1 TANK on Manchuria - 1 round Yakut
1 TANK on Japan - 1.5 round Yakut

1 INF on Manchuria - 5 rounds to reach India (land), 3 rounds (transport, landing on Yunnan)
1 INF on Japan - 3 rounds India (1 transport fleet, landing on Yunnan), 2 rounds India (2 transport fleets, landing on Burma)
1 TANK on Manchuria - 3 rounds to reach India (land)
1 TANK on Japan - 2 rounds India

1 INF on Manchuria - 3 rounds to reach Kazakh/Novo
1 INF on Japan - 3 rounds to reach Kazakh, 4 to Novo
1 TANK on Manchuria - 1,5 rounds to reach Kazakh/Novo
1 TANK on Japan - 2 rounds to reach Kazakh, 2,5 to Novo

If you’re planning of going against India then a Manchurian IC on J1 won’t help you - you’ll need transports to lift infantry from the islands and Japan, otherwise it will take longer than using transports. It can however help to fortify Asia against a KJF - depends on the posture of Japan.
If you are going against Russia, again you’ll need a lot of infantry and for that it’s more effective to first use all of  Japan’s starting IC capacity. 2 transports cost 16 IPC and allow you to move 4 units, 1 IC costs 15 IPC but only place 3. Plus by picking the infantry from the islands it allows to start saving for the IC.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

Although it takes an extra turn for production from Japan to reach the mainland, since the IPC you spend on a IC is spent on actual units so they appear 1 turn earlier.  The next turn your builds on the IC appear after the action occurs for R2 whereas those units you build on R1 can actually participate in the action the following round.  I agree that for the most part for Japan, build ICs when you max out your spending on the Japanese homeland IC.

Only later, when you switch to tanks is that the Manchurian IC allows to get some gains, although those gains arent very significant.

@Scarapis:

Well decided to sell off some of my A&A games (ones i’m not playing or using), but I had just a week or two ago mixed up all the pieces and grouped them up. so now I have to seperate them and figure out which pieces went to which game (if anyone has pics that would help)

This topic documents the evolution of A&A pieces through the game series with pics of all pieces:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23386.0

@Veqryn:

After all the release date confusion, I’m wondering if it was ever cleared up?   Which game released first, 1941 or 1942 second edition?

I’m curious because I have to name one of them “ww2v5” and the other one “ww2v6”

classic is ww2v1
revised is ww2v2
aa50 is ww2v3
spring 1942 is ww2v4

who is ww2v5 and who is ww2v6 ??

Veqryn, the reason I chose v5 for Spring 42 2nd Ed is that it was the one I decided to convert first and it wouldn’t make much sense to have a v6 before a v5. At the same time since they are two editions of the same game it would be more logic to have them numbered one after the other.
Also, the current list above already doesn’t follow A&A because AA50 and AA1941 are considered to be a separate games than Classic/Revised/AA42.1/AA42.2, like Pacific/Europe/Global. So to me it doesn’t really matter which one is v5/v6, especially since they ended up being released on the same date.

@Yavid:

yeah it’s almost like the box images are designed to treat us into buying the game.

It’s a conspiracy, I tell you all…

@Sean.C:

I’m wondering what everyone else thinks about where to put a J1 IC?  On the old map, i used to always buy 2x IC on J1 and put in Manchuria and Kwang, but now that Kwang and Kiang are worth 2 instead of 3, so they don’t seem like viable locations.  Also the distance from Manchuria to Russia in both directions is longer, and it’s 3 turns from India with tanks.  Another consideration is now India starts with an IC and will be UK’s primary staging point to help US for a KJF strategy.  It feels like my focus for japan should now be India instead of straight for Moscow.  Before India was just a convenient speed bump on the way to Moscow.

I’ve been thinking instead of a mainland IC in Manchuria (which seems to be too far from anything important), that i should instead put an IC on Borneo, East Indies, or both.  The only problem i see with this is then it will take longer to gobble up all the 1 IPC zones in asia/eastern russia for japan.  So maybe a 2 IC J1 buy, with Manchuria and Borneo?

Borneo is conveniently 2 SZ’s from both Japan and India.

Thoughts?

Depends on your Asian strat with Japan: you can either try to take the India IC or bypass it and follow the route Kwantung/Yunnan - Szechwan - Kazakh, which is the fastest way to Russia. If you’re taking India then you’ll be probably either better off with transports and possibly an East Indies IC to speed up bringing units to Burma. But careful with a J1 buy - the US can go KJF even without the SZ37 attack and Japan will have problems defending the transports and holding off the US, so the money spent there can turn to a complete waste.
If you’re looking to press Russia through China, then Manchuria but only after you’ve used all of Japan’s production, but that takes a while because now 4 inf and 4 tank cost 36 IPC instead of 32 and it takes longer for Japan to increase its income from Asia.

@Sean.C:

@adaptation:

I don’t know why people say Pearl Harbor cannot be done anymore - don’t forget that the Japanese sub is now absolutely untouchable with the new rules and can always go for Pearl Harbor. You can get 3 fighters(9), 1 bomber(4), 1 cruiser(3), 1 sub(2) and 1 AC(1) (grand total of 19) VS sub(1),destroyer(2),AC(2),fighter(4) (Grand total of 9).

Over 95% chance of victory with average IPC losses around 16-18 depending on if you chose to lose a bomber or fighter after your sub.

Then you end up defending with 2 fighters ( 8 ), 1 cruiser (3), and 1 AC (2) (grand total of 13) VS 2 fighters (6), 1 bomber (4), 1 destroyer (2), and 1 battleship (4) (grand total of 16).

Over 95% chance of losing your Japanese fleet with an average IPC loss around 18-20 for America depending on if they chose to kill a fighter or bomber after their destroyer.

Plus US player submerges the sub right at the beginning of the J1 attack, allowing it to participate on the counter on US2…

Then you have to consider that UK1 has almost a 70% chance of wiping out the other half of your japanese fleet

You’re goal here is India, not America.  The only reason people did it before was it was a slam dunk with no losses most of the time with units you didn’t need for India anyhow.  It’s a completely different story now.  Now your looking at the annihilation of a majority of your fleet that you actually need to help take India.

Yup, if the UK attacked SZ37 then Japan has to wipe out any remaining UK fleet from that attack and get the UK transports as quickly as possible. Attacking the US fleet almost removes Japan from the Pacific after US1.

@texasranger97:

what the hell is the brits mech inf??? I already saw brens in museum and I can tell� you this is not one

Yup, it’s not a Bren. From the looks of it I’d say it’s a Kangaroo - during the UK the British converted unnecessary tanks as armored personnel carriers - if you check the wheels they look close to the US Sherman or the Canadian Ram.

@kaptinknaughts:

So here is my question, say a bomber can do a strategic strike or it can wait and conduct in general combat. Can a submarine NOT suprise strike and just conduct normal combat? Like in my sceniro, where it was one attacking sub vs. one defending sub and a loaded transport(which I know have no combat value) in one single SZ? My friend wanted to opt out of suprise striking with thier sub to conduct normal combat on my sub and transport that way he could keep attacking instead of only having the one shot with suprise stike. Is this a legit move or can the subs only suprise strike??

You’re misunderstanding Surprise Strike… it happens on every round of combat that an enemy destroyer is not present, not just the first one. So, if both subs fire and miss and both attacker and defender decide not to submerge, you have another round of surprise strike. And so on.
In your example the only way for the attacking sub not to have surprise strike would be if there was also a defending destroyer. On that case both the defending sub would first first his surprise strike, then the attacking sub would fire in normal combat, then the defending destroyer fires on normal combat.
Of course, if the defending submarine hits while rolling 1, the attacking submarine becomes fish food without even firing back since his surprise strike ability is cancelled by the defending destroyer.

@MistuhJay:

@Hobbes:

I actually wondered about if the Axis player was going to try that on my 2nd game. He had bought a carrier and an IC on round 1, then joined both fleets together off France and ended up with 6 transports plus 2 carriers but he never got enough to try Sea Lion. However, if the Germans landed in Canada, then it would be 12 US units against 16 German ones, so I had to keep units in range while playing KJF.

Germany dropping 16 units in E. Canada? Never thought of that… what if Japan did the same thing to Alaska J3. America has to decide to defend E. US or W. US (and will obviously protect its capital, allowing Japan to assault W. US). It can’t be this easy… can it?

Please show this beginner why this is a bad idea?  =)

You can try to find an old strategy for Revised called Polar Express that is exactly what you are describing. I never tried it on Revised though because it’s too easy to spot once you know what to look for.

@Sean.C:

Before it was a race to Moscow and Berlin, now it seems to be a race to Caucuses and India with the heat shifting from Germany to Japan.

From my experience it also depends on the VC conditions. If the Allies go KGF on Standard Victory then Germany can simply on focus taking Leningrad while Japan masses against India and takes Honolulu. Single pushes by Germany to take the Caucasus may be impossible, depending on the presence of UK and US units to bolster its defense.
Allied KGF strategies on standard can also work if the UK manages to hold to India long enough and withdrawal its stack of units safely to Russia to prevent its fall before Germany falls to the Allies.

Overall the map isn’t significantly different from 42.1 regarding income. Which means that the Allies should be able to hold Japan long enough after India falls to take down Germany. Losing the IC is bad news but at the same time it wins a lot of time for Russia on Asia.

I agree with 42.2 favoring a KJF (but at the same time choosing that option weakens Russia because of sending the fighter to Egypt) but then the hard challlenge is to stop Germany from conquering Russia.

Oh, and the harder side of both editions of 42 is considered to be Allies, not Axis.

bump