Posts made by Lozza007

@WILD:

We don’t SBR much anymore (in Pac). I’m not sure the risk is worth the payoff. Unless you catch the enemy off guard and can swarm him w/escorts, and he is afraid to send up his ftrs. I think it might be worth it to bomb occasionally just to keep his ftrs at home and out of range though as mentioned earlier. Europe will have more opportunity to bomb though, so we might revisit SBR.

SBR may not be value for money for the Allies (unless it’s a NO) but it might still be necessary to stop the Jerries piling too many air units into the USSR.  Besides, it might be the only way the Allies can strike back into mainland Europe for quite some time if the Jerries have excessive amounts of money.

Lozza007

Just been thinking….

If Germany has a large airforce in AAE40 similar to that of Japan in AAP40, a key method of keeping those planes away from Russia is going to be UK and US strategic bombing raids. I assume Bombers from the UK (with an airbase I pray) can reach at least western Germany, meaning the Germans will need to keep some Fighters back to defend.  Losses will be costly for the Allies but if escort Fighters can get into the fray (landing on Carriers in the North Sea perhaps?) then I see some serious carnage resulting.  This will be particularly appealing to the Allies if strategic bombing is a National Objective.  I envisage a situation where the UK regularly spends its money on replacing Destroyer and Transport losses as well as purchasing a Bomber every turn, while the US builds up its forces to conduct a land invasion of France etc.

I also hope the Germans can’t build Transports in Italy to swamp North Africa, putting extra emphasis on the Italians to keep their house in order and maintain a decent fleet in the Mediterranean.  AAE original was certainly daft with the inability of the UK to hang on to North Africa and the Middle East if the Germans chose to go hard in that theatre.

Cheers,

Lozza007

Howdy,

Surely Japan would be deterred from attacking the USSR for the first few turns for two reasons:

1. There should be a massive Soviet army in Siberia just waiting to turn west to help save Moscow (the USSR thrashed Japan in Mongolia just one year earlier with this army at Kalkin Gol); and
2. Sending significant units into the wastes of Siberia will weaken all other Japanese attacks, which have now become “standard” in the AAP40 game.

A peace treaty between Japan and USSR did both sides a favour….until 1945 of course  :evil:

Cheers,

Lozza007

Hey chaps,

<sigh>It seems I must be the Defender of the Faith when it comes to the Royal Navy  :|

Whilst I appreciate that Axis & Allies is only an abstract version of an historical war, if there are some folks keen on playing around with a German navy in AAE40 then they’re going to have to build it themselves, rather than say, invading Russia.  The reason they didn’t start the war with a large navy was because Germany chose to spend its money on planes and tanks.  Guns’n’butter trade off at its best  :-D

Size of Royal Navy in 1939 (1 year earlier):
The Royal Navy had 15 large battleships, 15 heavy cruisers, 46 light cruisers, 7 aircraft carriers, 181 destroyers and 59 submarines.

Size of German navy in 1940: 4 Battleships, 2 Pocket-Battleships, 12 cruisers (all types), 27 destroyers, and only a few dozen submarines of which less than 10 could actually sail march further than the North Sea.

As I said in a post in AAP40 forum, I have no problem with the UK “wasting” its money on replacing endless destroyers in German submarine raids, but regularly trashing the UK fleet as part of the standard German moves is just silly, not to mention impossible.

Cheers,

Lozza007</sigh>

Hi there,

For starters - NO rant intended, BUT….

I resent somewhat the implication that the RN has to be utterly destroyed in most Axis & Allies games, in order for Germany to have a show of doing well.  Not only is it historically impossible (not just unlikely) but it leaves a bad taste in the mouths of players who like the challenge of playing the UK.

A better solution in my opinion is to have the UK navy forced to remain in home waters due to some German/Italian threat of invasion, OR encourage sufficient German submarine warfare in the Atlantic that a goodly portion of UK income is either lost every turn (limiting massive fleet builds) or forcing the UK to build Destroyers every turn, rather than more useful Transport ships.

Operation SeaLion should be a gamble for the Germans, not a realistic option.  I’d certainly hate to see a game where the UK is bundled out 50% of the time without the UK player even getting a single turn!

Remember folks - the RN was much the same size as the US navy so realistically there should be 1 Sub, 1 DD (or more), 1 Cruiser, 1 BB, and 1 CV + planes off northern UK just like the US fleet off Western USA in AAP40.  Germany should have no more than 1 Cruiser and a couple of Subs…

Keen to see what comes out from the designers :)

Lozza007

Hey chaps,

I’ve been looking over these threads for a while now and am keen to work on my Allied strategy.  Also used to play a bit through www.days-of-infamy.org with AAP a few years ago.

So what’s the update on Japan taking Hawaii in the first couple of turns and then working its way south towards NSW on J4?  Has this been discredited at all, with blocking ships perhaps?

Similarly, what are the thoughts on staying alive as UK in India/China?

I’ve only played the game once as I don’t own it yet, but I was rather shocked to see how much firepower Japan can bring to bear on J1.  The J1 attack certainly seems optimal given the IPC/Allied unit/Japan income tradeoffs.  The only plan that seems to get the US into the war quickly and effectively seems to be a northern route, out of Midway or Hawaii and attacking Japan’s new builds and maybe Korea.

I’ve modelled some naval combat a bit and found that the US player only has any hope of victory in the first few rounds if it can nibble off bits of the Japanese fleet.  Fighting battles with extra Japanese air power (i.e. more than the 6 air units from the Carriers) results in disaster, and any battle that sees the US lose the core of its fleet (Carriers, Battleship etc) is a win for Japan - just like in original AAP.  By the time you rebuild and get in position again, Japan has matched you $ for $ and it’s a stalemate.

A couple of questions too (since I don’t have a copy of the rules):

1. can you build ports and air bases on newly captured territory? (ref: Japanese port in Midway)
2. can you build Industrial Complexes on newly captured territory? (ref: US Factory in Korea).

The latter is important as I can’t understand how a US Factory in Korea would survive if it was built 1 turn after Korea was captured - Japan would surely have units nearby to retake it, or just bomb it to uselessness?

Cheers!

Lozza007