Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. mtngoatjoe
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 4
    • Posts 60
    • Best 2
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Posts made by mtngoatjoe

    • RE: Russia Round One–How to justify anything but inf?

      Others more experienced than I can go into detail, but the gist of it is this: The Allies usually pursue a Kill Germany First (KGF) strategy, and the Axis usually pursue a Kill Russia First strategy. In that context, the game is a race. The US and UK focus on the Atlantic and concede the Pacific. Germany tries for Africa, the US returns it to the UK, and then Japan tries to take it back.

      On the Eastern Front, Russia must be able to take/trade territory with Germany. A defense only strategy for Russia allows Germany a significant economical bonus that will allow Germany to win before the US and UK can land troops and take the pressure off Russia.

      Basically, Russia has two tasks: Survive until its allies arrive, and pressure Germany enough to prevent an economic situation that supports Germany.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      Bunnies,

      It was meant to be toung-in-cheek. But the way you say it, it’s not so funny. Remember, it’s just a game. The thing I like about this forum is that I learn a lot from folks such as yourself. And one of the things I’ve learned is that there are some scenarios where I wouldn’t need a tank on J1. There are a lot of times when it would be appropriate, but, not every time. I stand by my destroyer purchase.

      And you’re right about the kinds of people who spout my “philosophy”. I’ve listened to that shit for 20 years. Anyway, sorry it came across the wrong way. Several jackasses were the inspiration when I wrote it, and I thought it was funny.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      @Bunnies:

      @MtnGoatJoe:

      The only buys I can guarantee on J1 would be a destroyer and a tank

      What do you use the tank for?

      Don’t mind me. One of my failed New Year Resolutions is to not deal in absolutes.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: What do you name the various operations and gambits?

      @Bunnies:

      There will be a quiz on it on Thursday.   :evil:

      Will it be a surprise quiz? I hate it when I don’t get a chance to prepare  :?

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Russian moves to start game

      I was just looking at the board and you’re right, I don’t like the move. Leaving Germany with the troops in West Russia put them in too good of a spot. They can hit Moscow with 3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank, 2 fighters, and 1 bomber.

      You can reinforce Moscow to withstand that, but that would leave the Caucasus wide open. And Germany can hit the Caucasus with an additional 1 inf, 1 tank, and 1 fighter. Of course, Germany would give up a lot doing that, but I really wouldn’t want to be fighting over the Caucasus starting in round 1.

      I might try a triple, but whatever I do, it’s going to include the Ukraine and West Russia.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Russian moves to start game

      I think Karelia and the Ukraine would fall anyway. Russia could put a troop in Archangel to prevent a blitz, and in any case, Russia could easily take it back. Even if Germany takes Norway, I don’t think it’s the end of the world.

      Depending on where Germany’s fighters and subs are, the Allies would have a couple of options. 1) The UK could take Norway back on UK1 depending on German troop locations . Or 2) The US could take Norway on US2. The Allies would run into problems in Africa, but the US could still be in Africa by US2 anyway. It just depends on what Germany does with its air force and subs. If the bomber fights in Egypt, it would likely land in Libya. If that were the case, then Germany would likely only have two or three fighters in Western Europe. If that were the case, the UK could do its naval build in SZ8, and by the end of US1, the allies could have 1 battleship, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, and 1 aircraft carrier with two fighters in SZ8 to protect the US transports. If Germany consolidated its whole air force and all its subs within range of SZ8, the Allies would obviously have to go with a different strategy.

      What are your thoughts on a US IC in Norway on round 3? There could be some use for that. And if Germany wanted to fight over it, well, the Allies would build their invasion force up until they could take and hold it. And, if Germany is sending units north, then those units aren’t going east, and that’s good for Russia. Also, with Ally forces in Norway, it would put a serious dent in the Axis’ ability to hold Karelia, which is vital in order for them to get 9 victory cities.

      Again, there are a lot of ifs here, but it’s a scenario that could play out.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Russian moves to start game

      What are the consequences to only hitting Norway and the Ukraine on R1? Generally, I like to be aggressive with Russia, but a failed triple often leads to the loss of the game. If Russia only hit Norway and Ukraine, what would be threatened? If Russia won in the Ukraine, I would think that Russia could fortify Moscow and the Caucasus enough to protect both.

      A loss in the Ukraine could lead to a fight over the Caucasus and would be catastrophic to Russia. It might trade hands every round, and Germany might not be able to build there for a while, but it would take Russia’s attention away from every other fight.

      I’m trying to remember, does Germany have 3 inf and 1 fighter in Norway, and 3 inf, 1 art, and 1 tank in West Russia?

      What would Germany do if it lost both fights? Reinforce West Russia? Pull back?  Drive to Moscow or the Caucasus? The West Russia troops could be supported by the bomber and a fighter (or 2?). I would think losing two fighters in round 1 would make quite a difference in rounds 3+.

      I know this isn’t going to be a popular strategy, but I’m hoping you guys can help me think it through.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • What do you name the various operations and gambits?

      What do you name the various operations and gambits, either historically based, or A&A specific?

      And what do you think the difference is between an operation and a gambit? To me, an operation takes place over 2 or more rounds and has a reasonable chance of success, while a gambit happens on one turn, and the chance of success is not as high as an operation.

      For example:

      • Operation Sea Lion: The German invasion of the UK.

      • Operation Overlord: The Allied invasion of Northwest Europe.

      • The Norwegian Gambit: Russian attack on Norway R1. The first mention of this I saw was in a post from Granada. I don’t know if this is actually the first mention, so set the record straight if I’m wrong.

      • Operation Polar Express: The Japanese invasion of the US via a northern route. This seems to have been more of an option in earlier versions of the game, but I’ve seen it mentioned occasionally.

      • Operation AI (AKA Hawaii Operation): The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

      What else is there? Would you consider Germany invading Egypt a gambit? How about a UK landing on Borneo?

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: How often do you hold back attack forces?

      I think two of the general considerations are: 1) Is taking the territory worth losing the unit in a possible (or likely) counter attack? And 2) Does sending a unit to a territory take it out of range for an attack where it will be needed on the next turn?

      As for Russia specifically, I’ve seen people take West Russia with overwhelming force, and take the Ukraine with minimal force. This leads to the Germans taking back the Ukraine, but being unable to take West Russia.

      I’ve also seen people try to take a third territory on R1. The problem is that a failure in the Ukraine could leave the Caucasus open for invasion. If the Axis thinks they can capture and hold the Caucasus, they just might give it a shot. Don’t forget, if Germany captures it, Japan has four fighters they can land there J1. If most of Russia’s units are in West Russia, a German invasion of the Caucasus is what I would call, “Taking the bait.” If Russia is spread too thin and can’t take the Caucasus back, that’s what I would call a, “Catastrophic failure of leadership.”

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Does Japan need to be house ruled to weaken them?

      My buddies and I played two games one Saturday a while ago. Everybody played the same power for both games. Allies won the first, and axis won the second. A&A Spring 1942 is very balanced.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      I think Japan is hard to discus because there are so many ifs. The only buys I can guarantee on J1 would be a destroyer and a tank. I would only buy and IC in FIC if I thought I could go through India. Whether that is possible or not depends on the Allies. The Allies may chose to make a stand in Sinkiang instead. Or maybe Russia took a pounding in round 1 and needs its infantry elsewhere. And where did the UK go? Maybe it found other uses for its bomber and/or fighters.

      My scenarios are reactions to very specific actions and results by the other players before J1 and during US1. I think I implied more rigidity in my actions in previous posts than I really have. If neither of the two scenarios I’ve discussed play out, then I think Japan needs to look at building transports and picking a route to Moscow. And I think we’ve only touched on the subjects of Japan taking Africa and the option of sending Japanese air units to Europe. But again, I think those options are simply reactions.

      If I have any philosophy for the game, it’s this: Position my forces to fight the enemy where and when I chose. Make the enemy react to me, and make tactical decisions based on strategic goals. Don’t fight battles that I can’t win, or gamble where a loss guarantees the likely loss of the game. And pray everything doesn’t go to s&!t with bad dice :-)

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      Hobbes,

      Do you think the US went into the Pacific because of the two IC buy and the lack of a SZ52 attack, or was he going to do it anyway? How did the Russian/German front go in round 1? Do you think that played into the decision?

      If I were the US player, I don’t know if I’d go into the Pacific just because of a two IC J1 move, but if the Germans took didn’t do well and I still had my whole fleet, then I’d seriously consider it.

      Also, how lucky was that two sub attack on the battleship? At a minimum, the subs will get three shots. If the battleship doesn’t hit on the first roll, then the subs will get at least 5 shots, and they only need two hits. I know the battleship should have won, but I’m curious about the numbers.

      And speaking of subs, this is why I like to buy a destroyer on J1. It shows the US that you’re ready to fight over the Pacific if need be. I think it can be hard to hit the US on J3 if you don’t buy a destroyer on J1. If the Us builds subs on US1 or US2, Japan is much better off attacking than defending against these. Subs are pretty much fodder on defense, but significantly more threatening when they attack. I like to set it up like this (and assumes a US1 Pacific naval build):

      • J1: Buy destroyer and place in SZ 60. Take back Borneo; fight whatever other battles you need to; but always be ready to consolidate on J2.

      • J2: Depending on the number of Japanese fighters available (and the number Japan is willing to commit to the fight on J3), Japan may need to buy an aircraft carrier. A bomber may also be helpful depending on where the US fleet is. My goal for the end of J2 is to stage my fleet in SZ 51 (Wake Island) so I’m prepared to attack on J3. This staging also includes my air units.

      • J3: If at all possible, attack US fleet. Not attacking, or not being able to attack on J3 can lead to an arms race with the US. If Japan has taken Borneo, Australia, India, China, and Sinkiang, then Japan should have the money for it, but if Germany is having a hard time, then Japan must start putting pressure on Russia. And an arms race with the US just distracts from that. I think the key is to capitalize on the initial Japanese fleet size and not let the US get three rounds of builds in the water.

      In the end, I think the J1 destroyer buy gives Japan way more flexibility on J3 if the US gets froggy in the Pacific. If the US goes for a KGF, then Japan is only out 8 IPCs.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      @Mr.Biggg:

      I guess the difference would be then my indifference to the remaining subs. I just ignore them, more or less, and keep my fleet with my transports. 1 UK sub can’t do anything if you have a battleship escorting your trans.

      I’ve got lots of reasons for wanting a destroyer on J1, but in the end, it boils down to insurance. An enemy sub’s ability to submerge before combat means you have to make sure any units within range of the sub are sufficiently protected against a first strike sub. Is it an insurmountable problem? No. But with a J1 destroyer, Japan truly dominates the Pacific.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      @Mr.Biggg:

      @mtngoatjoe:

      I think Japan needs a destroyer on J1.

      I’m curious why it needs to be J1. You can always get 1 on J2. If US has built subs they are 2 turns from using them.

      Because, there are already two Allied subs running around, plus whatever else is left of the US Pacific fleet. I make it a priority to go island hopping, starting with Borneo, but to do that, Japan needs to protect its transport And if it buys another transport (though I tend not to), it needs to protect that. Buying a destroyer on J1 gives you options for chasing down the subs earlier (never a guarantee, but I try to). This is all aimed at having my entire air force pointed at the Caucasus at the end of J4.

      I might even buy a second destroyer on J2 if the US was gettin’ froggy. If, if, if….

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      Hobbes,

      I was going to say I half agree with you. But after changing my plan slightly, I think I ended up with what you were advocating. So, change my J2 and J3 purchases, and this would be my new evil plan:

      • J1: Buy IC for FIC; take and hold India.

      • J2: Buy IC for India, 2 infantry + 1 artillery for FIC.

      • J3: Buy 2 infantry + 1 artillery for India and 3 tanks FIC.

      • J4: Buy 6 tanks India/FIC; take the territory west of India with 9 units; Stage bombers and fighters for J5 attack.

      • J5: Buy 6 tanks India/FIC; Knock on the Caucasus’ door with up to 4 infantry, 2 artillery, 6 tanks, the pre-staged air units, and whatever else could make it’s way there in time (though any stragglers are probably better spent going through Northern Russia).

      And don’t forget, this is a “things are going well for Japan” plan. By the time you get to J4, Japan should have a lot of income. I want to go for a knockout punch on J5 in the Caucasus, and even Japan loses, I’ve got six more tanks + all my air on J6 to finish the job.

      Now if Germany is having a hard time of things, I’d lean a little more your way, build more infantry and artillery, and wait another round to hit the Caucasus. It just depends.

      My plan is also based on the idea of Germany having a big stack on Archangle at the end of G4. This will force Russia to either defend two territories, or consolidate in Moscow on R5. But the key to this for the Axis to have an overwhelming IPC advantage against Russia. If the Axis doesn’t end Russia by J6, then the game will likely go to the Allies. Not always, but, (and what did I say before?) if, if, if…

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Opinions on Japan buying two ICs in J1.

      I think Japan needs a destroyer on J1. Also, if you want two ICs in Asia, I think you’re better off doing it in FIC and India (Kwangtung is just too far away; you’re better off buying transports than building there). Two ICs build in Asia on J1 just might tempt the US into trying a KJF strategy (which wouldn’t really be a bad thing).

      There are several other things that Japan has to do at the same time, but just talking the IC strategy, this is what I’m going to try next time:

      • J1: Buy IC for FIC; take and hold India.

      • J2: Buy IC for India, 3 infantry for FIC.

      • J3: Buy 6 tanks India/FIC.

      • J4: Buy 6 tanks India/FIC; take the territory west of India with 9 units; Stage bombers and fighters for J5 attack.

      • J5: Buy 6 tanks India/FIC; Knock on the Caucasus’ door with up to 3 infantry, 9 tanks, the pre-staged air units, and whatever else could make it’s way there in time (though any stragglers are probably better spent going through Northern Russia).

      I would hope by the end of G4, Germany would be next door to Moscow. Even if he can’t take it, just being there will force Russia to pick between Moscow and the Caucasus. And either way, if Russia has to chose, it falls no later than round 6.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Famous last words

      I lose sight of my strategic goals while focusing on tactical issues.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: A Discussion on Japan

      If the UK abandons India on UK 1, then I think conditions are ripe to build an IPC in FIC on J1, and then another IPC in India on J2 (assuming the Russians can’t prevent you from placing units on it on J3). If you can place units J3, then at the end of J3 you’ll have at least 6 ground units (and as many as 10), and however many fighters you’ve sent.

      But even if Russia is in a position to fight over India, I’d say bring it on. Like Hobbes said, any units sent to India won’t be heading toward Germany. If Japan builds an IC in FIC on J1, then Japan could almost certainly take India back if it commits. The earlier Russia starts fighting Japan, the sooner it’s bleed dry. Even if India changes hands every turn, I’d say that favors the Axis.

      In my game, the US player build heavily in the Pacific, so it actually held me up for a round, but the fact that I could build six units per turn near the Caucuses is a big deal. If Germany takes a northern route to Moscow, then Russia has to split its forces to defend its two key territories.

      The downside is that even if the US doesn’t do much in the Pacific, it’s still hard for Japan to keep the Russian troops in eastern Russia from heading south one territory if Japan doesn’t build transports (which it wouldn’t want to if it’s building ICs). If Germany is having any setbacks on its eastern front, Russia can end up with 30+ IPCs at the end of R3. And if that’s the case, then it’s a slow road to take IPCs away.

      But not matter how things go, if you have transports, you have to protect them. I know I’m probably making a bigger deal of this than it is, but if the US has a Pacific fleet, it can island hop until Japan decides to deal with it. But once Japan moves its fleet out of SZ60, then its transports could be vulnerable (if the US has staged fighters and/or bombers in advance). There are a lot of what-ifs here, but if Japan builds ICs, then it doesn’t have transports to protect, which give its fleet and air units more flexibility.

      If Germany can take Africa, and if the German eastern front doesn’t collapse, and if the Allies don’t fight for India or Eastern Chine, and if the US commits to the Pacific, and if the dice don’t bounce off the table and over your head and take a big dump on you. If, if, if.

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • A Discussion on Japan

      I used to believe that Japan had to kill the American fleet in J1. But then I got tired of usually losing my attacking forces on US1. Can Japan kill the US fleet and survive the counter attack?

      The last game I played, I let the US fleet live, took back Borneo from the UK, took control of India and China, bought an IC for FIC, a sub and a destroyer, and set myself up to consolidate my fleet on J2 (if I so chose). This let the Russians move south, but blocking them would have required resources from other endeavors, and I knew I would get it back on J2.

      The US saw this as an opening to try a “distract Japan from Russia” strategy and bought a carrier, two subs, a transport, and a couple of ground troops. He put all the naval build in the Pacific.

      This kind of freaked me out, but I knew I had a round to prepare. I bought three tanks for FIC and a bomber. I took Australia and made some moves in Asia (took back my northern Asian territory from the Russians and took Singcang (SP?)). I used four fighters in Asia and left them in Kwangtun (SP?) so I could have some reaction options in the Pacific if needed.

      The US pushed west but left his fleet within reach of everything I had (except the cruiser I sent to Australia for bombardment). I think this was one of two tactical mistakes he made. He bought a carrier and an two fighters.

      I was nervous about attacking on J3, but I didn’t want his second carrier to catch up with his fleet. It turns out I need not have worried. I attacked with everything I had and obliterated his fleet. I lost very little in return. My big mistake was buying a carrier in case the battle went bad. I figured I could retreat my fighters to SZ60, place my carrier there and if I retreated with at least one carrier and two fighters, I would have enough of a deterrent to make what was left of the US fleet wait for its other carrier and fighters before it could counter attack. I also bought an IC for India.

      Since the battle went so well, I was able to start building six tanks in Asia as well as bombers in Japan.

      Throughout all this, Germany had some setbacks, but it was able to take and hold Africa (the other tactical error the Allies made). With the setbacks, it usually had a high 30s IPC count, but Russia wasn’t far behind.

      Our IPC count was pretty even at this point. The US had an IPC in Norway, but Japan could now keep  hitting Russia with six tanks, three fighters, and a bomber each turn. Germany recovered from its earlier setbacks, and the Allies lost any chance of landing in Europe in time to help Russia.

      With Germany on the verge of taking and holding its eastern European territories, the economic advantage was clearly with the Axis. It was getting late, so the Allies player conceded the game. I think with some luck he might have turned things around, but it had already been a long day for everyone (we had all helped a friend move into a new apartment).

      What would you guys have done different? None of us are expert players (we’ve only played about 8 games in the last year), so your insights would be useful.

      How do you destroy the US fleet in Hawaii without being susceptible to a US counter attack with a bomber, two fighters, a battleship, and a sub? Also, in our games, the UK usually takes Borneo UK1.

      If Japan let your Hawaii fleet live on J1, how would you capitalize?

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • RE: Magnetic carriers

      My cousin glued magnetic strips to the bottom of the planes. We’ve played five or six games like this and only a couple of strips have fallen off. All-in-all, I’d say glueing is the way to go.

      Page four of IL’s map thread has some comments on magnets and flight stands.
      http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=19486.0

      posted in Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
      mtngoatjoeM
      mtngoatjoe
    • 1 / 1