There is nothing on this earth sexier, believe me, gentlemen, than a woman you have to salute in the morning. Promote 'em all, I say, 'cause this is true: if you haven’t gotten a blowjob from a superior officer, well, you’re just letting the best in life pass you by.
Colonel Nathan R. Jessup, “A Few Good Men”
The annual 2nd Edition NTRR tournament is now open for signup at AAMC. The tournament starts on May 7, so sign up by May 6, 2007.
http://aamc.net/bunker/forumsql/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=257
Saburo Sakai
AAMC Commander of Tournaments
I may have missed it, but it doesn’t look like anyone cited the Battle of Lepanto - 1571. This should certainly rank among the top 2 or 3 naval battles in human history. The battle stopped the expansion of the Ottoman empire and kept Europe Christian - for those who think that kind of thing is important.
SS
I don’t know which president was in office when I was born.
Based on your story, it would have been Eisenhower. Unless, of course, you spent a whole lot of years in Grade 3. :wink:
SS
Situation 1: No, transports may never load in the same sea zone as an enemy unit. The rule book should be read to mean that units can only unload from a transport if an amphibious assault is occuring and only if the naval battle preceding the amphibious assault is won by the attacking force.
Situation 2: No. Again, a transport can never load while in the same sea zone as an enemy unit.
SS
Yeah, but I don’t look anything like that guy :lol:
My first online Axis & Allies Club was Days of Infamy which I joined June 1, 2004. I wanted a name that fit well with the the war in the Pacific theme and chose Saburo Sakai, by many accounts the leading fighter pilot of the pacific war, with at least 64 kills. I have since used the Saburo Sakai nickname or a variation of it in all of the Axis & Allies clubs I have joined.
No avatar, both because I haven’t found anything that really fits and I’m too lazy to look.
SS
There are two more tournaments open for signups at AAMC.
First, there is the Komp’s Tech War Tournament. This is a special, tech heavy alternate rule set developed by AAMC a few years back. The tournament is always a lot of fun. Sign up here: http://aamc.net/bunker/forumsql/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=245
Second, there is the 2x2 AARevised Team Tournament. Teams of two play a single game of AARevised in this single elimination tournament. Grab a teammate and sign up here: http://aamc.net/bunker/forumsql/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=246
Saburo Sakai
AAMC Commander of Tournaments
This is correct as long as the intervening territory is friendly or empty. If there is an enemy unit present, the 2 move blitz is blocked.
SS
Gamer,
There is a certain advantage that accrues to an AAPacific player with experience. But that is the purpose of my essays, to give the novice player a step up on where I was when I started playing the game. You don’t have to learn the India Crush by being crushed 4 or 5 times or learn the Anti-Crush through trial and error. I’ve set them out for you.
The other intent of the essays is to eliminate the mistakes and neutralize the tactics that are game enders. That leaves the players to play a tough, hard fought and close VP game into Round 7 or 8. This is where the game truly becomes great and it is especially so between two equally matched and expert players. In that sense, it is much closer to a true strategic test like chess than it is to A&A Classic which, if not decided by an M84 by US4 usually ends up being decided by who gets cheap tech first.
Once you get into a VP game, the playouts can be very different from game to game. Once again, that’s the beauty of AAPacific.
SS
Games can be over by the end of round 3 or they can last up to 40 rounds. How long that takes depends on how fast you play. The longest game I have played was 34 rounds.
SS
Making armor 3-3 would further significantly unbalance the game in favour of Germany. Germany starts the game with 13 armor on the board. Russia has 5, UK has 3 and US has none. Therefore, you have significantly enhanced the ability of the Germans to defend and hold a forward position in Russia. On top of that, transport capacity for the Allies (the manner in which all UK and US ground units get into play) is limited to 1 armor. Therefore increasing the defensive strength of armor does not help the Allies at all. While Russia could use a few armor units, it is so short of IPCs that it cannot build many.
The game is already unbalanced in favour of Germany and the turn 7 stack. Making armor defend on a 3 only makes the problem worse.
SS
@ncscswitch:
The defender is not the active player. As such, as soon as COMBAT is finished (the only part of the current turn in which the defender is involved), the defender would land that FIG (if possible).
THEN the attacker, who’s turn it is, would move on to the next phase of their turn… non-combat movement; during which the attacker would land THEIR aircraft.
I agree with this.
Saburo - Thanks for these articles. They’ve inspired me to blow the dust off of my AAP box and have another look at the contents.
I’m very happy to hear that. That is why I wrote the articles in the first place.
SS
“If I am told to fight, I shall run wild for the first six months, but I have utterly no confidence for the second or third year.”
Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto to Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe on the prospect of war with America
Implementing and Countering the 4 VP J1 Opening
Japan and the 4 VP Opening
In AAPacific, Japan has two basic paths to victory, the capital capture whether by way of India Crush or Australia Capture or the VP victory. Some aggressive Japanese players who seek a VP victory will try to get a leg up on the game by opening J1 with the objective of capturing sufficient territories and convoy routes to take Japan to 40 IPCs and 4 VPs on the first turn. Not unlike Yamamoto predicted, Japan can run wild at the beginning of the war but it is whether Japan can maintain that through to eventual victory that will determine the ultimate winner. If the 4 VP opening can be achieved Japan has gained a significant, but not insurmountable, advantage on the Allies.
I won’t go into the actual moves that are required to achieve 4 VPs on J1. I will leave that for players to figure out on their own. However, you must capture all of Hongkong, Malaya, Sumatra, Borneo, Java, Philippines, Celebes, Dutch New Guinea and all the related convoy routes. In addition you will make one or two limited attacks into China and the obligatory attack to wipe out the US fleet in sz9.
I have seen two versions of the 4 VP opening. The first one, I will call the “4 VP Standard Opening”. I call it Standard because in addition to all the attacks necessary to get to 4 VPs, the 4 VP Standard Opening also sees Japan capture New Britain and Midway. On NCM, the Japanese Carriers in sz20 make the move all the way to sz27 as is typical at the end of almost all J1s.
The second 4 VP opening I will call the “4 VP Modified Opening”. This opening, to the best of my knowledge, was developed by AndrewAAGamer who, as of this writing, is the Fleet Admiral and highest ranking player at Days of Infamy. He also happens to be one of the most creative, thoughtful and friendly AAPacific players around. The “modified” comes from the fact that neither Midway, New Britain, nor sz27 are attacked. At the end of J1 on the 4 VP Modified Opening, Japan cannot consolidate its fleet in sz27. Usually, the ACs are in sz25 and the rest of the major fleet units are spread around sz38, sz43 and sz47.
On balance, there is not a lot to choose between the 4 VP Standard and the 4 VP Modified openings. In my view, in the Standard opening, Japan is a little better positioned to continue to defend against US and UK incursions after J1 than in the Modified Opening because it is able to concentrate its fleet in sz27. However, because there are more attacks to make in the Standard Opening the chance is greater that one of the battles will go bad and Japan fails to achieve the 4 VPs desired.
After a successful 4VP J1, Japan must consolidate its fleet as soon as possible and then hold the middle of the board as it would in any other game. FIC must be stacked and sz28 should be occupied in strength or strongly threatened to prevent an early Allied incursion into the Central Pacific. The extra VP on J1 means that as 24 VP game can play out by round 7 (4-4-4-4-4-3-1 or 4-4-4-4-3-3-2) with the Allies scrambling to regain that “stolen” VP at some point along the way.
The Allied Counter to the 4 VP Opening
Two things will help the Allies successfully overcome the 4 VP opening, luck and aggression.
Unfortunately, the first factor is largely beyond the Allies control. However, do whatever you can. If your opponent declares those J1 opening battles and is going for 4 VPs, pull out the lucky rabbit’s foot and rub it for all its worth. Blow on the dice, pray, look at the dice from between your fingers, revealing each one in turn. Whatever it takes to swing lady luck to your side, do it.
Here’s why. By going for a 4 VP opening, Japan has just made every battle critical. Where there used to be some battles that, if lost, were just inconveniences (see, Essay #10), the 4 VP opening means any loss is a disaster. After all, the difference between a 39 IPC opening and a 32 IPC opening is only 7 IPCs, not even enough to buy a sub. But the difference between a 39 IPC opening and a 40 IPC opening can often mean the difference between a win on J7 and a loss on J8. So, when the J1 dice are rolling, my best advice is get lucky - the luckier the better!
After J1 is done, the Allies have to rely on the second factor - aggressive play. While a 4 VP opening does not automatically mean that Japan will not be able to capture India, it is very unlikely. Indeed, in the 4 VP Modified Opening, the Aircraft Carriers are not positioned to assist a J3 attack on India and likely won’t get there for a J4 attack either. This frees up the Allies to counterattack aggressively with a reduced concern that either India or Australia is at risk.
So, on Allies 1, find the weakest spots and attack. Take back any IPC territory, convoy route or both and kill as many Japanese ships and units as possible. This is not to say that you should take on low odds battles. That is never a good idea. No, it means that where the odds of success are 50% or better - attack. Every island that you take back is an island that Japan must attack again on J2. Every sea zone the you occupy is a sea zone to which Japan must dispatch a fighting unit to retake and which can be picked off by US planes on Allies 2. Every ship that is sunk is one less that will be available to Japan to defend sz38 in the decisive battles later in the game. In short, attack!!
Here’s a note on purchasing as well. As you will likely be playing a VP game, the US does not need to worry so much about buying bombers on US1. A large helping of subs on US1 will be more useful in a VP game. India should still buy land units because they will be needed to dislodge Japan from FIC as soon as possible but Australia can buy subs or a DD and a sub. It does not need to buy the AC that would work to counter an India Crush.
With the 4 VP Modified Opening, there is another opportunity for the Allies to be aggressive. Since the Japanese carriers end up in sz25, they cannot reach sz28 on J2. Further, since the sz27 sub is left alive, it can block any naval units from sz38 from reaching sz28 on J2. As a result if the UK can retake DNG with the units in Papua and a fighter from Queensland on UK1, Japan will not be able to attack Papua on J2. The US and UK can land 6 fighters and 2 Bombers on Papua at the end of Allies 1. On J2, the Japanese fleet will attempt to consolidate in sz33 and the entire Allied fleet can move to sz28 - including the 9 newly build US submarines - and the 6 Allied fighters can be launched into sz28 as CAP. This puts 10 fighters and probably 10 subs, along with 2 ACs, 3 DDs and 6 Transports on the doorstep of Japan’s IPC producing territories. With a 5 bomber buy on US2, the IJN will have no alternative but to retreat and the Allies can begin aggressively retaking territories.
In short, the Allied response to a successful 4 VP opening must be aggressive counterattacks. You have to regain that VP as soon as possible and you must weaken Japan as much as you can before it can consolidate its fleet. If the Allies are slow off the mark, victory for Japan will be assured.
Saburo Sakai
In which case, the defending fighter has to find its landing spot first. I would agree with that.
SS
I had to modify this essay. One sea zone reference was incorrect. I had referred to a sz28 sub surviving when it should have been sz27. This should be changed in the published essay. The error in the essay was in the paragraph immediately following the summary of the UK India purchases.
SS
The fighter definitely lands at the end of combat and cannot fight twice. The following is a quote from page 8 of LHTR:
All combat takes place at the same time, but
each affected territory or sea zone is
resolved separately and completely before
beginning to resolve another combat. The
attacker decides the order. No new units may
enter as reinforcements once combat has begun.
Since all combat takes place at the same time, the fighter cannot fight in two battles.Â
I agree that LHTR does not appear to clarify the order in which attacker’s NCM and defender’s fighter landing occur. All it says is the following, on page 19:
A fighter based on a defending carrier that is
destroyed in combat must try to land. It must
move 1 space to a friendly territory or
aircraft carrier, or be destroyed.
SS
J1 Disasters and How to Recover From Them
In the world of the warrior, seppuku was a deed of bravery that was admirable in a samurai who knew he was defeated, disgraced, or mortally wounded. It meant that he could end his days with his transgressions wiped away and with his reputation not merely intact but actually enhanced. The cutting of the abdomen released the samurai’s spirit in the most dramatic fashion, but it was an extremely painful and unpleasant way to die, and sometimes the samurai who was performing the act asked a loyal comrade to cut off his head at the moment of agony.
The Samurai Way of Death, Samurai: The World of the Warrior, Dr. Stephen Turnball
In AAPacific, J1 is a critical turn. While Japan, on J1, has the surprise attack advantage that sees all non-Chinese units defend on a ‘1’, it is still possible for Japan to suffer catastrophic losses in key sea zones or territories that will significantly hamper Japan’s chances of success. Whether Japan is able to fight on despite the disaster or whether it is time to choose the Samurai Way of Death depends on the extent of the disaster and where it happens.
In my experience, J1 disasters can be divided into three categories:
1. Unfortunate Inconveniences - These are the battles that would have been nice to win. While losing these battles forces Japan to revise its J2 strategy, Japan still has a good chance of recovering to win the game.
2. Game Threateners - These are the battles that, when lost, mean Japan will be playing from behind for the entire game. Not only good Japanese play is necessary to overcome these disasters, but also a good portion of luck.
3. Seppuku Time - Losing these battles means that there is really no alternative but to take the honorable way out, send your apologies to the Emperor and ask your loyal comrade to cut off your head at the moment of greatest agony. Hopefully, this will be followed quickly with setting up the board again for another game!
Dealing with the Unfortunate Inconveniences
I won’t try to cover all of the possible battles Japan can get into on J1 because they are as varied as the number of sea zones and territories within range of the initial set up of Japanese units. I’ll only cover the more common battles. With that in mind, here are the J1 battles that, if lost, create an unfortunate inconvenience for Japan:
- any attack on a Chinese territory
- missing the sz38 or sz27 subs
- Hongkong
- sz54 transport
- Borneo
If Japan has a disastrous battle in any of the Chinese territories, the usual consequence is that Japan suffers greater casualties of infantry than it would like but usually will not lose any air units and because none of the Chinese territories are worth any IPCs, Japan is not at risk of losing a J1 VP. The failure to capture Suiyuan, Anhwe, Kiangsi, Kwangsi or Yunnan inconveniences Japan as it may be necessary, on J2, to divert ground units and a fighter or two to kill wayward Chinese units. However, unless the losses are especially egregious, Japan should be able to recover.
Missing one or both of the Allied subs in sz38 and sz27 can also inconvenience Japan but does not significantly inhibit Japanese chances for success in the long run. Missing the sz38 sub means that unguarded transports in sz45 or sz36 may be at risk or, more likely that the sub will substall into sz27 and prevent Japan from executing a J3 India Crush (see Essay #1). Likewise the survival of the sz27 sub means that an India Crush is not likely possible and the UK player will be free to build something other than a carrier on UK1 but a VP victory is still easily within Japan’s reach. If both the sz38 and sz27 subs survive, it becomes more difficult but again, not a result that leads inevitably to Japanese defeat.
Failing to take Hongkong ranks up there as one of the most annoying outcomes on J1, but not something that will turn the tide of the game irreversibly against Japan. It has happened to me twice as of this writing and I managed to win both games. Attacking Hongkong on J1 with 3 Inf, 1 Rtl against 2 infantry suggest the odds of success approach 99%. Nonetheless, a defeat here can happen. If Japan fails to take Hongkong on J1, it usually will not cost Japan a VP because a standard 32 IPC opening would still see Japan get 30 IPCs and 3 VPs. All that Japan must do to recover from this is adjust its J2 attacks to take Hongkong. It’s an inconvenience but not fatal.
There’s about a 1 in 5 chance that an attack by 1 single bomber against the sz54 transport will result in the loss of the bomber. Even worse, there is about a 1 in 13 chance that the attack will result in the loss of the bomber with the transport surviving. Once again, this is not fatal to Japan’s plans. It will make an India Crush a little more difficult and will require some adjustment to Japan’s J2 battles but the loss of a single bomber will not turn the tide against Japan.
For those players who like to attack Borneo on J1, failing to take it is an annoyance. However, because an attack on Borneo is usually part of a 35 or 36 IPC opening, the loss of the 3 IPCs that go with Borneo does not prevent Japan from getting to the essential 3 VPs on J1. Japan must adjust it’s J2 attacks to invade Borneo again, but since most J2’s include an attack on Borneo, this is not particularly difficult. Usually the only adverse impact is the additional casualties that Japan has suffered in failing to take Borneo on J1.
Scrambling to Overcome the Game Threateners
As mentioned, these “disasters” are much more challenging for the Japanese player to overcome. Indeed, it may take more than good play to do so. You may need a fair bit of luck. The “Game Threateners” are:
- Midway
- New Britain
- sz43/Java
- sz46/Malaya
Failing to take Midway and/or New Britain are disasters for the same reason. If Japan can’t take the ports in Midway and New Britain, the Japanese CVs in sz20 can’t get to sz27 to join up with the Japanese BB, transports and DDs making both fleets more vulnerable. Failure to get the CVs to sz27 means that they can’t move to sz28 on J2 thus giving the Allies the chance to push forward into sz29, 32 or even sz28(using CAP if necessary - see Essay #9). As sz28 is one of the key sea zones early in the game (see Essay #8) , failure to establish a presence there on J2 buts Japan behind for the entire game. The only way to recover from this is to move the CVs back as quickly as possible. On J1 send them to sz25 and plan on consolidating the Japanese fleet in sz33 on J2 instead of sz28. From there you will have to improvise a defence or counterattack against the advancing Allied Fleet. It will not be easy, but it is possible.
Usually sz43 will not be a defeat for Japan because the odds are so much in its favour on J1. However, there is a disaster that can occur in sz43 that can create problems for Japan for the entire turn. Usually Japan will attack sz43 with a couple of transports, a DD or BB and AC and a fighter. If Japan is forced to lose more than 1 unit, it has a difficult choice to make. The fighter will be the first loss, but should Japan then lose a transport loaded with ground units for the invasion of Java or should it lose an AC or BB. If a DD is available, that will be the loss and likely Japan will choose to lose the transport in the hopes that better luck will prevail with the remaining ground units going into Java. However, weakening the attack into Java or suffering an outright defeat in Java will cause Japan significant problems.
Java is usually an essential part of a J1 3 VP opening. The 4 IPCs usually are the difference beteen 3 VPs and 2 VPs on J1. On top of that, Japan will have to send ground forces to Java again on J2. Any transports that are left in sz43 are likely to be destroyed by the US on US2 unless Japan commits a substantial surface navy to protect the transports. This will not be possible while at the same time making a large naval commitment to sz28, so Japan will likely have to compromise by sacrificing the transports in sz43. For Japan, there is no alterative but to pick up the pieces, attach Java on J2 and hope there is a chance to make up for the missing VP in later round.
sz46 and Malaya can cause significant problems for Japan if those battles go badly. Like Java, Malaya is almost always part of a 3 VP opening and the failure to capture it will mean trailing by 1 VP from the get go. Malaya is worse for Japan because the UK fighter is in a better position to cause havoc on UK1 if it survives the J1 assault. Malaya usually sees a bigger commitment of resources from Japan on J1 and consequently a disaster here means that Japan has suffered heavier casualties. I almost included this battle in category 3 because I have never won a game where I failed to take Malaya on J1 and I have never lost a game where the same fate befell my opponent. Notwithstanding this, I believe that this disaster can be overcome and therefore sz46/Malaya remains in the “game threateners” category. For Japan, all there is to do is take Malaya on J2, consolidate its ground units on J3 and J4 into FIC and hope it can hold on for the win over the long run.
Accepting Seppuku Time
I looked at all the typical battles on J1 and there were only 2 that I felt meant the game was over on J1. These are:
- Not sinking all units in sz9
- Failing to capture the Philippines
In sz9, Japan usually commits a minimum of 4 Fighters and 2 Subs. Sometimes 5 fighters are used along with the 2 subs. With 4 fighters, the chance of losing this battle is a little more than 100 to 1. With 5 fighters it is about 1000 to 1. I’ve never played in a game where the sz9 attack failed but I can tell you that it can happen. In Days of Infamy Game #5747 between two very good players - Goodgulf and KittenOfChaos - Goodgulf attacked sz9 with 1 sub and 4 ftrs. This weaker attack increased the chance of failure to about 1 in 25. But it was worse than that. Japan managed to sink only the transport and DD. Two US BBs survived to wreak havoc with the IJN after J1. Needless to say, Goodgulf lost that game.
The problem with BBs surviving the sz9 battle is not just that the US can push forward against Japan’s navy so much more easily, it is also that Japan has suffered such heavy losses in that battle. Losing 2 or 3 fighters on J1 is not a problem. Losing 4 or 5 and having one or 2 US battleships survive irrevocably turns the balance of power against Japan. If you’re playing Japan and sz9 turns out as bad as that, concede the game and move on. It will be more fun and less distressing than trying to recover the impossible position.
Finally, there is the Philippines. This is the true game ender. If Japan fails to take Philippines on J1, no end of horrendous consequences arise. First, the US bomber in Hawaii is in range of sz36 with a landing spot in Philippines. Any newly built transports are cannon fodder. Likewise, any unprotected transports in sz45 can be hit by the US fighter in China. Worse though is the fact that the US can and will build an IC in the Philippines on J1. Japan can’t ignore this IC but it capture it either. In US hands, the IC will permit the US to place up to 3 units a turn in the heart of the Japanese empire in the western pacific. Recaptured by Japan it will eventually become the target of a concerted US SBR campaign when the Allies recapture New Britain, Caroline Islands, French IndoChina or DNG. Finally, to pile on Japan will usually not reach 3 VPs on a J1 where it doesn’t capture the Philippines and will have suffered heavy losses in the attack. All together, this leaves the honourable Japanese player with little alternative but seeking the Samuai’s death. Set up the board again and hope for better luck!
Saburo Sakai
I have played perhaps half a dozen games of AAEurope, so I am not an expert in that game. My experience is very much like that of others - not much can stop the German stack.
SS