Great video Robin! No pics of 20 planes sitting in Alaska?
Interesting U.S. 1st push with the Axis.
It was a sloppy push - I was still working on the plan when the game started, and we were under time constraints. Next time I do this I won’t bother threatening ANZAC - that was a waste of time. I’d like to try this Japanese approach when Germany’s doing a little better, or with Sea Lion if England doesn’t defend well enough.
Is it better to go heavy at the Royal Navy, which forces you to use heavy ground troops against France, which in turn denies you an opportunity to stack up against Moscow (non-combating those Holland/Belgium tanks, WG mechs, and Slovakia/Hungary tanks instead of sending them to France)?
It seems to me, in a very general, strategic sense, that you have to either clean that Navy out good OR make sure you’re in a position to seize Russia before the U.S. really gets into the mix. If you end up in a position where the allies have the Atlantic AND Moscow still stands, your goose is cooked my friend.
Welcome to the forums Jercules!
That’s certainly food for thought. In my experience if Germany kills those boats and retains a fleet, UK can’t build a secure navy for a long time. This obviously helps against Russia, but maybe Leaving some boats and doing France light (with planes) as an all out Barbarossa rush could pay off. Do it with an IC in Romania perhaps?
Are CVs really only 14IPCs in this edition, or is that a typo?
I recal a concern about this that if UK is at war with Japan but Russia is not at war in Europe, Russia can land a fighter in Egypt, forcing Italy to ignore it or attack Russia. This only really works if UK declares war on turn one or two, and Germany has not attacked Russia by turn two or three. I don’t see this as a problem for the Axis:
Japan would love a DoW by UK
Germany tends to attack Russia anyway
UK can generally hold Egypt by turn two without the Russians
If it’s the ahistoric nature of the situation that bothers you, how do you feel about Japan helping Italy in the Med, or America ignoring a Japanese occupation of Hawaii?
I attack sz109 w 1bmb & 1sub, sz110 & 111 each with 2subs, 1ftr & 1tac, and I attack sz112 with 2ftr, 1bb & 1ca. I do this whether or not I’m going Sea Lion - in fact I never decide on Sea Lion till seeing UK1.
Taking out those battleships is good. If you have naval presence (I build a cv in sz112), it can take UK a long time to build a secure fleet. When I’ve gotten unlucky and left a battleship alive, UK’s always been right on my poor German butt.
I’d need to see the whole board to answer…
Fighters parked in the island of Japan can chose to scramble into sea defense or remain for land defense. This makes it very difficult for America to allocate their own air units in this invasion. Basically USA needs to put enough air in the sea to win if you scramble, but enough air in the island to win if you don’t scramble. Depending on how secure India is, you may have enough to do both. Has India they been fortressing or assisting in North Africa?
Good luck!
@Frontovik:
A Russia who builds exclusively Infantry and Artillery will have more land units than Germany will by G5.
I would absolutely LOVE it if I as Germany faced a Russia with lots of units on the front lines! It would make it easy to carve up Russia’s army piecemeal.
Russia should buy Inf/Artillery and mass into a couple big armies… constantly giving up ground for time. When opportunity arises, counter attack those German tank stacks and you will blunt the German spear.
how’s that possible?
every round germany has more money than russia, and a lot more starting troosp aswell
so how can USSR have more land units than germany? not even mentioning attacking the german stack…
I haven’t crunched the numbers myself, but this could be possible if Russia buys Cheaper units an Germany buys expensive tanks.
Sorry Zooooma, I got this a bit off topic.
No problem - tangents happen. I found the initial responses quite helpful; besides which I’d planned to start a new thread as soon as I’ve devised a more concrete plan anyway.
As for sending Russian units eastward. The best they can do is go all the way East, above Manchuria/Korea, because unless Japan and Russia engage each other, they are not at war. The rules specify that Russia cannot send units into China unless Russia is at war with Japan.
But you can simply declare war against Japan and then move into China. Really there’s zero drawback in declaring war. You don’t lose a thing, and Japan doesn’t gain.
Thanks everyone for the input! I’m going to draft a plan and post the moves soon.
But what if America for the most part ignores Japan.
The Turn I declare war, I’ll clear a path to Western US. With five CVs, my air units alone outnumber what they can build there. Transports bought the turn before can hit BC from The Sea Of Japan. The Following turn I can land all my planes in Alaska. If USA ignores me, I’ll take California. If they continue to ignore me, I’ll take central US.
This is not a Kill-America-First strategy because I know USA will respond (though I think I can crush them if they don’t). But I worry Uncle Sam might devise a reaction that is just cheap enough to not hurt their Europe campaign very much, but just effective enough to make me wish I hadn’t bothered. It might be worth play testing, but first I need to draft a plan I like, (which is coming together as I type).
Also, if Japan attacks (unprovoked) either Anzac or Britain then America may enter the war. … It has seemed to me allowing American in the war any earlier than turn 4 is pretty much dooming the Axis. My opinion though.
Maybe you’re right. Of course USA collects the same on turn three whether you declare or not, but It does let them attack (or poise on the coast of Gibraltar). If USA have built Turns one and two in the Atlantic, despite a J2 occupation of sz26It might be worth letting the into Gibraltar or France early 'cause you’re really going to clobber them.
Also, if Japan focuses, say, 2 turns or so on the Pacific… Asia will get token attention… meaning China and India get to be formidable and extremely difficult to assail.
True, but you’ll get money elsewhere. India probably won’t attack you till turn three, So against just China you should only need a token force (given the size of your air force). If you induce a good reaction from USA you’ll be making your way back to Asia anyway. If you don’t provoke a response you won’t need India or China.
In our games on ANZAC 1 the player always moves his Destroyer up to the Queensland SZ to block a Japanese move to the capital in one move. So to take Aus you have to DoW on J2, then wait until J3 to take it…
The destroyer doesn’t block you as long as you’re not at war. You could move to the Coast of Queensland J2 and declare war and take Queensland at once in J3 (if I go with a J3 attack).
Also Japan doesn’t really threaten allied efforts by taking out aus, so as a US player I think I’d just dump most of my IPC’s into Europe early anyways and put Germany on the defensive before they take the offensive (because of your early DoW)
Yes, that’s the problem with targeting ANZAC - it’s easy money but it doesn’t help that much to get rid of them. The purpose of ANZAC is to provide Japan with some income to take should they decide to pester America. The goal is to draw America away from the Atlantic without bankrupting Japan!
Final thoughts: Sea Lion only seems worth it to me if it can be done on the cheap because the British player did not spend on defense early. Even then I would not try and spend points to hold it from US unless I found a better way for Japan to pressure US. The games in which sea lion was done in our group with Germany investing heavy resources resulted in Germany getting maimed by Russia.
I tend to agree, but if USA is drawn into the Pacific then Germany can afford to spend more on Sea Lion (though I’m not sure how much more). This in turn should raise UK’s minimum budget for homeland defense (at the very least). Regardless I like the idea of drawing America away from Europe with or without Sea Lion, provided Japan isn’t set back (beyond what’s to be expected when USA goes Pacific).
i dont think the buying of a few offensive units on R1 (they could be mech inf instead and be only slightly less efficient in our russian defense should germany turn against us, and perhaps even better if speed counts for anything)would be that (if at all) hampering to Russia coping with Germany.
Offensive units are vital for a strong defense but speed is not, since most of the fighting will be close to the ICs in Russia. Given the abundance of Russian infantry, artillery is the best bang for your buck if you want strong counter attacks. If Germany can’t beat Russia when Russia buys offensive, I shudder to imagine how Germany would fare if Russia buys for defense.
A thought, Russia might like to buy three artillery round one and save the rest. This threatens to build an attack force if Germany pulls Sea Lion, or a defense force If Germany goes Barbarossa. It might be hard to spend all that money on cheap units before the Germans arrive though…
Disclaimers -
This is not a KUSF or KAF approach. This a more general plunge into the Pacific, which will likely kill ANZAC and harass USA
I am not proposing this as the ultimate Japan strategy. I am brainstorming to consider if it’s viable. I know this approach is dubious, but I don’t think it should be rulled out without due consideration.
The intention is to draw the USA away from Europe, while still growing and thriving with Japan
Theses are, as the title suggests, preliminary thoughts. I am not at the recipe stage yet (should I ever get there).
Traditionally Japan has had a hard time venturing into the Pacific, largely because all the money is on the main land. But now there is money in the water!
The turn Japan takes Sydney, they’ll capture 13-18 IPCs plus collect 2 for the territory and 5 for a bonus. If they get in Hawaii too, that’s another 6. That could be a 26-29 IPC boost when they declare war (plus maybe Alaska, Philippines, British Columbia, etc)) in addition to any gains on the continent.
There will still be forces on the mainland and lots of planes, so you’ll still grow in that direction too.
The bulk of your fleet can move to the Carolines turn one. This poises you on Hawaii, ANZAC, or allows a withdraw back to the sea of China (you can see what the Allies do before committing).
A couple new CVs will allow you to carry up ten planes wherever you go.
Transports from Japan can hit Alaska and Vancouver the next turn. Vancouver blocks Alaska, so you can move massive planes there the following turn
Japans advance into the continent will be slowed, but not by too much. Japan has an excess of boats and planes which are hard to make use of against just Russia and China. Certainly some money will be spent on Asia!
If America tries to ignore Japan, Japan should do very well with this. If America responds in force, they’ll out gun Japan but be slow to make any real gains. Japan withdraws slowly back towards Asia, concentrating on defense and continental gains.
If this works, it will alleviate pressure from Italy and Germany. It may even make Sea Lion viable, though it helps Germany either way). Of course there are potential problems:
America might find a recipe to build just enough Westward to thwart you efforts and still have a strong force in Europe
With less pressure on India, England puts more pressure on Italy and Africa
If it takes a couple extra turns to get into India, Russia has more time and resources against Germany.
Has anyone tried, seen, or thought of anything like this? Can anyone offer any insight?
Thanks!
we are talking about a whole buys worth of russian troops (less three inf) attacking germany that turn. i would call that massive, and perhaps more important.
Recall I vegged on the defense of West Germany - the result of eight hours of non-stop fast paced gaming.
Had I noticed, I could have simply blocked USA with a cruiser in sz110 or sz104. That’s all I needed. Your “very cool move” was no more than my big blunder. The point is tat attack killed way more than one Russian build - something like half a dozen tanks, half a dozen troops, and a bomber.
I’d counted your stack, and without the assault on W. Germany (which I missed blocking), you were a big dog. If you’d sent more from the beginning, I could have sent more Italians to help, and even left fewer defenders in UK. It’s not so bad if you take back UK. I get to bring my tanks back, so It’s mostly only cost me the ten transports. for this 70 IPCs I collect 45 back and prevent three turns of UK spending (preventing five turns of UK boat building). If this leaves me enough to hold against Russia, maybe it’s a good deal.
Incidentally, If you want to be in Germany on R5, build as follows:
Turn one, artillery in Leningrad, tanks in Moscow.
Turn two, artillery in Leningrad, tanks in Moscow
Turn three, tanks in Leningrad, planes in Moscow.
Turn two, bombers in Moscow
But do you really want to plan an R5 strike in Berlin before you’ve seen my G2? If I spend my 70 IPCs on ground forces you might wish you’d bought more infantry and artillery I think. This is very interesting though, because an aggressive R1 might just allow you to under defend UK slightly (as you did) and still deter Sea Lion. This might end up being too costly for Russia, though.
i think it highly likely that a dedicated sea lion is a non starter against a competent russia. japan was still a couple of turns away from knocking on the russian door as well, and played about as speedily as japan can (without attacking UK straight away).
Too early to say. Probably it’s a non start if Russia buys top heavy turn one.
As for Japan, I couldn’t have been much faster doing what I did, but If I made a devoted rush for the Mediterranean I could have been supporting Europe a little sooner. I also think it’s possible to discover a Japanese strategy which lures USA into a fight in the Pacific. This would cast a new light on Sea Lion I think…
Most of us are finding the Axis struggle in Global. This means they need every plane they have and more.
I also agree that Barbarossa is more viable than forcing G3 Sea Lion (though I think some experimentation is still warranted, but that’s another thread).
Even so, why not replace the subs with transports? You’ll force england to buy men so you don’t get in too cheap (G2 Sea Lion would be devastating). Since england can’t buy boats this turn anyway you can get the subs and destroyer later, and in the meanwhile you now transport extra troops from West Germany straight to the Russian front.
Sea Lion is only a viable strategy from what I have seen if UK does not take the threat seriously and does not therefor defend its capital with enough and does not bring the carrier and destroyer from Morocco back to the North Atlantic.
Or perhaps if USA is busy in the Pacific?
thoughts ZOOOOMA?
japan did its normal japan stuff, and eventually attacked UK on J4 (which brought america into the war, but since America was not poised to retake england on USA four, did not accelerate USA into the war against germany, and nor did america make any extra money)
Japan took India turn four, but declared war turn three, collecting for all of DEI, all of China, Northern Russia, and All of Pacific UK except India and Honk Kong.
I’m not sure if America could have done a better job poising for a turn three liberation of the British Isles. Ill have to count hat out I guess. Either way, the turn three attack did allow America to sit of the coast of Gibraltar on early. This could have been prevented with a turn four declaration instead, but the boost for Japan was nice.
germany could have no doubt defended better, but perhaps more importantly, russia could have bought better
That’s not more important. Germany could have defended much better too. Russia was only a favourite because I missed the American attack on West Germany.
If I give up Italy, I can send enough reinforcements to secure West Germany from USA and Germany from Russia. Italy falls, but you couldn’t hold it nor could you replace the troops which captured it.
Alternatively, if Japan waits till turn four to attack, America doesn’t get to Gibraltar turn three and can’t threaten both West Germany and Italy. This slows Japan down, but they still capture India turn four. It may be worth it it it saves Germany and Italy
I suppose we should count exactly what Russia can bring to bear.
- for that reason, i think it highly likely that a dedicated sea lion is a non starter against a competent russia.
You’re probably right, but I wouldn’t describe my actions as consistent with a “dedicated Sea Lion”. You made a conscious decision to go light on homeland defense in order to further pester Italy. This meant spending 14 IPCs in South Africa between UK1 and UK2 as well as pulling your tactical bomber into the Mediterranean. That’s why I went for Sea Lion.
I might have wasted a lot of effort in Africa given the circumstances. If I’d concentrated on holding Germany post sea lion form the beginning, I think I could have pulled it off.
Aside from that, I’m still not quite ready to give up on the devoted Sea Lion push until I’ve experimented more with Japan…
When can we play again?
Was Japan making 100+ ipcs?
Japan had just spent 88 IPCs, was starting an Australian invasion, Controlled China, India, DEI, Northern Russia, and was poised on the unprotected African and Middle eastern territories. Planes and ground forces were beginning to poor into Russia, who would be on the defensive before a second wave threatened Germany. The Axis had (or were on the verge of) a higher combined economy than the Allies, had more easy growth potential, more units on board, and were under no immediate threat anywhere.
The most immediately contentious situation in this game is the war waging between Germany and UK. If UK’s not careful, Germany can buy boats and waltz right in.
If you play UK, concentrate on homeland defense for the first turn or two
If you play Germany and UK is not taking efforts to fortress her island, consider a sea lion strategy.
Good Luck!
If Germany pretends it is alone on the map against England I believe they can forceably capture London on G4 after dropping a large number of units in scotland G3. The G3 Landing only has 60ish attack pips not a sure thing.
The G3 landing I calculate 81 pips vs 60, assuming Germany has five planes survive the AA gun and made a G2 Scotland landing. England narrow the gap by attacking sz111 or Scotland, but not by enough. I’ve presented these figures in the first post, edited last night. Check it out!
How many land ASSUMING Germany lands everything they can, 20 land units G3 and I think 16 G4 what is left to defend or retake Berlin? You can build 3 in Berlin G5. A bunch of tanks in W Germany with your 80ipc and also a few mech in france and a tac bomber in normandy?
What can be mustered to the defense of Germany depends on the strength and position of Italy, as well as exactly what America is doing. This is probably going to require (much) more play testing. Fortunately that’s fun!
Your Japanese ally could pour into siberia trying to hunt the 18 inf down and busting the line to distract Russia. Japan going after India probably isnt going to happan presuming Japan waits to attack until J4 just so america cant help defend London. By then india owns the DEI and is making 27ipc a turn.
Japan won’t be far into Siberia this early, but every dollar taken from Russia helps. By turn two Japan should have a major IC in Manchuria and should be in India by turn four. SBRs against Russia should begin as soon as a landing strip has been established. This brings a lot of pressure to Russia, but not soon enough to stop a R5 invasion of Berlin. germany needs to hold out a little longer.
One of these days I’m going to look seriously at harassing North America with Japan. I don’t expect they’ll do very well, but the diversion may be enough to save Italy and German occupied England. One of these days…
Allowing a brief digression, if we were to compare AA50 to AA42, we find AA50 adds:
[liA nicer looking larger board[/li]
AA50 is a better game with more bells and whistles, but some might prefer the relative speed and simplicity AA42 has to offer.
Back to the topic at hand, if we were to compare AA50 to AAG40, we find AAG40 adds:
More board spaces
A nicer looking larger board
Additional powers
Much better rules for China
Cool new factors such as Politics, bases, neutrals, and convoy disruption
Tactical bombers and mechanised infantry
New rules for ICs
expanded rules for 2 hit warships
AAG40 has more features above and beyond AA50 than AA50 has over AA42. Some people still might prefer the relative speed and simplicity of AA50, but you have to decide if you think you’ll be one of them.
Me, I think AAG40 is the best A&A game ever! It obsoletes AA50 more than AA50 obsoletes AA42 (though all three are highly playable solid games).
One more thing, although AAG40 is new and optimal strategies are nowhere near having been refined, it looks like AAG40 has more viable strategic options than previous versions of the game.
10 transports? How does Germany hit 70 ipcs? 30 orig+2 NB+4 France+19 French ipcs+10 NO+2 Yugo+1 Finland+1 Bulgaria=69
Finland is worth 2 IPCs a turn.
