I bought primarily fighters and submarines. I sent the submarines every which way, while my surface fleet (supported by lots of fighters) slowly but surely made its way to the islands. The Japanese were severely overwhelmed with submarines threatening both their main fleet and their transports from all parts of the ocean. They had to purchase lots of destroyers and disperse them throughout the Pacific to counter this submarine threat, which if left unchecked, would have spelt doom for the primary Japanese fleet in a combined American submarine/surface fleet/ air attack.
I like this way of thinking. People have been down on the subs, but I think they are key to any successful Allied strategy. I like the disruption that a bunch of Pacific subs would cause. In another thread I posted how a stack of subs on the coast would actually serve as a good defense. The idea being, any ship wanting to attack a coastline (thinking pacific theatre here) would need to move within two spaces of the coast the move before. But if there’s a stack of subs on that coast, WHAM, subs attack before the fleet can amphibious assault. They only hit ships, and after the destroyers have been hit, planes can’t hit back. I guess it’s not so much a defense as a deterrent. But, compared to aircraft carriers and fighters, a relatively inexpensive deterrent.
That is a brilliant idea and I’m glad you came up with it. :-D
It’s a great counter for the US player if the Japanese move an invasion force to Hawaii.
I tried KI-WEGJ again tonight. The American submarines ruined the Japanese navy, the Germans were strapped for units due to British landings, and the Italians were mercilessly pounded into the ground. It was glorious.
WAHHHHHH!
this game is favoring the Allllllieeeeeess! :evil:
TexCapPrezJimmy
I like this way of thinking. People have been down on the subs, but I think they are key to any successful Allied strategy. I like the disruption that a bunch of Pacific subs would cause. In another thread I posted how a stack of subs on the coast would actually serve as a good defense. The idea being, any ship wanting to attack a coastline (thinking pacific theatre here) would need to move within two spaces of the coast the move before. But if there’s a stack of subs on that coast, WHAM, subs attack before the fleet can amphibious assault. They only hit ships, and after the destroyers have been hit, planes can’t hit back. I guess it’s not so much a defense as a deterrent. But, compared to aircraft carriers and fighters, a relatively inexpensive deterrent.
i don´t think this is true. i japan`s mainfleet is in z62 (japan) your fleet would have to be in zone 56 or 65 to be out of striking range. you would probably choose 65 to cover a larger area. now if japan wants to attack alaska here is what they will do:
japan moves the fleet to zone 59 and places a destroyer in zone 57( i think its 57 but cant see it on the pic at bgg. but the one in between 59 and 56).
the result is that japan can´t be hit by your subs, and in order for your subs to be out of striking range of the japanese main fleet you would need to move all the way to zone 55 or 54. this means z64 is out of your subs range and japan is free to offloald in alaska. and that you would have to move your subs within range of japan in order to be able to apply pressure on their fleet again, in which case japan could destroy your subs in round one attacking with only airplanes and one destroyer, allowing you to at max kill one unit :-D
I love the subs/air combination. When I play Europe (which has the same rules for subs) as Germany, I buy all subs every turn starting on my second turn. I can usually kill Russia on turn five (barring terrible die rolls) and use my subs to protect France, which I leave totaly empty.
I have been planning to use a similar strat for Ger. The subs combined with air make taking down enemy fleets somewhat easy, and once they are down it is hard for UK and USA to get back into the Atlantic.
Using the German sub/air strat for USA and Japan would work a little differently because of the distances, but having carriers with fighters and bombers on an Island, it can still be done.
And the best thing about this is that transports aren’t cannon fodder anymore!!! Even a large fleet will go down quickly this way. (provided you can roll 2’s)
this strategy was discussed in this thread http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12363.0
the uk just drops a destroyer as a blocker in the north sea. kills your few surface ships in the baltic with air units. The following round your subs will either remain locked up in the north sea or killed by the uk, depending on the will of the uk.
The Japanese player had to invest in his naval power, because after my first round purchase (aircraft carrier and a cruiser), I bought primarily fighters and submarines. I sent the submarines every which way, while my surface fleet (supported by lots of fighters) slowly but surely made its way to the islands. The Japanese were severely overwhelmed with submarines threatening both their main fleet and their transports from all parts of the ocean. They had to purchase lots of destroyers and disperse them throughout the Pacific to counter this submarine threat, which if left unchecked, would have spelt doom for the primary Japanese fleet in a combined American submarine/surface fleet/ air attack. I hope this makes sense axis_roll.
Yes it does. In fact, that would’ve been my USA pacific strategy as well (once we get around to playing the game)
Ok, same result in our 1941 game. A balanced Allied strategy works.
Our game ended in a time limit draw, just as US killed all 3 Japanese Carriers in the Pacific and US retook UK and UK fleet killed the German Fleet.
USSR was of course on Germany"s doorstep, with Allies having retaken Africa.
Italy then killed the remaining UK fleet and relaunched into Africa.
The whole game at this point looked like it was rebooting, to start again.
I was surprised at how effective the Chinese were at soaking up Japanese hardware.
The japanese killed China every round, but lost valuable ftrs in these attacks.
Note: The Germans were getting ready to add 93 IPC’s of hardware, (having gained UK’s IPC’s from previous turn.)
Wow, do the NO’s make a difference, many more IPC’s flowing into many units.
comment, yes, Subs and Air power, nice combo.
Why do people believe a destroyer will stop subs. They are only another surface vessel in the path of the wolf pack, out to devour, the other pricey surface vessels. Especially when teamed with airpower-Bam.
WAHHHHHH!
this game is favoring the Allllllieeeeeess! :evil:
Haha. I think the game favors the people with the better strategy.
Played my first game of AA50 last week. We used NOs and Tech. The game last for over 7 hours!! Are your games lasting this long? I really doubt I can get people to play too many 7 hour games, i dont know enough geeks like me!! This was the 41 version, and I am hoping the 42 version is less lengthy.
Some notes, I was aliies, and I am not an inexperienced player, however, Gemrnay was able to take Karelia, Baltic States, W. Poland, and ukraine all r1. The russian, having no planes, and only 1 armor, did not have enough counterstrike to take back Karelia. The germans held karelia for several rounds. My opponent made a tactical error, in buying only tanks every round. he felt that russia was too weak, and would fall soon. And it looked bad early, as russia was having bad dice. I had to use the classic KGF strat here. To take pressure of of Russia. Eventually, German pressure dwindle, and russia was able to reclaim Kareila. If my oponent took a longer term approach, i think germany can hold on to karelia for the game, unless UK comes to rescue, elimintaing the russian NO bonus. Is Karelia undefensiveable in your games?
The japs are way too strong in 41. My opponent even made a big mistake by leaving his 2 AC carrier in Peral for a counter. I wiped dem out, but still didnt see a chance to match the Japanese naval strength. They start with such a lead, catch up to the US in production r2 or 3, and soon pass them. The only way to KJF woul dbe for the UK to get a factory down there and pump out some navy.
@TG:
After three years, I can say things have changed a lot. For instance, the rise of the Super Posters – yes, I’m looking at you Mister 7068. For a long time, I didn’t think anyone besides Yanny, CC, and I would break 5000. But A&A:50 has that effect of bringing people back. Like a Renaissance.
Do not under estimate the In-house dice rolling function Djensen installed. :wink:
One semi-big battle can add 5-6 posts in a matter of mere seconds.
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any games under 7 hours either. Ours actually tend to roll longer… lots of drinking and smack talk involved.
AxisOfEvil, Bluestroke
Do you both mind posting a short After Action Report of the games you played?
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12942.0
I think it’ll help the community a lot, in terms of testing new strategies and trying to decipher the game.
DarthMaximus,
Do not under estimate the In-house dice rolling function Djensen installed.
Next tell Jensen to install a in-house probability calculator – one that understands A&A:50 units. :-D
Bierwagen,
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any games under 7 hours either. Ours actually tend to roll longer… lots of drinking and smack talk involved.
To some of us, that isn’t a bad thing. :-P
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any games under 7 hours either. Ours actually tend to roll longer… lots of drinking and smack talk involved.
LOL It’s funny cause’ it’s true!!
