AA50 1941 w/NO - Allied Allways Win

[Woodstock]

(another idea I’ve seen is to build a Factory on one/two islands, producing another 4 units).

Hey! That wa smy idea!  :-P

It’s a long shot though, but I like it. If you place an IC on East Indies, you can pop out two ground units, a transport, and a fighter every turn (and after two rounds, you dont need to buy any more transports, and just shuttle). A nice combat force that can hit Australia, 50% of Pacific Islands, India, Persia, Trans-Jordan, Egypt, and the rest of the African East coast.

It’s an expensive gimmick, but a fun one  :-)

[DarthMaximus]

@marcelvdpol:

I think you are giving the Japanese wayyyy too much space to do as he wishes. Retreating means that you are not putting any pressure on Japan at all.

No, it means not putting pressure on Japan until you (the Allies) have the Advantage. 
Think of it this way, what can do more damage, the Russian inf scattered throughout Asia or one big stack of them on Novo on R5?  The stack is more valuable b/c now you have support from all the Russian armor you were buying in the rds 1-5 that get placed in Mos or Cauc.  Your early advance by Japan is meaningless b/c once you get through China you have to stop until you are certain you have enough force to move or merge your stacks.  Which is easier said than done considering Japan starts extremely weak in Asia and usually makes Phil/Aus a J1-2 priority.  You’re 50-60 income earned in J3-4, etc, doesn’t hit Russia until Round 7, 8, 9, etc.

@marcelvdpol:

If the UK/US retreat and let Japan have their way, those fighters will be in StalinGrad on turn 4/5, along with Japanese Infantry and/or Tanks. And moving those paltry four UK units from India to Ukraine is not going to change that.

No, those 4-5 UK units now get back up from 2-4 ftrs + bom stationed in Cauc.  Again, it is not that easy for Japan to simply march 1-2 inf stacks through Ind, Chi, and Northern Russia.  For Example if I stack Per and Japan moves 2-3 inf in Ind I can counter with 1-2 + 3-4 planes and wipe those guys out.  Or I further my retreat and strike when you try to go to Per.

@marcelvdpol:

Yes, and in those 5 turns, Japan grew into a monster, receiving 55-60 PC a turn, moving the Japanese fleet into position near Italy, buyng bombers to start threatening Moscow (and with any luck on the Japanese side, those will be Heavy Bmbers), having a Factory in India turning out 3 tanks a turn to throw against Ukraine along with a smattering of infantry (another idea I’ve seen is to build a Factory on one/two islands, producing another 4 units).

That income in terms of useable units doesn’t come into play for another 4-5 turns.
The Canal need to be open for Japan to help Ita, and the Canal is permantely closed by UK4 (units landed in Alg on UK2/US2). 
Japan needs to buy bombers first, which cost money.  Then invest in the Tech and then get it.  If we are playing that game I might as well say well, either the UK or US will have HB at this point too and Germany and Ita will have no income.

I do like a Japan factory on EI, the earlier the better, but factories cost IPC as well, which are not units marching on Mos.
Infact I like the EI + Ind combo for 7 units, but you still need Ger/Ita to hang in there for 6,7,8 rounds and remain a threat to Russia.

@marcelvdpol:

You might get there when? About turn 4/5? Precisely in time to get kicked out by the Japanese, who will take Egypt with an insane amount of planes and several tanks.

The flow of US troops through Afr is constant from round 2 on.  Japan cannot push the Allies out without pulling pressure off Moscow.  UK/US land in Alg in rd 2 and rd 3, the US continues while UK goes to Sz 6.  Ita must be protected with at least a token force from a sneaky US attack and by rd 5 Japan must make a serious commitment to even attempt to contest Afr.  I’ll gladly trade US inf for Japan inf b/c UK is reinforcing Russia by landing 8 units per turn in Kar.

@marcelvdpol:

IMHO a good Japanse player will know what to do with the room that he is given. Japan can do a lot, and if its allowed to run free through the pacific it will conquer the pacific in 2-3 turns at most. By that time, its fleet and airforce is positioned near India, its army has pacified large chucks of chineese territory. A turn later Japan might even think about conquering Hawai just to deny the US its National Objective.

Japan can defintiely do a lot, but can the crack the defense of all 3 Allies combined in The Cauc/Per/Kaz/Mos area?
You’ll need more than just a 10-20 ipc unit lead for several turns to do so, and I think that is easier said than done.

I certainly think it can be done, but it is no gimmie that it is automatically over if Japan hits 60-65.  You still have to make good moves.

[Jennifer]

I prefer FIC, Burma, India if you want to go that route.  Now you don’t tie up transports and ships protecting them.

[Uncle_Joe]

Uncle Joe-
  In both of your and our games, the situation appears to be about the same. I agree with your numbers in the broad sense (though I think Japan is slightly lower-65 rather than 70). Its what happens next that matters.

At roughly the end of turn 5, your numbers are approximately right.  Japan has taken India, China, Australia, all of the Pacific (more or less-maybe not quite all of China, maybe all of China but not yet Australia, but generally right).  US/UK have landed in Morocco (or have landed, and perhaps been kicked out of, western Europe).  Germany is on the defensive in the East (probably holding Poland, perhaps holding one or two of the border regions in Russia).  Russia is getting the strength to continue pushing west.  italy/Germany hold the top part of Africa (minus Morocco) and perhaps part of the interior of Africa (from blitzing German tank).

But now, US/UK threaten to either permanently hold western europe or conquer Italy (and take their money), and will be pouring 6-10 ground forces into Europe per turn.  Thus, Germany/Italy have to defend western Europe.  Which allows Russia to continue to press from the East (into Poland, into Rumania/Balkans, wherever Germany is weakest).  Germany/Italy lose their national objectives (US/UK in western Europe as well as Morocco-sometimes Gibraltar just to ruin the NO).  ON TURN 6:  Italy probably falls.  Poland possibly falls (and Germany proper is now threatened by all 3 allies).

Japan: to achieve 65 income, at the end of turn 5, they have: a fleet down in Australia.  A fleet in India.  Some (not alot) ground forces in Western/central China.  some (not alot) ground forces in India.  Factories in Japan and a few coastal areas-perhaps Manchuria, Vietnam, maybe even the islands in the Pacific worth 4.  Thus, ON TURN 6: Japan build a whole bunch of ground forces-in Japan, in Manchuria, in Vietnam (which are 3 turns from the front lines!!-they won’t be in the fight until turn 9!).  The fleet near India can threaten Madagascar or the east coast of Africa (worth maybe 2-3 income).  The fleet in Australia spends turns 6,7 and maybe 8 just getting somewhere useful.  The ground forces in China and India plod one space forward-to the space west of India, to the space west of western China-for another 2 dollars.

In short, I think your and our games are pretty similar at the end of turn 5.  But turn 6, Italy falls, Japan builds a bunch of stuff in Japan, and captures 4 dollars worth of irrelevance in central asia and east africa.  Japan may be a monster, but its an irrelevant monster.

It sounds like the German/Italy players werent playing with an eye on survival (ie, they were actually trying to make headway into Russia) and the Japanese player has been building for the immediate advantage rather than the long-term advantage.

The only time I’ve seen a KGF succeed was when we had a lesser experienced Japanese player and they failed to coordinate with Germany/Italy. Sure, they had an income out the wazoo (the 65+), but as you say, they werent ‘relevant’ to the rest of the game. The trick is to MAKE Japan relevant. And as I’ve said before, the easiest way to do that is ICs in Asia churning out tanks (about 6-8/turn) and especially bombers to support the tanks and remove Russia’s econ. At the very worst, I’d be prepared to trade Italy for Russia, but I dont think that even has to happen if Italy has been playing with an eye towards simple survival.

IMO, once the Allies commit to KGF, THEY are ‘on the clock’. With a monster Japan, its only a matter of time to Russia is GONE (much faster if Russia cant build units due to Japanese SBR). So with that in mind, Italy and Germany’s SOLE goal is to survive. Trading your whole air force for the Brit fleet is worth it if it costs them 2 turns to rebuild (at LEAST, since her econ is going to suck). Beyond that, infantry and planes while the econ holds, then infantry/tanks and finally just infantry. With even EQUAL econ, I really dont see the US and UK getting ahead at that point. They just have too much overhead and too much to protect from air power to be able to land into 10-12 infantry and a few planes.

Finally, since its all about TIME for the Axis, the Japanese can cost the US time by invading Alaska (which forces a defensive commitment and/or a counter-attack) and threatening Mexico/Panama etc from the Pacific. As was noted, there is nothing that says that Japan’s fleet has to stay in the Pacific either. Since they are likely to be taking Africa, its not much of a stretch to get some CV’s into the Med or South Atlantic. Which again, greatly adds to the US/UK headaches of protecting their fleet. Germany can hit any fleet with air, followed up by Japanese air (including bombers which can easily stage to Poland).

Personally, I think the Allies have a very good chance of winning the game, but not with KGF. A good Axis TEAM should be hold out until the Cavalry arrives.

[Woodstock]

No, it means not putting pressure on Japan until you (the Allies) have the Advantage.
Think of it this way, what can do more damage, the Russian inf scattered throughout Asia or one big stack of them on Novo on R5?  The stack is more valuable b/c now you have support from all the Russian armor you were buying in the rds 1-5 that get placed in Mos or Cauc.  Your early advance by Japan is meaningless b/c once you get through China you have to stop until you are certain you have enough force to move or merge your stacks.  Which is easier said than done considering Japan starts extremely weak in Asia and usually makes Phil/Aus a J1-2 priority.  You’re 50-60 income earned in J3-4, etc, doesn’t hit Russia until Round 7, 8, 9, etc.

“Your early advance by Japan is meaningless”

It is? You describe it yourself, by J3-4 you are at 50-60 income.
And what is your threat as Japan? Just 1 stack of defense, of on opponent that also needs to fucos on Germany.
With…30?..income. Russia can afford only one battle, while Japan can easily afford 2, maybe 3. In a row.

If Japan is given that much space early on because Russia and the other Allied players are prepapring and retreating for 1 good blow by turn4 or 5, Japan will have a field day in getting all of the Allied income and territories.

Make sure Germany can withstand that first round 4 blow, and the Allies are broke, and without units.
And then Japan starts kicking.

[a44bigdog]

Darth if you would like to test how deadly that KGF approach and ignoring or delaying attending to Japan let me know. I would be more than happy to play against it as the Axis.

[DarthMaximus]

@a44bigdog:

Darth if you would like to test how deadly that KGF approach and ignoring or delaying attending to Japan let me know. I would be more than happy to play against it as the Axis.

Sure, I’ll play you but I’ve got to finish up one of my other ones first, unless you don’t mind a slower pace.
Also I will not guarantee that I use the moves described word for word.  I’d rather just play a game and whatever happens happens.

I’ve found through numerous “test” games (trying to delibrate test something) the game breaks down because one side delibrate ignores something that they would never ever ignore in a “real” game knowing the other thing is being tested thus it becomes skewd. I just want to make this clear b/c I really think everyone has their own ideas on what a KGF may be so I want to make sure (I as the Allies) have the freedom to actually put up the best defense/offense possible.

EDIT:

I am also talking about a No Tech game.

[a44bigdog]

Darth a slow pace is fine by me. I am only around on the weekends anyway so even the games that me and my opponents play hard in tend to go a while. I will even make an exception to my policy of not playing no tech games as this is a test game and techs can greatly change and influence strategies.

I also agree with your statement about test games, heck I have done things in the past in games just to show they are possible. I also find that many times the conditions of the game totally invalidate what was to be tested in the first place. I could be wrong but I think in a KGF scenario Italy would about have to be destroyed first. I also understand that you may pressure Japan, however I do not expect to see the US dumping nothing but ships off the California coast for the first few turns. I will get G1 up in a bit.

[Stoney229]

@Cmdr:

Germany needs to pound Russia EXTREMELY hard in round 1.  It’s your only chance.  So far, I’ve seen Germany win almost every game of KG/KIF if they take Karelia, Baltic States, East Poland and Ukraine on Round 1 (that would include sinking SZ 2 and SZ 12).

uh… how in the world can you take Karelia, SZ12, AND SZ 2 in round 1??  not to mention, how do you sink sz2 & 12 if you are sending 4 fighters to karelia like you said??

[DarthMaximus]

@a44bigdog:

Darth a slow pace is fine by me. I am only around on the weekends anyway so even the games that me and my opponents play hard in tend to go a while. I will even make an exception to my policy of not playing no tech games as this is a test game and techs can greatly change and influence strategies.

I also agree with your statement about test games, heck I have done things in the past in games just to show they are possible. I also find that many times the conditions of the game totally invalidate what was to be tested in the first place. I could be wrong but I think in a KGF scenario Italy would about have to be destroyed first. I also understand that you may pressure Japan, however I do not expect to see the US dumping nothing but ships off the California coast for the first few turns. I will get G1 up in a bit.

Cool sounds like we are on the same page.  The reason I thought about the tech thing was if the US got shipyards, super subs, LRA, HB, or even paratroopers any one of these can really help in the Pac so at that point it might make more sense to do something in the Pac.

[TimTheEnchanter]

@Stoney229:

@Cmdr:

Germany needs to pound Russia EXTREMELY hard in round 1.  It’s your only chance.  So far, I’ve seen Germany win almost every game of KG/KIF if they take Karelia, Baltic States, East Poland and Ukraine on Round 1 (that would include sinking SZ 2 and SZ 12).

uh… how in the world can you take Karelia, SZ12, AND SZ 2 in round 1??  not to mention, how do you sink sz2 & 12 if you are sending 4 fighters to karelia like you said??

I hadn’t done the math, but I was wondering the same thing when I read that.  +1 for spotting the apparent use of jenforcez  :lol:

[Enigmatic_Decay]

How? I’ve never see the allies win!

[tin_snips]

don’t worry, it’s been proven that the axis have been winning more than the allies  :-P

[Telamon]

@a44bigdog:

I will even make an exception to my policy of not playing no tech games as this is a test game and techs can greatly change and influence strategies.

a44bigdog, I’ve read quite a lot of this forum (despite not many posts) and often find myself nodding in agreement when I read your posts, but I wanted to ask you… why you like techs so much?  Personally I don’t play with them, because I don’t really enjoy the strategies the make you employ.  Though I can see how they would keep the game interesting after you’ve played it to death (can’t see that happening!  :-D).  How do they improve the game in your view?

cheers

[Richter von Manthofen]

HMM I read this thread now and all i see is

We land in Europe - that slows axis advance sort of Allied strategy.

IMHO that is true, but it also speeds up Japans growth.

In my games Japan did NOT NEED to reach Moscow, because all J+IT had to do was linking up in India Persis (indian IC pours out tanks to attach via Persia -> Caucasus) That cabn be done very soon. in the Meantime Germany has noting to do except harrass Russia and hold CENTRAL/WEST Europe.

Italy also can grow quite fast if left unchecked (NOs are soon achieved) - If italy buys only a medium fleet itcan easily sortie out into the ATlantic - this forces the Western allies to buy at least a token fleet to protect their southern flank (turn 2-3 Italy should have secured the Med incl. Gibraltar) then it can sortie out and probably take at least Brazil.

All this diverts so much (given Germany sinks a bit of the Allied fleet early) attention from attacking France, so that Germany should be able to HOLD/recapture France.

At turn 5 Italy usually is at 25-30 Points  :-o if the first turn goes average for the axis.

BTW every time a KGF is tried Japan knocks on North americas door every turn and forces the US to rebuild an Army (Japanes cruisers make a nice costal bombardement tool. add a few carrier based fighters to the mix and Japan attacks soon with 6/8 inf per turn - even if they are lost or  the territoriy is recaptured this takes an awful lot of the US production away. And god beware if the US does NOT manage to retake Alaska(West Canada) min of 7 infantry (+6 per turn) is hard to dislodge (add a few Ftrs later)

Its said before japann must NOT concentrate on Russia /asia but do a multi task job, but with NO their Income will allow this.

I admit this is the scenario if the dice are (a bit) on the Axis side, if theyfavor the allies the allies win ;) - but thts the luck of war…

My observation: If the Allies win most of the time you are either playing without NOs (blow to Japan and Italy) OR you play (as axis) AArevised. - I never did much of this, so I am (as axis) a bit more flexible to use the new invironment. I fear old AA grognards (Revised) are too much bound to their old strategies to fully use the advantages that AA50 gives to the Axis. IMHO this game is QUITE balanced…

[Enigmatic_Decay]

I’m still curious as to how the Allies can win? with NO and tech on what are some of the strategies that you’ve used to ensure victory and what did the axis player do?

In all my games the axis player attacks deep enough into Russia to get their NO’s and then adapts a massive deffensive position and waits for Japan to grow unstopable. The allies can’t even threaten europe because once Germany adapts a deffensive strategy there numbers of men, fighters and tanks are just too much for the allies to be able to invade or hold any ground in europe and they can’t seriously threaten Berlin.

Ideas?

[DarthMaximus]

I’d say some you just aren’t seeing good Allied play, or the right amount of cooperation between the Allies.  If the Allies play as individual countries, then yes they are very beatable, but when they play as one cohesive unit they are much harder to beat.

The UK should have an unsinkable fleet in Sz 8 at the end of Rd 1, US adds ships and buys inf+ships.

Round 2 - Allies (UK/US) land 8 combined units in Alg.
Round 3 - Allies move on Lib and land 8-10 (4 uk, 4-6 us) more units in Alg.
Round 4 - UK can shift to Sz 6, US covers Sz 12 and Afr while maintaining a token threat on Ita.

In this time (rds 1-4) the US can set up it shuck from Wus to Ecan with about 8 inf per territory.  This deters the Jap invasions or makes it extremely costly.  Why land in Ala or try and kill 8 inf in Wcan when the US can counter with up to 16 inf and probably planes?  Can Japan really afford the extra trns and to throw away 8 inf for little gain?  Do they have enough already to push through the Chi-Rus stack in Chi or the Rus stack in Novo?  What about the Brits in Per?  If you go to NA, Japan will be weak in one of these other areas.  And ultimately I’ll gladly trade US inf for J inf all game long, I don’t care if it is in Wcan or Per or some other territory.

The UK in the early rds (while landing in Afr) can consolidate its Trj/Per/Ind forces and create a big blocking force that can hold the lines in Per and then retreat to Cauc if needed to help Russia against the Germans.  They also can have 1 inf/1 rt from Aus that can land in Afr on rd 3.  As for buys I’ll buy all navy rd 1, something like AC, 2 dd, ca, rd 2 buy all air + inf if needed to fill a 2nd trn, rd 3 buy air + inf.  Rd 4 you can add in ships when you move back to Sz 6.  The air heavy buys are to sink the Ita fleet, hopefully on UK 3 but possibly UK 4.

As for Russia they simply have to hold out against Germany.  I buy inf + rt/arm only in the early rds and retreat the eastern inf to the west, as they get back to novo you can decide if you want to shift 1-2 to Chi or if Russia still needs the Inf.

So, the UK lands in Nor in Rd 4.  Note, I take Fin and Nor with Russia in Rds 1 and 2.  And on UK 5 you start landing 8 inf per turn on Kar.  US still covers Afr and threatens Ita, but now with 8 inf per shuck.  By Rd 6 the Allies are all over Afr, approaching Trj/Per, and Northern Russia.

Germany better be seriously threatening Cauc by now otherwise they will never be a threat and you can turn all 3 Allies against Japan, just as they start to approach Mos.

Now I’m definitely not saying the Axis can’t win, they obviously can, but just that when the Allies work so well together your window (as the Axis) to make something happen isn’t that big.

Japan as a Monster isn’t that big of deal if Ger/Ita is essentially boxed into the core of Europe by rd 5-6.

[Funcioneta]

But how beat the axis economic advantage? Even if you manage stop Polar Express, it will stop reinforcements to Africa 2 rounds, enough time for axis securing Africa. And I’m pretty sure Italy will harass and probably kill your shuck if you only buy trannies. By round 3-4, Italy could be colecting more than UK if allies left Japan alone

But if you are right and KGF is the only way of win, it’s a BIG setback from Revised, where there were other strats viable. I’ll stick to Revised (or to my China Free mod) if this is the case

[marcelvdpol]

There are plenty of alternative methods to kill the Axis, but NONE are viable unless Japan is seriously threatened by more than a defensive force. USA has to build up a fleet in the Pacific (using the Carrier&Destroyer and any fleet elements that survived J1) to at least threaten to take Japanese islands (denying Japan the NO’s for Islands and Australia). This can be done in USA1 with good buys (I recommend at least 2 Trans, 1 Sub, 1 Destroyer).

UK can build an IC in India if Japan did not focus enough material against India on J1. An IC in India as well as a USA pacific fleet can stretch the Japanese supply line to breaking point. USA can focus on Atlantic buys in USA2, when UK has already made sure that Germany/Italy will not move their fleets onto the atlantic. USA alternating its buys between Atlantic and Pacific seems to work well for me.

The idea is to build up a force against both Japan from two sides (India and Pacific) and against Germany from two sides (Russia and Atlantic). Knocking Italy out of Africa is not that hard but requires 8-10 units landing in Africa.

All these can be countered ofcourse, but it will require the Axis to play well. No freebies.

[atarihuana]

j1 will almost always be in range for india j2. in fact setting it up j1  is a must imho to counter a KGF. this includes a factory in FIC. there is no way now for any UK navy pacific strat….