Unstoppable strategy: 1942 scenario

[Imperious Leader]

The only problem with it is his “experience” with it was two loses at my hands and a third, where i suggested that i land my fighters in Caucasus because he would lose it to the Soviets. I knew him personally and some of those statements don’t resonate from his actual results.

He took my idea and posted it on BGG. The actual idea perfected is posted on the 1941 or 1942 strategy map thread.

http://www.mediafire.com/?yrnntzloydw

here is 42, what i played in my game with him are outlined in it. What mike should have played are also outlined.

[Jennifer]

Noting this was posted 12/22 originally, I don’t think Japan can afford to send 6 fighters to East Ukraine.  How do they deal with China, let alone America?  Or are you turtling Japan and hoping Germany can crush Russia like a cheap pop can?

Also, I find East Poland to be the key territory, not East Ukraine.  Granted, from Burma you can get fighters to East Ukraine (or Ukraine for that matter) but not East Poland, but odds are, you’re going to be standing in East Poland.  Also, what do those fighters do?  They can defend, but they don’t help you advance and they cannot be lifted out if you decide to move your forces in.

[kendric]

I think their main point is to hold it one round then you can land german fighters + maybe move in reinforcements. After that perhaps they can fly back to japan.

[Jennifer]

Perhaps, but I don’t see East Ukraine as being as valuable as the strategy contends.

East Poland is better, IMHO, and from there, moving to Karelia.  Splits Russia in twain since they now have Japan coming from the SE and Germany from the NW.

[Stoney229]

@Imperious:

The only problem with it is his “experience” with it was two loses at my hands and a third, where i suggested that i land my fighters in Caucasus because he would lose it to the Soviets. I knew him personally and some of those statements don’t resonate from his actual results.

He took my idea and posted it on BGG. The actual idea perfected is posted on the 1941 or 1942 strategy map thread.

http://www.mediafire.com/?yrnntzloydw

here is 42, what i played in my game with him are outlined in it. What mike should have played are also outlined.

Would you be willing to link to said strategy map or strategy map thread?

[Imperious Leader]

sure can but you already done that.

http://www.mediafire.com/?yrnntzloydw

http://www.mediafire.com/?jrfltrddwj2

[Corbeau Blanc]

I had a similar strategy than what the OP listed in Revised Edition.

It was not unstoppable but very much near it. It involved exactly that, flying japan fighters to secure the same territory: Ukraine. This made the german stack almost imposible to overcome by russians on G3 if G1 was full 8 tank gambit.

Then all there was to do is move the whole thing to menace both moscow and caucasus, leaving no choice to Russia to abandon the IC to germany. By then it was normally over a few turn laters as Russia was forced to turtle in moscow.

It was counterable as long you knew it was coming but I won so many games with it that I I had to litterrally give the counter away to my friends so they still want to play.

In this version, it looks way easier to do with Italy and territories layout. And frankly, I am unsure if I can find a counter to it. Admitedly, did only play one game so far so I did not experience it yet ( was playing allies )

[Imperious Leader]

Well the strategy of landing Japanese fighter on Caucasus is primarily the idea of buying mostly tanks and centralizing them so the Soviets cant protect both north and south. Latter after when Caucasus is the target you land the fighters, but thats been done since the MB days and its not a new idea. In fact the idea is the same exact idea from AAE extrapolated for AA50.

Its not even unstoppable given some of the postings on this site and the guy who posted them on BGG was on the losing end of that strategy. I played him in 3 games defeating him twice as Russia ( he was Japan once and Germany in game two) and told him id bring my fighters over on the third game when i was playing Japan. it barely worked anyway.

Then i made my maps after more reflection and he posted his “unstoppable” idea latter, but tried to take credit for everything.

[Gharen]

If the Axis did the strategy posted on the first page I think the Allies would probably win more often than not.  Even if Moscow falls I guarantee that one of the other capitals is near check-mate herself and the loss could be mutual unless Germany and Italy are knocked out almost together.  This game has proven, in my opinion, that neither side can ignore one whole front to the game and expect to succeed cause it didn’t happen that way in the real war.  US needs to push both Pacific and Atlantic while Russia of course handles mostly the west front against Germany and coordinates with UK and China for a stonewall against Japan.  England needs to monitor worldly assests and I think put extreme pressure on Norway, Finland, Baltic, France, and Med. fleet.  If Axis ignore Africa, namely Egypt, its game over for Axis.

The problem my with the group I play AAE with is that the Allies haven’t won in our 3-4 games so far mainly because are doing very little if anything to contain Japan other than the random fleet skirmishes.  If the Allies go for Germany and Italy first you need to give Japan multiple targets to attack to spread herself thin for counterattacks.

I think the Allies have the leg up in this setup and that leg up is bombers.  You strat bomb the Axis nonstop like its going out of style fast!!!  If Russia is starting to go downhill, then put some fighters over there and hopefully you have an invasion fleet ready to rock and roll that can do the 2 to 1 pound on France.(UK, Italy, US)

If Axis go for the gusto on turn 3-4 then make them pay that same round, plain and simple.

[Imperious Leader]

I play AAE

The correct term for Anniversary is: AA50

AAE: is Axis and Allies Europe.

[Gharen]

My apologies, I sometimes call it AAAE but AA50 makes more sense, i just forgot the extra A.  Thanks for pointing that out. :roll:

[katfishkris]

i have tried this, with great results.  G1, germans took karelia.  G2, they took caucasus. G3 they took moscow.  all with the help of those 6 Jap fighters that were not afraid to die.  the US player saw this and came straight to japan, which i stacked full of inf.  by the time US had enough to try to invade japan, africa belonged to italy and UK was being shelled by germany, and germany was toying with the idea of invading Washington.  allied player gave up.  sausages for everyone.

[Cow]

I already do this strategy and I usually win games but I lose sometimes too.

If we’re playing without NOs yeah it’s a pretty even game slightly favors the allies.

Play with NOs yeah the allies need 1d6+3 to start with. Just got to hold on to Caucasus and Moscow till usa takes balkans (bam russia +10 ipc) .

in revised the strategy sucked because of AA guns, but now it’s pretty legit because the figs go where they like.

The best part is after you get your stuff in position they can sink some naval with LRA.

[Bigtiti]

just a sec
if i get it right, japanese get to fly through 2 flaks?(india and caucasus)
lol, gl with that

[tin_snips]

@Frontovik:

just a sec
if i get it right, japanese get to fly through 2 flaks?(india and caucasus)
lol, gl with that

aa is no longer ‘always active’. so you can fly over any enemy aa, on your way to another destination, without getting fired upon

[Lucifer]

This unstoppable strat, is this NOs off, and no tech?

How high bid should allies get, to have a fair chance of winning?

Anyone who seriously believes in this unstoppable strat?

[Imperious Leader]

I find the attention it gets ridiculous because its simply stopped by lots of infantry buys and British fighters in Caucasus and landings at Karelia basically every turn.

The guy who so called “invented it” was beaten twice by me and then posted his strategy within a week of playing. Usually you go on a winning streak against credible players before you make such bravado, but to call it unstoppable is so ridiculous it boggles the mind.

The other idea of landing fighters in Caucasus goes way back from the MB days as the only other way to support a drive to take Moscow. I was playing Mike as Japan and suggested landing my FIC fighters to support his crash of Italian and German forces in Caucasus. It BARELY HELD and eventually led to the Soviet defeat. IN the two games i played him i just didn’t allow him to take Caucasus and his plan backfired twice because of the nature of his “all tanks or bust strategy” I was the Soviets twice in those games.

I also propose the tank idea in my strategy map for 41 and 42, but also acknowledge that its reckless to just buy tanks.

His idea was never tested with NO’s or Tech. He is a friend of mine and i can say he claims he hates the game anyway and does not own the game himself, but borrowed another friends copy of the game. Im quite sure he has not played since those 3 games. So all this gossip really is predicated about a guy who posted on BGG and played 3 games and lost 2 of them. nice.

I think its fine if you want to be funny. Heck id be laughing at the amount of posts dealing with this.

[Jocher]

Am I crazy or have I noticed that no one’s brought up the fact that those 7 or 8 planes from Japan have to go through India, then Caucus, both of which have AA guns?  That’s 14 some odd rolls - I’m willing to bet at least 3 of those planes go down.

[Guest]

@Jocher:

Am I crazy or have I noticed that no one’s brought up the fact that those 7 or 8 planes from Japan have to go through India, then Caucus, both of which have AA guns?  That’s 14 some odd rolls - I’m willing to bet at least 3 of those planes go down.

aa guns do not get to fire at planes unless the territory they are in is attacked.

[Jocher]

are you sure?  Just checked the rulebook and it says otherwise.