AA50 1941 w/NO - Allied Allways 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….

[Funcioneta]

Yes, there is one: playing 1942 scenario, that is, by far, much less imbalanced than 1941 (but still gives some advantage to axis)

[DarthMaximus]

@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

I don’t think the Axis Economic adv can last or if it does it is not immediately enough to kill the combined stacks of inf/arm/ftrs that boarder Mos (or are in Mos).

For Example, say there are 9 Rus/Chi inf in Chi.  Japan has to commit 7 inf and 6 ftrs (81 ipc in units to take vs. 27 to defend) or a more likely force of 7 inf, 3 arm (36 vs. 27), but that leaves the Allies the option to counter the remaining arm.  Attackers need to spend 4:3 in order to take.  Lots of the Axis economic adv gets eroded away killing Allied units.  Unfortunately for the Axis, defense is cheaper to buy (3 ipc for 1 inf).

IMO, I don’t think the Axis should be able to maintain the eco adv long enough.  Also any eco adv doesn’t come into play until several turns down the road, a lot can change in the meantime.

I also don’t think the Axis can reclaim Afr if the Allies go heavy landing in Rd 2-3.  They can dump up to 16-20 troops in Afr and that excludes ftrs/boms plus the 2 Safr inf.  Ita only has 1 trn, and 2 if you can keep the Ger trn alive and continue to bring down 2 Ger troops.  At this point it could be safe for the US to only follow-up with 2-4 inf if attacked by Japan b/c the Allies have already done their damage.  It would take an absolute major Axis commitment to hold Afr which means either 1)  Japan is helping, so no assualt on NA or 2)  Ger is helping, so less pressure on Mos.

As for the NA threat, I don’t think Japan can offer a credible threat before rd 3, which is almost too late.  As I said the UK/US should already have landed heavy stacks in rd 2 and 3.  I’m assuming Japan makes Aus and Ind a higher priority, considering the US goes after Japan and that on J1 they’d setup to at least have a shot at Aus/Ind on J2.  If Japan sets up to go after the US, the US can then respond accordingly on US 1.

@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).

I disagree, but think I need to clarify.  When I talk about falling back and ignoring Japan, I do so with the intention of confronting them on my terms (or what I hope are my terms).  Basically, stretching out Japan’s supply lines while I shorten mine.  I’m just not sure the Allies can put up a credible offensive in Asia in the early rds, so I just choose not to fight where Japan can use its full arsenal.  I retreat and then try to pick off the weak points which should be one of the following routes: southern, central, or northern.  If Japan is weak on one or more of these routes you (as the Allies) may be able to find some very favorable trades.

[Lynxes]

But how beat the axis economic advantage?

To further argue DMs case here, I’m guessing that you have to keep those German and Italian NOs down, once you hinder Karelia being taken and then both Italian NOs the economics are not too bad, something like:

Germany ~40 (two NOs)
Russia ~27 (excl. eastern Russia after EVE)
Japan ~58 (incl. India, China)
UK ~35 (incl. Scandinavia, Africa)
Italy ~9
USA ~45

Axis & Allies IPCs are at break-even here. If you reach this stage you will be able to focus enough Allied IPCs on Europe to get an advantage. You can then have forces enough to hinder Japan, through Africa/Middle East and/or a Pacific offensive, while at the same time closing in around Germany. Especially if Italy is knocked out of the war, an immediate IPC boost. For AA50 to be a global game with an active Pacific theatre, stopping the European and African advance of the Axis is an absolute must.

[Andy1984]

I can see how the European axis are put under pressure after a long while, but not as quickly as just five turns. Last game, my Germany built only armor and infantry (and an occasional bomber after a really long time). By having focused on ground forces, it became increasingly difficult for the Allies to build sufficient transports (and cruisers) in order to ship the invasion forces. Also remember UK can only build 6 (?) units each turn in England, which further limits her actions. On the eastern frontier, things are getting plain ugly for the SU by an ever increasing lack of forces. If Germany concentrates her forces in two SU-provinces (e.g. Baltic and Ukrain), and they trade East-Poland, they’re gaining two NO each turn… which should ease the defense against UK and US. Early on, I needed some Italian forces for support, but after four or five turns, Germany should be capable to make a decent stand in the east.

About Africa or Scandinavia: it’s loss is regrettable, but far from lethal.

[Jennifer]

@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?

I’d agree with DM in that I don’t think you are seeing balanced play from your opponent. (Balance as in equitable skill to your own.)

First off, it appears the biggest mistake the allies are making is attempting to use the strategies of Classic and Revised for Anniversary in so much as they are not attacking Japan.

It only takes 6 rounds for Japan to have a 500 IPC army if you ignore them.  This is not good since it takes over 10 rounds for Russia to achieve that without counting damage taken from Germany!

I believe it is imperative that America at least force Japan to build boats in the Pacific.  Maybe not go all out after Japan, but at least present enough of a threat that Japan feels the need to put boats in the water.

If you are not going that route, then landing massive British and American troops in Karelia would help alleviate the pressure.  After all, you’re already giving Japan an 80-90 IPC income anyway, so you shouldn’t worry about the 5 IPC loss to Russia for having some allied units on red territories.

[Andy1984]

@ Jennifer: if the US would like to keep Japan at bay, doesn’t she need almost her entire income to do so? If not (from what I’ve seen), any ‘small’ American fleet would be easily destroyed by Japan thanks to their huge starting fleet. The ipc’s the US spent would almost be thrown away, since a few ships would hardly delay Japan.
Please tell me: what kind of a US-fleet did you imagine (size and type of ships) to face Japan? (In the games I’ve played, I’ve seen BB and destroyer based fleets in the Pacific. The hitpoints of the BB would make a minor attack against the Japanese fleet extremely costly. But then again, I may have been playing the game completely different than you)

[Jennifer]

No.  I am referring to building just enough to encourage Japan to play defensively with her fleet and even outfit it with more ships.

If you want to kill Japan you need to spend almost your entire pay doing so however.  In that regard you are correct.

[a44bigdog]

Telamon, I prefer playing games with tech because in my opinion they are much more interesting and have a greater variety. While I think AA50 has some more options than Revised I feel that playing non-tech games will lead to most of the games playing out the same way.

I still feel ignoring Japan is a huge mistake. It does not take much effort on Japan’s part to quickly boost their income. Also after turn 3 or so the limiting factor to Japan’s production is IC slots to fill not income. This also means that the tank becomes Japan’s Infantry. I see no reason to build Infantry with Japan in regards to Asia. Tanks attack better, defend better, and get there faster. This is not classic so there is no need for Japan to do some sort of IPM.

As far as Japan invading the US it can do so quite easily without sacrificing all that much pressure off of Russia. While it may not be able to take and hold W. US it can easily drop 4 transport loads a turn in Alaska, drawing US forces out of the pipeline to Europe.

[alwayswin]

1941 setup Japan is dominant and should be in the 40 IPC range first turn with NO’s. Furthermore, turn 2 India should fall unless UK player went all out there, in that case take Australia and more of China and Far East, now its second turn and you have 5o+ IPC’s. IC in East Indies and India should come quick and Africa, the Islands and eventually Caucasus. Bombers built in India can bomb Russia immediately. With money for tech rolls, heavy bombers and long range should be top priority. German just needs to survive and build up for 5th turn advance toward Russia, that way the West will be well defended and a strong force can move forward without looking back. If you’re smart you have a fair sized Italian Navy to work with as well. If Italy is getting both NO’s then most of Africa can be left for Japan. All Italy needs is 20-25 IPC’s per turn to cause major problems for the allies. The larger the fleet the more attention it takes away from Germany.

As far as game balance, I feel there is a slight advantage to the Allies in '41 and a slight advantage to the Axis in '42. I also feel that research & development is too powerful and game changing. A limit of 2 or 3 per country works well with another limit of purchasing only one roll per turn.

[Richter von Manthofen]

If the US buys some ships to force japan to also Build ships the advantage is still on Japans side. japan needs ONLY to match the US builds at most. As usually japan has more BBs (usually) to soak up losses, It “only” has to maintain a fleet in "striking distance to the US setup areas. Of xcourse it needs fighter cover, but that is easily achieved as Japan has a definite carrier advantage (same as bbs) in the early stages.

I too often saw the US building up for a strike on Europe/Africa and then they had to go a few rounds against constant naval landings from Japanese troops. In the meantime Italy (must also build some ships IMHO) sailed out and damaged the US attack fleet while Germany spent a turn or two to strike at the UK ships.

IMHO if the Euro Axis strikes a balance betweed agressive defense and heavy blows on dangerous Allies - build up points (Germany has the inner line - often enough units used for an attack on one front are available for defense action on the other front next turn), they are in a 2-1 position for a win.

regarding an 8 inf attack on turn 2 on africa - yeah thats a really bad blow to the axis, thats why I NEVER saw a game in AA50 where Germany did not commit the bulk of its airforce/navy to take out UK ships in the biggest number possible. Sometimes the Luftwaffe got blown out of the air, but more often the UK built ship after ship only to watch them sunk by the Luftwaffe - so the main weight in this thrust must be done by the US.

If I may say so - Japan does not have to go after russia immediately, buiding up a potential threat to the US West coast is more important.

I do not say that teh Axis does suceed every time, but they really get a 50+% share…

In the games I played so far (slight Axis advantage) Lady Luck decided the outcome of the games. More than once by a single streak of bad rolls in ONE offensive, but also by some attition to one side by losing the more risky attacks, when probabilty would have sid otherwise.

[atarihuana]

why bother WUS when u can fight US in MED and africa with japan, helping italy, threatening russia. if US ignores pacific, grab hawaii / 2nd island - 5 IPC NO for US and thats it.

[Funcioneta]

Why bother with Moscow as Japan when you can make a serious raid in mainland America, forcing USA to defend there instead Africa, thus giving Africa to italians?

If USA tries ignore Japan: congrats, you won as axis! Tons of free IPCs for Japan in all the globe, japs menacing America, Siberia AND aiding italians in Africa (if they need it  :-P). A super-strong western axis that can easily beat UK + soviets. UK colecting less than italians …

No more KGF strats, pals. Sooner you accept that is a dead road, sooner you’ll accept the game is broken and needs a heavy allied bid (and a burning of page 10 of rulebook  :-P )