Thanks! Having a great time, and learning, so…
What do you do with the Americans in your "standard game?
-
NOs on in most of my games.
America sits so deep in the turn que that which direction they go is determined by the Japanese play out.
-
Usually play with NO’s and put more than 50% of the U.S. into the Pacific. How much depends on Japan successes and their builds.
-
With NOs -
I try to always start with a European focus. If it is safe I may move my Pac AC/dd to Sz 56 with ftr cover. If not they’ll head to Sz 20 or protect the UK trn/dd in the South Pacific.
I try to buy heavy air and inf early. I may wait on a trn buy until US 2, but I always set up my shuck from Wus. Early air also can help deter some J Pac moves and quickly get to Afr or Europe.
-
I play with tech and NOs and I go pacific all the way with the fighter or bomber to the UK every so often.
-
With NOs: 50-75 % spent on Europe, depending on how aggressive Japan is moving navy against the West Coast. I try to keep a West Coast fleet afloat, and also as a threat to move towards the Phillippines and East Indies if the Japanese fleet sails west. The point is to keep Japan tied up in the Pacific in order to be able to keep Africa from being lost to invasions and all fighters sent vs. the Russians, rather than an all-out offensive vs. the Japs.
-
I try to spend 70 % in the Europe Theater and 30 % in the Pacific Theater. This is my strategy for the total game. Turn 1 is a different matter, and this first spending depends on the situation on the map. Usually I would spend all money on ships in the Pacific Theater, or all money on bombers to SBR Germany, for Turn 1 only. Then continue with the 70/30.
Historically USA did spend 90 % in Europe and only 10 % in Pacific. But the cost of a real army seem to be higher than the cost of a real battleship. In the A&A games, its opposite. Infantry cost 3 IPC and battleship cost 20 IPC, so its different.
But the point is, the East coast factory is closer to the action, so it is rational to let the main shuck of forces move from here, against the main theater in Europe. But it is also a must to threaten Japan.
A strategy I am trying out now, is to buy all bombers turn 1 and 2, and let them either kill the german and italian navies, or SBR germany and italy. Then from turn 3 establish the usual shuck with inf/trannies against Africa or France or Norway.
-
everything to pacific, except the EUS coast DD to kill off german subs / reinforce sz12… but the tranny flushes through panama :D, heck even the AA gun EUS goes to pacific ;)
-
I still don’t think I have devoloped a consistent US strat. My past few games though I was able to have 3 fullly loaded tranies my 1st 2 turns threatening Europe. Nothing feels better than to give the Axis a quick squeeze with a fist full of UK and US troops.
-
@Cmdr:
Problem is, if America abandons the Pacific, there is a great chance that Japan will take W. USA for keeps without a significant (read 2 or 3 rounds of dedicated investment) investment into preventing it. And with a Japan bored out of their mind from inactivity, they have the time and resources to blow on trying for it, or at the least, threatening it with all their extra equipment. America just doesn’t have the extra equipment that Japan does. (3 Carriers, Battleship, Cruiser, they probably put some more units in the water as well to prepare for the American attack that never came.)
but i wonder
can’t US just drop 10 inf on west us, problem solved? -
in my last game as the allies, i bought units for europe and abandoned the pacific to try to “trick” the japanese player. then on J2 he moved his navy further away and i moved mine back to WUS SZ and spent almost every penny there for 2 rounds, building quite a formidable fleet.
i think it put a major kink in japan’s overall strategy. he seemed a little flustered for the next couple turns and eventually overlooked uk’s clearing of persia, followed by the blitzing russian tanks to take his newly constructed IC in india lol
but i def think the US has to keep japan honest, otherwise their navy and production can be quite overwhelming
-
With NOs and tech, for the same reason that it’s improbable for the KJF campaign, it’s improbable for the japanese to take the US coastline. It takes 3 turns minimum to get a decent force there, and that leaves an obvious assault coming and at least 1 US buy of troops to defend the coast. At which point the buildup of Japanese makes wasted buys when they could be going toward the frak India offensive.
So I usually go all out in the Atlantic. The Germans and Italians can’t hold out against the combined effort of all the allies at a 6 turn maximum, and that isn’t enough time for Japan to get to Moscow
-
in my last game as the allies, i bought units for europe and abandoned the pacific to try to “trick” the japanese player. then on J2 he moved his navy further away and i moved mine back to WUS SZ and spent almost every penny there for 2 rounds, building quite a formidable fleet.
i think it put a major kink in japan’s overall strategy. he seemed a little flustered for the next couple turns and eventually overlooked uk’s clearing of persia, followed by the blitzing russian tanks to take his newly constructed IC in india lol
but i def think the US has to keep japan honest, otherwise their navy and production can be quite overwhelming
Seems to me that you got lucky, most Japanese players would’ve swept up your islands, and blockaded the US in the Pacific
-
actually i remembered what happened:
he had sent part of his fleet to australia to take out the UK fleet that i kept forgetting about. then with my move plus 1 rd of purchases i had him on the run, meanwhile the rest of his fleet were close to india by that point. it slowed his land based asia game enough to give russia a little more breathing room, which i think is important in this game.
a good germany/italy player should reconize a KG/IF plan and “turtle a bit” to hold out until japan reaches moscow. a strong pacific presence by the US is imperative to slowing them (japan) down.
-
As USA playing using NOs, I tend to build all naval in the Pacific on round 1 except one transport in the Atlantic. Then 60/40 (Pacific/Atlantic) naval on round 2. But I always make sure Atlantic transports are full and ready to go across on each round. Therefore you have to buy a couple of land troops to fill transports as required. Get a back and forth going with the transports in the Atlantic going to Africa so as to fill at least one every turn. Once Pacific fleet as got some capital ships I tend to buy alot of cheap subs and a few destroyers to fill it up. Also need at least two transports in the Pacific to insure you can take back islands as needed. From round 4 on it depends upon what Japan does if you go more Pacific or go all out Europe. 8-)
-
For fun….
Pretty much 80% builds in pacific. In the atlantic I am just trying to get troops in Africa as fast and safe as possible. IMO if Italy takes Africa game is over. I like to use british for India and Northern europe.Threatened with death if I lose…
100% European builds. -
i do not play with no’s and teck rolls
-
we usually play aa50 with NOs, no tech
we have the impression US will be only strong when spending 90% or more in one region, either for Europe or Pacific.
On the other way, for all players it’s more interesting and more fun if US plays everywhere, as happend in WWII.Unfortunately US funds does not allow that kind of play, a 50% spend means your too weak for Europe and you will never threaten Japan.So this looks good at a first glance, but it’s waste of time and money and leads to frustration to the Allies player.
Our Idea:
Dividing US !
That would be an Idea for a new AA version or TripleA sceanrio.
The eastern US forces get their own NOs for Europe and Africa, a higher income, 10 - 15 IPC, but they can only build and play in the Atlantic and Europe/Africa
The western US forces get their own NOs for Pacific and Asia, a higher income, at least 15 - 20 IPC, but they can only build and play in the Pacific and Asia
Both get units of a diferent colour to seperate them from each other, they can’t attack together as well.
Move Order ist new: you play western US completely and after placing units, the eastern US will be played.
That’s the same concept as dividing Germany into Germany and Italy in AA50.
For obious reasons that US nations need more money as US has now as a united country, how much is questionable of course. I would like to see the US competitive in both Atlanic and Pacific at the same time, but of course much weaker as now, when US spends 100% in one region. Some rules have to be defined as well, one thing that should not happen is, that one side is building air units and fly through US to support the other side (e.g. fighters that land on the other ACs).
what do you think of that idea ?
-
It’s a bit different from what happened with Germany and Italy though. Italy only starts on 10 IPCs! And Germany has less income on both 41 and 42.
Of course it all got complicated by NOs.
-
We play with NO’s and tech rolls, and my normal partner and I spend most of the money in the Atlantic. We move the SZ44 off the west coast and build three subs there turn one. Then we usually put one into each of SZ58, SZ52, and SZ46. On the second turn we buy a couple subs. Japan will have to avoid moving unescorted carriers in range of the subs, and will need to use a lot of forces to kill the subs. If they attack any of the subs, the counter would be 3-4 subs, a carrier, a destroyer, 3-4 fighters and a bomber.
In Atlantic, our plans often change. We either buy mostly transports and link up with the British navy after they take France while helping hold France or we attack the Italian navy.
Suggested Topics
