@Caesar:
Yeah which is why FIC is key but adding any more minors in China seems pointless with a transport fleet.
The Japanese fleet has enough to do without shielding transports ferrying troops to the Chinese mainland. To save 12IPCs?
A Nameless but Effective China Strategy
-
@thedesertfox you arent spamming cruisers - they are too expensive a unit. also you shouldnt ever purchase a single cruiser anyways - they are very much not the best unit for the cost. subs and destroyers should be the backbone of your navy while your loaded carriers do the heavy hitting. Also Andrew is correct about battleships not ever being a great purchase either.
-
@andrewaagamer i think the (except for turn 1) is a big point you cant gloss over. as Japan if you are stacking amur turn 1 with the russians i am going to wipe out your army in one big attack when i have the units in position and then can gobble up your territories immediately following the big attack. also the russians can keep units in Tsaka to project a threat if the Japanese want to grab SFE for free with a sinlge transport turn 1.
-
@theveteran said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
@andrewaagamer i think the (except for turn 1) is a big point you cant gloss over. as Japan if you are stacking amur turn 1 with the russians i am going to wipe out your army in one big attack when i have the units in position and then can gobble up your territories immediately following the big attack. also the russians can keep units in Tsaka to project a threat if the Japanese want to grab SFE for free with a single transport turn 1.
Yeah, I admit I was tired of typing and I probably should have gone into more detail as to why you can’t be in Amur on R1 for all the newbies out there that have not learned that yet the hard way.
I am not crazy about going to Sakha with the Russians. Buryatia is the spot for me. If you go to Sakha the Japanese can get 17 ground troops into Amur and their entire airforce into position to wipe you out since you are trapped there. As Japan I would forego an early DOW on the rest of the Allies and go after Russia if my opponent did this.
-
Should also add there is no guarantee even 20 can stay in Amur the whole time. If Japan ever has enough units in position to wipe out that stack they have to pull back to Buryatia until the danger passes.
-
Then I suppose it accomplishes its mission fairly well in stopping a J1 attack from happening.
-
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Then I suppose it accomplishes its mission fairly well in stopping a J1 attack from happening.
Which would be great if the Axis had to win on both sides of the board, but they don’t.
After wiping out the Russian stack Japan can push through the now almost empty Russian eastern flank and gobble up Russian income which makes an early Moscow take a certainty. Since the ground troops they lose are not that much more than what would be pinned anyway in Korea they can still go for a J3 DOW that a) limits the US response to a hard charging German Moscow push and b) have enough of a threat that they can force India and the US to combat them and still stalemate China.
If Moscow goes down on G7 that is bad news for the Allies.
-
Exactly. Moscow is the only problem. The Allies in the Pacific to include Russia can stop Japan, the problem is stopping Germany. That’s why I’ve been trying to make some kind, any kind, of a floating bridge for America work because it’s the only hope the Russians have of survival.
-
AndrewAAGamer 2025 2024 '23 '22 '21 '20last edited by AndrewAAGamer Apr 5, 2023, 8:46 PM Apr 5, 2023, 8:44 PM
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
of a floating bridge for America work because it’s the only hope the Russians have of survival.
First, I would recommend giving up on that Floating Bridge idea. The infrastructure cost is just too great. Look instead at trying to capture or place minor IC’s (mIC). Normandy and Southern France have existing mICs. Greece and Norway are great places to put new ones.
Second, as for Russia; Moscow falling early is a problem. Moscow falling late is not. Taking Moscow does not win the game for the Axis. Taking Moscow and then taking Cairo does. Therefore, the key for the Allies is to have made enough progress against Germany/Italy and built up an Egyptian Wall that Germany still cannot win the game once Moscow falls.
-
russia can survive without an american bridge strategy. fly all the fighters you can spare if possible to moscow - even anzac fighters ive seen in moscow to help hold or british fighters built in persia can fly to moscow in one move.
-
@andrewaagamer said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Second, as for Russia; Moscow falling early is a problem. Moscow falling late is not. Taking Moscow does not win the game for the Axis. Taking Moscow and then taking Cairo does. Therefore, the key for the Allies is to have made enough progress against Germany/Italy and built up an Egyptian Wall that Germany still cannot win the game once Moscow falls.
Don’t forget that the Allies can’t just endlessly defend, defend, defend. At some point, they’re going to have to take the initiative and go on the offense. If there’s a method to defeating Germany while they’re still in the thick of war not having seized Moscow, then I’m all for that method since I think we could all agree that the Allies would stand a better chance against a Germany still fighting Russia then a Germany that’s already destroyed Russia. If the Allies try to just defend their victory cities there will be no thought of them winning at all.
-
Goal #1 for the Allies is first to stop the Axis. Then, with an advantage in money, build up a superior force and then finally push forward. Throwing resources away for not enough value is not something the Allies can do and still win.
-
@thedesertfox I have posted a standard J1 opener that is an exact copy of Cow’s final version. I would like to see what moves you propose for USA1 through Anzac 1 for your super amazing and effective China strategy. Feel free to ignore the European theater portion of the strategy, although it would be nice to see the units that you would place as the United States for the Atlantic side.
You talk in so many hypotheticals, but let’s see what it means in practical terms as you will quite often see good players have moves similar or identical to those that I posted. If your plan has gaping holes after just 1 turn, it will age even worse by the mid-game.
-
@andrewaagamer Throwing resources away for not enough value doesn’t work in a TripleA match but can sometimes work in face-to-face match against poor opponents. I have a feeling most of this strategy is designed for people who eventually make mistakes when faced with threats in multiple locations.
-
@arthur-bomber-harris said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
@andrewaagamer Throwing resources away for not enough value doesn’t work in a TripleA match but can sometimes work in face-to-face match against poor opponents. I have a feeling most of this strategy is designed for people who eventually make mistakes when faced with threats in multiple locations.
I think there is something to be said for that though. A perfect A&A player doesn’t exist and being that this amazing game originated from the good old fashioned person-to-person board game on the table, it’s not like people to have battle calculators in front of them either, especially when they’re playing the actual board game in person. That ultimately leaves a margin of error in play at all times for both sides that essentially forces them to eyeball with RNG in mind and the ‘rough’ averages that rolls can give in terms of analyzing the probability of winning and losing battles. Just like this strategy isn’t universal in all scenarios, it’s just meant to counter Japan when they so choose to do a J1 DOW. Atleast, that’s what I think.
I’d be find with posting my own response to the J1 DOW with my America and ANZAC turn 1 and maybe turn 2 as well depending on what you wanna see. I also do understand the concern for what’s being put on the Atlantic so I can include that to, but I dont think the moves over in the Atlantic will be super necassary with America. Plus I’ve been meaning to get some input on my starting Pacific build anyway.
-
Just the USA Atlantic purchase on turns 1 and 2 is necessary. No need for detailed troop movements there as frankly the game is mostly scripted for the first few turns on that side of the board.
-
@thedesertfox still waiting for your response to the standard J1 opener I posted.
-
@arthur-bomber-harris said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
@thedesertfox still waiting for your response to the standard J1 opener I posted.
You didn’t ask me, but I’ll give it a try:
Low luck, 6 IPC Pacific bid, J1 COW opener. All units moved or purchased could be going against Japan. Feel free to change up the J1 NCM.
-
@govz why is your game low liuck? I feel nobody plays that way?
-
That certainly is a reasonable response and will require Japan to be more conservative in the next rounds. Yunnan likely will trade hands on J2, and then be held in China hands on China 3 if stacked. By turn 4, Japan can decide whether to focus on kicking the Allied stack out of Yunnan (India will last for a long-time) or simply go after India while letting China run amuck for the mid-game.
I personally try winning the map on the European side of the map and would be happy if Russia was 100% focused on helping out in Asia on R1-3. Stinks for Japan but increases the chance of victory overall.
-
@theveteran certainly reasonable to use low-luck to demonstrate a strategy. I actually prefer it as the board will reflect the most-likely outcome.
A few people play low-luck which is their personal choice. It is different; not good or bad.
Suggested Topics
