What to do with Japan

[Commando Brado]

What does everyone think about taking away the Russian NO for Japan attacking it? Meaning, if Japan attacks Russia, then Russia doesn’t get 12 IPC’s. Only Japan would get the 12 IPC’s if Russia attacked it. I think this would be a way to help balance the game. Sometimes Japan doesn’t attack Russia b/cuz it gives Russia 12 IPC’s if it does. This would allow Japan to attack Russia w/out any negative effects.

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Commando:

What does everyone think about taking away the Russian NO for Japan attacking it? Meaning, if Japan attacks Russia, then Russia doesn’t get 12 IPC’s. Only Japan would get the 12 IPC’s if Russia attacked it. I think this would be a way to help balance the game. Sometimes Japan doesn’t attack Russia b/cuz it gives Russia 12 IPC’s if it does. This would allow Japan to attack Russia w/out any negative effects.

But remember this is a game based on world war II a real war that happened, and in that war there was no contact between Russia and Japan (at least not until Russia attacked it in 1944.) Beside their air force can help them take over territory easily and get them that money back, so if you know what your doing it shouldn’t be that bad.

Your free to try it though.

[Commando Brado]

What does A&A being based on WWII have to do w/my post? I’m simply talking about balancing the game, using different idea’s. I’m just curious if anyone’s tried it. And of course Japan can take over territory they’ve lost to the Russians using their airforce. Again, the point is balancing the game. Yes the game is based on WWII but it’s still a game at the end of the day so it has to be balanced, otherwise it’s no fun to play.

[Dylan the Canadian]

Alright then I guess your right, but still it’s always bugged me that Japan and Russia go to war, except when I’m Japan goggling territory from them.

[Commando Brado]

There are a lot of things that bug me too about A&A, like the fact that planes can hit subs when a destroyer is present, even though that never happened in WWII. But at the end of the day it’s a game.

[SSPanther]

@Commando:

There are a lot of things that bug me too about A&A, like the fact that planes can hit subs when a destroyer is present, even though that never happened in WWII. But at the end of the day it’s a game.

Planes hit subs all the time. Thats why the Germans eventually equipped their subs with radar. They feared aircraft more than anything! Destroyers did not seek subs out for the most part, but rather stayed with the convoys to protect against wolfpacks. Actually later in the war planes were equipped with sonar and thus were able to take out subs independent of any destroyer.

[SSPanther]

The biggest things that annoy me are shore bombardment (it was used but had an absolutely minimal effect on outcome of major battles such as Iwo Jima, Normandy, etc.) and aircraft being able to take out infantry.

[Dylan the Canadian]

@SSPanther:

The biggest things that annoy me are shore bombardment (it was used but had an absolutely minimal effect on outcome of major battles such as Iwo Jima, Normandy, etc.) and aircraft being able to take out infantry.

Why can’t aircraft take out infantry?

[SSPanther]

@Dylan:

@SSPanther:

The biggest things that annoy me are shore bombardment (it was used but had an absolutely minimal effect on outcome of major battles such as Iwo Jima, Normandy, etc.) and aircraft being able to take out infantry.

Why can’t aircraft take out infantry?

I just think it is highly unrealistic. Infantry is very difficult to locate, pin down, and most of all, completely destroy. Sure you’ll inflict casualties but no single air division could ever realistically take out an entire infantry division. If they could  the war in Afghanistan would already be over.

I think air power should be limited to damaging infrastructure (as is already represented) taking out heavy equip such as tanks, art, mech, etc, taking out ships, and possibly harassing infantry at most. Harassing could possibly be preventing them from movement our something like that.

[Jennifer]

Retreat from China. (Yea, you lose a lot of cash, but you save so much in resources it isnt even funny, and the Chinese can’t really come after you to hurt you!)

Invade Russia and blitz for Moscow!

Take Hawaii on J2, reinforce the crap out of SZ 26 (or SZ 25 if you cannot hold SZ 26)

Take Australia on J4/5

Take the DEI on J5/6

This represents a “perfect” world, however.  One in which America does not go after you with 100% of their resources and crushing you through shear finances.  If America is “honest” and invests in the Atlantic as well, this should be achievable.

[Commando Brado]

I’m talking about hitting submerged subs, not ones on the surface. Yes planes could attack surfaced subs but the units in A&A represent a major force of units, not a single unit. Planes did regularly bomb ports w/dry docked subs and the occassional plane(s) would attack subs out at sea. But like I said, I was talking about submerged subs. The point I was ultimately trying to make is, A&A is a game. Therefore, it should be balanced and leave the win to the side w/the best strategy and of course a little bit of luck, due to the dice. Thus, being a game and making it balanced, historical accuracy and realism have to be sacrificed a little.

[JimmyHat]

This is also what I discovered after a handful of Axis games.  Why is Japan fighting China again?  My Japanese objectives are not to capture VC’s, it is to make it easier for Germany to be victorious by distracting the Americans as long as possible and fighting the Russians.  Fighting China is a waste for Japan and an empty black hole for units.  Of course once you leave China alone for a few rounds, it will be next to impossible to return….

If you bring that army in China north, the Russians will not be able to stop you until you reach the moscow area and link up with the Germans.

[Jennifer]

I am quickly coming to agree with this philosophy.  THere is nothing for us in China except destroyed war materials and lost lives.  There are no objectives in China, the land value is worth a bit, but no where near the cost of getting it, the Chinese cannot chase us out of China….

Major Complex in Korea, and blow the snot out of the Russians!  Hope you can do enough damage to them before you fall to America!

(PS: All of our objectives except India are in the Ocean. Defined as you need transports to get there.)

[knp7765]

Interesting idea about Japan not bothering with China.  You do make a point, very little gain and a lot of manpower lost.  I would still attack Yunnan to close the Burma Road and deprive China of that 6 IPC NO each turn and keep them from buying any artillery.  Plus, Yunnan is a gateway to Calcutta.  Not sure about giving up Shanghai or Hong Kong though.  Maybe it would be best to build a couple of minor ICs on those two and just keep putting men there while the rest of your forces go south to India or north to Russia.  By the time China can get any sizeable force there, it will be all infantry and you should have a lot of men there to hold those vicotry cities and 3 point territories.  Even the Flying Tigers fighter won’t be able to help them.

[JimmyHat]

The reason I don’t like the idea of IC’s on China if you’re only planning on a defensive campaign is because no matter how many units you can put on the mainland to defend, over the course of a 12 round game China will be able to outproduce those factories.

IF you are diehard to build factories on the mainland, I suggest Korea for an attack on Russia like Jen said, or FIC for an attack on India. The other problem with production sites on the mainland is once US is all up in your grill you won’t have the IPC’s to spend anyway, and if you do…try and save 8ipcs for when the US fleet leaves.

[Jennifer]

no!  nyet!  No burma road!  I am not losing valuable men, trained in the art of war, to chase around a bunch of musket carrying infantrymen for 1 IPC!  No!  Full retreat!  Take DEI, you stop England from getting NO!  Retreat to Manchuria, invade Amur, build MI/Armor in Korea, you take Volgorod and weaken Russia!  Very good, very good!  You swing down and take India from backdoor!  India no stop, India put all their men in China, hope to get Korea, but you too smart for that!  You sneaky!  You move stealthy around back and invade from Middle East because you crazy!

(I don’t know what I am talking like that.  I mean no disrespect to anyone and am not racist, it just seemed….different.)

Anyway…yes, the idea isn’t to trade Yunnan, because then you are losing men.  Who cares if China gets the NO, because they cannot come get you anyway.

[Robson]

wow great Jennifer, I always wonderes what to do with the Japanese. Mostly I tried to hold China down, but it takes so much resources, so I can´t handle the rest.
Do you think the same strategy worked when the USA doesn´t go All In Pacific? Or do you think in this case you would be more aggresive in the pacific ozean and against the Chinese?
Thanks for the great input!

[Jennifer]

If America isn’t going all in Pacific (because they don’t know how easy it is, I assume) then it works better.  You really don’t need China or Kwangtung to win.  I suppose if Japan wants to get the 6 VCs it is easier to get Kwangtung, but honestly, if you speed over to Russia with all those MI and Armor, maybe you can do enough dmg fast enough to make Germany’s life easier.

[JimmyHat]

I disagree on two minor points.  First off, this plan wouldn’t work if America was going 100 Atlantic.  In that case you’d want to put China in a vise because VC’s are you’re victory condition and if you let China get back up, Japan won’t be able to bring them down.

Secondly, while I’m not discounting Jenn’s strategic qualities…I did voice this opinion first.

[Robson]

@Jen yes that sounds good, i will try this in my next game!
@Jimmyhat I think in this case when I build fast units with Japan and get much pressure on Russia from the east, the other axis can spend more ressources in defending Gibraltar and the western front or am I wrong?