Germany duking it out with the Army of Siberia
IMG_9183.jpg
Large bulge of troops massing for Berlin
IMG_9184.jpg
Four battleship counter
-
I think it is obvious that you are both right on different points. You cannot ignore China entirely, but there’s no point in making it the overwhelming object of Japan’s strategy. If you ignore it entirely, it will buy art and push Japan off the coast taking around 10 or 12 IPCs and two victory cities (1/3 of Japan’s victory requirement). If you make it your chief aim, you will waste a lot of time that Japan can’t afford to lose what with Calcutta building up defenses, ANZAC putting together a navy or air force or something, and USA bringing an economic hammer to bear. And that time will indeed be a waste as there are no victory conditions in China.
The good news for Japan is that China can be severely crippled from the first turn simply by taking Yunnan and a few other territories in the North. From that point on, if Yunnan is held, China can barely do a thing of importance in the whole game. And it only requires a couple infantry a turn and a few support planes for Japan to keep China under the boot.
-
@Cmdr:
On top of that, I advocate +18 more mech and + 12 more armor for another 144 IPC worth of material being shoved into China via Russia (Timguska) bringing the total to 199 IPC.
Um….
don’t do that then.Hooray! We’ve saved 144 IPCs!
Plus that much land force is waaayy more than what is needed.
-
@Cmdr:
On top of that, I advocate +18 more mech and + 12 more armor for another 144 IPC worth of material being shoved into China via Russia (Timguska) bringing the total to 199 IPC.
Um….
don’t do that then.Hooray! We’ve saved 144 IPCs!
Plus that much land force is waaayy more than what is needed.
Those units are designed to blitz through Russia and invade through China’s rear door in rapid fashion forcing them to split their build or lose significant resources.
You can win the game without a single Chinese territoriy. Keep in mind that no matter how many artillery they have, not a single chinese unit can go to Korea.
-
A fleet of 9 subs (54 IPCs) is sufficient to have the advantage over 4 battleships (80 IPC). It’s a 60%/40% in favor of the subs, not counting potential air support.
For the sake of it, increase this to 13 subs (78 IPC), and then the subs have a 99% chance of winning. All 4 battleships go down and on average only 3 subs are lost.
Pretty easy to see:
-
Yes. What is your point?
-
@Cmdr:
Those units are designed to blitz through Russia and invade through China’s rear door in rapid fashion forcing them to split their build or lose significant resources.
My point was that the discussion was about Japanese victory in general, which does not require that Japan sink heavily into land forces against Russia. So your assertion that China needs “hundreds” of IPCs investment wasn’t accurate. It would be like saying France “required” the entire Luftwaffe to fall on G1 just because I like to save land forces. :lol:
That’s all I meant. Obviously putting that kind of mobile land force into East Russia is entirely viable. It just isn’t needed to keep China in check. -
If Japan intends to win on the Pacific map, then China requires no less than 200 IPC worth of units because you also have to deal with Indian units. If Japan only wants to tie up the allies, then China can be ignored, but Russia still needs an investment and you may as well use overwhelming force.
-
Or skip all the bull-crap, and**just do what I said**.
Make the effort to take and hold Yunnan, and take anything else you can take for FREE. Let the Chinese Devils attack YOU if they dare. Within the first 3 turns, they will be relegated to uselessness, without investing ANYTHING more than what already starts there, and all whilst you are on your route to India, OR Russia, OR NSW.
Jennifer points out you can “Win the game” without a single chinese territory. That’s like saying “You can win the game without a single Japanese territory”
China affects 2 Victories
If you don’t relegate China whilst NOT at war with the allies, you will be forced to win by the following territories.
TOKYO
CALCUTTA
MANILLA
SYDNEY
HAWAII
SAN FRANYes that’s right, either it’s China’s territories, or SAN FRAN and HAWAII. Bad news.
I’ve played games - where the game was LOST - precisely because of this.
MORAL OF THE STORY
Don’t ignore China entirely. Hit em hard enough to keep em down.
And
Ruanek, HYPERBOLE is the point I’m trying to make, you cannot accept strategic advice when it’s provided in regular exxagerations.
-
No, there are two avenues.
1) Attack China first and India/Australia second
or
2) Attack India/Australia first and China second.
I am adovcating path 2, because it is FAR easier to obliterate the Chinese after you have India and Australia than it is to beat the Indians and Australians after you secure China.
-
MORAL OF THE STORY
Don’t ignore China entirely. Hit em hard enough to keep em down.
A) Hit Yunnan round 1 for sure, but don’t blow all your cash trying to keep it. China can only make Artillery and Infantry, it’s not exactly a “huge” threat. Further, none of those units can get to Korea, French Indo China, Malaya, India, Kazakh, any of the Mongolian territories, Sham State or any Russian territories, so they are very limited and you can easily get a lot of firepower in range later to handle them.
B) Hit Yuannan round 2 or 3 if it won’t jeapordize getting India, which is a higher priority. (Would you rather China have 18 IPC or India 20-30 IPC?)
C) Main priority is to get India early to minimize defenses. Secondary priority is Australia to minimize defenses and maximize income. Tertiary priority is China, and even then, you might be better off going for Moscow or San Francisco.
-
Thank you for Agreeing Jen.
-
It’s interesting, then, that both of you have apparently agreed the whole time but still had to argue over it.
-
It’s interesting, then, that both of you have apparently agreed the whole time but still had to argue over it.
Welcome to Axis and Allies (dot) Org. :wink:
We do, however, disagree as to the degree of involvement in China. I don’t think Japan should be overly concerned with China until India and Australia are down, Gargantua seems to want Japan to be very concerned in the affairs of China regardless of how India or Australia are going (assuming a typical game, in which those two nations might never fall or might be little more than a nuissance.) Assumed that if China got miraculous dice the situation might change. Likewise, if India is sitting there with a 200 IPC fleet, Japan might suddenly get more interested in it. (aka: non-typical game.)
-
Well if you deal with Sydney/Calcutta, but evac China leaving Shanghai to the Chinese along with Manchuria/Jehol/etc, and they are pushing out 29 IPCs worth of units directly in Shanghai each round, it’s game over for Japan. I have seen Jennifer post an evacuate China tactic before and it’s a terrible idea. I think she’s way too caught up in the IPC value of units and forgets that positioning and tactics supercede everything.
In my opinion, doing either of the following leads to disaster:
- Going all out and trying to take over all of China.
- Totally ignoring China and expecting to head back later and take back Shanghai.
I like to try to kill 3-6 Chinese units every round, basically matching their builds, and limiting them to an IPC value of 8 or less.
-
Gargantua seems to want Japan to be very concerned in the affairs of China regardless of how India or Australia are going
Actually if you read anything I have said, I’m not advocating that at all.
I’m advocating exactly what shadowguidex is saying, and his position, is the correct play to make.
Taking and holding Yunnan IS the integral component of this strategy.
-
Of course, if I get good luck (haha, never with the Axis do I have good luck) and have the chance to put the dagger into China’s heart, I take it.
Yunnan is important, but I’ll take any of the Burma Road territories, most especially India itself. I’m not going to leave forces to get obliterated in Yunnan by Chinese or British troops just because it’s on the Burma Road though.
Much like the rest of the game, positioning and finesse dictate a lot. China requires some finesse to maximize results while minimizing forces required to achieve that success. The best players fully understand this balance - and don’t get caught up in predetermined tactics or requiring themselves to commit to a 135 IPC Army (entirely arbitrary number) because that’s what they predetermined is necessary - that sort of talk is just ridiculous.
-
I have to agree with shadowguidex and Gargantua on this. You can’t leave China alone, but you don’t have to totally wipe them out either. That can come later after other, more prosperous objectives and more dangerous threats are dealt with. I have seen games where Japan either totally left China alone or simply tried to guard the coastal territories. After a few rounds, China built up a lot of infantry with a few artillery thrown in. They took back the coastal territories and had too many men there for Japan to get back on the mainland. Then again, I have seen games where Japan expended a lot of men and equipment to wipe China out. Only problem was it gained them only 12 IPCs and Japan had too many threats from India, ANZAC and USA to counter.
I like the idea of hitting China on a limited basis, enough to cost them about whatever they build, and taking a territory here and there. Taking Yunnan is cruicial, but usually as a stepping stone to Burma, then India. If you can do it quick enough, with a little help from naval landings, you will usually take Calcutta. Then you can go back and mop up the rest of the Chinese.
-
To follow on Knp’s post. I’ve seen games where Japan left China, moved heavy into Russia from 2 angles,(the north and just south of Mongolia) and helped in a 1-2-3 on Moscow and won the game!
Again, Axis win by either VC’s on the Europe board or Pacific board. If you plan on winnning in the pacific, then you should NOT retreat from China. If you plan on winning in Europe then by all means evacuate the Pacific and drive hard on Moscow. Your fleet can move to the Indian ocean to drop their ipcs.
-
To follow on Knp’s post. I’ve seen games where Japan left China, moved heavy into Russia from 2 angles,(the north and just south of Mongolia) and helped in a 1-2-3 on Moscow and won the game!
Again, Axis win by either VC’s on the Europe board or Pacific board. If you plan on winnning in the pacific, then you should NOT retreat from China. If you plan on winning in Europe then by all means evacuate the Pacific and drive hard on Moscow. Your fleet can move to the Indian ocean to drop their ipcs.
They also win by surrender.
I’ve won games where China had 30 Infantry, 25 Artillery and a Fighter in China and I only had Korea, FIC, Malaya, Sham State and India on the mainland. (No, I did not have San Francisco or Pearl Harbor. I did, however, have a Japanese tank in Moscow.)
-
To follow on Knp’s post. I’ve seen games where Japan left China, moved heavy into Russia from 2 angles,(the north and just south of Mongolia) and helped in a 1-2-3 on Moscow and won the game!
Again, Axis win by either VC’s on the Europe board or Pacific board. If you plan on winnning in the pacific, then you should NOT retreat from China. If you plan on winning in Europe then by all means evacuate the Pacific and drive hard on Moscow. Your fleet can move to the Indian ocean to drop their ipcs.
Yes, based upon your chosen strategy you can employ a full Russian headlong charge, and drive through China without really bothering to deal with the Chinese units, this is certainly a viable tactic and it’s worked for me a few times.
My biggest problem is the overreaching comments that makes one strategy “THE” strategy that MUST be employed, which is what too many people on here keep trying to do. This game is too vast to create a one-size-fits-all strategy that will work for you most of the time - that’s foolish. The best players will change their tactics each game and keep the enemy guessing. If they’ve seen you do strategy X five times in a row, then they should learn and adapt and crush you next time. There is NO strategy that works better than 50% of the time, in my opinion, so achieving success more than 50% of the time requires creative and varied strategies.
You will not be good at this game if you continually do the same thing every time you play the game - that worked and worked well with other versions of A&A, but not this one. I recommend developing 3-5 different strategies that are viable, and changing up your approach each time. Keep your enemy guessing, it’ll be your best advantage. Nothing more fun than a G6/G7 Sealion that went totally unnoticed in planning until you plop down the transports with money you’ve saved for a round and a half.
Be flexible, watch the board, and don’t try to SEVERELY over-analyze things. When I see comments like “You need at least 144 IPCs worth of units to successfully accomplish X” I laugh out loud.
Good hunting.
Suggested Topics
