@MarshmallowofWar that is correct.
My Allied Strategy for UK & US
-
Grasshopper, I was wondering if you’ve ever heard of/tried the “fortress DIE” strat? In short it has the ANZAC grabbing one of the DEI islands, usually Java (I think), on their first turn and then building an airbase on it on their second turn. The idea, as near as I can tell, is to then have the UK Indian forces land more troops and the US fly airforces there to try and keep the Japanese tied up in the DEI longer and keep them from geting the NO associated with it. Do you think an idea like this would work well with your over all blue print put forward here?
-
Grasshopper, I was wondering if you’ve ever heard of/tried the “fortress DIE” strat? In short it has the ANZAC grabbing one of the DEI islands, usually Java (I think), on their first turn and then building an airbase on it on their second turn. The idea, as near as I can tell, is to then have the UK Indian forces land more troops and the US fly airforces there to try and keep the Japanese tied up in the DEI longer and keep them from geting the NO associated with it. Do you think an idea like this would work well with your over all blue print put forward here?
I understand where your going with that. But I personally don’t worry about Japan getting their island NO with the American fleet off the coast of Queensland. I am, however, considering an ANZAC airbase purchase for either an island or western Australia for the purpose of using their initial fighters in a mop up role after big naval attrition battles between Japan and the States.
-
Won’t work. Japan is a superpower, and until US comes into play anzac, india, and china can’t hold on their own. If I see anzac doing this and building an airbase I am licking my chops as japan. That is a waste of 15 dollars. Japan will have 3-5 transports in range including 3 carriers and 4 bombarding units. NO way allies can hold it. Yes it will keep the NO out of japan’s hand for a turn, but why waste 15 on airbase and your planes. That is 31 dollars on planes. Japan can easily take it for loss of none of it’s airforce. Just play defensive as allies in pacific until america can come and rescue you. Play to the end game not for turns 1-4. This is how allies are forced to play just because america’s income and units are not into the war until later in the game.
-
I am very confused on how you are thinkkng japan is letting you do attrition battles. How deos the japan you play let you attack his fleet when he is weak? I Like building carriers as Anzac later in the game. Right now in the game I am playing I have 6 planes as anzac and 2 carriers on turn 6.
-
I am very confused on how you are thinkkng japan is letting you do attrition battles. How deos the japan you play let you attack his fleet when he is weak? I Like building carriers as Anzac later in the game. Right now in the game I am playing I have 6 planes as anzac and 2 carriers on turn 6.
Attrition is not about who is attacking who, as America, I am happy if Japan is attacking my fleet, because I can sink ships in a Defence role as well. I have noticed in your comments that you believe Japan has units and money to burn as it is all regenative, and you feel that it is America that must guard their pieces as irriplacible assets. This is a very backwards point of view and I find it difficult rationalizing with you on that basis alone.
-
I believe it is this way for america until around turn 6-7. Japan’s navy will be large enough to attack US anywhere near queensland or the DEI. While your navy overall might be larger. The problem is that it takes 2 turns for your fleet built in western US to reach queensland. Like I posted previously Japan will be making int he 70’s so he has nearly as much as US. 12 of that is destined for ground units. So around 60 for ships. 10 subs. That is a lot of punch in attack power. Later in the game America will have fleet superiority if America continues to build at least 90% in pacific for 8-10 turns. Then japan will have to bow down to america and anzacs might. their combined fleets will just be too much too attack. Once America takes and holds phillipines that is game over for japan in the pacific, but if america is spending so much in pacific then I might just make russia’s life a living hell with japan and take russia out with germany. Making the atlantic side a very likely win. Since Japan herself has to be captured for allies to win I think russia would have fallen a long time before this. Would you like to see an outline of my axis strategy? Yet to loose with it :). While I’ve only played 6 games Vs. opponets and 2 Vs. myself I’ve played well over 1200 games of axis and allies. I’d love to have someone play with me that is an expert as well and we can go over certain strats and ideas while in game not caring who wins or looses. This is what I did with Zukov a couple years ago when 42 version came out. Got a lot of great idea’s. Anyone wish to do this with me?
-
Im sorry but this makes no sense to me. How is Japan getting to 70IPCs BEFORE America enters into the game? I mean it is possible, but not with out taking down the Uk in India and the Chinese and grabbing chunks of Russia AND taking the DEI. This is stretching Japans resources in several very different directions, meaning their overall strenght would be weakened by being spread out. This is no way you can achieve a 70IPC by spreading Japan out. You will need to focus japan at ONE objective first (like the DEI) and take that out right before you could move on to another (like taking Calcutta). Now I could see you being able to take the DEI and then be in a good position to push for Calcutta, you’d be in a prime position, and the DEI will double Japans economy but that still only makes it about 45-50IPC, while the US will be at 80IPC. Meanwhile you’ll still have to hack your way into India which means you WILL need to buy reinforcments for this front. So your fleet is being concentrated in the south and west of the pacific, this gives the US free regin, along with the ANZAC, to do what ever they want in the south east and central pacific(land on lightly defended islands, convoy raid, pick off lone ships) with Japan unable to do much to stop them, for atleast several turns unil they resolve whatever they are doing in the South and against India. Whatever you after you size the DEI, America would be able to match WITHOUT needing to spend the 90% income Grasshopper is suggesting.
-
In evergame I’ve played japan has taken out china +12. 2 russian territories +2. DEI and phillipines +17. Kwangtung and malaya +6. French indo china +2. Plus NO +5= 44 + 26 starting territories =70. Not to hard to do this. Should be accomplished by turn 5 as japan. If china is playing well your income will be around 68. This might lend itself to more russian territories though. Your fleet doesn’t neccessarily need to be in malaya as you suggest. Malaya though is a great place to counter any US and anzac movements. 3 ground units built a turn is enough to take out UK india with starting off units as well. The reason is because UK india is making 4-6 at max from turns 4 till end of game if they last that long. Take a look at the game between gaaza and me on the play by email games. Look at how I’ve played japan. This might give you an idea of what I’m talking about.
-
I have to agree with Clyde, The only way to make that kind of money that early would surly mean attacking the Pacific Allies and therefore bringing America in the war, which makes my strategy easier to acomplish. Attacking the Pacific allies means no $10 peace time NO for Japan and gives America a sure $20 bonus. I don’t think you and your friend are playing the rules right, but I would very much like to see your detailed Japan strategy for the first 3 rounds the way I did to begin this thread. That way we can identify where this $70 income in coming from.
-
I actually don’t attack the allies until turn 3 or 4 depending on what anzac and UK do. I like your strategy grasshopper I just think capital ships should be bought few and far between. I like 2-3 carriers with US and 2 BB’s at most. All my other buys with US being subs and a couple destroyers and planes. Fodder units are hugely important. This is why a tank rush doesn’t work. You need cheap units to take the hits so your expensive units can keep attacking at later levels.
-
I actually don’t attack the allies until turn 3 or 4 depending on what anzac and UK do. I like your strategy grasshopper I just think capital ships should be bought few and far between. I like 2-3 carriers with US and 2 BB’s at most. All my other buys with US being subs and a couple destroyers and planes. Fodder units are hugely important. This is why a tank rush doesn’t work. You need cheap units to take the hits so your expensive units can keep attacking at later levels.
Ok. I appreciate that opinion, but you should also consider what you don’t want the US to do if you’re Japan. Capital ships plus fodder scare the hell out of the Japanese airforce.
-
LOL ya. US is just scary. I hate playing as them and I hate going against them :)
-
LOL ya. US is just scary. I hate playing as them and I hate going against them :)
I think it’s fun playing the States, and difficult playing Japan.
-
lol that’s funny. Japan was hard the first time I played because you have so much to do, but I now I see almost exactly how to play every round and counter every move. Nothing japan can do if US goes all out, but europe board should be looking pretty nice in that case. What seems to be the problem when you play Japan? I can stall US out with Japan from holding phillipines for at least 9 turns if not longer. By then Russia should have been taken and Germany should be a juggernaught.
-
lol that’s funny. Japan was hard the first time I played because you have so much to do, but I now I see almost exactly how to play every round and counter every move. Nothing japan can do if US goes all out, but europe board should be looking pretty nice in that case. What seems to be the problem when you play Japan? I can stall US out with Japan from holding phillipines for at least 9 turns if not longer. By then Russia should have been taken and Germany should be a juggernaught.
If you playout my blue print, you will see that my entire American strategy is focused on protecting or retaking the Phillipenes as early as turn 4.
-
Grasshopper, I was wondering if you’ve ever heard of/tried the “fortress DIE” strat? In short it has the ANZAC grabbing one of the DEI islands, usually Java (I think), on their first turn and then building an airbase on it on their second turn. The idea, as near as I can tell, is to then have the UK Indian forces land more troops and the US fly airforces there to try and keep the Japanese tied up in the DEI longer and keep them from geting the NO associated with it. Do you think an idea like this would work well with your over all blue print put forward here?
We actually tried this in one game. I don’t remember all the details but we had mixture of ANZAC and UK airforce on Java with inf and the Air base.The navy was a mix of UK and ANZAC in the seazone with the US in striking distance. I remember it being taken out fairly easy by the Japanese but what it did accomplish was a heavy distraction for Japan. They were constantly out of position and were soon taken out. Could of been the skill of the player and never seeing that before that led to the demise but it was an interesting way to go.
Grasshopper, I totally agree with your American Navy strategy I love to use it as a hunter/killer force seems to work great. My question for you is how does this strategy pan out for you if Germany has a successful sealion? My problem with the Pacific navy build is every time i do it sealion is always successful and i have to run and save the UK. I guess i just have bad luck.
-
Majikforce, to answer your question, I have only recently tried this idea in the past 2 games that I have played the allies and both those games, we were using the latest Alpha+3 ruleset. Seeing as there has been no sealion attempts since we started playing Alpha+3, it is difficult to present a senerio where my American strategy is concerned. Although I have only tried my strategy twice, it was incredibly successfull against Japan in terms of keeping them away from Calcutta, and sinking their entire fleet before it can do any damage in the Pacific. I have been developing the strategy for some time now as I always thought that there could be something more productive for America to do during peace time other than just stacking in Hawaii. Obviously, if there was a ligitemate threat to England, my blue print would be comprimised, however, a Russian advance by Germany would allow the Calcutta factory to support Russia, which is the goal of the American plan.
-
Let me give you my numbers for japan in my current game. UK attacked japan so I was able to keep america out of the war until turn 5. I just purchased for japan round 5. Here is my fleet numbers. I have 20 aircraft so I will keep these out. This is only a tally of my fleet I also have 6 transports. 15 subs, 6 destroyers, 2 cruisers, 2 battleships, and 4 carriers. With your American buys I don’t see you taking and hold the phillipines for a long time.
-
Let me give you my numbers for japan in my current game. UK attacked japan so I was able to keep america out of the war until turn 5. I just purchased for japan round 5. Here is my fleet numbers. I have 20 aircraft so I will keep these out. This is only a tally of my fleet I also have 6 transports. 15 subs, 6 destroyers, 2 cruisers, 2 battleships, and 4 carriers. With your American buys I don’t see you taking and hold the phillipines for a long time.
I’m sorry, but this post is ridiculous on many different levels. For one, how can Japan keep America out of the war for 5 rounds?
-
By turn 5 you will have 40 units comprised of air and see. Japan will have 49. The units you buy in western can’t do much of anything so if we subtract that it is even less units. Still don’t see you taking and holding phillipines for a long time. since if I see a possible take and hold of phillipines coming my 10 subs I buy in sea zone 6 and possibly 2 more in sea zone 19 if I can afford it would mean that I could counter with far more than you can bring because you would have had 2 less buys than me since it is 3 turns from western US to phillipines. While as only 1 from sea zone 6.
Suggested Topics
