US#1 Buys - ROCmonster's Video

[special forces]

@theROCmonster:

Sigh I just finished turn 9 and I don’t see how the allies win… Japan just took out UK india. Germany is sweeping in the southern oil fields seriously threatening taking egypt. Russia can’t come out of his capital too much for fear Germany sends his major forces north and takes russia while russia’s infantry are away trying to conquer some of their land back… UK has a sizable force in normandy, but Italy has some 40+ grounds units and 3 air to defend all of western germany and the france area. Even with UK atlantic making in the 50’s the last 3 turns it has been rough on the allies. US is just now doing well in the pacific, though I can’t even hold phillipines yet or else I will be destroyed easily by the Jap counter attack :(. Tough game I am telling you. I am not a big fan of playing as the allies. I feel this is the biggest problem with global 1940. Playing as the allies just isn’t much fun…

Really? I love playing Allies (in Global as well as in other versions), but it’s true, turning the balance is not that simple.

i think you might’ve gone abit too enthousiastic in building a UK fleet.

Since Egypt is crucial, i want loads of ground troops to fill Africa (if possible 3 land units per turn in S.Af and once there is an IC in Egypt, 3 land units per turn there too, even if it is just INF), to defend the VC and to prepare for the battle of the Middle East. Of course i have US fleet to back me up in the Med. I can see that in a US-all-Pacific this might be a problem).

India is bound to fall if Japan says so…

I just realised that in all my games as Allies, i never got to land in Normandy. Always gone either Med or Norway. Attacking Axis flanks just always felt more lucrative…

[theROCmonster]

I think I see why, though right now I am building 13 units a turn for the europe board as well as 3 units in egypt. I would have stayed in the med, but what I saw was that Italy has nearly 40 ground to defend with… Italy wasn’t going to fall anytime soon, and with building 6 units in africa (that is if I were building units in south africa factory, which I didn’t) a turn this would take a long long time. also if I were using these units to drop in med I wouldn’t be able to drop in europe until at least turn 10 or later, unless I built a ton of sea units. Also if I were dropping units in greece, I wouldn’t be able able to defend egypt as easily since these units would be going to greece. Allies are rough. Other versions I love playing as the allies. Revised, 42, classic, and even anniversary (though honestly I like axis more in anniversary even with a 13 bid for allies). Right now I am just having a rough time finding the perfect strat. Japan is about to loose complete control in the pacific, but this is at least 2 turns away. 2 more turns of full US builds in pacific, and then on T12 I can build in atlantic. T13 land in gibralter and then start pumping 10 units+ a turn into europe with US.

[theROCmonster]

axis win. In three turns Russia will fall. Attacking units are 117 1’s, 26 artillery, 23 tanks, 5 figs, 5 tacs, 2 bombers. VS. 144 2’s, 5 tanks, 1 tac, 2 fighters and 6 aa guns. Battle calc says Germany will win with 44 units left at the end. Since it is low luck this will probably be how it ends up or even better. India fell this turn to Japan and can be liberated, but Japan is too strong. US will be spending in pacific for 2 more turns and then be able to send everything toward germany. By the time US lands Russia will be gone. Germany making 100 and Italy at this time has 50 ground and air units combined defending germany’s flank. I can now play someone if anyone is interested. I will be axis.

[Guest]

nice work
it has been fun following your game
must get tired rolling that many dice:)

[theROCmonster]

Thanks Morrel. It was fun at first, but the last couple turns have been a pain in the butt. I have so much invested in both sides, axis and allies, that loosing with the allies hurt much more than winning with the axis. I didn’t play it out after russia was taken because I can see the writting on the wall. Japan still has a bunch of men on the mainland and making in the 40’s for a couple more turns and the US still hasn’t landed in europe. Italy has 30 ground units now. Just took out a huge UK force in normandy. Germany can spend 80% of his money in trying to get all of africa which will soon fall. Germany has 30 tanks and 15 mechs that will be in stallingrad next turn and then after that add 9 tanks a turn to taking africa and if they wanted india, which still has some 40 men. The huge naval battle in the pacific still hasn’t taken place as neither side can take and hold the phillipines. Japan has 23 fighters and tacs in the phillipines. US and anzac can’t land because they in no way can take out this force just yet. Though getting closer to being able to. When they can land in the phillipines it will be 2 turns from now and then They will be able to kill of Japans navy in the biggest naval battle I have ever heard of. Japan has 48 subs, 5 carriers, 2 cruisers, 6 destroyers, and 2 bb’s. The US has 55 subs 7 BB’s 6 carriers fully loaded, 3 cruisers, and 8 destroyers…. Japan also has 31 planes in total… Anzac has 7 destroyers 1 cruiser 2 fully loaded carriers as well and UK has 2 destroyers in the pacific also. Crazy amount of money!

[Young Grasshopper]

ROCmonster,

I just got finished watching P1 of your 1940 strategy videos, and about the only thing you did that I agree with, is your purchase of an aircraft carrier, 1 destroyer and 1 submarine and your attack on Yugoslavia (please refer to my G1 blue print for a detailed explanation of what I would have done G1), as for the rest of what I saw……

1. Why do you need 2 air units to go into Normandy and take out a french infantry and artillery?, maybe because your ground units only attack @1. Try bringing in 1 artillery from holland, put the mech from w. Germany and 1 infantry from holland into France and fly the holland fighter out to sea. bring 1 tank from holland and that will give you…

2@2, 1@3, 1@4 instead of 3@1, 1@3, 1@4. I know its not much of a difference but this way you free up an air unit to hit ships in the Atlantic.

2. Why are you sending a plane into France? You are giving France of all nations, a glorious opportunity to shot down a plane, and even though you don’t feel as though he will hit it, I bet you will still make that “gulp” sound while he’s rolling for that AA gun. To me, air units are the most valuable pieces in the game, and I would never chance them if I don’t need to. If you’re not attacking Southern Italy with your 3 tanks from Southern Germany (which I see you’re not) than you have more than enough land units to take France without risking an air unit.

3. Besides, it looks like you need those planes in the Atlantic, because I see you’re letting a lot of British ships get away. An arguable conversation would consist of not attacking 1 of the big 3 sea zones (#109, #110 and #111), but you’re letting 2 of them get away. IMO, #111 and #112 are a must hit, and it comes down to a choice between #110 or #109. As for #109, how well do you think your surviving subs in #106 will fair with a destroyer and 5 air units coming down on them, and with defense rolls @1 for subs, that destroyer will likely survive long enough to hunt down the sub you just purchased when it tries to disrupt convoys later. All I’m saying is, if I were your UK opponent, I could do a lot of creative stuff with what your leaving me.

Going to watch your next video now.

[Young Grasshopper]

ROCmonster,

R1 was pretty straight forward, no issues with what you did and you have the time to make changes if you wanted to next turn.

JI was well done, no problems with your purchases or your attacks on China or your non-combat moves, for the record, like you said your income comes to $40 for Japan after Round#1.

I totally disagree with your entire US1, I would have a lot more respect for your Japan strategy if you were to put up a good show for the Americans and buy the capital ships they need and position their fleet in a more aggressive zone. Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.

[Young Grasshopper]

China is China…… I would have done the same.

Watching your UK1, you have proved my point about taking out the 109 destroyer, without the destroyer your subs could disrupt convoys and there would be nothing Britain could do about it (they would submerge when facing a lone cruiser).

Your landing in sumatra would be better in the Celebes, as you can bring 1 infantry back in UK2, and land in sumatra that turn, for a total of $7 by the end of UK2 (that way your transport will be closer to home with the extra $3 in hand).

I totally disagree with your evacuation of the Med, you are giving Italy way to much room to do what they wish (refer to my UK1 blue print for what I would have done). You are not putting any pressure on them and as soon as they take out the French boats and land in Trans Jordon, they will get a $5 NO for no boats in the Med (unacceptable), and your fleet will be cut off from ever entering the Med sea again. This kind of evacuation strategy is exactly what the Italians want, if you force them to attack your units, they will lose ships and planes with only $10 to spend. My advise for UK players is to grow a pair, and make Italy fight for their cash… not give it to them in a golden envelope. Why don’t you just give Calcutta to the Japs… I would understand your strategy if you would have put the American fleet in a position to help India when they enter the war.

Watching your first round Italy and right away, I wouldn’t have purchased what you did. A fighter or even a destroyer has more attack kick and flexibility than a sub, even my 3rd choice would have been a transport.

I can’t even watch Italy turn 1 any more… this is not how a lot of my games are fought.

Sorry to be a jerk ROCmonster, but you have claims like “Japan is too strong for the US, and can keep the Philippines for 7 rounds” and “I have played hundreds of games and am undefeated” and to me thats unfounded arrogance. how about we just start over without all the “my way is better” crap and agree to disagree?

[theROCmonster]

The reason I didn’t attack taranto was because I did at first. Italy got lucky and scored 4 hits. Britain got unlucky and scored 2 hits. And the battle ended in Uk loosing everything and Italy having a BB left… This was why I changed up the move.

[special forces]

@Young:

Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.

Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.

@theROCmonster:

The reason I didn’t attack taranto was because I did at first. Italy got lucky and scored 4 hits. Britain got unlucky and scored 2 hits. And the battle ended in Uk loosing everything and Italy having a BB left… This was why I changed up the move.

Bad luck won’t strike every time, i think with UK you need to go for it in the Med, the pay-off is too good (in Alpha3 at least). You will throw better next time!

[Young Grasshopper]

You don’t have to attack Italy to put pressure on them, just stay in the Med and scatter your navy (like blockers) and force Italy to attack you. It’s to much for Italy to deal with your ships and the French boats. They will lose ships, planes and they will still be stuck with $10 which should slow them down for a while, tough to recover and when they do, the states will be contributing a few warships on Italys front door.

[Young Grasshopper]

@special:

@Young:

Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.

Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.

Basing purchases and positioning startup units in a way that creates a one round bluff is silly IMO, maybe I exaggerated when I said that I would have no problem disclosing my strategy, but the first few rounds are so limiting for the states, adding deception as a reason for purchases is minor compared to spending and doing things to max limited capabilities.

[special forces]

@Young:

@special:

@Young:

Who cares if your opponent is in a cloud of doubt over what side of the world the US intends to build on…… WHO CARES! I make no bones about the fact that I intend to use over 90% of my total income to crush the Jap fleet, and I will tell the Jap player that before the game even starts. Your basing your entire purchase and positioning on some unnessasery bluff.

Now, to be fair, an average opponent will not declare he’s gonna do a certain strategy and sign a contract that he will stick to it.

Basing purchases and positioning startup units in a way that creates a one round bluff is silly IMO, maybe I exaggerated when I said that I would have no problem disclosing my strategy, but the first few rounds are so limiting for the states, adding deception as a reason for purchases is minor compared to spending and doing things to max limited capabilities.

I guess that’s true, the huge size of the map sorta negates short term deceptions (although in some cases it can sill work). And pre-war USA doesn’t have that much.

Still, I used to like to play with placement (this is an example) 4 planes for E-USA, ground troops in Central, and the next turn buy 2 AC’s and TRP’s  W-USA, moving the ground troops to W-USA, ready to board next turn, and landing the planes on the AC’s. Due to the big distance on the board between east and west USA, this is sorta easy to keep the enemy in the dark.

Even starting this pre-war, you can give the impression you’ll focus on the Europe side, then switch Pacific with a larger than expected force (obtainable in 1 turn)
I know the Pacific is big, and the result will not be much, but it can have a certain impact, and sometimes even 1 turn can make a difference.

(also you still have the option to go europe with this, so it keeps your options open)

Back on topic: US buy 1: fighters/tacs for E-USA and ground units C-USA may not show your muscles right away but keep a lot of options open, for either side of the map.

[Young Grasshopper]

Not a bad strategy, interesting, but I need capital ships against Japan so I buy 2 carriers and a battleship. I would consider bluffing by saving all my money turn 1, but it’s a little pointless when you can only build a maximum of 9 units when your not at war.

[special forces]

@Young:

Not a bad strategy, interesting, but I need capital ships against Japan so I buy 2 carriers and a battleship. I would consider bluffing by saving all my money turn 1, but it’s a little pointless when you can only build a maximum of 9 units when your not at war.

Ah yes, Alpha IC limitations, good point there. I guess this was more of an OOB thing.

As for saving money, that’s an ANZAC thing ;)

Let’s just say i’d buy planes first or carriers first depending on what message i want to give Japan (which will depend on J1’s actions and my mood of the day…) carriers are obviously a good buy.

I maybe should add that normally as USA i expect a J2 DOW to happen (at least with my usual opponents)

[Young Grasshopper]

I love this game because I am constantly learning something every game I play, lately I have been convinced that transports and land units to fill them is ideal for ANZAC. I have also learned to keep America out of the war for as long as possible.

[special forces]

@Young:

I love this game because I am constantly learning something every game I play, lately I have been convinced that transports and land units to fill them is ideal for ANZAC.

Anzac transports are indeed quite useful now yes, you let USA clear the , ehh… road, and let Anzac take territories. And troops are much closer to the action compared to fresh americans.

Even putting an anzac inf on a US transport has good options now that USA plays before Anzac. In my last game i had USA destroy a jap blocker and move their TRP in non combat to (i think it was either) Java or Sumatra, to have the anzac unit take the (in this case) empty island.

I have also learned to keep America out of the war for as long as possible.

Are you talking from an american point of view or as Japan?

[Young Grasshopper]

Speaking for Japan of course, if I’m America, I want in the war as soon as possible as it closes the axis economic window of opportunity sooner.

[Guest]

The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.

[Jennifer]

@Vance:

The worst thing Japan can do is to bring USA into the war before round 3.

Usually not an issue.  Thing is, if you wait too long to strike India, you cannot strike India.  Without India, personally, I don’t think you can win with Japan.