I am playing the Allies in a game with my dad. I always use the same strategy, I do operation Tourch in Europe Meanwhile in the pacific I build a navy and head on with the Japanese. Operation Tourch is a success while the pacific stategy always fails. Any thoughts? :|
USA can be pretty difficult to play. I’m not exactly sure where your problem is in the pacific but you must block with USA until your navy is greater than the IJN. Typical moves are to consolidate the navy in Hawaii or Queensland. Also if Italy is Germany’s can-opener then ANZAC is USA’s or vice versa. One of the greatest ways to defeat Japan is to deny them the DEI. That amounts to 20 IPCs for them. This is easy to do with USA and ANZAC working together to take the isles and keep blocking Japan. Even if you have to sacrifice a cruiser to block off your navy from destruction USA must stall and delay Japan until they out-produce them. I tend to buy many destroyers for blocking and subs to take out transports or convoy. Could you be a little more specific on how your failing in the Pacific?
Cyanight makes some strong points.
I’d like to add that convoying the sea of Japan is also an option. The main thing with the US fleet early on is to elude the IJN and/or the Japanese airforce whatever it is that you do. By clever use of cheap blocking ships like Cyanight described or by just staying out of their range. By turn 4 or 5, just staying out of range of the Japanese airforce is usually enough because your fleet can compete with the IJN by then.
I’d say, if you really love your commitment in Europe and to continue on that path of experience for a while, your overarching strategy with the USA should be (highest priorities listed from top to bottom):
Prevent Japan from sniping Hawai/Sydney.
Prevent the irrevocably taking of Hawai/Sydney later on, after Japan has built up some time for an upcoming offensive.
Spend the rest of your income on your offensive plans (Torch to start with, D-Day later on.
This means spending 17IPCs more on warships/aircraft in the Pacific than Japan does but never less than 17IPCs. On average per turn (so you can skip building anything in the Pac x number of turns -if that is safe- and later you spend x multiples of 17IPCs at once). This has to be done early on because once Japan has gained an income of ~80IPCs per turn, still has its starting fleet advantage over the USA and has taken Calcutta, it is too late to begin competing and the USA will lose Hawai/Sydney if Japan starts focussing its 80IPCs on you each turn… In this particular case, the UK can probably/maybe take back Calcutta but I wouldn’t want to gamble on that.
Why multiples of 17IPCs? I don’t know. I experimented only very little with this number because 17IPCs is the Pacific part of the USA’s income. It may be a coincidence, but I have found out that 17 works fine but still requires clever usage of blockers and buying of units because you may still loose a head-on clash of titanic fleets + aircraft if Japan starts an ‘arms race’.
Therefore I think that <17IPCs more per turn than Japan will probably tip the scale in favor of Japan no matter what you do.
Some people say that the US is perfect for newbies to play. I disagree.
Some people say that the US is perfect for newbies to play. I disagree.
Only Country id give up as a " Newbie" Country would be Anzacs outside of that each country is to valuable.
The US can be difficult to play. The mistake that many people make is trying to spend evenly on both sides every turn. This will give you a weak wishy washy US on both maps, and probably cost the allies the game. When playing the US you really need to pick one side to dominate and dedicate about 75% (or more) of your income to that side. The other map you play mostly defense and block out the enemy to stall them etc…. Use the Anz (Pacific) and UK (Europe) to supplement the US fleets as needed.
I like ItIsILeClerc’s philosophy of spending 17 IPC min per round in the Pacific as a guideline. This would be about 25% of the US income (based on about 70 IPCs per turn once NO’s kick in). So that would leave 75% for Europe. You could go the other way as well and spend heavily in the Pacific to get an edge on Japan looking to sink their fleet/transports. I like to spend nearly all income on one side for 3-4 turns to gain the upper hand, then like ItIsILeClerc said at some point you will need to play catch-up on the other side.
I agree that giving the US to a newbie would like throwing him in the deep end to learn how to swim. The navy part of the game (including air range) can be very difficult to get a grasp on. With that said, the US could be a good power for a newbie to start with because the US doesn’t do much until round 3 or so in most games (depending on when Japan attacks). They will need some help, but this might ease them into the game, and they can see how the other powers at war move around, set-up and conduct battles. Of course this could also be a turn off to a new player as well for the same reason. The US doesn’t get to do much for a while.
@WILD:
(…)You could go the other way as well and spend heavily in the Pacific to get an edge on Japan looking to sink their fleet/transports.(…)
This thread seems to be the right place to elaborate on this. I really like to hear how you guys do this if you have some experience with it.
I have never really seen this happen in my games, but I really see this working on a grand startegy level in certain situations.
I once did this against myself playing both the Axis and the Allies. That’s how I test out strategies before I ‘use’ them in a team (or against them ;-)). Saves ‘thinking time’ when with your friends and you get a clue about the viability of a certain  strategy. During that one time I got to mixed results (I think I made some mistakes with the tactical implementation of the strategy).
First the US Fleet needed protection against the huge Japanese advantage in or on its inner circle of territories by buying many CV + FTR/TAC + DD. Japan has a lot of aircraft and a decent fleet at start and if the USA moves its fleet deliberatly into range of both, the USA is going to loose all its units in a very unfavorable ratio.
After a couple of turns (turn 4 or 5 IIRC) the defensive strength of the US fleet was good enough to withstand an attack from both the IJN and the Japanese aircraft so the push westwards was started, producing more DD’s, Subs and TRS and STR as reinforcements.
 When I stopped testing (turn 9), the USA/UK/ANZAC had taken all of the DEI and the entire South East Asia up to Hong Kong. But Japan, playing a very elusive game with its fleet, was not on its knees: it still had strong enough defenses in China and everything North of Shanghai and a very large stack of defenders in the Philippines. Furthermore Japan took Hawai and San Francisco from the USA.
The problem I encountered with this ‘KJF’ strategy was that Japan always threatened to take Hawai and after that, San Francisco as an ‘eye for an eye’ if the USA moved its fleet towards any Japanese Posessions. The IJN simply kept its distance/blocked and stayed within striking range of Hawai. In Europe, Germany was about to take Moscow and had become a monster without any real US’ presence there. Surprisingly enough Moscow stayed out of their hands for 8 turns even without any US commitment. UK had been very generous with its spitfires… Anyway the USA could NOT ignore europe any longer and had to swith into a (very near) 100% mode against Germany (afer taking back SF, of course ;-)). Japan would definately recover over a couple of turns with this switch of USA focus into Europe. The IJN, still eluding the US Navy, was getting stronger by the minute.
Looking back I think I had been too afraid of Japan taking San Fransisco, therefore waiting too long to exchange Japanese possessions for some of the USA’s. Or didn’t see how this could be turned into advantage for the USA at least…
Correct me if I’m wrong but I think that if the USA moves forward as soon as possible and conquers everything around the Philippines and the DEI and cutting off the Japanese ability to place reinforcements for the IJN anywhere (by overwhelming the set up points), loosing Hawai and SF is worth it. SF will be taken back the same turn or 1 turn later. If the IJN wants it, the set up point for the US Navy in the Pacific is lost as well but this shouldn’t matter too much because the allied fleet is already much stronger, ANZAC + India have a rather huge income and the USA is planning to focus on Europe anyway. Furthermore, Japan looses a LOT of IPCs by US conquest and convoying (no intention to actually conquer Japan or North of Shanghai itself), while the USA looses only 6IPCs in the long term (Hawai + its NO). Not to mention the IPCs the USA gains by taking back the Philipines and parts of the DEI and SE Asia (sharing with the ANZAC and the UK).
Note that Japan produced the absolute minimum on Mainland Asia to not become completely overrun and loose everything there against the USA+ China + UK. The ‘Lion’s share’ of its income was used to reinforce the IJN/airforce (and fortify Japan itself at some point) and because of this I think that Japan cannot prevent being killed or at least castrated by the USA if the latter, with the lessons learned, seriously goes KJF…
As America ive learned to play it on a Reactive state
And what I meen by that is simply put America has the Oppertunity to Swing its Econmical Might any which way.
Normaly I dont deal with the whole Kill Japan First cause to me its not the greater evil. it truely takes japan quite some time to ramp up in IPCs
Plus its easy by the time round 5-6 comes into play to be able to pick off units here and there and slow them down some aslong as your able to keep away from there airforce your American Navy should be able to hold its own with out to much of an investment in america and by that i meen out of say the 70 IPCs alocate 30 to the Pacific and just play smart and if you see Japan making a big move to Either SF or Hawaii 70+ IPCs worth of Ships planes an units can really wake them up or Deter them from making an Approch
Also in my eyes the greater Evil is Germany with England being in Constant Direct threat from Germany and Russia being Squeesed its imparative to Alocate as much funds to the Atlantic to keep from having Moscow fall
Basicaly the way i look at is if Germany falls then Japan will never be able to Conquer what its needed to win but you cant say that the other way around Cause if Japan falls to America and Germany takes over all of Russia then the Middle east and then push into calcuta its collecting such an income that it wont matter…
Also on a side now… i spent about 10 ipcs as america doing tech rolls… from say round 1-6 and belive me your gonna hit atlest once!..just yesterday i got Improved AA… and Upgraded Bombers… Game Changer!..
I had Korea with america and i built a factory there… and put my Russian forces to support it… i built in 2 turns… 6 american AA… he attacked with 14 planes and i shot down 8… so worth it!..
and the Bombers… when Germany took russia… that same round … I did the 1-2 punch with US and UK… and 7 Upgraded Bombers did the trick to Crack the Nut that was Germany hit 6/7 and England finshed him off… it defently changes the game!
I am fairly new to the game but I have played the US a couple of times now. I have found that in the erly rounds when the US is Neutral, I like to send fighters and tachs to the Pacific air bases and the Hawiian fleet heads to the Philipenes. It lets the Japanese player know that I won’t surrender territory and the aircraft on the airbases has helped with some sea battles. They are also easy to move into position whereever I need to react to the Japanese player. I try to encourage the ANZAC and UK players to grab the DEI as early as they can. It may cost them some transports but they will soon be making enough to offset the early losses. I also encourage the ANZACs to evetually mount an assault on the Carolines. The extra naval base and air base helps move the fleets back and forth with more quickly. I also plant a minor I/C and a naval base in Alaska. I also garrison the Allucean Islands (cursed spelling) to prevent a break in the US bonuses. Hawii is reinforced with the early west coast fleet. I buy DDs, subs, and fighter/tachs to begin with. About 25IPC but I have the blockers, the harasment from the subs and the punch of aircraft. I’ll keep this up for about six rounds and then move to more capital ships ending up with 3 carrier groups. I don’t use but one or two battleships. Cruisers and destroyers with the air power usually works in picking the Japanese fleets apart. Round eight, I start invsting in loaded transports (inf. & art.) until I can move on liberating Siberia or moving on Japan itself. I try to keep the Japanese player dancing to my tune.
The European side is similar in that I build a fighter a round for the east side as well as a loaded transport (inf & tank) and build this fleet up to move to Morraco. I then reinforce Gibraltor if in Allied hands or land in Morroco and then build an air base there. Drives the axis players crazy. Once I help liberate Gibraltor if needed, I free up North Africa. Every turn buying fully loaded transports. Eventually I can start faerying troops back and forth from Washington to Morraco. The point is to be able to hit Normandy, Italy, Southern France, or Greece. Keep the axis players guessing and wait for the opening. If the Soviet player can hang on for about ten rounds, the US and the UK can do a one two punch with teh US taking Denmark and the UK swinging through the channel to hit Germany. If the Soiviet player can hold on and suck the Germans and Italians into a protracted fight, the US should be able to eat up enough Axis territory that it will be faerying troops from one end of the Med. to Gibraltor to Washington and back again without any breaks. A hand full of DDs and three or four cruisers with the Fighter/Tachs that have been sent to Morroco and eventually Greece (air base there as well once truly secured) is all you need to support the invasions. You have to hit the axis as soon as you can. You may lose a small fleet or a landing force but you have to set the tune for the dance. Make the axis move troops where you want them to go and them hit them hard where they least expect. With the US you have to plan wher you eventually want to go several moves in advance and make the conditions occur that will best help you get there. It can be expensive and even ugly but I have only lost once as the US and IThat was when I was the noobie and the US was my first chance to play.
I am fairly new to the game but I have played the US a couple of times now. I have found that in the erly rounds when the US is Neutral, I like to send fighters and tachs to the Pacific air bases and the Hawiian fleet heads to the Philipenes. It lets the Japanese player know that I won’t surrender territory and the aircraft on the airbases has helped with some sea battles. They are also easy to move into position whereever I need to react to the Japanese player.
I’m not sure who you play against, but I can guarantee you that Japan is not being played right if you can manage to send the US Pacific fleet and air to the Phil and various ABs without paying heavily for it. Eventually the USN can do this, but that’s after putting A LOT of boats & CV+air into the water first. Japan simply starts with too much air and navy and the USN doesn’t start with nearly enough to poke it’s head into the lair of the beast.
It might work in your play group or the triplea AI, but it won’t work against experienced players. And if you keep doing this move at some point your play group will come to realize the gift you’re handing Japan on a golden platter and utterly smash the USN. Done right, you won’t even see a favorable exchange rate on the losses both sides will suffer. Richest country or not, the US simply cannot afford to lose entire fleets to Japan in exchange for a couple subs, dds, and maybe maybe some air.
You’re on the right track and eventually the US needs to move in a face down the IJN, but you need to make sure you have enough to survive and/or are strong enough to take a lot of Japanese equipment with you. With the caveat that the strategic situation in Europe and the Pacific has a huge influence on what US should do, a lot of the time the US can afford to trade units with Japan as long as they come close to a 1:1 exchange ratio.
Japan’s simply not strong enough economically to match US ship builds in the Pacific while still dealing with the Indians and Chinese on the mainland. Especially if you’re denying them their money islands or at least contesting them. Japan has enemies on all sides which weakens what she can do. So being able to take out a huge chunk of their air/navy will seriously jeopardize their long term chances at victory.
I, too, prefer a KJF strategy, but only to a certain extent. I buy mostly subs and aircraft (and some CV’s to hold them) as US and ANZAC to harass the japanese. rather than stacking at pearl, I will send my starting ships to Queensland and establish a bastion there, and then work with the Australians to pick off one of the Japanese Carrier groups, hopefully as it is solidifying South East asia. I will use my air to help ANZAC secure the South Pacific, and my subs to do some convoy damage once their main fleet is distracted up north, when i finally combine my reinforced fleet at the carolines. In Europe my priority is to gain naval dominance to allow the UK to ship troops across the channel and to contest the med. The Balkans, undefended 9 times out of 10 - are an excellent and oft-overlooked foothold into Europe. A factory in Greece will outflank the German east front and bite at central Europe. Ideally, by mid game the philipinnes will be American and the IJN shattered, at which point the US will shift its focus to europe to support its strategic air campaign over France with boots on the ground. The Japanese may still be strong in Asia (alternately, allied dominance of the Pacific may not be so complete), but the ANZAC will be strong enough to finish the strangulation of Japan with the remnants of the USN and rejuvenate the Asian allies.
I advise you to take this with a grain of salt, however, as I am relatively young and inexperianced at G 40.
It seems that each time that I have played the US, I have had the same Japanesse opponent. He has spent alot of his attention in China and looking for a confrontation with a major us fleet but tends to ignore little fleets much to the dismay of his axis partners. You are quite right “axisandalliesplayer” it won’t work with most players. I do tend to play Europe side heavy I think because I have played the Soviets more often than anything and felt that if I am the US player than I need to live up to what I have expected them to do.
I have tried to stay balanced but as you can see by my first post, I will take soem chances and pay a higher price if I think I can get the players that I am facing to eventually make the moves that I need them to in order for my nation’s victory.
With that said, I know that I have a lot to learn. Please keep the suggestions and strategies coming.
In our games, when the Allies win it is usually due to the US going strong in the Pacific first. You don’t even have to necessarily take Japan out by capturing Tokyo. In a lot of cases, the US can end up neutralizing Japan. The best way to do this is for the US to capture Iwo Jima as a base for US bombers so they can pound the Japan IC and have subs in SZ 6 to convoy Japan. To do this, you also have to manage to knock out all or most of the Japanese Navy so they can’t kill your subs, either by one big battle between fleets or a bunch of little battles picking the fleet apart.
This strategy also needs the Allies to take at least one or more of the DEI so Japan doesn’t get that extra bonus. Usually, ANZAC and India can help with that. If the Allies can get this done, even if Japan is fairly strong in Asia, they won’t be able to afford to keep funding their troops there and will eventually get whittled down by China and possibly India.
Once you get this done, the US can start sending more stuff to Europe because even if UK and Russia are holding out good against Germany, they are going to need help.
I wish I could give you a certain number of rounds but that really depends on how crafty your Japan player is.
Another strategy I have heard but find hard to do myself is for the US to simply pile defense on Hawaii and Sydney to keep Japan from nabbing that 6th VC and putting most of their stuff in Europe to hit Germany/Italy. This is basically letting Japan “have it’s way” in the Pacific and Asia. I think this only works if you see Japan’s attention is focused on China or Russia. If that is the case, Japan may not be able to afford to go further in the Pacific. However, if you can see Japan is building up for a thrust toward Hawaii or Australia, I don’t think the US can provide good enough protection while still sending a lot of stuff to Europe.
To play the US against experienced players you need to know one word- LOGISTICS.
You need to spend your money shrewdly, prepare in advance for an efficient shuck route as well along with air support. This in short is the key to playing the US well.
I skip operation torch for british then go to operation dragoon
I always go Pacific.
I will always have a two Transport shuck sending 4 Ground units min to Europe to annoy Germany, who has to keep retaking Normandy and Belgium. Italy will be collecting no more than one NO, with N Africa and Gib safe, so I do not fear a Southern sweep against Russia.
I suppose I fear Japan’s 20 + Air and 15+ Navy getting out of hand and America then being too far away(West Coast IC, max 10 build).
My last couple of times playing the US I have fallen in love with sending bombers to London. Two a round if I can. Couple that with a skeleton fleet and a two transport shuck to Gibraltar depending on how the UK has fared it seems to give Germany fits or at least distract them from a full out Russian push. The rest of the US$ goes straight for the DEI. I am a firm believer in preventing Japan any income. My buddy likes to take Korea and build a factory with help from those 18 Russians but I think that is fools gold. I have played him many times as Japan and I welcome that strategy every time. You can have Korea while I assault Calcutta protect the DEI and build my income to 60-70, forcing the US to build in the Pacific. Which allows Germany to go to work virtually without any worry. You want to stop Japan, as the US go for the DEI and get help from UK, ANZAC and China. Allied coordination is very hard for the axis to overcome. Just my two cents.
I would not care about retaking normandy unless I can do so efficiently, its not like the allies can go much farther than normandy. Just have a large force in West Ger a maybe a few in paris to threaten a counter.
I start to lean towards thinking the USA is dependent on the Axis plans as well.
I think the consensus on this forum lies at dominating one map with the USA, spending ~80% of its income there. Likewise, spreading its investments ~50/50 is considered a mistake. I think the USA can actually focus down the wrong axis map and it can be really hard to tell which map the USA should focus on. Takes a lot of experience with a lot of possible Axis strategies.
The danger with the Americans is not seeing 3 turns out where you want to be. You have to make this decision based on what you currently see, so it is like playing the stock market.
The only thing you have going for you is most of the strategies are pretty well ironed out and documented so you can make an educated guess based on Axis positioning of what is likely to occur. And, once you get past the first 2 rounds, everything becomes fairly clear as the Axis reversing course after the second or third round is pretty much game over.
I’ve found that by far the hardest part is planning the US purchase.
The strategy in moves is pretty straight forward: Go East or Go West. Win the Ocean. Keep the pressure on, don’t let there be a lull of reinforcements.
