Bad Moves?

@Xayd74 (apologies - not going to quote your last post responding to my questions - would take up too much space!)

I see your points, and think that it seems pretty sound.  I just cant help but be a little skeptical of too strong a reliance on one form of strategy.  Don’t get me wrong, I agree that the conveyor system from WUS to Australia is critical, particularly if that region is going to be the emphasis of the game.  And I see your point about HI and WUS being weak - but ultimately secure.

I just wonder what the effect is if the system is stalled in Queensland by a Japanese player that has done more than just box in the UK, but essentially obliterated it and taken India.  Seems the Japanese player can then concentrate his force out the DEI or the Philippines and begin a concentrated effort of rolling you back (assuming you’ve attempted to expand into DEI).

I like that it accounts for various Japanese starting round attacks.  But is it fair to say that this strategy contemplates a KIF strategy by the Japanese player?   And not a KAF one?

But I see the flexibility the approach has, particularly in shifting north through the Carolines and perhaps bringing the battle to the central Pacific, in effect incorporating some of the elements Uncle Joe has discussed.

These approaches seem pretty sound.  I wonder if people claiming the game is out of balance (in favor of Japan) have ever really encountered something like this.

attacking mongolia
might be the worst move in the game :D
no profit

@gtg21:

I see your points, and think that it seems pretty sound.  I just cant help but be a little skeptical of too strong a reliance on one form of strategy.  Don’t get me wrong, I agree that the conveyor system from WUS to Australia is critical, particularly if that region is going to be the emphasis of the game.  And I see your point about HI and WUS being weak - but ultimately secure.

I also dont care for a single victory strategy for the Allies, but it’s all I’ve found so far. And I’m now working out a nonJ1 technique to stall the US production line for as long as possible. There doesnt seem to be any way to stop once it gets rolling.

@gtg21:

I just wonder what the effect is if the system is stalled in Queensland by a Japanese player that has done more than just box in the UK, but essentially obliterated it and taken India.  Seems the Japanese player can then concentrate his force out the DEI or the Philippines and begin a concentrated effort of rolling you back (assuming you’ve attempted to expand into DEI).

So far with my conveyor strategy, India and Burma have never fallen. If India is taken, I would say the game is over regardless of what is going on elsewhere in the world. Much like Russia in 1984 and Revised, the whole game pivots on keeping the country that has land position in the primary theatre alive. If they fall, then everything crumbles.

@gtg21:

These approaches seem pretty sound.  I wonder if people claiming the game is out of balance (in favor of Japan) have ever really encountered something like this.

I was one of those thinking it was horribly out of balance, but I was making mistakes and playing old school. At this point, I’ve put a lot of time into it, enough to realize it’s actually ridiculously well balanced. At the end of each side’s turn every round, it looks like they’re gonna win. I havent experienced that very much in prior A&A games. It’s like watching the superbowl and knowing in the first 10 minutes who’s going to win. Lame! I want it to be a head race all the way to a photo finish. This game, with all it’s complexity, does that. I really have to tip my hat to Larry.

@Xayd74:

I also grab the phillipines and hawaii bombers and put them in australia (and put the WUS bomber in hawaii to later join them). I grab the phillipines fighter and place it in Malaya or Shan state. I also grab the two men on Hawaii and take them down to Queensland (and inf/tank on WUS and move them down to hawaii) to get the arms supply moving as fast as possible.

This is actually an illegal move.  According to the political rules, it is illegal for the US to put its units in a UK or ANZAC owned territory until the US is at war.

Right you are. I just caught that distinction today. Overall though, it shouldn’t matter. The bombers dont come into play for me until the assault on the DEI JIN. That’s several turns down the road. Nevertheless, I’ll make sure to factor that in the next time.

I think it’s an impractical move. I dont see how it can be done early enough without accepting a horrible trade ratio of forces. Japan can stall this strategy by picketing with DDs and if she has planes anywhere near the coast, all of them can arrive in Japan at moment’s notice to benefit from the scramble rules. Can you force the Japanese to redeploy a portion of their fleet and air force? Sure, but to what gain? Even half to 2/3 of the starting force (augmented by builds) can stand off the US fleet with little issue. And the remaining portion is still more than enough to seal off the Brits and take the DEI.

Now MAYBE if you’ve already whittled down the Japanese fleet a bit and you have some sort of southern force as well, this could be used to draw the Japanese and allow a counter-attack in the DEI to succeed. But as a general strategy? No, I dont think it fulfills the role of pressuring Japan since it threatens no longer-term effect.

Two buddies and I have played about a dozen games, and it seems to get easier and easier to contain Japan. First, you don’t have to control all of the DEI, you just need to prevent Japan from controlling them. With all of Asia under control (except India), the Phillipines, and three out of the four DEI islands Japan is only at an economy of 61. Not much better then the US, except they have to buy alot more ground forces and likely more transports. While the US is devoting themselves almost soley to air and navy, and has two to three minor allies that add to Japans troubles.

We usually find the Japanese fleet operating in the south, and so with no real threat to Hawaii the US fleet will base itself in Australia (frequently the Aussies will build an airfield in the Northern Territories) and move air units down there as well waiting for the Japanese to split up or pick off transports. If Japan doesn’t opt for a J1 attack the Brits can land four infantry, four fighters and a tac bomber on Java, the Anzacs can augment this with four more fighters. This presents a threat to all the other DEI islands, plus the threat of massing US units in the area. If Japan does manage to gather enough units to threaten java the air units can just rebase to India or Australia. We’ve had Japan counter by landing fighters in the Phillipines, but then you no longer have a mass of fighters guarding the homeland, so US builds moving thru Hawaii are routinely a threat. Both sides use blocking destroyers, but, both sides usually go out of their way to kill these too.

All too many times we find the Japanese presented with a choice of assaulting multiple targets, but, if Japan does they’ll have to either sacrifice their transports or split their fleet and face an allied counterattack. Meanwhile India is just digging in and fighters from the US and Anzac are only a turn away from defending Calcutta. Japan got an advantage in our early games, but, the allies have been on a roll as of late, giving them a slight edge on games won. I don’t think Japan has to do anything wrong for the allies to win, I just think that unless Japan can gain control of all the DEI (and thus gain their NO bonus) and hold it, they are pretty much on a timer until they’re whittled down by the allies.

Uncle Joe, or others using this strategy….

What specifically are you doing with China with this approach?  Are you hitting Hunan each turn until  you are wiped out?  Or are you doing something else?  I am wondering about not attacking Hunan turn 1, massing all existing units plus builds to Shensi, and then counter attacking from there.  It seems that it is just too easy/cheap for Japan taking out China if they try to counter attack the first turn.

I do launch the counter-attack as long as I’ve taken out at least 1 unit when Japan attacked originally. If not, then I tend to not counter-attack.

But what to do with China largely depends on when Japan kicks off the war against the other Allies. In general I think its folly to try and create ‘hardpoints’ with China. Japan has too much airpower and can slaughter the Chinee wholesale that way. Instead, I prefer to fall back and snipe at small Japanese ground forces. Japan is critically short on ground troops and even shorter at the point of attack. If you can snip off one or two a turn in counter attacks Japan will eventually lose steam without a major commitment of resources (which can cost them in the DEI race).

I do similiar moves with China. I don’t allow any walk ins, I want a chance to kill an infantry unit in every territory Japan walks into. I’ll keep a mass (or as many as I can mass up) of infantry behind the front lines with the fighter as a counter attack force. If Japan can muster a ground force larger then I think I can counter attack and kill I’ll move my mass further back and to the north so ultimately it will cost Japan an extra turn of movement when China does die and they go after India. I’m always looking to counter attack. If you can get the Brits and China working together to keep Yunan from falling to the Japanese that’s great too, but, it really depends on how the game progresses.