I had a game alot like that one but germany took india and italy took malaya japan got invaded britian held middle east and retook india but italy held out in Malaysia for 10 plus rounds thanks to stranded Japanese and german aircraft that game lasted 25 rounds if germany didnt get dumb with its airforce in the middle east and waited a round and japan saw troops in canada can get to japan with a port the axis would’ve won.
oh and japan went out on round 12
Try and take Tokyo? :-D
I’ve been able to take out Japan multiple times by clearing Tokyo and blockers and paving the way for a lone transport to capture the Japanese capital. If you have 4+ loaded US carriers plus some bombers, you can usually strafe Tokyo down quite a bit. Especially as Japan if strips most/all of the starting land units to move against the DEI/mainland and doesn’t build many replacements. US could always ncm a carrier or two into sz6 after strafing Tokyo and clearing out any blockers so the Aussies can use their air to help with the take if needed. US or Aussies could also throw out a blocker or two so Japan doesn’t just retake their capital.
Even trying for it can depend a lot on your opponent’s complacency, luck, and how much of a gambler (or desperate) you are. Trying to take Tokyo can be a very a high risk-high reward situation as you’ll likely be losing most of your US air force. But oh boy if you get it. I’ve tried it 6-8 times and taken it 4-5 of those ones.
One of the times I took it really salvaged a game for me that I in all honestly should’ve lost. A combination of bad dice and bad decisions against a really solid opponent had the axis poised to win on both sides of the map. My opponent got a little too cocky as he was kicking my ass up and down that board and left Japan lightly defended after ensuring my US trn were out of position or blocked from trying an invasion. But US air was able to mostly clear Tokyo, leaving the Aussies to send in 2 inf plus 4 fighters to finish it off. The only Japanese transports were off India, so Japan was done building in that game.
Good thing too as China, India, & Russia had all fallen. US was finally able to focus in Europe and left the Aussies to clean up the Pacific with the fighterless US Pac fleet. The British ME factories were overrun as the Brits retreated back to Egypt. 4+ US fighters a turn started landing in Egypt just in time to bolster the defense. Despite that Egypt still fell twice, but was recaptured both times either with US troops or UK mech/arm from SAF.
Meanwhile Aussies had 90+ IPCs from sacking Tokyo plus their regular income and could only build 6 units a turn. I eventually was able to get Korea, Kwangtung, & FIC producing plus a 2nd minor in Australia itself. By the time my opponent surrendered, the Aussies owned all the DEI, Korea, FIC, Japan, most of the 1 IPC Jap islands, and had liberated most of the SFE for itself as well as getting both India and China back into the game. Anzac was making like 55+/turn and actually had more income before India itself was liberated. Probably one of the crazier games I’ve played in.
The Brazillian
Turn 1 send a transport with 1 arty to SZ 66 on the europe board, leaving a fighter on New Zeland
Turn 2 Annex Brazil, and land a fighter there, you now have 3 Inf, 1 Art, 1 FGT
Turn 3 Land at Gibraltar, or Morocco
Turn 4 Be helping the allies in the Atlantic
Seen this a few times.
What I like about it is that Brazil is virtually permanent cash for ANZAC. And, as mentioned above, it does bring more troops to Africa for the fight.
What I don’t like about it, you’re short a transport now for the Pacific. Then again, that begs the question of if you want Australia to take some/all of the DEI or leave them for India?
I, personally, like t get at least one carrier for the Australians at some point of time. Failing that, keeping three fighters in the Pacific is nice because the US can take an island, ANZAC can land fighters there for Cover Air Patrol (scrambling).
I think those are the five best ones personally
Here’s my ANZAC Run-through video…
Can we talk about the fact it’s an hour long video?
@Cmdr:
Can we talk about the fact it’s an hour long video?
Pretty impressive eh?… no dinky 5 minute vids for my subscribers, they deserve an hour.
@Young:
@Cmdr:
Can we talk about the fact it’s an hour long video?
Pretty impressive eh?… no dinky 5 minute vids for my subscribers, they deserve an hour.
Isn’t it about the same length as the US one and 2/3 the length of the UK one.
The US one could have more and the ANZAC one less. But then your subscribers would say that there isn’t enough in there for ANZAC.
I’ve got a few suggestions for what ANZAC can do:
@Cmdr:
I, personally, like t get at least one carrier for the Australians at some point of time. Failing that, keeping three fighters in the Pacific is nice because the US can take an island, ANZAC can land fighters there for
CoverCombat Air Patrol (scrambling).
Yes, CV for the Aussies makes them many times more useful. Generally requires some discipline to save enough to have 36IPCs in a round because you want the two fighters on the same turn.
26 would be enough, you have 3 fighters. Assuming 2 of them are deployed somewhere but the 3rd one is in decent range, you could just get 1 carrier, 1 fighter. Unless you’re aiming for 5 fighters total for the ANZAC.
36 is preferred though. Effectively, it means a fighter has to go backwards to sit on the carrier if you only have 26. And 29 is required to avoid a wastage of a production spot. With 34 you’d probably buy a DD.
The lack of an airbase on Sydney makes buying fighters and sending them off shore a slow process.
ANZAC should build the fighters ahead of time, not save the 20 IPCs for a single build. If you build the fighters early, they provide defense, limited offense, and you can still drop them on the carrier later. On the other hand if you’re hoarding cash and Japan heads your way, you are limited by factory capacity in how many units you can build.
Doing it all at once is like storing money in your mattress instead of earning interest on it.
Marsh
I’m suggesting buying cheaper units like inf to save money rather than spending up on an expense mini navy which won’t be much use anyway.
Also don’t overlook the possibility of just landing ANZAC fighters on US carriers. Great range extender, and gives Japan a lot to worry about.
Marsh
Always a good option in SZ33. Generally if the USN has gone further they’re out of range and you need to position into Queensland.
I have been wondering about this too. What I have done in the past is if Japan has not been overly aggressive in the DEI, I will allow ANZAC to take Java. On turn two I put all of my planes on the island for defense if Japan is still not a big threat, and then build a factory. Many times, Japan hasn’t even declared war yet and my ANZAC factory is relatively safe for a turn, in which it can build some units for defense. I find this strategy especially good at dividing the Japanese navy and some land units, as they want the money island as well as to take away my nuisance of a factory. I have found that I have the most success when the Japanese have a large U.S. Strike on turn 3, because 70% or more of their navy is required to do this, leaving Java open to build.
You can’t build a factory on Java though…
I’m suggesting buying cheaper units like inf to save money rather than spending up on an expense mini navy which won’t be much use anyway.
I dunno, I think the Aussies need to build up some ships. It’s not a bad idea to use your Aussies to block SZs as needed instead of using a USN ship. And when the opportunity arises to target the IJN blockers. Do as much of the light work as possible in order to conserve the strength of the USN for big clashes with the IJN.
Yes that is my bad, i forgot we were play testing a house rule at the time.
