I’m not disagreeing with that at all, Cow.
What I was saying that A2 also had strategic choices and varied options to take.
One strategy that US can take is to go %100 Pacific for several of the first turns, crush Japan, and then stop the Euro Axis before they win.
An interesting allied strategy.
Uncrustable, there’s no reason to insult Bruce.
If you won’t construct a reasonable point in this discussion, at least don’t simply poke fun at what he thinks.
@Uncrustable:
and now bigbadbruce is cowers in the corner ;)
Say what?
Was there any challenge somewhere?
Should I point out that I never refused a match… and yet, never lost!
I just see no point aguying “believes” and paper strategy. Anyone sawing A2 is cracked and sure lost for Axis, I say they are wrong. So far, nobody proved me wrong… and suggesting an opening is not a proof of any kind.
Once I bought a carrier, destroyer and sub on G1 and added them to my Baltic fleet only to see them destroyed by the British airforce and one or two ships that survived the German attack on G1. The british lost their units too, but I lost my entire G1 purchase…
Once I bought a carrier, destroyer and sub on G1 and added them to my Baltic fleet only to see them destroyed by the British airforce and one or two ships that survived the German attack on G1. The british lost their units too, but I lost my entire G1 purchase…
That must have been some really horrible dice, thats a cruiser a sub a destroyer a carrier a battleship and 5 fighters (maybe a couple are tacs)
really really bad dice for uk to kill all that uk lol
@Cow:
well usa should have balanced purchases, something needs to go down in pacific for god sake.
I always wanted a UK rule for USA - in so much as half their economy was in Washington DC and half was in San Francisco like England is half in India and half in England. DC is close enough that America could still abandon one side of the game (unlike England) but at least there would be a one round delay on some stuff getting from one side to the other (Fighters built in E. USA could still get to carriers built in W. USA but probably could not make it to naval engagements that round.)
???
you guys totally do not understand anything I say.
If you win games as allies, you do balanced purchases with usa or you lose to japan. I do mostly pacific buys, there is no reason to get more than 4 transports for the atlantic (Except in the sea lion situation) the rest of the atlantic fleet is dedicated to sinking a little baltic fleet or protecting UK navy.
You can also fly fighters into Russia’s capital to save him. march inf through norway -> finland -> wherever.
allies strategy is about working together. heavy pacific purchases can allow for india to send his 3 air units to moscow as well (typically I have somewhere around 10 allies fighters to hold that sucker and a couple bombers).
The battle for russia is often very close in dice games. Germany gets around 30%-50% sometimes 70% odds typically. USA dropping men on europe does not really “save russia” since italy past a certain point is pretty much on europe guard and germany’s air + inf/art can no problem strafe whatever you send.
~
also if things are going great in pacific calcutta can prevent an axis win on the europe half of the map. So USA should be doing pacific heavy buys for a multitude of reasons. (IE MARCH TO EGYPT, which is a must do after russia is gone!)
the biggest reason is the transport chain to doing drops on europe is freaking long.
The game is pretty even, in fact usa 1 i always buy 3 units pacific sub/dd mix. usa 2-3 depends if germany does sea lion or not. no sea lion = i purchase to shut italy down and out of the game with the rest going to pacific (at the least 3x sub/dd for pacific). usa 3-5 is mostly pacific. I just buy a skeleton fleet to just guard UK transports from germany with trickles of carrier 2x fighters or dds coming in.
key elements to this is keeping at least 1 or 2 uk transports alive in the india/africa seazones to ensure italy is shut down (usually 2, after sumatra i bring that transport back in).
all usa has to do is provide navy to guard uk’s 5 transports on Uk so he can shuffle 10 guys a turn no prob. usa is too inefficient with transports. typically usa got 2-5 depending, but as long as you protect uk’s naval so uk can just buy ground units to drop, you will be fine. if you can’t get a foothold in normandy or whatever. you can always march norway->finland -> karelia->nov-> wherever.
another element to this strategy is shutting japan down from the cash islands before the fall of russia so you can turn around and focus on guarding egypt and the united kingdom. keeping calcutta alive is important.
~
If usa spend all atlantic, I see no problems in japan winning the game on the pacific side of things. if usa spends no atlantic i don’t see how russia can even stand a chance or how egypt will be out of germany/italy grasp when russia falls.
~
alternatively you can do a europe emphasis and just always buy subs/dds for pacific (cheap stuff) and go heavier in atlantic.
Axis is just more fun to play for global. They have all the options while allies are pretty much limited to directly responding to axis. With the exception of USA who can do what he wants.
the biggest problem i have: allies is boring for group games. whoever gets russia or usa does nothing for 3 rounds.
so we came up with a solution to this endeavor and we concluded we should put russia/germany at war off the bat. japan at war with everyone but russia. we bid for axis. goes for around 10-15. japan actually does pretty good at war first round, but it is germany that gets shafted out of 5 for not being at war so it works out.
hell yeah it is good times. :D.
the game is pretty balanced for what it is and is enjoyable for 1v1s. for multies I recommend russia + uk and usa +china+anzac. if you have 3 allies players russia alone, uk +china, usa + anzac… for this I recommend just starting at war and taking a bid for axis or someone will be bored for the first hour and a half.
aside from that. game is balanced. for low luck games 3 allies is fine. so the players that do ehtiopia round 1 don’t get diced and players that don’t get an inf for uk. whatever.
So USA is getting its massive NO bonus on turn one ?
Would have to be a ludicrous high Axis bid to balance that lol
not really. take into account paerl harbor. it is more or less 8-17 bidding down.
game favors axis slightly in a normal 1v1 playing without any house rules or whatever. for multis in a group game, you are not going to control your allies or get them to do what you need them to do… and you don’t want a couple guys being bored for awhile so house rules make sense and think of it this way adding 1 sub and 1 art to g1 could save the guy a few units from dieing in france and smooth out the naval attacks for g1.
USA won’t do anything atlantic turn 1. if you go through with sea lion it can’t really sink your naval cos you got normandy for germany so you can put stuff in the ocean if you have to.
japan might be delayed 1 turn from taking cash islands but it a smooth ride back from hawaii and you can pretty much be a turn ahead of usa as long as you are moving west.
allies may hold an island or two for a 2-3 turns, which is the equivilent of japan waiting to go to war round 3.
not the end of the world really.
There is a really good 1941 settup out there, you should try it sometime. Would fit perfect into your group games :)
Game starts on turn 3 i think, so noone has to wait
I take back what I said, Japan DOW 1 is pretty good if you go for the money instead of pearl harbor.
Round 1 attack doesnt seem that great to me. You are not in position to take the money islands on that round and in FAR better position on Round 2.
try it before you knock it. People have done this opener, mostly in live games. People are just trying to have a good time and want to skip the whole not being at war thing. It’s also a viable strategy, it may be “sub optimal” to some, but I like it. Most people who don’t like it just prefer more conservative play or prefer to see what the allies are doing before they go ahead and commit to something. Most of the time people do this for a change of pace or to try something outside the norm as it leads to crazier games.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=26960.0
Once you play more than a few games, like say 5 as axis and 5 as allies, maybe 1 or 2 J1 DOW, couple sea lion, couple barb, maybe a japan that opens up on russian land for a game… basically do different things and see how they go then you can make a comparison.
I am surprised you played the older version and never did anything outside of the norm.
~
as far as J1 war goes. you kill dd sub from usa at 0 loss. you get the fighter on phil as well, kwangtung and borneo and FIC so you make the same income as not going to war. your kills equate to the +23 usa gets. the -7 to india makes for an easier time in dealing with uk pac. does screw you up with china a little, but whatever. you won’t be skipping over the dutch islands that is for sure.
If USA pushes into japan sea zone to convoy you, you can make a quick anzac rush and that is super hilarious to win with.
Oh, dont mistake me. I did plenty of off the wall shtuff in Alpha 2 and Alpha 3. I’ve tried sinking the British BB AND hitting the Americans in Pearl. I’ve tried ignoring the Americans completely and pushing for Moscow - this move was picked up by an opponent which lead to the Alpha 2 development of 100% allied attacks on Japan aka The Pac-Strat that once others were made aware of, was so bad, Alpha 3 had to be invented in the first place. wink Yes, there were plenty other contributing factors, but still…it was funny as hell that Japan couldn’t do squat against India, Australia and an 80 IPC America pounding on it finally getting pushed back - yes, the 18 Russian infantry were also used here - except, unlike normal, Japan couldnt do anything about it, no shore bombardments and no planes left.
However, I have never won with a round 1 attack by Japan. Round 1 attack by Germany is way more successful, but not as good as round 2.
Note, I have won with Sydney before. You’re correct, it is fun! But that followed a Calcutta Crush so I had Hong Kong, Manilla, Sydney, Beijing, Tokyo and Honolulu - America tried an Atl-Strat.
you did your j1 different.
plus I am really doubting your impact on making a +3. sure the community as a whole lead to the development, but the main play testers have always been LH and his group.
I took sydney against a full pacific usa, but he went to convoy japan and I went to anzac and he could not make it in time.
Yea I know he had to play test it himself, but I did kind of spear head the whole America crushing Japan in Alpha 2. ^_~ It was weeks later when he confirmed it was outta whack and then there was like a few months of discussion about what to do with it. lol.
Anyway, yes, my J1 is prolly different because I set up round 3. If you leave it all in place on round 2, it’s not like the allies are going to miss what you are doing! When you get to Round 2 and move to attack, THEN the allies are like “oh shtuff” and then it is usually too late. or, it is when I have done it.
j3 DOW is really bad.
I’ve never had an issue with it. But then, my goal isnt to win with Japan, it’s to sap Russia in any direction possible, ignoring China (which other people say is bad, but I’ve yet to have an issue with it, the idea is to pound into Russia once England knows you are not Sea Lion.)
