Map and Strategy Differences between 1st and 2nd Editions

@Cow:

Hobbes, ukraine russia round 1 or not? Big debate about it on forum.

3 games as Allies, so far I did Ukraine on all of them, only the first one failed. I’ve only used 2 armor in all 3 attacks though and if I can kill all German units except for the fighter I will pull it back.

The odds are exactly the same as in Spring 42 and it is the single attack that the Soviets can make to hit Germany hard. And if you can pull back and leave the fighter that’s even better, although it will be bad news for the Atlantic.

@Slackaveli:

@Petebu:

I am thinking that the attack on Egypt is must now with the 2 games you won as the Allies. I have not played the new game yet and I cannot wait, I will be the Axis. Do you have any other advice as the axis player in this new ediition?

put your fleets together and squash the USA lol.

I actually wondered about if the Axis player was going to try that on my 2nd game. He had bought a carrier and an IC on round 1, then joined both fleets together off France and ended up with 6 transports plus 2 carriers but he never got enough to try Sea Lion. However, if the Germans landed in Canada, then it would be 12 US units against 16 German ones, so I had to keep units in range while playing KJF.

bump

@MistuhJay:

@Hobbes:

I actually wondered about if the Axis player was going to try that on my 2nd game. He had bought a carrier and an IC on round 1, then joined both fleets together off France and ended up with 6 transports plus 2 carriers but he never got enough to try Sea Lion. However, if the Germans landed in Canada, then it would be 12 US units against 16 German ones, so I had to keep units in range while playing KJF.

Germany dropping 16 units in E. Canada? Never thought of that… what if Japan did the same thing to Alaska J3. America has to decide to defend E. US or W. US (and will obviously protect its capital, allowing Japan to assault W. US). It can’t be this easy… can it?

Please show this beginner why this is a bad idea?  =)

You can try to find an old strategy for Revised called Polar Express that is exactly what you are describing. I never tried it on Revised though because it’s too easy to spot once you know what to look for.

Something just popped to my mind about G1.

On 1st Edition the standard G1 attacks (UK fleet, Egypt, etc) usually consist of:

• Retaking Ukraine (+90%) and Karelia
• UK DD on Egypt SZ (+90%)
• UK Cruiser on Med (+90%)
• Egypt (+90%)
• UK Atlantic fleet (+90%)

Which, when you combined odds of all winning all attacks gives you overall odds for G1 of close to 66% (or at least 2/3 that G1 will go as planned).

But on 2nd Edition there’s a substantial difference on the combined odds if you add the G1 Egypt attack:

• Retaking Soviet territories (+90%)
• UK DD on Egypt SZ (+90%)
• UK Cruiser on Med (+90%)
• UK Atlantic fleet (+90%)
• US Atlantic fleet (+90%)
• Egypt (+75%)

Or: (100/90)(100/90)(100/90)(100/90)(100/90)*(100/75) = +/-44%

So, if the Allies let Germany attack Egypt and if Germany chooses to do so, then German odds for winning all attacks as expected on G1 drop to less than half. And that most likely opens opportunities for the UK to exploit from failed attacks.

Something for the Soviet/Allied player to consider before sending that fighter to Egypt…

@UrJohn:

@Mallery29:

A balanced game is even harder to pull off (global I guess would be different story)…I can try to keep one at bay, but one of the axis is going to become a monster because if you go that route, I would make Japan bloom and Germany would just go all defensive and control the Atlantic…that’s why a balanced game can’t be pulled off.  US can’t half a$s the Japanese, and you certainly will never get into Europe if you half-a$s the atlantic… Trust me, I would love to do that with the US (I guess a way to do that is make the US like UK/India in Global. Give the EUS like 33 spend and WUS 21…just random numbers, don’t anyone strike it down in fury).  You get money to spend for both sides, and you limit the effect of a KJF/KGF strat (granted, you could still go through the canal and beef up the other side, so I don’t have a great answer for it).

Interesting idea. I think you  could get away with giving US just a moderate bump, maybe 5 extra IPCs total, and requiring that they spend no more than half +1/2 IPC  on either side. Tho if they lose WUS, they’d have to be allowed to spend all on EUS.

The more I play AA42.2 the more I’m becoming convinced that the Allies need to go for the balanced strategy (unlike its predecessors) and that it was designed that way, but for it to work you can’t split the US income.
It may also depend on what type of Victory you’re playing, specially the VC victory because that’s the quickest and most competitive play and that’s the one I’ve been playing so far.
On Revised/AA42.1 there were basically three Allied strats that I used: KGF, Fortress Russia and KJF (VCs were irrelevant since Axis always needed Moscow to win). KJF was usually not worth it unless the dice were hard for Japan and on a KGF the US would withdrawal its presence from the Pacific. Fortress Russia is a counter to the Axis rush to Moscow and can be played with a KGF, were you land with the UK/US on Archangel/Karelia, use those units to stop the Axis advance on Russia and then decide which way to push, either against the Japanese on India or the Germans on Karelia/Ukraine.
On AA42.2 the Indian/Pacific is changed: there’s a vulnerable VC on Honolulu but now the US Pacific fleet has a chance of surviving and contest the Pacific and the UK can drop units on India. Which means that the US may be able to be always switching production between the Atlantic (at least to liberate Africa) and the Pacific.
Even if the US focus on the Atlantic it should leave the Pacific fleet to threaten Japanese transports and prevent a capture of Honolulu. If Japan chooses to take Hawaii it will need 2 rounds to reach it from SZ60, so the US has 1 1 round of additional naval builds to prevent Japan from doing so.

@Mallery29:

I’m pretty sure in total victory, Japan would probably just ignore Hawaii since they aren’t going for cities, so the US could put some units out there, but how effective could you be in the Pacific?  Even with the EI fleet dead, the US has to push somewhere to take the heat off Russia/India.  I’d like to see it work, I just have my doubts.

Yeah, on total victory the Axis target is Russia until it falls and with both Axis players still on the game. Just having the Pacific limits the options for Japan if you also have a big UK airforce on India because then Japan starts having real problems to defend more than 2 SZs with its starting fleet (even with no EI attack).