The obvious alternative being that the China/UK play is strong.
I’m assuming strong UK pac/China play in both cases.
There’s nothing magical that the two can do against Japan - both are set up to die by midgame unless Japan really screws it up. That’s intentionally baked in to the game balance. Perfect play by UK and China can delay it but not avoid it. It takes Japan choosing to be distracted by some other objective and failing to follow through in order for either one to survive.
Basically every game report I have read shows UK Pac turtling at some point where I believe it to be ill advised.
It’s this inappropriate turtling that appears to make them weak. Alternatively in games I play weak play by the allies sees them die elsewhere before Japan can finish off UK Pac.
The other thing which is consistently done is India not adequately defending against SBR.
Patton himself could be playing UK-Pac and it would still be doomed to an early demise if Japan chooses to focus on it.
The only way to save India is to pull Japan’s attention away from it. This is a math thing, not a quality-of-play thing. Mathematically India has no defense against a full-force, properly-executed Japanese attack.
You mean if US goes full Atlantic and ANZAC doesn’t help either? Well, obviously.
I mean even in an all-out KJF, India cannot be saved if Japan is determined to take it. US can go full Pac and Russia can help China and UK can shuffle units from Africa and all of that combined can’t save India.
The only thing that can save India is the Japan player deciding he has other priorities.
I mean even in an all-out KJF, India cannot be saved if Japan is determined to take it. US can go full Pac and Russia can help China and UK can shuffle units from Africa and all of that combined can’t save India.
The only thing that can save India is the Japan player deciding he has other priorities.
That is not my experience.
I see you having 3MEC at Kweichow/Hunnan plus perhaps a few survivors of J1 and the 6 at FIC/Kwangtung. Are you getting through Yunnan with this force?
BTW, why MEC at FIC? Surely that’s a waste when you could be buying art.
Honestly? Simplicity and I’m lazy.
But I really never considered ART in FIC because I make the assumption it’s all fodder and expensible anyways. I do suppose it helps my odds.
And Simon we’ve been over this before. UK and China can stack up Yunnan for a J3 showdown. It can be made worse with Russian interference.
Note my J1 is 1 MIC and 2 TT, so on J2 I’m putting 4 INF taken from Korea in position to augment the J3 showdown.
If things look entirely sinister on Yunnan, I can drop my surviving J1 units island hopping back on the mainland as well on J2.
I’ve never had to pull back my DEI island hoppers yet, but it’s possible.
I mean even in an all-out KJF, India cannot be saved if Japan is determined to take it. US can go full Pac and Russia can help China and UK can shuffle units from Africa and all of that combined can’t save India.
The only thing that can save India is the Japan player deciding he has other priorities.
That is not my experience.
You can save India, but it costs you Europe.
And Simon we’ve been over this before. UK and China can stack up Yunnan for a J3 showdown. It can be made worse with Russian interference.
Yeah we have but I can’t say that I got satisfaction.
J2, the Allies would have ~16inf 1tb assuming no soviet help.
J3, the Allies would have ~22inf 1tb 3AAA plus any soviet help.
J2 that would be enough to deter the attack.
J3 you’d have 6 units on FIC and ~4 on Kweichow. You can take Yunnan down with that but you’d need to lose a heap of planes to do it.
I mean even in an all-out KJF, India cannot be saved if Japan is determined to take it. US can go full Pac and Russia can help China and UK can shuffle units from Africa and all of that combined can’t save India.
The only thing that can save India is the Japan player deciding he has other priorities.
That is not my experience.
With all due respect, you don’t have very much experience. Was it 60 days ago, or less, when you arrived here asking newbie questions?
Play against quality competition and it’s a different game than the one played by people who aren’t all that experienced.
Well Mr Elk - my experience with G40 is pretty limited too, but I do play much more experienced opponents and don’t think I have lost India yet.
I have taken India when playing Japan, but at the expense of poor fleet positioning which caused me no end of problems.
Each player has his own approach and sometimes a change of opponent will lead to a whole new set of dynamics. So perhaps your and simon33’s difference of view is due to the opponents you play?
Thanks Private Panic.
With all due respect, you don’t have very much experience. Was it 60 days ago, or less, when you arrived here asking newbie questions?
Play against quality competition and it’s a different game than the one played by people who aren’t all that experienced.
So play the man rather than discussing the issue. Hmm.
I still think defending against SBR is a move for Calcutta which makes them a useful power.
Trying to explain that the initial board setup and game rules doom India and only a conscious choice by Japan to engage in sub-optimal play can change that.
If you all want to get all prickly about it, then I won’t bother to help answer questions in the future.
Sorry if you thought I was getting prickly Mr Elk. I wasn’t. But I did want to nurture simon33’s right to express a different view without upsetting anyone. We were all newbies once and gained much wisdom and insight from engaging in debates on these boards without fear of being criticised for having the courage to express a contrary view.
One of the factors that makes this a great game is that there is no single answer. These boards are full of debates that prove just that. What is optimal in one game will not be in another, because the variables are so significant.
Trying to explain that the initial board setup and game rules doom India and only a conscious choice by Japan to engage in sub-optimal play can change that.
If you all want to get all prickly about it, then I won’t bother to help answer questions in the future.
You see, it’s the arrogance of your viewpoint that makes me prickly.
Just because people you’ve played with haven’t lasted long in Asia doesn’t mean that the Allies are being played effectively.
For the record, I’ve yet to see Calcutta saved unless Japan chooses not to pursue it.
Even “optimal” play by the Allies to save Calcutta is a sub-optimal strategy because Europe is almost guaranteed to be lost. Saving Calcutta is not worth giving up the game in Europe.
I think this is the point Elk is making Simon.
You may be able to save Calcutta, or make it severely expensive to do so, but in the 4 years I’ve been playing global, the only time I’ve failed to take Calcutta as Japan is because I did something else like attack Russia instead or sack Sydney early. I have saved Calcutta by misplays or poor calculations by my opponents, but that isn’t classified as optimal play.
Sometimes the losses for Japan are prohibitive which are the nature of dice games, but I’ve yet to see Calcutta saved by playing it against my own strategies or against human opponents. I’ve stacked Yunnan like you’ve suggested for J3 showdowns and Yunnan still falls with very little left to defend Calcutta, I’ve turtled, and I’ve even done the full Allied investment into saving Calcutta multiple times (MIC in Iraq / Persia) but it forsakes Moscow and turns the game into a meta game of playing for Egypt in sub-optimal conditions for the Allies due to proximity of production as Europe quickly becomes an impenetrable fortress for the Axis.
In my opinion there aren’t many viable strategies for India except to get a MIC in the Middle East for London to help fly planes to Moscow and then hunker down to keep Japan bogged in a sub-optimal location as the Allies assert control over the Pacific.
You can argue otherwise, but my experience leads me to believe that the hundred or so games I’ve played gives merit to my assertions. You may have alternate strategies for a more effective India, or a more annoying one, but in my book Calcutta falls to Japan if I say so or I get diced.
In my opinion there aren’t many viable strategies for India except to get a MIC in the Middle East for London to help fly planes to Moscow and then hunker down to keep Japan bogged in a sub-optimal location as the Allies assert control over the Pacific.
Yes - factories in the Middle East are critical. In a current game as allies, my UK has built them in all three 2 ipc territories available. Both India and Europe are served by this investment.
For the record, I’ve yet to see Calcutta saved unless Japan chooses not to pursue it.
Even “optimal” play by the Allies to save Calcutta is a sub-optimal strategy because Europe is almost guaranteed to be lost. Saving Calcutta is not worth giving up the game in Europe.
I think this is the point Elk is making Simon.
Fair enough, I’m happy to hear your viewpoints and experience. I just have some trouble reconcilling it to my own.
Regarding a J3 attack, no unit produced in Asia can reach by that time. Let’s count the maximum which can reach:
J1 produce 3TT+art, take art from Machuria & Japan, including 2 inf. 4inf+art to Hunnan
Then: Mec + 6inf + 2art arrive from north, 3art+tank+6inf from Japan via Kwansi. Note I am assuming ignoring Kwangtung which is clearly absurd unless there is no DOW J1 or J2.
Total for Japan (up to): 18inf+8art+tank+11ftr+8tb+2sb
I get in Yunnan:
UK: 1ftr 1tb 8inf 1arm 3AAA
China: 17inf 1ftr
Japan wins retaining 1arm+7.33art on average. Interesting. They’ve made some enormous sacrifices to get there though. You could also throw in some Strat bombers produced J2.
EDIT: Left off a few Japanese units
