So how do the Allies win again?

Everyone can see that japan has alot of airpower and with airbases can defend specific hardpoints fairly easily such as carolines and the home island.  But, the southern islands are only 1 turn further away for the US than Japan, and they do not have airbases at the start to defend them.  The allies, in my opinion, have to draw Japan into attacking there fleets, instead of the other way around.  Get the ANZAC NO early and then head for the indies for all your worth.

Japan starts with 3 carriers, 2 bbs, 2 cruisers, 4 destroyers, 2 subs, and 3 transports.  They also start with very little manpower in south asia.  Japan is forced to build factories and transports and men with her early income, the US has no such problems.  Sure they need an extra couple of transports  but that is about it.  Japan doesn’t have a large naval advantage and really cannot afford to invest significantly into boats for the first few turns, by then the US should catch up.  Not enough to offset the airpower, but you don’t have to attack japan directly, attack her income.

I agree with most of this. The US HAS to get into the DEI area. There is nothing else that they can take that is worthwhile short of Japan herself and that is not a realistic goal in a competitive game. The problem is how to do it without trading too unfavorably.

Contrary to what people think, the Allies do NOT enjoy a huge economic lead over the Japanese. Sure, they make more income, but the Japanese are trading on a surplus of high-cost units. At the start of the game, the Japanese have plenty of aircraft with which to mate up with newly created CVs for naval power. Every 16 IPCs Japan drops is 37 the US has to drop to match, at least until the Japanese run out of surplus planes. With that in mind, it is going to take US quite a long time to overturn Japan’s naval advantage. And IMO, the US doesnt really have all that much time. I think the pressure is on the US/Allied player to stop Japan before she takes out the Brits. Once that happens, it’s all over but the shouting unless the US is in position to do major damage within a turn or so.

Even at the beginning of the game when Japan has to invest in TRs and an IC for China, it’s still not all that heavily in the US favor. The US is only making 22 at that point and Japan is likely making in the mid-high 30s. So Japan can put 10-15 into the ground war and still keep parity with the US (although I dont think that is her most effective play).

I think the goal of the Allies is to strain Japan’s available combat power every turn, as much as possible. It’s similar to AA50 (but harder for the Allies IMO) in that Japan can do anything, but Japan cant do everything simultaneously. Many times it will be necessary as the Allies to make spoiler attacks or moves that Japan can easily thwart, but when taken as a whole, all three Allies can make Japan spread her combat power. Unless they can do that, I think the Allies are doomed. None of them can stand up to the full weight of the Japanese attacks so all of them have to nibble around the edges and force responses. A sub here, a minor landing an island there, and show of force in another area will add up headache for Japan (I’ve been on both ends of that!).

Goals for the Allies as I see it at the moment:

China - spread out, counter-attack the weakest spot once per turn to kill off Japanese ground forces. Do NOT mass up anywhere. That is just an invitation to be slaughtered by airpower.

Britain - boots on the ground. Take as much of the DEI during peace as Japan allows and invest in troops. If Japan delays until J3 (which I think is solid), then maybe a sub or a DD, but beyond that - grunts and guns. The goal is as per China - make the Japanese spread out and bleed off ground forces. AA guns are a good investment for the UK since it makes Japan have to really worry about having her combat power diluted.

US - get into the DEI. If Japan heavily defends against that, a surprise raid into Manchuria/Korea can be very damaging. Usually that is just a threat though. I can’t imagine a competent Japanese player allowing it, but he DOES have to honor it and that draws off forces. The US should be staging out of Australia so they can reach the DEI in two moves from Pearl. Taking the Carolines is nice, but it is often a trap too. Japan can bring a LOT of firepower to Truk (which is what makes it an appealing base). Take it if it’s safe, but otherwise ignore it and focus on the Australia to DEI line.

Anzac - support the US. Build them a naval base if they want it and stage aircraft and subs in Western Australia. Always be in position to threaten the DEI as well. If Japan moves out of the area to hit the US, move in and take an island. Japan will HAVE to try and take it back and that siphons precious ground power away from the Brits. Anzac money is worth less than Brit money IMO so even an unfavorable trade is usually OK here (ie, losing the TR).

Goal as all Allied powers: Stretch Japan to the limit each turn. You would rather see Japan making more numerous low-odds attacks than getting away with being able to mass overkill in her fights. Mass overkill results in fewer Japanese casualties and the way I see to hurt Japan is to force her to constantly be losing men and guns in Asia.

The CV piece itself is not as powerful of an attacker as a pair of DDs, that much is true. But CVs let you play all the fun little games with aircraft which are necessary to get overwhelm kill power on an attack. Using CVs can GREATLY magnify the range of land based aircraft.

For example, you have 2 CVs (fully loaded). Those 4 aircraft all join a nearby battles and then plan to land on an island or close land base. That clears the decks to allow any OTHER planes within 4 (or 5 now) to join the same fight and then land on the CVs. That rotation increases you potential for massed sea firepower in a way that DDs can’t hope to provide. And that is offensive firepower, not defensive. CVs are the single most flexible naval units you can buy.

To me though to spend 16 for a carrier than another 20-21 for the planes just isn’t worth it compared to the 4 or 5 destroyers and subs I can get for the same price.

Whether or not that is true for the Allies, it certainly isnt for Japan who starts with a large surplus of aircraft. For 16 IPCs Japan can easily magnify her combat power FAR in excess of 2 DDs. The Allies have to build the planes as well so they might be better suited with surface ships, but even there I think a good mix is going to be preferable to an excess of either.

I’m a big fan of strategic blocking as well, but over time that will dilute your combat power as well. I find it desirable to set up kill zones where I can mass LBA and CV-based planes in tandem to thwart any attempts on the DEI.

No doubt that the DEI is a huge killing zone for both allied, and axis ships.  One other big problem ACs have though, is a high vunerability to subs.  I honestly wonder if ANZAC would be well severed purchasing primarily submarines and a sprinkling of aircraft for the blockade power, and to pick off Japanese boats lacking proper escort.

Subs backed up by LBA is a very powerful option for the Anzacs. They stat with a significant air threat so dropping a few subs to stalk the DEI is good strat I have employed in a number of games as the Allies. Anzac money is ‘cheap’ so trading 6 IPCs for a sub for 8 for a Japanese DD is easily worthwhile, especially in the game.

@GrayBlaZe:

I’m still evaluating and learning AAP40 but I agree it seems to lean twards a Japanese victory.  Japan can completely wipe out China and have the UK backed in a conrner with no more navy before the US knows what had happen and can’t do a thing to help.  However, one thing I’m looking into now in favor of the allies is American stratigic bombers in Imo Jimo, along with enough navy and scramling fighters to keep them safe, it can do a lot of damage to Japanese industries.  A bomber can fly nonstop (7 spaces) from Western US to Imo Jimo.  It not that hard to do since Japan is busy taking over China and the UK in India.

Interesting. My read of the new SBR rules kind of leans towards it no longer being a viable option. In my experience, Japan already tends to keep Fighters available in Japan for defense of the home sea. Performing SBR runs is opening up the US to horrible trades of fighters at 10 IPCs a piece. Then again, it might just force Japan to leave enough fighters home to pull some off the line. It also give the US a direct ability to hit Japan’s airpower (albeit with relatively low odds). Please let me know if it works out when you get a chace to try it (and it certain did in real life ;) ).

One of my friends playing the US took Iwo and staged bombers, fighters, and navy there with the intention of threatening any new Japanese builds but in the end it was too little, too late. It still didnt impact the Japanese econ directly and that made it somewhat less than useful for helping out the Brits.

Hehe, yeah, I figured it would be rough. But in most of our recent games Japan’s navy is often busy pasting the Brits for the first few turns so that does leave open the possibility of a US capture of Iwo with a survivable force. Given that, this could work as a deterrent to pin Japanese fighters in Japan rather than in China and India killing ground troops.

Of course the US would need to have a threat capable of hitting the DEI too and I’m not sure that is possible. But it is an interesting idea if Japan gets too cute in India.

I think it depends on what the Japanese do. If they stay massed up, the US threat down South wouldnt be very real. But staying massed up cost the Japanese time. If the Brits can hold out for a while, things might turn against Japan.

One thing we have wrestled with the Allies is that being at Pearl isnt really a threat to the Japanese. As long as Japan maintains a credible air force on Japan and has some trickling builds of ships in the home waters there really isnt much the US can do up there. Best case would be the landing in Manchuria/Korea, but this would require significant force to pull off and Japan can easily relocate for defense if the US masses up too much at Pearl. The interior lines that Japan enjoys make offensive action against her extremely difficult.

What I’m trying to find is a way to split the Japanese up and make them take some risks rather than committing massiving overkill to every fight. I think it is going to take a combination of threats to do that but they do have to be real threats.