Posts made by aaFiendish

Care to be more specific? Where should the russian player attack? And while it is potentially a valid strategy in no-bid depending on how it is implemented, Russia cannot attack without the allies so what is the point in mentioning them? I mean, I’m glad you came up with a “other strategy”, but why don’t I just list all of the other options you could potentially come up with. Germany - attack or defend, uk - attack or defend, japan - attack or defend, us - attack or defend. Now that I’ve covered all the strategies, maybe we can dig into details a bit?

@Al:

Japan

If you have a noob japan player and they dont get key things done like conquering india, china, and some of the Russina territories, then Germany has to fight all three.

If you have a “noob” player playing any power and the other four are equally match the team with the “noob” player will lose. I think that all powers are important, and if neither “does their part”, the game is lost. By your logic, Russia would probably be the most useful I think, but it really doesn’t matter which country you pick. If they don’t do their part, things will be tough.

TheDuke’s strategy is the way to go, and I completely agree. Usually my opening moves with the US involve funneling troops up to west canada, because I like to load into the atlantic from there, since there really is no reason to load from eastern canada. I’ll also shift my AA’s around so that one is in western CA and one is in western US. It doesn’t accomplish a whole lot, but having one in eastern US is generally pointless. While I would like to build in Eastern US to load my xports first round to potentially go to africa, it really isn’t that detrimental to build them in western. If Japan takes hawaii hard, I’ll build there, and 4 infantry and an AA gun will generally be enough for defense against what Japan can bring round 2. Western Canada is doing pretty well too, especially if you move both UK troops over there.

Recently I have been playing/teaching the game to an extreme novice, and at one point during the first game he said “I thought about bringing the japanese to the US, but then I realized how pointless it would be.” Truer words have never been spoken. The US can see an actual japanese assault rounds away, and prepare accordingly. The threat of an initial Japanese incursion is really not all that frightening, and like theduke I will bait it while at the same time doing pretty much exactly what I normally would be against Germany (loading xports into fin/nor) from western canada. Germany is as good as done with Russia collecting from asia.

One thing I should mention regarding pearl harbor is you don’t need to let japan take it. If the force there is overwhelming, I will usually do what you do and shuttle my navy eastward. This takes a long time, and while beneficial is only slightly so I’d say. A better use I usually find is to attack pearl harbor and destroy what I can of the fleet. Navy, Bmb, and maybe a fighter can usually trade quite well over there, and doesn’t really cost the US too much. Meanwhile it leaves the Japanese navy much more exposed, which makes it easier to deal with them and potentially bottle them up. Just think about it if the opportunity presents itself, you may surprise the hell out of japan if it doesn’t occur in your gaming group.

@darkangel:

japan is one of the least difficult countries to be. in fact its the esiest other than america.

p.s i hardly play with japan. for some reason japan and the UK are the countries i play the least. i do not know good strategy with japan.

If you do not know any good strategies with Japan, how can you say it is the easiest country to play? I certainly agree if you mean easy as in does not have to worry too much defensively. However, the game also generally hinges on all nations. Certainly Germany, UK, and Russia need to be played well enough to keep them in balance. Without the help of Japan and America though, either side is left struggling. They can be harder to play because they have more options. In any event, I definitely disagree that Japan is the easiest to play.

Also, it would be helpful if in any of your posts you actually replied to criticism. Posting something and then ignoring responses is equivalent to acknowledging we are right, which may be what you mean to do.

Further, stop calling everyone here a “common person”.

I have a tough time with west europe. Usually though I leave it pretty lightly defended, and guard berlin instead. If I can persuade the allies to land in spain, it’s not all that bad an arrangement.

Assuming eastern europe has a pretty sizable defense, and a recent infantry build in germany, that means I’ll have a bunch of infantry in germany (say 10) and armor. That will generally be enough to not worry about an attack there. This depends on the circumstances of course and how much xports are around, how much airforce, etc. But I’m going to assume there are around 4-5 xports for UK and 4-5 for the US, with not much extra air. I would play differently otherwise, and I won’t go into the thousands of different iterations. Anyhow…

If I can deter the allies enough from a western europe landing and then into spain, that’s fine. Landing in spain to me does not represent “poised to attack all territories” anymore than the UK seas does. Actually, at that point I will bait an attack in southern europe. Next turn I’ll take it back, and your fleet will be out of position for a turn, good deal. If western europe is taken somewhat lightly, I’ll take that back too with armor and planes. If western and southern are taken, I’ll try and take what I can by splitting my planes and armor, probably sending planes to western since the armor in southern won’t be subject to return fire really, and will still be in position for karelia. Fortunately on southern I can also use eastern european infantry.

Sadly, the allies can always go hard into western europe. With two rounds worth of builds there it’s not very manageable for the germans to hit it usually. So if I wasn’t planning on this I’m screwed. However, two builds worth of units for UK and US means two builds worth of units NOT in kareliea. I am hoping japan is doing pretty well in the east, they usually are. In any event, this will be my best shot at karelia, and if the allies have a good hold in western there’s not much an other option other than hold out and wait for the japanese to come to your rescue. I do not like that option.

@UKcommander:

I don’t considering picketing pointless, because as a Russian player picketing not only slows down the Japanese player, but allows you more time to prepare defense. Let’s say that Japan has 10 armor, 2 fighters, and a bomber in Yakut and attacks the one infantry in Novo.

That’s a horrible example. Why would you want to slow down japan? I’ll take my 24 infantry against your 10 armor, 2 fighters, and a bomber anyday, and beat you 99 out of 100 times and more.

Obviously, if Japan had 30 armor, it’d be a different story. But lets instead say that Japan (more likely) has 5 armor, 25 infantry, 4 fighters, and a bomber. I still say not to picket. He can attack your 24 infantry in moscow, blitzing through, with 5 armor, 4 fighters, and a bomber. Not really a big deal. If you don’t picket, he will not attack moscow, but will attack novo. If you do picket, he will not attack moscow, but will attack novo. That infantry will die on the first round, and maybe, just maybe, get a shot off. I fail to see how using a picket “slows” japan down. If japan wants to come down the pipe with raw armor, I say bring it on.

Only in certain circumstances does it slow japan down. In a lot of cases, like the above, it is just a pointless waste of an infantry.

Sadly, I don’t think I communicated my question very clearly. Given the 2 circumstances that I noted, I will almost always picket. What I meant to ask was what happens OUTSIDE of those circumstances. Obviously you are going to picket if a tank can blitz.

I think the circumstance I was going for was more of the following:
Japan is barrelling down on russia. Lets say it starts at yakut, and russia retreats back to novo. In this case, russia expects japan to hit yakut with 8 infantry, 3 fighers and a bomber. Southeast asia is light enough that japan will take its battles without extra air support. The question is as russia, do you leave an infantry in yakut?

More often than not, I see people leaving an infantry as some sort of silly last stand. I never do, because I see it as pointless.

Generally speaking, I tend to not leave infantry lying around simply to make territory hard to conquer. There are two times I might choose to leave one:

1. A tank can blitz through
2. Planes might be committed to the attack that can be used strategically elsewhere

Lets take japan vs. russia for example. I tend to not leave troops lying around as the planes are going to usually be brought in on the attack and I will be lucky to get one hit. It seems like a silly last stand when that infantry can be used more effectively elsewhere and for a counter attack.