Possible to win as Axis? Without bids?

[tactical]

Anyone,
I know this question has been asked and stated(by myself, also) a million times. In a 10VC game or more, can the Axis win with no type of bid. I played 2 expert Allied players, both of them completly in synch with their moves. Did the AC G1 move. Lost in 4 hours. Did the buy all infantry for Germany, mabey 1 tank on turn 4 or greater. lost in 6 hours(2 different games). Mabey I'm not playing Japan effectively. Both these games were KGF. Russia only bought inf and stacked them, creating dead zones everywhere. Further helped by USA shuck-shuck from Eastern Canada to Norway. In addition to England shuck-shucking into Norway.

Did I mention they didn't only bring troops? They landed mad planes all over Europe, where stacks of Russian inf were. Making it impossible odds to fight 10 Russian inf stack and 3 UK planes on the same territory without taking heavy losses.

Now I agree, they are both better players than me, they play pbem, and the one goes to tournaments. I do consider myself a good opponent(not great). I adapt to different strategies and I make no or very few tactical mistakes(at least that I can see-I also ask opponents if they see me make mistakes<after the games>to see where I can improve.). Again, mabey I didn't get Japan to Moscow in enough time for both games. but Damn, impossible to beat them.
They said I played 2 good games(games were played on different days). But my one friend said that it is almost impossible for the Axis to win without a bid. Is this true? He didn't say it was impossible, just incredibly difficult for the Axis to win with no bids.

So for all you great players out there. Is this game completly even? between Axis and Allies?

Randell

[DXfoxman]

First, I'm no "great player", and I dont pretent to be. but heres my opinion:

Again, mabey I didn't get Japan to Moscow in enough time for both games. but Damn, impossible to beat them.

Im not sure about you, but for me a KRF(kill russia first) stratigy doesnt work all the time. Sometimes i can get better results from my japanese navy, either taking india/ausi/china, or putting pressure on the U.S. If the U.S. was shuck-shucking to europe, A good navy knocking on their back door will usually stop them. well, at least it'd stop me.

If(and only if) the Allies target one county, logicly, it leaves the other one open. You CAN NOT win by the targeted country alone and never will, unless your incredably good or incredably lucky. The only way to victory is to use the open(not targeted) one to its fullest, and in effect, winning.

With that philosophy in mind, I can say that the Axis can and will win atleast some of the time. But then again, i could always be wrong.

This is just my humble opinion. :cool:

[macfu1205]

My group has played about 40 games of A&A revised and in a 9+ VC game it is almost impossible for the Axis to win without some tweak or just plain awful dice pretty much the whole game for the Allies. If you play with NA's it is even worse.

Lately we've allowed the Axis to pick their NA's and make the Allies roll for theirs and then only get one for two of the three countries. It seems to have helped a little, but we hate messing with the rules when the game should be fairly even to start with.

I to am open to any suggestions to help even the playing field.

[Scott_WAR]

Its relatively the same with the old game as this game. The axis has a good position to start with. If they dont get screwed over by the dice in the first round or 2, then they have a decent chance to get themselves into a winning position. But, they dont have forever. Once the game gets past turn 4 the allies usually start gaining momentum. This doesnt mean you have to go for the throat on turn 5 as axis though.

The important thing is for the axis to be able to understand exactly when a move must be made. Wait too long, the allies may have built their defenses enough to make it near impossible. Go too soon, and if the attack fails, you wont have enough behind it to ever mount another push. Depending on how the alllies play, how their dice are, etc, this can be longer or shorter each game.

[AxisRoll]

If the axis get UK down in money, then they can play it out even.

Germany get africa
Japan get india, austalia

[questioneer]

Axis win, without bids??? Yeah give the Allies dice with all 6's on it. They might have a chance then.

[Kaufschtick]

Tactical,

I'm a long time A&A player, of all versions. I myself have had quite a bit of frustration playing as the Axis( no wins yet!). IMHO, it's not impossible to win as the Axis. However, I do think at this point that when possible, the more skilled players should play as the Axis. The Allied side, I feel, is more forgiving, which is better for less skilled players. The worst possible situation I could think of now would be for skilled Allied players with a Kill Germany First strategy. In this situation, the Axis are up against it! Keep in mind, that Axis & Allies is a very good game, don't give up on it!

If you want, try using a bid as the Axis, however I don't think that it's absolutely necessary. I would say don't be afraid to experiment with what works for you and your group of players. The sky won't fall if you use a bid, and I think you'd be suprised at how a small bid greatly affects the game. It doesn't take much, even a tiny 3 IPC bid can shake things up. I have played using a bid as the Axis, and had a blast! What I learned was to do what works for the group I game with and myself. A bid is a very simple way to tilt the games balance in whatever direction you feel is needed. As you experiment with how much is just right, I think you'll see that the game is pretty darn close as is. Not perfect, but nothing that can't be fixed with a bid and hopefully a "tweeked" 2nd edition rule book sometime down the road.

I would also say too, that moving the victory city of LA to Hawaii and going with a 9 V.C. victory condition is a given.

[Molotov Cocktail]

I'm no expert either but I have found that my games have usually gone to the Axis. All but two and I think I've played about 10-12 games now. Maybe those that have the opposite could tell me what they are doing as Allies and what they are doing as Axis.

I think Japan has to be very aggressive in Asia. Some will disagree but I find a good Japanes strategy is to buy two IC's on J1. from there on in you can pump 6 tanks a turn into Asia while your navy is i) taking and holding India; ii) taking Hawaii and Australia. I remember one game I played I managed to sail the Japanese navy into sz.7 to protect Germany. It was a LONG game.

With regards to Germany I think an AC on G1 is almost a must. Then get an extra transport or two in the Baltic. It allows Germany to use its tank stack and planes against UK/USA landings with 4 plus men as fodder. Sure this lets Russia get pretty strong for a turn or two but by turn 3-4 Japan should be taking some of the pressure off Germany.

Also in my humble opinion Germany must go after Africa. After 2 turns if it isn't going well then maybe give up, but that extra ten has a net effect of 20 IPC. 10 for Germany and ten away from UK. This also forces the US/UK to take Africa back unless they want Germany to rake in 50 IPC a turn.

Also keep the German planes within striking distance of the Atlantic. Even if you don't attack it the Allies will have to buy some cover for their transports. 2 subs, 1AC, 1 Dest, 6 planes and 1 bomber can do a lot of damage. Even at the risk of losing some planes an effective attack on Allied shipping can be the game breaker.

I fogot to mention that I use AH rules. AH rules vs. LHR ... kind of becoming like the Hatfields vs. The McCoys isn't it? :-)

[TomJag3]

The Axis can win, though it's no easy row to hoe. An aggressive Japan is a must.

The following strategy isn't guaranteed to work, but it did against me.

I'm not really fond of the Japanese building 2xIPC strategy. I like the flexibility of transports and I like mixing infantry with my armor. I don't like losing 5 IPC units when there are 3 IPC units available. I like to get rid of the US presence in Asia as soon as possible. Then, some pressure can be brought on the Soviets from the east.

Germany should take Egypt and get rid of that fighter on turn 1. From there, they can spread across Africa like a cancer. Expect US and British units to arrive in Morocco around turn 3.

Target Moscow. Buying 12 inf and 1 arty on turn 1 should provide the casualties needed for later. Lots of armor the next couple of turns should get some offensive punch for when you need it. When moving toward Russia, don't try to take everything in front of you. Identify where you can take territory without the Russians being able to counterattack. Arranging to take a territory next to Russia or the Ukraine while having the Japanes fighters within range to reinforce and help defend the German ground units is a good thing.

Above all, roll low!! :-)

[tactical]

Some good ideas out there, thank you. I like the AC and an extra trany idea. It would definitely help prevent Allies from landing in Norway on T1.
2 Ipcs on J1, I have never thought about that. I wouldn't go 6 tanks per turn though, probably 2 tanks per turn, the rest inf +inf(need more fodder) being transported to mainland or isles to help defend. But 2 Ic's on J1, I'll have to think about that.
And lastly, for Germany, if an AC is bought on G1, will need a few turns on inf ONLY, every turn mabey throwing 1 tank in until you retake land. But all good ideas, thanks

Jason

[Marshall]

I have yet to win with the Axis. My cousin and I have played frequently, with both of us trying each side regularly, and the Allies consistantly win, regardless of who plays them. The Axis have only won one game, and the Allies threw some lousy dice that game.

The biggest problem I have as Germany is that in every game we've played, U.K. attacks Algeria on UK1, and then the U.S. moves those two transports loaded with goods into Algeria on US1. This makes it nearly impossible to hold Africa without diverting major resources, and doing so leaves Germany move vulnerable to attack from the Soviet Union.

The other problem is that the U.S. has so much expendible income, they can develop weapons very quickly. Usually in our games, the U.S. has both HB and LRA by the third or fourth round. This makes it very difficult for the Japanese navy, since they can be hit by U.S. aircraft almost anywhere in the Pacific, and if the U.S. flys a couple of bombers over to Germany, Germany's money goes down the tubes so fast it makes your head spin. Sure, they can only lose 16 IPCs a turn, but that's pretty significant when they are trying to beat off both U.K. and the Soviet Union.

We've always done well with Japan, but Germany gets trounced from the first round on. It seems like the Soviet Union is stronger in this version than in the original, but it is hard to put your finger on why that is so, since they don't really have that much more, piece-wise.

We're considering making Atlantic Wall and Tokyo Express standard rules to help balance things out. (Atlantic Wall seems realistic to me, anyway, since amphibious assaults are usually pretty brutal on the attackers.) Any thoughts on that?

I'm very interested in hearing from anyone who can win consistantly (or at least half the time) with the Axis against an equally competent opponent.

[Scott_WAR]

The answer is in a German carrier being built the first turn. Now, what you buy with that carrier is debateable, but the carrier is the important piece. The carrier enables you to hit UK with 1 infantry, 1 tank, 5 or 6 fighters and a bomber on G2. UK, should take this into account and defend UK a little more than usual. This will usually mean they wont go to africa.

USA on the other hand may still do it. If they do, you actually have the fire power to destroy them. If you have your fighters in position to hit UK, then more than likely they can hit algeria as well. 1 infantry and 1 tank, 4-6 fighters, possibly the bomber, a supporting shot from your BB. Against 2 infantry, a tank and an artillery, you should destroy everything but lose your infantry and tank. At worst you lose a fighter or bomber, but the advance into africa is stopped for now.

As a side note, building the carrier and transports really forces UK and USA to stay out of africa to begin with. The lack of troops does hurt against russia, but Germany gets africa immediately, and that income can make up for it rather quickly on turn 2,3 and 4.

[Drax Kramer]

Some good ideas out there, thank you. I like the AC and an extra trany idea. It would definitely help prevent Allies from landing in Norway on T1.

How? Do you plan to attack British fleet with a German one if the British invade Norway on B1?


Drax

[Drax Kramer]

The answer is in a German carrier being built the first turn. Now, what you buy with that carrier is debateable, but the carrier is the important piece. The carrier enables you to hit UK with 1 infantry, 1 tank, 5 or 6 fighters and a bomber on G2. UK, should take this into account and defend UK a little more than usual. This will usually mean they wont go to africa.

With 30 IPC British can purchase an expensive item and enough infantry to make any sort of invasion a costly failure for Germans. These ground units can always be used for offensive purposes in subsequent turns.


Drax

[TomJag3]

Buying the German carrier and a transport on turn 1 guarantees Russia's survival. That's the equivalent of 8 infantry on the board and the equivalent of allowing Russia an extra turn's worth of builds, because you will be later in getting a substantial amount of troops to the front. Because Russia will be bigger, it will take longer to mount an offensive against Russia. Russia will be able to afford forces to heckle the Japanes. Bad idea.

[axis_roll]

In an ongoing game on G1, Germany purchased an a/c, 5 inf, art and armor. That ground unit buy MATCHES USSR. I did not 'fall behind' USSR on units, and UK has not bought 1 ship, but 4 ftrs (and ground units)

He moved UK BB and 2 tpt to SZ 4 on UK2, so I moved behind him to SZ 3 to block him in. He must now attack me to free his BB/tpts or I kill them next turn. I am using my fleet optimally (tpt, 2 sub, DD, A/C, 2 ftr) better at defense and he is forced to take his tpt's into battle as fodder if he so chooses. Actually, some of his ftrs are out of range to hit me in SZ3 unless he buys an A/C (more 'wasted' allied navy dollars!?)

PS. We're playing LHTR1.1.

[V-Disc]

I've managed a win as the Axis. I've been described as a "very cautious" player. I certainly don't consider myself a "great" player.
I didn't try anything fancy; no AC. I built alot of tanks & INF, and the occasional FTR.
My first priority was taking AND holding Africa. GER, by G3 I think, held everyhting from Cairo to the Cape. That income boost was too much for Russia to contend with. I completely agree with the previous posts; Africa is a must.
The Allies in this game were commited to feeding IC's in India and Sinkiang. The US also built an IC in Norway. By that time GER was too well defended.

[Molotov Cocktail]

This is directed to Marshall and Drax. Sorry I don't have time to figure out how to use the quotes thing yet. :(

Let's say that G1 Germany buys the AC and two transports. If Britain decided to go for Norway on UK1 then they could buy either a BB, 2 DD, 1AC etc. Let's assume they buy an AC and a destroyer. They have 1 BB, 1 AC, 2ftrs, 2 transports (that is if Germany didn't sink the one on the Canadian coast G1) 1 DD and 1 Russian sub. If Germany puts its planes in the right spot (sorry don't have my map right now) they can hit that British Fleet with 6 planes, 2 subs, 1 bomber, 1 DD, 2 trns and 1 AC. Pretty good odds for Germany. Then UK is screwed. No Navy and losing IPCs rapidly, if Germany gets Africa. So even if you don't attack, the UK has to sit back a few turns and wait for US help. And I agree the UK can just buy men that they can use later but then they aren't invading Africa, aren't buying an India, Aust or South Africa IC.

Or if they move to far like axis roll said Germany can pin UK Navy.

I'm not saying this strategy is unbeatable but I have won with it. Although Moscow is usually the target, the UK is the Allies weakest link. They have the most territory and once most of it is taken, it is very hard for the Allies to get it back. So by T3, 4 the UK economy is dropping to below 20 and after that they aren't very useful and not much of a threat to Germany. So that means US has got to help them. The US can either go for Germany or Japan all out. US can't really afford to do both.

So the AC and Transports prevents UK from moving to Africa. Or at least it makes the UK think twice about it. With 1 AC and 2 or 3 transports the threat of Sea Lion is very real and UK can't ignore that.

[DXfoxman]

I have some questions to axisroll.

1) about the a/c. Do you put it in the baltic or the mediterain? it seems that if it is in baltic, seems that germany/finland/w.europe would just be as good.

2) what is LHTR?!?!?!

thnx

[V-Disc]

I have a question for axis roll/Axis Roll as well.

Are there two of you now?! There's "Axis Roll" and "axisroll" Cleary...you guys are rollin'!

[macfu1205]

DX-
I'll answer your questions:

1) The A/C goes in Baltic
2)LHTR is Larry Harris Tournament Rules. You can find them in several posts on this message board.

[axis_roll]

I have a question for axis roll/Axis Roll as well.

Are there two of you now?! There's "Axis Roll" and "axisroll" Cleary...you guys are rollin'!
yes there are TWO of us. We're team mates in two-on-two matches.

I am axis_roll, my pard is AxisRoll.

note the "_" is teamed with lower case
while the Caps (AxisRoll) has no underscore.

[Scott_WAR]

Drax, you seem obseessed with Russia. Let me explain, Russia has neither the income nor the units to threaten Germany in any way for the first 3 or 4 turns, if Germany isnt played by an idiot. UK and USA are much more of a threat to Germany. The AC buy, and the transports stall the UK and USA, so Germany can take africa. With the extra income from Africa, Gemany can out build Russia in no time. Building all ground units for Germany ensures that UK will hold or at worst, take back africa early, and that they will land troops in Europe by round 3 possibly round 2. As soon as UK and USA start landing in Europe on a consistent basis, the game is essentially over for Germany.

A $16 ipc carrier, can do so much, it allows german air to reach UK navy, It allows german air to invade UK, without having to have them all in W europe, it stalls allies from landing in Europe for at least 2 turns, it more than likely helps gremany take africa, by keeping UK concerned about sealion. So much for so little.

[AxisRoll]

I have also done 2 A/C one for med and baltic. I was a little light on ground troops.

As it forced allies to do KGF.

Not sure i would do both again. or at least on turn1.

[tactical]

Drax Krmaer,
By saying B1, I assume you mean UK1?. If UK invades Norway on turn 1 can Germany attack Uk ships if I choose to buy an AC AND transport on G1? So on G2 can Germany attack the UK ships succesfully? The answer of course is no. On Russia1 NCM they will move sub from sz 4 to sz 2. On Russia2 NCM they will move that same sub to sz 6, therby locking the German fleet in for 1 round. When I say locking in, I mean Germany cannot reach UK's fleet with Germanys fleet.

HOWEVER-On G2, here are your Baltic options
1)Is operation Sea Lion a valid attack?
2)Look at the board,you can either strafe the Russian sub with fighters while landing troops and planes back into Norway. 4 units plus any planes-sub attack.
3)Or you can just move the whole fleet to sz6 and destroy sub.

But in any case, the Ac+tranny move opens up a lot of options. Buying an AC+tranny allows you to turn Karelia S.S.R into a dead zone if need be, instead of forcing waves of troops through Karelia to get to Norway to retake.

What really hurts Germany though is having to send 6 units into WE on G1 just so Uk doesn't take it on UK1, I hate that crap. Instead of moving pieces East to retake or attack Eastern Europe, Germany has to guard WE,+2 inf every turn. And for people who don't think Uk can take WE on turn 1, this is what they come with. 1bmb,2ftrs,2 inf, 2 arm +1 BB shot. And can Germany's navy reach them on G2? NOPE..WHY? Russian sub in sz6.


It's tough being Germany
Randell

[tactical]

Actually, Scott_war, not entirely true that Russia doesn't have troops to threaten Germany for the first 4 turns. If Germany doesn't get all inf on G1, Russia will push into germany as fast as possible. Forsaking all of East Asia(if it's a KGF), using almost every available infantry to sweep accross Europe. Which means(as you probably already know), Germany needs to hold onto Africa for a few turns.



Randell

[Carico67]

On Russia2 NCM they will move that same sub to sz 6, therby locking the German fleet in for 1 round. When I say locking in, I mean Germany cannot reach UK's fleet with Germanys fleet.

I may have misunderstood your post, but thought to mention it as I have seen a lot of players (myself included first time 2 times I played allies) forget that the R sub DOES NOT block the GER subs. So Ger subs and any air (AC opens up air possibities bigtime) can strike up into the NE SZ of the UK on G2...

Anyways, not sure if that was overlooked (as many of us have done) but wanted to mention it for new players as well to consider just in case, and also to strengthen your argument of pro-AC build. Thanks, C2

[DY]

I am strongly in favor of a G1 CV and Trn. I also believe 3 trn + 2 inf on J1 is superior to 2 IC. It seems to me that the initial loss of 8 troops on the Eastern front for Germany more than pays for itself over the long term. The games where I have seen 13 inf on G1, Germany is never able to crack Russia, because the UK and US can funnel so many troops through Norway/Karelia.

The only way to stop the shuck is with a G1 navy. Admittedly this is hard to do without a small bid. I think the Axis does need a modest bid in order to have even chances of victory.

Drax has been against the G1 CV from day 1. I'd be very keen to play a 9 VC LHTR game (no bid) against you Drax. Even if I don't win, I think I can prove to you the merits of a G1 navy and demonstrate how it's at least as good as an all land unit strategy.

[AxisRoll]

Well Dy, I'm glad to see you change your mind on that.


The german navy doesnt always work out. Check game log for game 94. Germany navy got 2 hits in 2 rds. Dam dice are terrible this week.

I will only hit submit when the time adds up to an odd number and it is daylight in the CST timezone. The week has been the worst ever for me with dicy.

[tactical]

Carico67,
Technically you are correct, German subs can reach sz 3 on G2 if Russia sub blocks sz 6. however, if(and likely, since attacking Norway) UK goes for KGF, then they will have plopped down 1 to 2 more sea units on the board in sz 6 on UK1. Realistically, would not be worth the battle(for the Germans) to trade off plane+2 subs for Uk's fleet. Once UK's fleet is gone, they rebuild, once America's fleet is gone, they rebuild, once Germany's fleet is gone, it's gone.


Randell

[tactical]

OOOps,
Meant to say plopped down more sea units on sz 3

[Scott_WAR]

Hey tactical, I started a new game with drec last night. I was axis, he was allies, you know he is pretty good as allies.

G1- I but a carrier and 3 transports. Hit egypt, hit girbralter BB with sub and planes. Loaded east europe with all I could except for 5 infantry and 3 fighters, which are in W.Europe, and 2 fighters in germany for the carrier.
G2- I buy 1 transport and the rest infantry and tanks.
G3 on-- all troops, with a fighter when I decided to hit the UK.

To make it as short as possible- Russia made a push towards Germany, but didnt ever really threaten Berlin. UK has built 2 fleets, both of which have been destoyed. So far the germans have lost 2 fighters and 2 subs from these battles. The german Navy sits in the Baltic with a carrier (2 fighters) destroyer and 5 tranports. Uk is preparing for an air raid having bought fighters the last 2 rounds and having 8 sitting on UK. USA has went into Africa once, lost all of its atlantic fleet except for 1 destroyer, but managed to destroy the German med fleet and keep africa out of Germany's hands. USA has since spent all their resources fighting against Japan in the pacific.

Germany has fought Russia back to caucus, west russia and archangel. JApan has destroyed 2 US fleets, but has lost both, Borneo and East Indies. The Japanese fleet is currently 3 BB's a carrier, a destroyer and 2 transports strong. Japan has cracked Asia. Only Russia stands between Moscow and Japan, and there arent too many of them.

All in all I am pretty happy with the results of this strategy so far. It hasnt been a strategy I would call a "sure bet", but it did accomplish everything I wanted it too, except one, that being africa. If I had managed to take africa as Germany, this game would be over, as it is it is still a very good game, and I cant wait to finish it. If you wish I can let you see the save of it, tactical, just give me a yell in IRC.

[tactical]

Scott_war,
Good game tonight, thanks for showing me the error of the allies. The game sounds pretty good. Drec's tough, the one game we played I think froze. I like your strategy, but I'm still debating on 1AC and 1 BB, I want to try this out myself. Object-combine fleets at sz 7. take Brazil, Japan takes Alaska(if capable).

Africa safe for awhile. Only problems I see
1)too risky to build IC on Brazil? Lets say Allies went for KGF and Japan has 5 tranny's, forget Asia and double team USA? Japan can get 10 inf a turn, Germany 3, but both countries will be hit with counter attacks. just worried if you will lose more units than the time gained by such a tactic. Also wondering if Japan should IC Alaska(12 units a turn) with 5 trannys, but you have to remember there will be less of a push into Asia at this point.
2)Usa will eventuall get Alaska back, but a dual Axis IC on West America and on Brazil, damn, what damage you could do.
2)Once you lose that Alaskin Ic, could mean trouble for Japan.

Ideas? Comments? Next time I play someone as Axis, hopefully I will get a chance to use this, if they adapt, oh well, there's always next time

Randell

[DY]

AR game #94 is not your FIDA game is it?

[Drax Kramer]

Drax has been against the G1 CV from day 1. I'd be very keen to play a 9 VC LHTR game (no bid) against you Drax. Even if I don't win, I think I can prove to you the merits of a G1 navy and demonstrate how it's at least as good as an all land unit strategy.

It unlikely I'll ever play under LHTR unless AH embraces them as tournament or optional way of playing. From my point of view, LHTR is just another set of house rules. If I'll player with house rules, I'll rather use mine.

Now, as far as German CV is concerned, my position can better be described as sceptic rather then dead set against it. I didn't play A&A:R enough times to build an experience of my own so when I see someone calling for G1 CV, I ask for an explanation why this build is superior one way or the other. I aways ask what are Allies going to do differently and how is this going to effect the game.

If I am "obsessed" with Russia, it is because that's where the victory lays in my opinion. As long as Soviets are holding, Axis can't win, unless Minor Victory is played.

Can someone explain me why fighting over Norway is a bad thing for Allies? Can Germany simultaneously fight with British over Norway and press Soviets while holding Western Europe against US?


Drax

[DY]

I don't believe staying in the Baltic and trading oer norway is a good way to utuiles the German navy. I always bust out to SZ7 on G2, linking with my BB if playing with a bid (allowing a G1 strike on Egypt without amphibious support).

After that, SZ12 threatens Brazil and protects Africa, with direct drops into Congo etc.

[AxisRoll]

gm 94 is another 2vs2 game with A_R and I

[tactical]

I've played some tough games lately, haven't won yet, but each step gets me closer. The problem is that when I start out with a german navy, it is hard for 5 turns to get back on track and start pushing Russia back East(against an expert Russian opponent). During this time, the German Navy has to do everything it can to survive because when the German Navy goes, America can pump troops through Africa and across Asia. Right now, my problem is with Japan. My opponents have been able to stall me every time. I turn Yakut S.S.R into a dead zone. But my opponents have been able to turn China into a dead zone with russian troops. How? The problem is that I have not been able to hold onto India for more than Japans turn. Japan takes India, America attacks with planes that have come over from Cacasus,then Russian troops hit it. But mabey I need to tweak one thing. I have realised with Japan to buy transports until Manchuria,Kwangtung and FIC are safe from attack, or you can hold them for a round. you should have 4to 5 transports and it should be turn 3(roughly)depending how your opponents play the game.

Then, buy two IC's on Kwangtung and FIC. I have always felt to go through China to take out Russia as fast as possible, but India can be a major hinderence if you keep it under Allies rule. Any thoughts on this strategy? Or is this as old as the dinosaurs?


Randell

[tactical]

It's late, but when I say 5 turns, I mean 5 turns to turn the tide of battle, not 5 turns to retake land. I need to do posts earlier in the day.;)

[pdubarry]

Why not just buy the two IC's on J1 and skip all that transport business? Just a thought.

[TomJag3]

It's a difficult call, 2 IPC's or 3 transports.

On T2 for Japan, they can afford the 6 armor and ship 2 inf from Japan to the mainland. Following this course, they'll be a little shy on attrition units but will have a strong first turn attack.

3 transports on Japan will allow them to have 4 transports on T2, which the 32 IPC's income will fill with 4 tanks and 4 infantry. Transports allow greater flexibility, concentrating force at 1 location. They also enable reinforcement of islands and the threat of going after Hawaii, Alaska, etc.

How does a compromise build of 1 factory and 1 transport sound? Build 5 armor and 2 inf on T2 for 31 IPC's. I think that I like this less than either of the previous 2 options.

[DXfoxman]

Why not just buy the two IC's on J1 and skip all that transport business? Just a thought.

Well, first of all. It cost 30 IPCs to build 2 ICs. 32 to build 2 trans. Both have their advantages. But for Japan, usually i buy transport, rather than ICs. It seems i can get more bang for my buck, and be able to get my money worth every turn of the game.But, this all depends on if your going for the pacific, or asia. Asia sometimes(and only sometimes) calls for IC's. But i never see any need to build ICs in pacific.Unless ,of course, if you get Alaska or some other American foothold.

But then again, i wouldnt make trans/ic's make up too much of my buying. Seems i need things to fill and protect them, before i even concider buying either one.

This make sence to me. But im probably missing something :)

[tactical]

To be honest, it all depends on what the Allies are going to do. If the Allies are going for KJF, then I would prefer to buy 2 trans on J1, you have to assume that one trany is dead, to bring the total to 3. If the Allies go KGF, then there is a possibility,again, a possibility to buy two IC's on J1. But very rarely, even when the Allies go KGF, will they leave the Pacific or Asia without some token force. If Japan is completely left alone, 2 IC's has got to be the best buy on J1.



Randell

[pdubarry]

I guess I'm coming from the idea of playing an 8VC game where getting India is the point of the game for Japan. Also, I hate watching my precious transports get blown out of the water by stray aircraft.

I will readily conceed that transports will eventually be needed if USA really goes after the islands and has any success. But then you would have plenty of time to account for this even if you already bought 2 ICs.

My main point originally was to stress buying them right away as opposed to several turns later. Pick a strategy and go.