I ended up losing the game.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=13595.0

As I recall the German air gave me fits in the Atlantic with fleet movements and eventually once India did fall, it all came crashing down.  I'd have to look over my game again, but I think I held India until rd 8 or 9.

Now, I bought ftrs/inf for Ind thinking the att/def would be beneficial since you can only place 3 units, but it turned out that I ended up having to tie up most of my UK airforce in and around India making it hard to attack Ger or defend the Atlantic, it just isn't easy to get ftrs from India to Sz 12 or Sz 6.

I suppose if you go all inf for Ind and count on heavier Russian support it might hold out.  I tried to limit my Russian support.  I had a couple inf and tanks but tried to keep it mostly UK/US.

I also didn't do much with the US in the Pac, which may have been a mistake with a UK IC in India.  I think Japan had a pretty good setup in Rd 1 to threaten Sz 56 (I think he took HI in rd 1 as well), and with the lack of UK ships in the Atlantic I pulled the US AC.

I'm still thinking that tying up 3 units in production for the UK for Ind (or another IC) might be too much.  Assuming you earn 25-30, that leaves you with only 16-21 for Ger.  Throw in a couple J SBRs and you might have to pay 6 just to place 3 in India.  But as I said it would probably be better if you commit heavy with the US to the Pac as well and any or all Atlantic dropoffs should just go to Alg where it is easier for both the UK/US to protect.  My mistake might have been not committing to a cripple Japan strat.  Do the bare minimum against Germany and get the US to Sol while UK still holds India.

Happy Easter!

We did the family brunch-lunch thing.

Oh yeah, watched the Masters too,   

Also a lot of the early Axis gains are spent on infrastructure.  Japan often buys at least 2 ICs and Germany needs a 2nd if they can't take Kar.  The Allies can simply buy units all game long and need no additional ICs.

Do you not consider the allied Atlantic navy an infrastructure cost?

This amounts to more than $45 in ICs for the axis....

Good question.

Yes, I guess I would, but it helps that they Allies start with a 113 to 58 ipc Adv in rd 1.

It's a good point though, so if we assume both sides do infrastructure in rds 1-3 and you hit rd 4 and the Axis only have a 5-10 ipc lead, I'm not sure if this is enough to turn the tide (or play for a long game).  I think the Allies versatilty (trns + inf + planes) can help draw the game back to close to parity.

I'm generally not worried about a 5-10 ipc deficit, that just a matter of a dice roll here there, a SBR or two.  Basically I'd put that in the margin of error, now if the Axis routinely have a 15-20 ipc lead then you are asking for trouble.

I still cannot understand how many continue talking about shuck and KGF. USA cannot ignore Japan unless Japan also wants, and even if they do it, soviets will fall much quicker than western axis, and I fail to see how allies can recover the economic parity with a ignore Japan strat

B/c the Axis can't maintain the IPC lead in a KG(I)F or they can't get the difference high enough.  Yes the Axis get parity and maybe even have a few turns of a lead but they are Ultimately reduced to:
Ger:  26-30 + 5 (NO) = ~31-35
Ita:  9
���: 50-55 + 15 (NO) = ~65-70

At best you are looking at 114, but realistically you'll probably be lucky to be at 109-110.

Allies:

Rus:  25-30 (depend on fin/nor) + 10 (NO) = 35-40 (no Arch NO, but the big one is in play with UK/US help by trading either Pol or Bul)
UK:  23-30 (depend on alg/lib/fin/nor)
US:  37 + 5 (NO) = 42

The Allies will be at approximately 107 + whereever they land in Europe and trading Nwe, Pol, or Bul.

Essentially you have parity, this is not enough to kill the Allies.  Consider you need a 4:3 advantage to kill an enemy stack and the likely hood of a 1-2 attack is small since Germany is cut off from making a significant attack on Mos.

Also a lot of the early Axis gains are spent on infrastructure.  Japan often buys at least 2 ICs and Germany needs a 2nd if they can't take Kar.  The Allies can simply buy units all game long and need no additional ICs.

I think Germany needs to take Kar early and hold, hopefully they can hold in rd 2 (rd 3 at the latest), otherwise I think you might stall out a bit too soon, which ultimately allows the Allies to box you in and then make it 3 on 1 vs. Japan.

[LOVE]

I don't think we have played the game long enough to be certain that a Pacific strategy is not worth it. It appears that right now the Allies need some help in the form of excessive casualties by Japan on J1 for KJF to even be viable, but we need to explore every avenue thoroughly before we can solidly declare it's not working, I think.

I'd agree, but wouldn't necessarily limit it to J casualties.  A poor Ger showing can also give the freedom to the US to go Pac immediately if they want regardless of how well J went.

-Completely ignoring Japan, in my experience, has been a very bad idea.

-Italy moves between UK and US so it breaks up the Allied amphibious 1-2 punch which is a benefit to the Axis in France, at least, despite being forced to usually trade NWE every turn.

-I've had trouble as the Allies with mass German air purchases since it means that if the Allies want to have the UK go to Europe and the US go to Africa, they will have to purchase twice as much navy to protect 2 separate fleets which can get costly.

I find ignoring Japan early may be the best approach.  Barring bad dice or just plain terrible moves there is very little the Allies can do to stop their intial expansion (rds 1-3).  Germany is by far the bigger immediate threat, I think you throw all you can in the Atlantic early to cripple or slow them.  Then once you take out the Ita fleet or feel secure about Afr (rd 3-4) you can better judge just how much you need where.  The key would be to just not over commit with US trns early if you know you may like to do a mid game Pac fleet with the US, then just stick with 2-3 US Atlantic trns.

I think Fra is a bigtime trap for the Allies.  Let Ger defend it and go to Kar.  It is much more important to keep the supply lines open from Kar to Mos.  A 60-65+ ipc Japan can be dealt with assuming you can reinforce Moscow with the UK and US via Kar (Arch-worst case).

Yes you need more ACs (or navy) but that can be done early, but I'd recommend DD fodder as well.  I buy a UK AC in Rd 1 (with a CA) and a US AC by rd 2.  I LOVE ftrs so I tend to buy a ton regardless so a rd 3 or 4 UK AC is doable for me when I move to Sz 6.  The US can always afford a second AC if needed or just make them the DD farm.  But don't forget the US Pac AC can make it to Sz 12 in round 3.  Throw out 2 dd per turn, they may not do much, but a stack in Sz 12 can reinforce Sz 6, or can threaten any aggressive J moves to the Med.  You need about 1 dd for every 2 Ger planes for significant fodder per navy.  Germany just can't keep up the air threat long enough.  Worst case for the Allies you spend an extra turn or 2 dumping to Alg, but you can still threaten Ita/WE and you make it clear Afr is yours, you also get a nice supply line going that can deadzone or stack Per to cut off Japan there.  Also don't over buy UK trns.  2 is more than enough early assuming you bring the 3rd from Aus and get it to Sz 12 in Rd 3.

If the Axis get a good start (particularly Germany in Egypt G1), they are VERY hard to stop.  There is one particular axis strategy that we have seen that is virtually unstoppable (with NO's on).

A flawless Germany against Russia in rd 1 can definitely be big trouble.  I'm getting hammered in a League game where Germany took no losses (maybe I killed 1 inf or something).

What must be taken into account when it comes to the balance in the game is that USA, UK and Russia can get IPCs to bear against Germany and Italy MUCH quicker than Japan can put IPCs into action against Russia or even USA.

Very true.

Turns 3-5 is the time when the Allies have the advantage and should be able to gain an advantage against the European Axis. After that, Russia gets pressured from behind and you'll be forced to divert a lot of Allied troops to defend Russia, airplanes to Moscow or land units towards Caucasus from Africa, usually both. If you eliminate Italy and/or hold France and build an IC there before the Japanese become too big, you can win the game.

I'd argue for Kar over Fra, but the time frame seems about right.  If you kill the Ita Fleet or it flees the Med by rd 3-4 and you can land in Nor/Fin/Kar by rd 4,5,6, then the Axis should never have the ipc lead in units to take Mos, considering it will be only Japan vs. all 3 Allies.

I tend to agree with Mazer on some of those concerns.

On the SBRs, I don't know if I'd consider them broken, I'd just consider them the game finishers.  IMO the side that has the lead can gain a ton from SBRs, perhaps this was designed to prevent one side from excessively turtling and hoping for dice to get them back into the game.  If it gets to the point where either Germany can be bombed for 10-20 per turn or Russia for 6-12 then you can probably see the writing on the wall and will surrender.
Early or infrequent SBRs aren't that bad considering the production caps of some countries with early excess cash or the ability to not have to repair in some cases.

I've said in other threads that I think the number of round 1 axis attacks can be an issue.  I do like the variety of starts it can provide but I still think too much might hinge on Germany's battle in Egy.  If you can't take out the UK ftr it can be trouble.

I think KG(I)F is definitely playable and might be the way to go.  My concern with any US Pac strat (even though they can work) is that for all the time and effort the US can put into it, they gain almost nothing.  Bor and EI are both UK's so even if you liberate you can't put a US IC there to enhance your Pac moves or reinforce India or SE Asia.  It isn't until you can retake Phil where you gain economically with the 2 ipc + 5 NO.  But if you can do that then Japan is probably already all but removed from the game as a threat.  It is a lot to risk for the US, turns and turns and turns of Pac buys it the hopes you can take Phil in like round 6,7 or 8 (if that).  That is a lot of very long term planning.  Why not just go the easy route and make an immediate impact in Afr/Eu?

My solution to the Pac would be:
1 - Get rid of the NOs,
2 - Make Sol, Ngu, EI and Bor Japanese
3a - Make all islands at least 1 ipc
3b - Hi worth 3 or 4, Mid and Wake worth 2, Phil worth 3 or 4
3c - Sol and Car worth 2

I think this might make the Pac a bit more enticing given both sides can gain finanically and the gains/losses would be felt immediately.  But this would pretty much require an entire new game.

I haven't played too many games as Japan, but I do the Phil island attack on J1 b/c of the NOs (both getting and denying the US) and also I just prefer to just get it out of the way.  That way I don't have to worry about back tracking later to get on J2.  I'd rather get the core of ���/Pac settled early so I can then just concentrate on expanding outward after that.

I think LL is a valuable tool that can be used to determine good strategies from bad.  For the most part any succussful strategy in LL will work in ADS.  There are exceptions, particularly when dealing with tons and tons of small scale battles, but it can really help you eliminate bad moves or a bad series of moves (long term).  A bad attack in LL is not going to all of a sudden be a good idea in ADS, unless you are counting on dice and if you routinely do that you are going to lose 70-80% of the time.

LL can also teach you how to leverage superior position.  Because you don't have to deal with drastic dice swings you can plan a bit farther out and be fairly certain if your stack is safe from attack.  Now translate this same stack to ADS and you can do the same moves without fear knowing the only way this is a "bad move" is if your opponent gets good dice.  And as I said before that is not a winning position for your opponent.

Yeah, but you're Baltic fleet will be blown to bits. So what's the point?
Well...that is exactly the point. I'm building units to fight. And if anyone tries to attack the Baltic fleet, that fleet will defend, and take down quite some expensive units. Units, that at least UK, are unable to replace easily, setting the Allies back a couple of rounds.
By then, the fleet has served it's purpose.

Did Ger buy a DD?
If not, UK buys a bunch of subs (3-7 depending on threat and board layout) on UK 1.
G2 - Germany forced to buy at least 1 dd or lose surface ships to subs surprise attack.
Whether Ger buys a DD or not UK attacks with 3-7 subs (depends on UK 1 buy) and 2 ftrs, 1 bom.

The subs can only hit ships and UK can always manage its OOL to have 1-2 subs for a 2nd round attack to sink any AC.

I don't think Ita necessarily needs more of a fleet to help secure Afr.

They start with 2 inf there, and can get inf, 1 arm there on Ita 1.  The arm is important for blitzing.  At this point the UK should just have the 2 inf in Safr/Rho.  Round 2 you can get another 1 inf and 2 arm plus 1-2 ger units if you moved one to Balk or Bul (on G1) or even a Ukr survivor.

You simply can't compete with a determined Allies assualt if they want Afr.  It just isn't possible.  UK can dump 6 units and US can dump 8 (obviously not immediately) but very shortly.  All you need is a tank or two to blitz and clear out the 2 inf in Safr, which again can be done on say Ita 3 with the units you drop off in Ita 1 and 2.

While you are doing that you can send inf/rt/arm to bul/ukr to threaten Russian and the remainder of your Afr core to Trj/Per (then reinforced by J).  Once you claim the southern part of Afr via blitzing let Japan defend it for (assuming they have the resources) while you concentrate on Russia with Germany.

It doesn't take too long for the Allies to nuetralize the Ita fleet, you simply have to assume you will lose it in Rd 3 (4 at the latest) unless you escape to the Red Sea.  The Allies can also have a realistic token threat on Rome by Rd 3 with up to 4 UK ground units + planes and 4-6 US ground units plus planes.  Not much but enough to make you regret buying ships on Ita 1-2 esp if you have them off the coast of Egy.  And if the Allies do force you to defend Sz 14 then they can use their DDs/CAs for fodder if needed conserving their air.

Finally an Ita AC w/ftrs alone won't necessarily deter an attack b/c Italy has no cheap fodder, after the first hit taken to the BB you are immediately losing CAs or ftrs.  I'll trade US or UK ftrs for either of those even if I can't get to the AC or BB

For example (assume UK stacked Per and saved up to strike Trj on UK3)  Teh US can realistically send 4 ftrs, 2 boms + rd 1 buys (assume US sees Ita buy an AC and buys 1 bom)
The US can then attack with:
4 ftrs, 3 boms vs. 2 ca, 1 ac, 2 ftrs, 1 bb
Say 4 hits to 4.  The Italians already have to make a choice between losing ftr vs. ac.

Obviously that is just one example and takes some careful planning by the Allies (maybe some luck to), but the US is free to react to the Ita 1 buy (or non-buy) and easily has the flexibility to buy units to have a decent shot to sink the Ita fleet in rd 3.

Also if Ita buy a second trn before adding other ships, it probably won't do them much good since it adds no defense to the fleet.  The US will attack 2 CAs, 1 bb, X trns with as little as 2 ftrs, 2 boms.

Afr is important but you don't want to spend more resources on it then it is worth.

I think you claim what you can early with Ita, try and delay when the Allies get to Lib/Egy, while you maybe free up a ��� trn or two to reinforce the Ita/Ger held parts of Afr.

I agree with axis_roll that it can really depend on G1.

However, for the question of 10 inf, I usually go 6 inf, 3 rt instead.  I do this for scenerios where I think I need to get a ton of units on the board but the 3 rt really upgrade your attacking/trading ability and can really help in strafing German stacks light on inf and heavy on armor if they venture to close too soon.

I seem to rotate a lot between 5 inf, 3 arm and 6 inf, 3 rt.  I use the 3 arm buy if Ger brought a lot to Bst and stacked Fin to take Kar heavy.  Here the 3 extra arm help in making sure Ger can't move everything into Kar on G2 or you can counter with a massive Belo stack and the new armor.

If I'm not that pressed or don't need the armor I'll go with the rt.  I'd like to get a ftr but usually wait until rd 2 or 3 when you can get the Arch NO and have mid 30's in cash and can get a better feel for how much pressure Ger/Ita are going to bring.

I've seen (used) similar to that.

I usually go:
1 to EI
1 to Bor
1 to Kwa
2 to Phil

With NOs -

I try to always start with a European focus.  If it is safe I may move my Pac AC/dd to Sz 56 with ftr cover.  If not they'll head to Sz 20 or protect the UK trn/dd in the South Pacific.

I try to buy heavy air and inf early.  I may wait on a trn buy until US 2, but I always set up my shuck from Wus.  Early air also can help deter some J Pac moves and quickly get to Afr or Europe.

I wonder if the reason why no one has accepted my offers and wanted to play me is b/c they won't use TripleA realtime, or the LL setting, or is it that most players agree with the axis bias in 41 + NOs?

I would agree with Bardoly, it is more to do with time.

I'd gladly play a couple of 41-with NO-LL games PBF, but I'm just not sure I can commit a couple of hours to a real-time game.

[Edit:]

Yeah, I'm not sure about a Nor IC.

You can pretty much accomplish the same thing from Kar, and here you didn't need to buy an IC and you can still pressure and move on Mos when the time is right and trade Fin if you really want to.

You would have to defend Nor from potentially all three Allies.  I would think the US goes to Atlantic if they see an IC in NOR.  It is going to end up in UK or US hands.  I'd expect a heavy UK crusier navy as well.  Free bombardment.
Also in Pol (in mainland Europe IC) at least Ita can help with a toke defense as well.  They should always have a few inf/rt/arm around.

Edit:

Also you'll have to buy an AA or both UK/US will combine to bom it for 6 every turn.