October 21, 2014, 08:47:06 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Do you live near Cincinnati? Join us this weekend for A&A Spring Gathering XI on April 5-6, 2013. Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register AACalc  
Loading
Pages: « 1 2 3 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Japan counters to a West Russia stack  (Read 2354 times)
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 47906


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 08, 2007, 06:21:24 am »
0

I think you are discounting the level of headache the N. African route can be for Japan.  If America goes N. Africa s/he can be sending in 12 grounds units a round to Persia quickly, plus fighters.  That's as good an anchor as can be, and suddenly, Japan finds him/herself defending Industrial complexes in India and FIC against a possible American invasion, while America is free to calculate his or her least chance to kill all attackers and move the rest of his or her forces to the German front as reinforcements. (If America wants an 80% chance to win, then they calculate that.  If they want 99% then that.  If they only want 33% they can send more forces to Germany.)

Persia is not THAT far from Algeria.  Especially for tanks.  And if you play NAs and America gets Mechanized Infnatry, just forget going the southern route at all because you'll never make it.

(E. Can/E. USA --> Algeria --> Libya --> Egypt --> T-J --> Persia = 5 Turns max.  Japan needs twice as many rounds to be a reasonable threat to Moscow, let alone hold Persia.)

And no, for the record, Germany CANNOT defend N. Africa against British forces and Americans. (I like using Britian to take Algeria and Libya.  Softens the blow of Japanese acquisitions a little, especially if England also took Norway.)  Sorry, but there's no way 1 transport can move enough troops to N. Africa to even threaten the Allies.
Logged
LT04
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1250


10th MTN DIV


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 08, 2007, 08:14:54 am »
0

Jen I agree with you but I think if US were to do that a good Japan player would see it coming at least 2 or 3 turns out before the US got to Persia. Lets say for sake of discoution that Japan got blind sided when US troops landed in Algeria b/c s/he thought that they were going to Norway. For a tank its one more turn to Anglo-Egypt, and another to Persia. If Japan had a good TRNS fleet in SZ 61, or SZ 60 (as any good Japan player would) and a sizable standing Army on Japan (I'm using Japan as an example to illustrate the fact thats as far away as Japan can possibly get and still be able to produce troops if they still control their capital and have no IC's on the mainland) when US troops get to Algeria, its one turn for TRNS to SZ 36 troops can unload in French Indochina and the next turn the tanks can move to Persia before the US gets there.

Lets me explain the easier:

US to Algeria, Japan to SZ 36 and unload in French Indochina, US to Anglo-Egypt by tank, Japan to Persia by tank, now you have a dead zone in Trans-Jordan and if Japan did it right you have now created a stale mate if for even a short time.

I guess this strategy would only work it you use what I call the Ho Chi Min trail technique. I love this strategy here is a good example of how to implament it. Lets say UK builds a IC in Union of S. Africa and buys 2 ARM every turn for it. Every turn following 2 ARM move to Anglo-Egypt from there they can move to Persia, Algeria or French W. Africa and can reinfore 2 ARM every turn after. The reason I said all that is b/c this momentum train is a vital concept of the game. Japan and the US have just as far to go to get to get to Trans-Jordan from their capitals. Yes $ for $ the US would probably win but what I'm trying to say is that Japan doesn't have to make it easy for them, and has the ability to make that decision.

-LT04

 

Logged
Axis4life
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 105



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: April 08, 2007, 09:05:44 am »
0

You're right Jennifer I was discounting the N orth African route because the group of guys I play with don't typically use it.  However I think that one of Japans greatest strengths is that you can see everything coming a couple of turns in advance.  I think if I saw a rather large syack of US/UK units in Algeria I would be able to adjust my avenues of approach on moscow to limit that stacks effectiveness.  Maybe not who knows thats what makes the game fun. 

Even with the UK and US dropping units in Africa Japan can build a force to counter them and still take IPC's from the UK and RUS.  So japan would have more money to allocate to stopping that advance plus the JPN IC's are closer to the action.  The US and UK have to shuttle their troops by TRN.  Advantage JPN.
Logged
Nix
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Aircraft Carrier
*
******
Posts: 2724

League 2012: 1 wins, 0 Losses


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 08, 2007, 09:15:19 am »
0

And Germany will if US puts troops thrue africa in the start smash them, and later they will just send everything against Moscow, since no allied landing is in sight (and no UK canĀ“t Break Germany by themselves.)
Logged
U-505
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*******
Posts: 11383


Rollin' hard, Rollin' fast, Rollin' by


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: April 08, 2007, 12:26:49 pm »
0

5 turns for the US to be putting heavy pressure on Persia is rather optimistic. The first round landing in Algeria is only 4 units and since the US has to build more TP's, the second landing will be pretty small as well. Plus it will take an extra round to get the first big group of units going through E Can from E US. And since Germany will most likely have Africa the first 2 US landings will be dealing with cleaning up Axis units. And by the time the US gets to Persia in force the Imperial Japanese fleet is alrealdy sitting in sz34 chewing up the advanced US reiforcements with BB bombardments and diverting US troops with landings in IEA. That doesn't even count the Japanese ground forces that have been massing in India from the beginning. My Indian IC is never under threat from invasion and I always get Persia no matter how many Allied units are sent there. Sending US troops through north Africa is merely a delaying action to give the UK/Russia time to contain Germany. The amount of Russian units it would take to be able to hold Persia is staggering and it ends up drawing Russian units from other areas and smart Axis players will take advantage of that. As a strategy, it's one of the better ones but don't make the assumption that you will be pushing Japan back. All you will be doing is holding them off with the goal being trying to keep Russia alive long enough to destroy Germany.
Logged
ncscswitch
Guest
« Reply #20 on: April 08, 2007, 12:39:30 pm »
0

If Japan goes THAT heavy to Africa, then Japan will be weak elsewhere... like the northern and in particular the central avenues of attack.  That allows Rusia to keep their IPC's up, and adds RUSSIAN forces to the Persian counter...
Logged
Nix
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Aircraft Carrier
*
******
Posts: 2724

League 2012: 1 wins, 0 Losses


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: April 08, 2007, 01:57:52 pm »
0

Northern route is basically irrelevant, and will be taken by japan easy.  Becuse Russia lacks offensive units.
Logged
U-505
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*******
Posts: 11383


Rollin' hard, Rollin' fast, Rollin' by


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: April 08, 2007, 02:06:52 pm »
0

I didn't say Japan was landing in Africa heavy. A couple infantry going to IEA forces the US to bleed off units to retake it or let japan have Africa. Japan easily wins those battles with BB support and air superiority. Russia will have it's hands full supporting the UK in Europe and trading territories with Japan in the north and middle. Rarely do they have much cash to add units to the Persian front. More often than not their builds are just replacing what they lose every turn. In my experience the north collapses which forces a pull back to Cauc and Rus. The Japanese goal is to keep the US and Russia separated in T-J and Cauc respectively to keep the US from getting troops into Cauc.
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 47906


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: April 08, 2007, 02:12:46 pm »
0

I believe Switch was trying to point out that Japan has a limited amount of assets available.  They cannot have their entire armies both on Moscow's door step and in Calcutta.  Thus they are either weaker at both locations, or almost abesnt from one of those locations so they can build enough to counter American aggression.  And if America neutralizes Japan while keeping Africa in England's hand, that's an allies game.  Germany at 35 IPC (-3 Norway, -1 Algeria, -1 Libya and that's best case scenario) facing Russia at 21 IPC (worst case Russia's down 3 IPC up nothing) and England at 24 IPC (Down Australia, New Zealand and India) is going to falter.  That alone is going to be 45 IPC to 35 IPC in favor of the allies.  All they have to do is make Japan keep focusing on America and off Russia.
Logged
LT04
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1250


10th MTN DIV


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: April 09, 2007, 09:41:42 am »
0

I have never seen a US push to hold Persia like you guys are saying. I have seen the US send a meager force to "assist" the UK in taking and holding Africa but never a full blown assult beating down Japan's mainland army. For the most part I've seen the US send troops mostly INF to Norway and and reinforce Russian positions until one of the allies gets the gusto to take it to Berlin or reinforce until there is a sizeable force on the Russian / German front so Russia can afford to send troops else where to hold whatever it has left. Even then Russia won't take much from Japan b/c it will take all Russia has left just to hold whats there.
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 47906


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: April 09, 2007, 10:23:28 am »
0

Oh, it's a beautiful thing when done right.  You really should see it, LT04.


6 Transports get's America 12 units a round into Africa.  12 Transports get's America 12 units a round into N. Europe.  Also, the 6 Transports in SZ 12 can hit S. Europe, W. Europe and Norway as well as drop down the coast of Africa to fend off potential Japanese assaults there.


Once America gets Persia, Russia can move out and turn over the reigns to Patton and Bradley to hold the land.  Then, as America adds 12 units a round to the defense, they can make plans to invade India, FIC and the Rest of Asia Minor or split off forces to assist in Europe.  Either way, Japan is very bad off and Germany's looking at the decimation of her empire.
Logged
LT04
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1250


10th MTN DIV


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: April 09, 2007, 11:19:20 am »
0

I imagine it would be. I would suppose you would land all INF on the first wave series, then all ARM on the second wave series. then bring any air support after that. All of this assuming that Algeria is Allied held, and that the mission is all about Persia.
Logged
Axis4life
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 105



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: April 09, 2007, 11:42:08 am »
0

Also a strong allied presence in Africa early, perhaps both a UK and US landing in Algeria, forces Germany to allocate precious resources if they want to supplement their IPC's with the  UK's.  If both the UK and US drop a R1 load in Algeria you are looking at 3-4 inf 2 ARM and 1 ART ready to go.  Not the largest army in the game but enough to make Germany think about not taking Africa.
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 47906


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: April 09, 2007, 11:49:06 am »
0

Personally, if I go N. Africa, I land with British forces for two rounds, taking Algeria and Libya so that England has more money.  As I said, America doesn't NEED it, they have 37 pretty secure IPC already, England has 12 secure IPC.


As for landings, I find 5 Infantry, 3 Artillery, 2 Armor (37 IPC) to be a good stack.  Yes, that's only 10 ground units a round not the adverrtised 12, but you can easily get 11 infantry, 1 artillery and have 12 ground units as well.  I just like my mix for personal reasons. (It's a math thing, I don't expect anyone on this board who has not taken MATH 416 Modelling, to understand.)


Obviously, that's flexible.  If you engage the enemy and lose a significant portion of infantry, you can focus on more infantry.  Maybe going 9 Infantry, 2 Armor for a round or two to get your infantry back up.


Later you can take all the unspent money and augment your transport fleet so you can jump from E. Canada to Algeria and then from Libya to Caucasus or Trans-Jordan each round to cut the walk time.  But that's later on, after you've established a beach head in T-J and later Persia.
Logged
LT04
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1250


10th MTN DIV


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: April 09, 2007, 12:11:35 pm »
0

I defiantly think you would curb Germany's appetite for N Africa if the Allies insist that they must have it. But do you think that you would rather give Germany the illusion the allies are not intrested and then pounce like a rabid junkyard dog?

I'm just saying if I was Germany and I thought the Allies were going to put up a fight for Africa I would rather consintrate recourses in other avenues, for example a Navy or a kick a** Luft Waffe.

What do you think?

-LT04
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2014 Support Drive
Support Level
Forum Username
Note: payee will appear as Livid Labs, LLC.
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • A&A Europe 1940 [FMG]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • WWII Themed Combat Dice [FMG]



Axis and Allies.org Official Gold Sponsor: Field Marshal Games

Axis & Allies.org Official Silver Sponsor: Historical Board Gaming
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2014 Livid Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
Axis & Allies is registered trademark of Wizards of the Coast, a division of Hasbro, Inc.
Note: the copyright below is for the forum software only.
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!