• HOW THE WAR IS WON. page 6 in the rule-book

    Allied victory - Capture Japan

    Japanese victory - Gain and keep control of any 6 victory cities

    My guess is, that this edition will see very short play. Japan have an even more severe time limit than in the last A&A Pacific edition. Now Japan must set up for a main attack against either India or NSW, with a potshot at Hawaii, before T3. (Conquering USA is out of question, of course) If they dont manage this, the allied might will push them back to Japan, with no change to recover, and I guess the Japanese player will surrender long before Japan itself is attaced.

    Maybe the 25 point victory condition from last edition was better, I dont know ?


  • Eh, I think it will take until atleast turn 6 to see where the game will end up.  There will be alot of dancing in the early game on who attacks who and when to keep it interesting.  Also, even though Australia will be hard to take the US is just as far away as Japan is, and the UK is pretty much on her own on the land.  Should be alot of dancing and vying for positioning.  And who knows, there may end up being a strat to build up for a J3 drop into alaska =)


  • @Razor:

    Conquering USA is out of question, of course.

    Are you sure?

    What if Japan just held its own against the UK and ANZAC, cooked china with its idle land force, and with everything else went after the US?

    Japan starts with more income that the US does, and by the time the US gets it war time ecoanmy even a very conservative japan is going be making 40+ ipcs. Not to mention Japan start out with a huge military advantage over the US.

    The main problem japan will face is moving its army by transport. Simply moving the required amount of force is going to take a few turns and quite alot of cash. That dosnt mean it is out of the question though.

    If japan takes the alluetian islands or Hawaiian islands, they can just stockpile, infantry, tanks and transports, protected by fighters and tactical bombers. When they have enough they attack.


  • Have you tried it or just speculating?


  • @Omega:

    Have you tried it or just speculating?

    I am just speculating, I will be trying it later this week.


  • Actually there is a convoy at the US, worth 52 during war, but still a convoy.  We could assume a Jap strat that involved smashing the US fleet then just hanging out strangling the US’s economy possibly being feasable.  It would only take, what, 26 subs to counter that income.  But no, seriously, the Japs start with 12 surface ships and 2 subs, wouldn’t be impossible to imagine a Japan containing the south somehow and going after the US with a vengeance.


  • @Vareel:

    Actually there is a convoy at the US, worth 52 during war, but still a convoy.  We could assume a Jap strat that involved smashing the US fleet then just hanging out strangling the US’s economy possibly being feasable.  It would only take, what, 26 subs to counter that income.  But no, seriously, the Japs start with 12 surface ships and 2 subs, wouldn’t be impossible to imagine a Japan containing the south somehow and going after the US with a vengeance.

    Now that’s just villianous.  Even if you don’t have enough subs to counter all 52, it’s probably not beyond the realm of possibility to build enough subs and park there(with air backup from hawaii) to make sure you could kill any stack of destroyers the US floated before their air ever had a chance to hit back.  That’s just really really really really nasty.

    Although that seems strange that you CAN convoy attack the mainland of the country in question.  You’d think that would only effect island or distant places from the capital or industrial center, not the mainland itself.  I mean, what about rail or roads?  I suppose Boeing in Seattle may have used the ports for materials (and I don’t know) but I would have assumed rail was the way to go.  I’d have thought that Japan proper would always get its 8, the US always get its 50, etc etc.

    ooooo…  that’s just downright nasty.


  • @Vareel:

    Actually there is a convoy at the US, worth 52 during war, but still a convoy.  We could assume a Jap strat that involved smashing the US fleet then just hanging out strangling the US’s economy possibly being feasable.  It would only take, what, 26 subs to counter that income.  But no, seriously, the Japs start with 12 surface ships and 2 subs, wouldn’t be impossible to imagine a Japan containing the south somehow and going after the US with a vengeance.

    Wow that would be pretty nasty!

    I think i willl try that soon.


  • Yeah, imagine what will happen to germany and/or the UK in Europe with this system?  Contest the atlantic, or loose all your money.


  • @Vareel:

    Yeah, imagine what will happen to germany and/or the UK in Europe with this system?  Contest the atlantic, or loose all your money.

    Also means that a KGF won’t work if Japan sends subs to West US.  The US will absolutely need to balance the two theaters may suffer substantial economic losses (even if it isn’t threatened on land).  And Germany will likely need to continue at least some submarine production to make sure it doesn’t have the same problem in the Baltic.  No more solid tank buys at the expense of the Baltic Fleet.


  • The main problem Japan would face would be the British and the ANZAC pushing hard and breaking through Japans defence.  Although I tried this in the first AAPacific and it worked but I didn’t invade I just kept the US out of the war for 4 turns leaving me free to take India.  I didn’t invade US for one beacause of the Transport issue and the US had a huge land army to prevent such a landing.  Although with the whole convoy thing this stratagy would most likely work.


  • @Historybuff:

    The main problem Japan would face would be the British and the ANZAC pushing hard and breaking through Japans defence.  Although I tried this in the first AAPacific and it worked but I didn’t invade I just kept the US out of the war for 4 turns leaving me free to take India.  I didn’t invade US for one beacause of the Transport issue and the US had a huge land army to prevent such a landing.  Although with the whole convoy thing this stratagy would most likely work.

    I highly doubt a significant dent can be put on US income using this strategy without having Anzac and UK fairly contained, especially their Naval units.  However, once Japan has a strong position, it MAY be possible to convoy attack the US and cripple them.  It’s still a very nasty way to play.  I like it.  Same thing applies to Japan though and it probably won’t be all that easy to pull off…

    I can see this easily replacing strategic bombing as unless they’re building destroyers that survive until their next turn, a sub is a 3:1 investment of guaranteed economy drain.  A bomber is on average ~3.5:1 with a 1:6 loss and only if they choose to repair, not accounting for intercept rules, which basically means less economic loss than a sub unless you roll better than average every time and never get shot.  If a power can sub/air destroy whatever destroyers they place or keep in their seazones, and continue purchases of subs to match, they’ll be able to eliminate/prevent opposing naval buys AND drain economy.  And if they ARE buying destroyers, well, that’s two fewer land units to send somewhere.


  • Aye, and its one of the reasons i’m tempted to take my subs south on J1 instead of hold them for an attack at pearl.  You can only take so much from the UK on J2, and those subs would threaten there boats, and cost them IPCs.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 3
  • 5
  • 3
  • 47
  • 52
  • 5
  • 13
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

37

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts