Thanks guys. Understand now. Looking forward to starting a game after work tonight 😊
China as a new sub-player
-
WE are not arguing about why they didn’t include Chinese aircraft carriers, but rather give the Chinese SOMETHING to fight back with. They got all these new territories, but don’t have a toilet to pee in and cant do anything to prevent Japan from taking about 3-4 territories the first turn and probably cleaning up in 2-3 turns total.
I would like something to shoot back with.
-
And I would prefer to redeploy the UKR fighter in AAR. But it does not get moved.
Setup is setup, and it should not be changed.
You can bid inf to Ukraine, though, making it dumb for Russia to attack. That changes the setup.
Despite that comment I don’t think tinkering with the China ftr’s initial placement needs to be done, especially not right now. It just seems like a unit that will be really desirable to take out in the 1st round…the same way it was in Revised, and if it’s not killed on J1, could be a pain for Japan.
-
@Imperious:
WE are not arguing about why they didn’t include Chinese aircraft carriers, but rather give the Chinese SOMETHING to fight back with. They got all these new territories, but don’t have a toilet to pee in and cant do anything to prevent Japan from taking about 3-4 territories the first turn and probably cleaning up in 2-3 turns total.
I would like something to shoot back with.
Why, you got something to shoot back with: Brits and USA. And also remember, 3 inf each turn = att power of 1 ftr, + 2 hits. You’ll just have to be creative to try to keep China alive (pressure from pacific, Brits pushing through Fic, Bry stacked with Russian fodder, Allied units defending in Chinese territories…
Personally, I think China is in much better shape than in AAR: there after 2 turns China was done with, now China can even grow strong if Japan is busy elsewhere.
-
Mmmm… I’m tired of playing with twin ICs at Sinkiang/India plus z55 USA fleet build and China resists pretty well in revised. Not sure if Anniversary China is better than Revised “China”. If at least they could buy a fricking art… Or do you think japanese armor blitzs in mountain zones of China is more realist? Sure Japan’s elite armor could blitz Sichuan or Yan’ An in real life :-P
And for Ukranie fig of Germany: Germany can rebuild more figs. China cannot rebuild nothing more than popping infantery (probably only 2 each turn if Japan takes enough land the first round).
But I’m convinced that that picture cannot be the true setup.
-
I think it’s pretty realistic that China doesn’t stand a chance against a determined Japan. Back in the 40’s, some of those Chinese were still using bow and arrows (exaggerating), whilst the Japanese like things to be as advanced as hell. So no rtl nor ftrs for China, only sheer power of numbers historically.
In revised however, China is so easily crushed that it’s a no-brainer for Jpn: Attack China, then India, then Sinkiang, then push to Moskva. If your opponent is building an Indian complex, they made a mistake (CSub). If they’re building both complexes in Ind and Sinkiang, then they made a double mistake (if India falls, which it will (Csub), Sinkiang will fall too (2 units every turn vs. 11 if Jpn’s logistics are OK).
Now in AAAE, Jpn will have to let other things go by whilst it struggles to conquer the vast ranges of Chinese soil. This is the difference between AAR and AAAE: AAR’s Jpn: Ind AND Chi AND Aus AND Yak AND Afr, whilst AAAE’s Jpn: … OR … => Jpn will have to choose what it’s greatest gains with smallest losses are. And that’s something I really really like.
-
In revised however, China is so easily crushed that it’s a no-brainer for Jpn: Attack China, then India, then Sinkiang, then push to Moskva. If your opponent is building an Indian complex, they made a mistake (CSub). If they’re building both complexes in Ind and Sinkiang, then they made a double mistake (if India falls, which it will (Csub), Sinkiang will fall too (2 units every turn vs. 11 if Jpn’s logistics are OK).
Maybe you should play a Revised game against India IC, Sinkiang IC, Siberian units, australian fleet and z55 built USA’s fleet. If you try build 11 units each turn and no fleet, you are damned to a USA’s IC at East Indies or Borneo on USA 5 or 6. If Germany is not near of Moscow, it’s game over for Axis, menacing building more ships there and even a invasion of Japan. And UK can aid soviets to resist enough, especially if they build IC at South Africa (that can even reinforce India if it resist enough).
In this scenario, probably you could not build even the 11th unit, because Japan struggle to reach 33-35 IPCs.
In Revised, if allies really want, Japan cannot afford attack all places. A KGF strategy is a (slow) option, but is not forced.
-
Back in topic, Boardgamegeek’s picture cannot be the 1941 setup. Impossible. Japan not only can kill the lone chinese fighter in the game. Japan can kill ALL the chinese units in the very first turn (they come 3rd, after Germany and USSR). Thus reducing China to 3 territories, zero in game units and ONE building unit for China 1. OK, if UK can enter and free one territory, China can get TWO units (good luck with 1 Burma 1 inf :-P ). 2 units at the very very lucky best for China at end of round 1 cannot be. Unhistorical, unbalanced and not funny.
-
Japan can go after those 4 territories, but i concluded its best to just try 3 and save the plane against the British ships off India…leaving China able to build one extra infantry. I think China was meant to be a road apple if Japan wanted to devote her forces against her. Look at AAP set up and how Japan cleans up on turn 1. Of course that game gives Japan a huge deficit against USA, but 1941 was the time where Japan went wild on all fronts.
-
In AA Pacific, China, after J1, has more than 5 inf and a fighter (a fig that can be replaced in AAP, probably by a bomber). Also is very difficult for Japan cut Burma road (UK can free it). In AAP, China should have 8-10 inf and a fighter after China 1. In this picture of AAAE, China would have probably 1, maybe 2 and as very very much 3 inf and zero figs after China 1 (and zero figs after China Infinite). A very different world.
Note than many say AA Pacific is unbalanced in favor of Japan.
-
Yes its unbalanced. good point.
But as you see in the last two global versions, China gets chumped out in 1-2 turns anyway for the most part. I think they just made China into more pieces to stop Japanese tanks coming over and reset the dynamic so its Germany against Russia, Italy and England, and USA Japan.
AAR had three gang up on one or the other ( KGF/KJF) and i think they wanted to get away from this stasis.
-
If your opponent is building an Indian complex, they made a mistake (CSub).
C-sub is for beginners. Not for experienced players. Besides, that “paper” has many holes.
Japan can be crushed in a KJF strategy without the Japan player knowing what to do on defense.
They certainly wont be marching to moscow, or even india, in that event. They will be hanging on for dear life…
-
I don’t know as China is Japan’s best option. At 1 IPC per space why not just move the navy to Austrilla and India?
On the other hand China will continue to build at a rate of something like what 3 INF per turn. I guess it will all depend if Chinese units can leave Chinese soil in the game.
LT
-
@LT04:
I don’t know as China is Japan’s best option. At 1 IPC per space why not just move the navy to Austrilla and India?
On the other hand China will continue to build at a rate of something like what 3 INF per turn. I guess it will all depend if Chinese units can leave Chinese soil in the game.
LT
Based on what Krieghund has already said in an earlier post, Chinese units cannot leave China, except to attack Hong Kong. I am also beginning to wonder about that Boardgamegeek picture, as A&A Pacific has a lot more Chinese infantry on the board. I understand that the scale will be different, but there is just about the same amount of Japanese infantry in that image as A&A Pacific. I have a hard time believing that a Japanese player is going to go after China all out, when he needs the Borneo and East Indies IPC, and probably the National Objective boost. If my reading of the game board is correct, the troops in the Caroline Islands cannot get to the East Indies the first turn.
If this is a correct list of one of Japan’s National Objectives, and I think that it is, then the Japanese player is going to need every one of his infantry to cover objectives outside of China. Kwangtung+Netherlands East Indies+Borneo+Phillippine Islands+New Guinea+Solomon Islands= 5 IPCs The Japanese have 4 transports, and a lot of islands to take. Throwing a lot of troops into China makes no sense given the National Objectives bonus IPC, which appears to give nothing for taking China. Looking at the board, and then the possible setup for Japan, and the Japanese National Objectives, Japan is going to be stretched to the limit to get those on the first two turns, and then hold them.
-
Is this correct that chines unit can not leave China?
If yes, what is considered to be chinese? All 7 starting countries of course, but also Shanghai and/or Manchuria? And what about Hongkong?
If this is true, you could leave French-Indochina unprotected against a potental chinese attack.
-
Is this correct that chines unit can not leave China?
Yes.
If yes, what is considered to be chinese? All 7 starting countries of course, but also Shanghai and/or Manchuria? And what about Hongkong?
All of these territories except Hong Kong are considered to be original Chinese territories. Chinese units can only enter these territories and Hong Kong. Hong Kong is a British territory, so if China takes it, it’s liberated and returned to UK control.
-
Is this correct that chines unit can not leave China?
Yes.
So the chinese fgt can not attack in the sz off Hongkong even if there is a lonely trn?
-
Seems China need serious modding :-P. Japanese troops sitting happily in FIC, knowing they can attack China but China cannot attack them sucks. It has no sense. It must be wrong or not true.
As much, it could be the rule from AA Pacific, where chinese units couldn’t enter on allied trannies. I still don’t like this rule, but is far better than this.
-
Yeah that seems kind of odd that Japan could not send a single unit to china and not have to send a single unit to a Chinese adjecent space and not have to worry about loosing it.
I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm: Can other allies place units in China?
LT
-
So the chinese fgt can not attack in the sz off Hongkong even if there is a lonely trn?
No. The transport will need to find someone else to keep it company.
@LT04:
I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm: Can other allies place units in China?
That depends on what you mean by “place”. Can they move them in? Yes. Can they build them there? No.
-
So the chinese fgt can not attack in the sz off Hongkong even if there is a lonely trn?
No. The transport will need to find someone else to keep it company.
@LT04:
I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm: Can other allies place units in China?
Thanks for clearing that up.
LT
That depends on what you mean by “place”. Can they move them in? Yes. Can they build them there? No.
Suggested Topics
