IBut I really think that their main strenght is the fleet they can use to control the mediterranean.
Italy is weak, but you’re right. The problem really is once you lose that fleet Italy is a lost cause.
I don’t think Italy will necessarily win Africa as well, the odds are in England’s favor.
As for Japanese - Alaska route I know you think it’s a very strong strategy but to be honest I havent heard anyone on this forum about that except you, let alone somebody really taking and holding Western Canada, let alone Western USA. And considering the long route the Japanse have to go I doubt one can really bog down the USA 100% to the West Coast and not going KGF.
I had taken and hold Wcan (for 1 round) in Revised two times with this strat (and trade Cusa and Ecan). You have more money and more starting trannies now as Japan, and the route to Alaska and Wcan is, in fact, shorter than to Moscow with the new map, so now should be easier go to America than in Revised. And yes, It can force USA to defend West Coast at least to 90%, so forget going KGF with USA if axis try this.
And Japan can still send guys to Asia. Collecting more than 60 IPCs aids a lot
I’m not totally convinced that its a complete KGF game. I think what we are seeing is people not yet maximizing Japan’s potential in a KGF situation. Japan can be making as much money as the US (or more) in short order if left alone. And that means that Russia is going to be losing territory and being SBR’ed into the Stone Age from the East. IMO, Germany and Italy can certainly afford to play a little more defensively against Britain/US than Russia can against Japan. And a successful Japan will be taking money from all three Allied players.
Personally I think things are set up to allow for Britain and USSR to fighting Germany and Italy while the US primarily tackles Japan. The end results of that type of play seem to be fairly historical (although the actual mechanics of Japan having anywhere NEAR the production capability of the US is insane, I believe it necessary for gameplay purposes). If the US is pressuring Japan, that can save the Brits some money in India/Australia and sometimes the Indies and Borneo. It also can save Russia from being hit in the back. Japan can either keep up with the US fleet production or she can take on Russia. Even with 40+ IPCs a turn she really cant do both. And its harder to hold onto those 40+ IPCs if the US keeps filtering raids into the South Pacific (or any Brit survivors threaten the islands).
Our first few games were definately KGF. Japan seemed so unbeatable in the Pacific that the US players just gave up and went after Germany. The Japanese players were not fast enough to translate that into relief for Germany/Italy and the Allies won. After that, our Japanese play started to improve. The next time the US abandoned the Pacific the Japanese gobbled up India, Australia, the islands giving the US bonus money, and were driving hardcore into Russia. They took Alaska and were threatening the Continental US as well. They still didnt move as quickly as they could and the idea of SBRing Russia was late. But it was scary indeed to see the Japanese making almost 60 IPCs a turn and cranking out tanks on the mainland and bombers to smash the econ. Suffice it to say, the next games we played, the US and Brits were back fighting for the Pacific! Since then we’ve learned a bit about US Pacific strategy as well and we’ve started to see more diverse battles at sea.
I think KGF is probably a viable strat. But I do not believe it is the only viable one or even the optimal one. And I think once people become better at utilizing Japan it will become less and less of an appealing strat than people seem to think. I believe that this will actually result in a more balanced approach towards global strategy than in any of the previous A&A editions.
My opponent tried a global strategy with USA last weekend. He probably put 90% of builds in the Pacific. I was able to hold him off as Japan(shocker). But what I did on J1 is send my closest CV and 2 fighters to the Med to protect Italian navy. It worked like a charm and the navy survived until the last round(6). By then it was too late I had Africa most of the game and I was attacking Caucus the last 3-4 rounds. Japan never even missed that Carrier.
Japan still took Asia, India, and held all of eastern Russia with USA going 90% into Pacific.
Italy is a seperate power. We have a USA controlled China. I wonder if it would have been a good idea to have Austrailia as a UK controlled miner power with an IC and some income with English convoy income(THINK AAP). Forgive my history knowledge but Austrailia was it’s own nation and India still a colony???
Italy is weak, but you’re right. The problem really is once you lose that fleet Italy is a lost cause.
Italy is not weak. What are you guys doing to lose Italy’s fleet so easily?
I don’t think Italy will necessarily win Africa as well, the odds are in England’s favor.
I think it’s strongly in favor of the Italians. Especially without a UK S. African IC.
@Flying:
But what I did on J1 is send my closest CV and 2 fighters to the Med to protect Italian navy. It worked like a charm and the navy survived until the last round(6). By then it was too late I had Africa most of the game and I was attacking Caucus the last 3-4 rounds. Japan never even missed that Carrier.
Exactly! If you’re playing with NOs, You can have a stocked Italian CV in the Med. at the end of round 2 as well. At the end of round 3 you can have two fully stocked CVs (1 Jap 1 Italian) in the Med. I see nothing that the Allies can do to stop this, especially with the US doing the predictable KGF and allowing Japan to do whatever they want.
JTDTM wont work in AA50–'41 or '42. That strat is dead now,IMHO. Not enough time for Japan to build an army capable of threatening the Russian backdoor. Maybe five or six tanks will get close by J4, but by then you can have 6-7 Allied fighters and 3-4 bombers based in Moscow destroying not only these front line units but also the reserves as they try to cut through China and East Russia.
/heavy deed
Not sure if JTDTM is dead that easily, Japan can still build a lot of aircraft to support the tank push. I’m thinking letting Japan go all the way to 60-70 IPCs is just impossible. I think the only place you can really stop the Japs is India. Yes, it looks hard but this is how you COULD do it (not tested out yet!):
In order for this strategy to work you need the US to occupy those 2 Jap CVs off Midway and their fighters in some way, probably threatening Phillippines, and keep this offensive going so that Japan can’t throw all they got at India. Also, UK will be needed to really help Russia ASAP as a reward for saving India-> expect tough fighting for Karelia. You will probably have to build a BB or 2 CA along with 2-3 DDs instead of that CV when you send away those fighters, and USA will have to send some ships and bombers into the Med. to deal with the Italian fleet. From turn 2 and on, UK and USA will have to build fighters and store them up in UK in order to send to Moscow when the Germans come knocking! The crucial thing will of course be if the Russians can survive the sending of 6 inf to India but I suspect it can be done since in most games I’ve played it was the Japs and not the germans that ended up in Moscow…
PS. The only counter for this strategy for the Japs seems to be to send the Midway fighters directly towards India and forgo Pearl Harbor-> But then I would love to play USA! And those Russians can just march back to Caucasus and you build that IC in South Africa. DS.
Lynxes, that’s a well thought out strategy and I think it could work. However, Russia’s western front may be too weakened by the loss of the infantry and 2 fighter build (on R1) to withstand an aggressive Germany and Italy. It would certainly be a precarious balancing act defending both Moscow and India.
Lynxes, that’s a well thought out strategy and I think it could work. However, Russia’s western front may be too weakened by the loss of the infantry and 2 fighter build (on R1) to withstand an aggressive Germany and Italy. It would certainly be a precarious balancing act defending both Moscow and India.
Perhaps some tanks instead of the ftrs.
4 tanks = 2 hits, just like the planes (or even more!)
If the Indian plan falls thru, the tanks can be used to take land against an agressive Germany/Italy.
I think if you do this as russia, throw the stack of 7 inf into Buryatia too. Keep Japan occupied
Yes, tanks are also a possibility. The only drawback is that if you strike back at Caucasus you will weaken India whereas fighters can land again in India. But yes, you can take 4 hits which is nice. You can also build 2 arm+1ftr. I assume you build 10 IPCs of extra defense units on R1.
When I think of it, Japan can’t even send their fighters from Midway west to strike at India on turn 2, they only reach Kiangsu! So the best Japan could do is to forgo the invasion of Phillippines and send those two transports normally used to invade there to prepare for India turn 2 invasion. Then Japan could have: 10 inf, 1 art, 1 arm, 5 ftr+CA+BB shore bombard, for a total of 28 attack plus 7 shore bombard first round (assuming one ftr hit by AA), vs. that defence force of 28 for India (or 32 if you send in 4 Russian arm).
So, if you see a Japanese opening move of setting up all five transports to invade India, you should maybe not build that IC in India, but that seems to be the only counter to allow a J2 invasion! Maybe be could see some nice American strategy being developed to exploit such a scenario, such as aggressive naval builds which could really pay off if you have both the Jap cruiser and battleship off India!
When I think of it, Japan can’t even send their fighters from Midway west to strike at India on turn 2, they only reach Kiangsu! So the best Japan could do is to forgo the invasion of Phillippines and send those two transports normally used to invade there to prepare for India turn 2 invasion. Then Japan could have: 10 inf, 1 art, 1 arm, 5 ftr+CA+BB shore bombard, for a total of 28 attack plus 7 shore bombard first round (assuming one ftr hit by AA), vs. that defence force of 28 for India (or 32 if you send in 4 Russian arm).
So, if you see a Japanese opening move of setting up all five transports to invade India, you should maybe not build that IC in India, but that seems to be the only counter to allow a J2 invasion! Maybe be could see some nice American strategy being developed to exploit such a scenario, such as aggressive naval builds which could really pay off if you have both the Jap cruiser and battleship off India!
Japan can forgo the invasion of the Philippines as you describe, but I think they must at least sink the Philippines DD and transport with their BB. If I’m Japan I can’t send that BB to India, no matter what’s happening there.
Japan can forgo the invasion of the Philippines as you describe, but I think they must at least sink the Philippines DD and transport with their BB. If I’m Japan I can’t send that BB to India, no matter what’s happening there.
Well, Japan can either attack that DD+trs with ftr from Formosa + DD from Carolines or divert 2 ftrs from the Midway force and forgo sinking the DD+trs off West Coast. But sending that BB to India is probably still very risky since it’s a big part of the Japanese naval dominance in the beginning-> USA will have a field day if only 2 CV+4ftr will be left vs. the entire USA Pacific fleet!
The more I play, the more convinced I am that the reason people are thinking the Axis have an advantage in the '41 scenario is because they are trying the same old KGF strategy. A US Pacific strategy is not only possible, but IMO, necessary. Japan makes entirely too much money, too quickly, for the Allies to allow her to translate that into pounding the Russians and the Brit holdings with impunity.
A US Pacific strategy basically forces the Japanese to respond in kind or else risk losing her high value islands and bonus money. Japan starts with an advantage in fleet strength (considerable after J1), but she has to split her attention (and income) between China, pressuring Russia, conquering the British holdings, and countering a US Pacific build. If you remove the threat of a US Pacific fleet, Japan can go hog wild on the other goals.
Conversely I do not believe that the US and Britain coordinate as well in the Atlantic as they did in AAR. Maybe it more perception than reality but it seems far easier for Germany/Italy to defend against US/Britain than it did in AAR. My guess is that that is intentional.
It will be interesting to see how this shapes up in the future, but my instinct is that the game is actually quite well balanced in '41… ;)
Maybe it more perception than reality but it seems far easier for Germany/Italy to defend against US/Britain than it did in AAR. My guess is that that is intentional.
really? i felt that by splitting Finland and Norway up into 2 seperate territories, and doing the same with France and Northern Europe, that this forces Germany to defend on even more fronts
still, i enjoy the challenge
Thats true, there is more territory to defend, but its the turn sequence that messes with the coordination. Those additional territories are probably necessary to give the Allies a chance, given the new mechanics. The order of play makes it harder for the US/UK to coordinate because the Axis get a small reaction (Italy) in between the US and UK’s turns (unlike in AAR). Also, that same sequence allows for a 1-2 punch from Italy followed up by a knock out from the German Fighters/Bombers if Allies leave their fleet at all exposed.
Also keep in mind that all of the transports that the US/UK have to buy now are no longer ‘armor’. That means they have to invest a lot more to protect them than ever before. Couple that with Bombers being cheaper and it makes it harder to keep the fleet safe (and the ‘auto-dead’ transports mean more payoff for the Axis if they win a battle).
I’m ont saying its impossible to coordinate the US/UK into a KGF strategy, but its certainly not the no-brainer it was in prior editions.
Also, that same sequence allows for a 1-2 punch from Italy followed up by a knock out from the German Fighters/Bombers if Allies leave their fleet at all exposed.
Very true, but even more deadly on land (against Russia).
I’ve noticed this in my first two games so far, that you have to be extremely careful in how you defend Moscow/Cauc because Italy can tank blitz to take out one of the territories to the west of Mos or Cauc and Germany can then Blitz right in. You have to be very careful of a German stack in Epl (I think that is the space), b/c 1-2 Ita armor with 1 ftr can wipe out 1-2 blocking inf and Germany might be able to blitz right to Mos. The US is usually not in postion to be able to block this in the first 5-6 rounds.
JTDTM wont work in AA50–'41 or '42. That strat is dead now, IMHO. Not enough time for Japan to build an army capable of threatening the Russian backdoor.
Well no one ever said the Jap tank drive has to go along the Northern route. Even in Revised the Northern route was usually the least effective, with most players pushing South or Center rather than North. All I can see is that there are still 5 Russian IPCs to be had up North, and not much to deter the Japs from going after them.
The Axis still don’t have a real way to win that doesn’t involve Moscow/Caucasus, so I don’t see the JTDTM strategy going anywhere anytime soon. It might take on a more India focused dimension, but the Japs will still be hurling tanks at Russia and pressuring the back door. Its pretty much unavoidable, given the way the game is set up.
We’d need a much more substantive change than a few extra territories between Moscow and Manchuria, to prevent this from happening. Also, if you unload into Soviet Far East directly from sz 63 instead of through Bury, its still only 5 moves to Moscow via the Northern Route (same as the South or Center) so it wouldn’t surprise me at all to see a regular Jap stack in Evenki, even if it is a little smaller this time around.
I think the only way Russia really has to worry about a massive Japanese attack is if the USA allows it by committing to KGF. Even at 50+ IPCs a turn, Japan does not have enough money to effectively fight a major US effort in the Pacific AND pressure Russia AND finish off the British in Asia (at least not without a lot of luck…).
Personally I think more frightening to Russia is the spectre of 5-6 Japanese bombers flying in and wrecking Russia’s factories turn after turn. And that can happen a LOT faster than any Japanese ground assault if they are left unmolested in the Pacific. Even if a few Japanese bombers go down to AA fire, Russia simply cannot afford to be rebuilding her factories when she is fighting for her life against Germany. And Japan can begin doing that in force on J4 (at the outside) if the US ignores them.
As powerful as bombers are in this edition, their lack of defense still makes them a luxury (especially in the Pacific). If Japan is being pressured by the US, she cant heavily build them and even if she does, they cant be used inland without falling behind at sea. And Japan’s income is pretty much a house of cards. If the US can take back just 2 of those islands, the IPC swing is massive. The Allies start gaining bonus money and Japan is in danger of losing it. If Japan doesnt match the US, her whole econ can unravel fairly quickly.
If you havent tried a US Pacific strat, I highly recommend trying it, especially if you are currently of the opinion that the Axis have an advantage in 41. Our experience is that its a very well balanced game and that honestly the pressure is on the Axis more than the Allies. And the key to that is to NOT do KGF with the US and keep Japan in check instead.
If you havent tried a US Pacific strat, I highly recommend trying it, especially if you are currently of the opinion that the Axis have an advantage in 41. Our experience is that its a very well balanced game and that honestly the pressure is on the Axis more than the Allies. And the key to that is to NOT do KGF with the US and keep Japan in check instead.
Without the NO’s, I think a pacific strat is very doable as Germany does not become too big too fast.
Subs are cheap and very offensive minded. Just don’t base any sort of ‘fleet’ mainly on them.
Lately its been working for me as allies to invade north africa with Patton on turn 1 and use my airpower and some newly built naval forces in the atlantic to destroy Italy’s pitiful little navy. You will need english support in this and it can all go afoul if germans get airpower techs.
