Revised objectives and Victory Cities chart to correct error spotted by beaudoin996:
Hopefully no more corrections will be required…
Cred
Those US pacific builds- really a NO thing?
-
I’m sorry but the US has no chance in the pacific against any semi decent axis player, and the polar express is easily countered.
US can do many things but there is one thing it should, imho, do. Buy 2 bombers a round. This means at the end of US1 there are 4 US figs, and 4 US bombers. These bombers will do many things, like pin the Italian Navy, burn German IPCs with SBRs, and protect against polar express, unless Japan is willing to buy boats to defend her fleet. This also makes it easier to up the ante on germany in unit count to defend berlin, rome, or france.
Also, starting your shuck from WUS helps, but with heavy SBRs in berlin, russia can usually push back G without much help. Also key to any KGF strat is to get russia’s 2nd NO, not easy but very doable around R3-5, when Japan gets in the game. Then if Japan decides to polar express, awesome, russia has more money than germany and doesnt have to worry about japan.
If you like strat bombing with the US, like I do, try this opening sometime. Turn 1 buy 3 Heavy Bombers and save 4 dollars. I actually do this with a few different US openings wether KGF or KJF. Turn 1 send both bombers to England. Turn 2 bomb Italy with both bombers and fly all three new bombers to England. It’s fine even if you lose both of the original bombers over Italy, you’ll still get the big score on turn 3, but I have never lost both bombers on turn 2. On turn 3 hit the Italian Navy with 4-5 bombers, easily wiping it out. Where you land depends on where the navy is, but you usually have to land in Caucusus and cost Russia 5 IPC. But that’s OK because the guarenteed destrcution of the Italian navy on turn 3 is easily worth the 5 IPC to Russia. Your surviving bombers can hit Italy on the way back to England next turn so you only lose one turn of SBR to kill the navy. If you go KGF and have your carrier in the Atlantic the fighters can help. You can also, as I often do, only buy 2 bombers on turn 1, but 3 is almost an absolute guarentee (even if you lose one on turn 2) if only the bombers will be able to hit. After the Italian navy is dead, you can resume the SBR campaign.
As for the US having no chance in the Pacific… if they go all out they can focus Japan’s attention only on them. No further units other than, maybe a couple infantry here and there, will move west. The US can pin the IJN at Japan and force them into a naval arms race for the rest of the game. It takes everything the US has to do it, but they can do it. Since I brought it up, I’ll explain.
Turn 1 Build: 3 subs, 1 bomber, 1 transport, 1 infantry. 40 IPC
Turn 1 Moves: Move east coast inf, art, trans, destroyer to east canada and the ships to the sea zone that reaches Norway, France, and Morroco. They will wait here for an opportinity where they can make a real difference instead of just suiciding on turn 1, the Atl will get nothing other than this force from us all game so we’ll make sure it does something truly useful for them when the time is right. Well, that and shutting down Japan starting at the end of turn 3:-) Move the central inf west. You can either leave the US carrier to protect the Brititsh ships on turn 1, or move it to panama to make it look like you might be going KGF. Bring the two fighters and bombers to west US.
Turn 2 Build: 1 carrier, 3 destroyers, 1 cruiser 50 IPC (replace DD with sub if less than 50, buy an extra ship if you held Phillipines… it’s all about numbers from now on).
Turn 2 Moves: Move the the original carrier and it’s 2 fighters, the destroyer, 3 subs, and 3 bombers to Midway. This force (3 subs, 2 fighters, 3 bombers) is within reach of Japan’s sea zone, if the IJN hasn’t been there, it will move there during their next turn… unless it makes the fatal mistake of thinking the US can’t take the island without the fleet defending it and ignores the buildup and abandonds the home islands and goes south. If the IJN goes south it can never return and Tokyo will fall. The 3 subs and bombers are covering the sea zone so nothing can leave the island without the IJN there to protect the transports. The US force is large enough to require eveything except the lone southern carrier to defend against. If the IJN attacks this force they will win, but they will lose enough in the effort that the US builds will still be enough to make the turn 3 move. Even if things go really badly and you have to delay a turn, you are still achieving your goal of forcing Japan to buy all navy. If they aren’t they will lose this race, if they do they will never lose the race… but never do anything else, either.
Turn 3 Build: 1 carrier, 2 fighters, 1 destroyer, 1x transport.
Turn 3 Move: Move the subs forward from Midway to Iwo Jima, leave the bombers on Midway. Move the entire US fleet to Iwo Jima, including the original transport we bought with 2 of the 4 inf that are there by now (central and alaska). Take Iwo Jima with the 2 inf and your airforce. Assuming the Japanese player is good his fleet will still be alive and too strong to attack (only if he built navy on turn 2). If he did not build navy on turn 2 suicide every thing but the carriers and the destroyer into the IJN this turn (using only 1 fighter to take Iwo Jima). You would have just sent in 3 subs, 1 fighter (1 is taking iwo), and 2 bombers. He has very tuff choices to make on what to kill, and with our turn 2 builds arriving at iwo jima this turn we can afford to lose all of this if it will kill just 3 japanese naval or air units… and they should kill more than that.
Turn 4 Build: 1 carrier, 2 fighters. From this point forward you build a full carrier every turn, and whatever the best combination of subs, destroyers, and cruisers are. Don’t build a battleship, cruiser and destroyer are better for our purposes. We need all the numbers we can get and a battleship is the same on defense, but one less die roll on attack than a cruiser and destroyer. Also, only build a cruiser when you have 12+ left over after buying as many subs and destroyers that you could afford. Destroyers are a better deal than cruisers, but we want the most powerful navy we can build each turn in this situation so it is better to build the cruiser than to save the money for a destroyer on the next turn.
Turn 4 and future moves: The situation you have created is a naval arms race. The position in Iwo Jima is useful for two reasons, but you can fall back to Midway if it every becomes necessary (for example if he bases all his extra fighters on Japan, they reach the Iwo sea zone but not Midway so you have to fall back to Midway. They usually do this, because you use those transports you build to take back Philipines and other islands. You usually loes the one you send to phillipines but leave 2 inf defending and as long as you are in iwo any navy he sends to philliines will die you your air and subs. When the second transport is finished taking all the useful islands it can suicide into taking borneo or pull back to respond to anything the japanese manage to do in the pacific, which won’t be much since US subs, bombers, and fighters cover most of it.
While it is true that the US can never catch up, and never win this naval arms race, that is only true if Japan does the same thing the US is doing… buy nothing but ships for the rest of the game. Even if the US has to fall back for a turn, the Japanese still have to build all ships or the US will pass them buy. Japan can afford an infantry or 2 per turn if they really want too, but are better off building that extra sub if they can. Whatever force Japan had outside of Japan itself is pretty much all it will have to work with for the rest of the game. If Japan slips up just once, the IJN will die Tokyo will fall soon after. But even if Tokyo survives, it doesn’t really matter. Both the US and Japan have essentially been taken out of the game, Japan won’t do anything all game long other than build navy. Even in the best case scenario for Japan, where the US slips up and they kill enough US navy to end the arms race… what turn does that happen on? How’s Germany doing? How about all those British and Chinese partying down together off of your coast watching all those pretty Japanese ships sit at Tokyo? How long will it take for Japan’s to arrive now, starting froms scratch on what turn… 5, 6, 7?
So, I guess I agree that if played correctly the US cannot defeat Japan. But they can stalemate them, effectively taking them out of the game… which is the next best thing to defeating them. The US is completely tied down and can’t help in the Atlantic at all… but Russia and England don’t need their help if Japan isn’t ever coming to save Germany. The Allies can afford for the US to do nothing for them against Germany if it means that Japan will never come from behind. The Axis can’t afford to have Japan just pinning the US in the Pacific, it’s doesn’t work both ways.
This is not a game breaking, game winning strategy or anything and I wasn’t saying it was. It is one option that the US has available too them. The US gets to pick how the war will play out based on what they do, they really do. Most players just want to harrass both Germany and Japan without ever accomplishing much of great siginifigance. I think that is a mistake, and that the job of the US is much the same as Japan’s job with the Axis… to be a ticking clock that says “the game won’t go past this turn, because on this turn the US finally be strong enough to…”. In the Pacific that means pinning the IJN at Japan for as long as possible, destroying it and taking Tokyo if you can. It the Atlantic it means taking Italy. Building up to do it as quickly as possible and not wasting the forces you build on silly things like suicide attacks on France.
Sorry for the long post, but the US is not completely outmatched by the IJN, they are only slightly behind and Japan needs to build nothing but navy if they want to maintain their slight naval superiority.
-
… 1941 scenario is utterly broken and gives monster advantage to axis, but at least they will live more time
So how high bid would you to allies in an ADS game? I’m assuming one unit pr. territory limit.
-
The US’s main contribution in my KGF games is the SBRing, figs, the recovering of Africa, and threatening of Rome and a double drop in France. This is achieved by turn 4 at the absolute latest, the pieces in play by turn 3. There is no ‘shuck’ anymore, where do you shuck to? Africa? Why, the axis have 1 trannie down there typically its easy to overrun. France? Hell if i’m trading france i gots the cash to come after you in the pacific. And yes, once turn 3-4 comes around Germany will fall to russia and the UK alone in later turns if played properly, as russia is usually strait up out-producing them and the UK even is after SBRs are taken into account.
Almost every game Japan comes after the US I will win, as those are units russia does not have to worry about allowing her to push even harder vs Germany, or even just pulling back for a turn to overrun Japanesse ICs in India, etc.
-
@Subotai:
So how high bid would you to allies in an ADS game? I’m assuming one unit pr. territory limit.
OK, with one unit for territory limit, 19 is the minimun. You need
1 fig to chi (yunnan will be killed with this limit)
1 inf to sik
1 inf to nin
1 inf to yun or maybe ind (not to egy, that would be doom of UK bb)But probably it would need more. Japs can still kill the other 4 territories leaving chineses with 3 inf, 1 fig at end of round 1: patetic. I’d say 27 (one inf to the other chinese territories)
But I think that it’s better simply bid chinese infs with without territory limit. It would prevent gamey bids to Europe or Africa (I think those theaters are balanced, it’s Asia the broken one)
And of course ignore that stupid rule of infinite high walls on chinese frontiers visible only for chineses but invisible for all the others. In vanilla rules, China acts as Willie E. Coyote and Japan as the Road Runner: the axis Road Runner will pass the walls, but chinese Coyote will smash against them :-D
-
With a bid that high crazy stuff happens, like Russian Armor in Stan and an art in Bury, or a UK DD in SZ 8, or a UK sub in SZ 35, or even a US sub in SZ 50. These arent even the best i can come up with.
I’m sorry but if allies get an inf in egypt and an art in Kar the game is balanced. The only thing that will change the KGF being so powerful will be a change in axis turn 1 moves. Unless you mean the entire bid should only go to china, which still leaves brokenness as I have successfully played Japan while ignoring china for the most part in the past, even with the US gunning for me a tad.
If you want to show me your polar express I’ll be on TripleA most of Saturday/Sunday, i welcome it. Just give me a 7 bid and LL =) (much lower than the proposed 19, and LL favors axis or so I hear).
-
There’s nothing so far that points to the theories that AA50 is very unbalanced, more so than AAR. People seem to forget playing skills… :roll:
I’m pretty sure that I would win most games if I get much more than a 10 ipc bid to either side, i.e. $15 or more, one unit pr.TT.
-
Unless you mean the entire bid should only go to china, which still leaves brokenness as I have successfully played Japan while ignoring china for the most part in the past, even with the US gunning for me a tad
I don’t know how could you win a game ignoring China, but if it works, and for that very reason, we shold start bidding units only for China AND alowing chineses exit from China (not only attacking axis, but also in NC moves)
As for the challenge: time and technical reasons will not allow me play TripleA (my wifi is not stable) :|. And I don’t play with LL
-
@Subotai:
People seem to forget playing skills… :roll:
I take that into account. As time passes, people will polish their axis gameply and axis will become unbeatable. I cannot trust in axis having bad luck or playing bad all games. I have played various games where axis made some bad moves, allies played better and still axis won by big margin. I did a really bad starting in one, buying a german IC for Egypt, going north Barbarossa, buying too much trannies for japs (I got confused because I thought allies would go KGF so I started setting up Polar Express) while allies had only lesser errors and made some bright moves and STILL I won by resigning when I (axis) had a economic advantage of more than 20
Many say that they don’t want win because of dices. Other say they don’t want win because good tech rolls. I don’t want win as axis only because they have such big advantage
-
@ Func,
you have many good ideas, and it’s obvious that since there are so many unhistorical issues in A&A, at least China should be allowed out of China. But China is not a full playing power in AA50, and so China becomes a minor “detail” in the AA50 game. And if we’re gonna change anything more than already changed by “players evolution” like in AAR, then it’s house rules. I know many use house rules, but I don’t use them myself and I don’t like house rules. I see A&A like a variant of a modern chess game. Bids are not official rules approved by Larry Harris, but I think he will understand that they are needed. Also tech has been badly broken since Classic, so many players decided to play w/o tech in AAR. In AA50 tech is an optional rule, if not AA50 OOB would be broken like AAR OOB, which needed some small modifications to fix the bugs in the finish part of the game design process. If someone makes a change to AA50 more than using bids, then it’s house rules. I personally don’t like to make changes to a game, so I prefer bids, which is a necessary evil.As for the challenges I made to all those who claim that either side should have more than $10 in a starting bid, my statement applies both for ADS and LL games. With all respect Func, I would totally crush any opponent with a starting bid @ $20 or more for allies, assuming 1 unit pr. TT. no tech and NOs and ADS. I also feel confident with a $15 bid for allies with the same premises.
-
I agree with must of your post, Subotai, excepting by tech issue (I don’t think it’s really broken in AA50, but that’s matter for a new thread) and the bids issue. Of course, 1 inf each territory in soviet frontier and Egypt would crush the balance, and that is the reason for not bidding allied units: Europe and Africa are NOT broken, it’s Asia the one broken, mainly China (but also India and swarm of jap starting trannies).
If something is not wrong, don’t touch it. Fix the broken one instead -> China. Restricting bids to chinese units is the solution. And so, we should bid like this:
- I’ll take the allies if chineses receive 5 infs
- No way, pal, I’ll take allies if chineses receive 4 infs
- OK, dude, you get allies
(Or something similar)
Suggested Topics
