What do you do with the Americans in your "standard game?

[joh01749]

With NOs and tech, for the same reason that it’s improbable for the KJF campaign, it’s improbable for the japanese to take the US coastline. It takes 3 turns minimum to get a decent force there, and that leaves an obvious assault coming and at least 1 US buy of troops to defend the coast. At which point the buildup of Japanese makes wasted buys when they could be going toward the frak India offensive.

So I usually go all out in the Atlantic. The Germans and Italians can’t hold out against the combined effort of all the allies at a 6 turn maximum, and that isn’t enough time for Japan to get to Moscow

[bbrett3]

@keplar:

in my last game as the allies, i bought units for europe and abandoned the pacific to try to “trick” the japanese player.  then on J2 he moved his navy further away and i moved mine back to WUS SZ and spent almost every penny there for 2 rounds, building quite a formidable fleet.

i think it put a major kink in japan’s overall strategy. he seemed a little flustered for the next couple turns and eventually overlooked uk’s clearing of persia, followed by the blitzing russian tanks to take his newly constructed IC in india lol

but i def think the US has to keep japan honest, otherwise their navy and production can be quite overwhelming

Seems to me that you got lucky, most Japanese players would’ve swept up your islands, and blockaded the US in the Pacific

[keplar]

actually i remembered what happened:

he had sent part of his fleet to australia to take out the UK fleet that i kept forgetting about. then with my move plus 1 rd of purchases i had him on the run, meanwhile the rest of his fleet were close to india by that point. it slowed his land based asia game enough to give russia a little more breathing room, which i think is important in this game.

a good germany/italy player should reconize a KG/IF plan and “turtle a bit” to hold out until japan reaches moscow. a strong pacific presence by the US is imperative to slowing them (japan) down.

[Panzer Leader]

As USA playing using NOs, I tend to build all naval in the Pacific on round 1 except one transport in the Atlantic. Then 60/40 (Pacific/Atlantic) naval on round 2. But I always make sure Atlantic transports are full and ready to go across on each round. Therefore you have to buy a couple of land troops to fill transports as required. Get a back and forth going with the transports in the Atlantic going to Africa so as to fill at least one every turn. Once Pacific fleet as got some capital ships I tend to buy alot of cheap subs and a few destroyers to fill it up. Also need at least two transports in the Pacific to insure you can take back islands as needed. From round 4 on it depends upon what Japan does if you go more Pacific or go all out Europe. 8-)

[Flying Tiger]

For fun….
Pretty much 80% builds in pacific. In the atlantic I am just trying to get troops in Africa as fast and safe as possible. IMO if Italy takes Africa game is over. I like to use british for India and Northern europe.

Threatened with death if I lose…
100% European builds.

[panzer666]

i do not play with no’s and teck rolls

[Crossover]

we usually play aa50 with NOs, no tech

we have the impression US will be only strong when spending 90% or more in one region, either for Europe or Pacific.
On the other way, for all players it’s more interesting and more fun if US plays everywhere, as happend in WWII.

Unfortunately US funds does not allow that kind of play, a 50% spend means your too weak for Europe and you will never threaten Japan.So this looks good at a first glance, but it’s waste of time and money and leads to frustration to the Allies player.

Our Idea:

Dividing US !

That would be an Idea for a new AA version or TripleA sceanrio.

The eastern US forces get their own NOs for Europe and Africa, a higher income, 10 - 15 IPC, but they can only build and play in the Atlantic and Europe/Africa

The western US forces get their own NOs for Pacific and Asia, a higher income, at least 15 - 20 IPC, but they can only build and play in the Pacific and Asia

Both get units of a diferent colour to seperate them from each other, they can’t attack together as well.

Move Order ist new: you play western US completely and after placing units, the eastern US will be played.

That’s the same concept as dividing Germany into Germany and Italy in AA50.

For obious reasons that US nations need more money as US has now as a united country, how much is questionable of course. I would like to see the US competitive in both Atlanic and Pacific at the same time, but of course much weaker as now, when US spends 100% in one region. Some rules have to be defined as well, one thing that should not happen is, that one side is building air units and fly through US to support the other side (e.g. fighters that land on the other ACs).

what do you think of that idea ?

[Twigley]

It’s a bit different from what happened with Germany and Italy though. Italy only starts on 10 IPCs! And Germany has less income on both 41 and 42.

Of course it all got complicated by NOs.

[Butcher]

We play with NO’s and tech rolls, and my normal partner and I spend most of the money in the Atlantic. We move the SZ44 off the west coast and build three subs there turn one. Then we usually put one into each of SZ58, SZ52, and SZ46. On the second turn we buy a couple subs. Japan will have to avoid moving unescorted carriers in range of the subs, and will need to use a lot of forces to kill the subs.  If they attack any of the subs, the counter would be 3-4 subs, a carrier, a destroyer, 3-4 fighters and a bomber.

In Atlantic, our plans often change. We either buy mostly transports and link up with the British navy after they take France while helping hold France or we attack the Italian navy.