@jkprince indeed 🙂
Thank you both for your interest!
WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies
-
Some thoughts after trying a J1.
The main one is that China is very much stronger. I would go back to placing a Kiangsu IC J1, and a 2 TT buy. Malaya is not a good location for an IC because you can’t reliably hold it.
Other thoughts are that hold the Carolines are probably even more important with more NOs in that part of the Pacific.
In general though, I think the move is very strong.
-
This post is deleted! -
Up to 33 P2V games now between playtesting, 1v1s and 2v1s.
Nailing down optimal Axis strategy has been the hardest part, for a while we generally thought the game favored the Allies but things are finally starting to even out.
Tending towards thinking that G1/J2 is optimal. Russia is so buffed that starting to eat into their income immediately has big benefits. Also tends to force them to not spend much in Siberia or else pay the price vs Germany.
J1 is quite difficult given that the Allie are so incentivized to use the Siberian units against Japan. That, along with a buffed China, means you need to strengthen the mainland army before heading out for other objectives. OTOH, J3 just lets the Allies scoop up too much easy money and makes taking many of the primary objectives quite difficult as the Allies have time to reinforce them.
-
@mikawagunichi said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
J1 is quite difficult given that the Allie are so incentivized to use the Siberian units against Japan.
This is a pretty reasonable point, although also a solvable problem. Presumably USSR will vacate Amur USSR1 and leave 3 inf either in Buryatia or Sakha (more likely the latter). Also mobilise some land units in Siberia. There just wont be enough units to take either Northern Manchuria or Korea USSR2 even with only the 4inf starting on Korea defending Northern Manchuria. If Siberia is under defended USSR1 or troops are left in Amur (unless 1 as bait?) then an attack J1 is probably justified. The problem is round 3. Normally Amur and Siberia will be stacked up enough to not be a worthwhile attack so Korea needs to be defended or surrendered. TTs around the Philippines can be used to retake Korea, together with ones bought J1. But this means they aren’t taking the money islands.
I have pondered if a Southern Manchuria IC would be advised, and probably it would be superior to the Kiangsu IC. Both may be overkill. Including an FIC IC, 3 mICs was too much in OOB and BM in the average game, IMO. Possibly it could be fair in PtV although I doubt this.
I still think not pumping units out of FIC is a death sentence for Japan. Although it doesn’t stop you from winning in Europe.
-
@simon33 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
oubt this.
I still think not pumping units out of FIC is a death sReally great analysis from both @simon33 and @mikawagunichi. When I play Axis in PTV, I generally do G3 and J3 DOW, with decent results. But in my current game with @aagamerz13, I am facing a G2 DOW, J2DOW against Russia that is actually proving more challenging than i expected. So a G1/J2 might be viable as well.
-
@simon33 I generally agree with the discussion regarding what Russia typically does, but that means Japan needs to leave all the Northern/Southern Manchurian and Korean units up north to defend AND add several more units, possibly some planes to defend. And doing that leaves Japan short handed against China. Realistically need to dump all 3 TTs worth of stuff and then get a factory going J1 with another J2 just to keep up.
We’ve had a small number of games where Russia marches the Siberians back to Moscow and it makes things so much easier on Japan I just can’t see many experienced Allied players ever doing that.
-
@mikawagunichi said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
Up to 33 P2V games now between playtesting, 1v1s and 2v1s.
Nailing down optimal Axis strategy has been the hardest part, for a while we generally thought the game favored the Allies but things are finally starting to even out.
Hello, still think Allies are favoutite in P2V, played 10/12 games, just one victory as Axis…
Curious to play a game as Allies to see your Axis strategy
:blush: -
@malmessi74 I still think the Allies are favored as well, just not to the same degree as when we first started playing this version. Tried to apply OOB Axis strategy at first, which definitely doesn’t work. Would be happy to play a game sometime. Same screen name on triple A.
-
@mikawagunichi said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
@malmessi74. Would be happy to play a game sometime. Same screen name on triple A.
I have seen the game where JAP took Calcutta at turn 6 but it’s dicey, I only play LowLuck…
Is it ok for you ? -
@malmessi74 Yeah we pretty much only play LL as well.
-
I’m ok for a L.Luck Game…
-
how many rounds does a PtV game last compared to BM and OOB?
-
@oysteilo said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
how many rounds does a PtV game last compared to BM and OOB?
IME it’s the longest version. Almost never have either side achieving victory condition, but one side admitting defeat when it’s clearly over. Can easily go 20 rounds.
-
I played 10/15 games and if no one makes huge mistakes the game can reach turn 13/15 very often…
I’m talking of LowLuck games with no achieving victory condition, but one side admitting defeat when it’s clearly over.Always ok for a game if someone wanna try
-
So when you guys play the Axis and win, how do you do it/what happens?
I am starting to feel like the Allies only lose when they really mess up. The Axis seem to have to play almost flawlessly, to have a chance. What have your guys results been? My group has very very few Axis wins, and some of those have asterisks attached to them.
-
@daaras said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
So when you guys play the Axis and win, how do you do it/what happens?
I am starting to feel like the Allies only lose when they really mess up. The Axis seem to have to play almost flawlessly, to have a chance. What have your guys results been? My group has very very few Axis wins, and some of those have asterisks attached to them.
Just to be sure, since you say ”your group”, this is about P2V, right? Or OOB? Or both?
-
@daaras said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
So when you guys play the Axis and win, how do you do it/what happens?
I am starting to feel like the Allies only lose when they really mess up. The Axis seem to have to play almost flawlessly, to have a chance. What have your guys results been? My group has very very few Axis wins, and some of those have asterisks attached to them.
My group too…
I have won just once when I managed to take London with a SeaLion.
The only time I have lost against the Axis it was when I played Usa focusing on Europe only, completely disinterested of JAP and lost.
Now I am playing another game when it’s clear that Ger will try SeaLion but I wanted to play K.J.F. the same… London will fall and I will probably loose the game.
In my opinion, if Usa plays a balanced game and the other allies make no mistakes, then the Allies has the 90% to win in PtV (talking about games played by player of the same level…) -
-
Regarding P2V it’s very different from the other two versions. Especially Germany has to apply a rather different approach. Mechs are not as efficient a spam, costing more and really only shining combined with tanks. Therefore a lot more slow-movers should be built, why Germany has to be more patient rather than to go on a swift rampage against Russia. Also carriers are simply an even greater ship in P2V, why it’s rational that Germany also plays a bit more of the sea game.
Italy has more of its own game, but should still make it a priority to help out big brother.
Regarding Japan it’s basically the same outlook as in the other versions, but more territory to cover in China, more likely RDOW and a lot more dynamic on the ocean.
-
@malmessi74 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Strategies:
If you accept LowLuck and a little bit of editing I’ll be happy to try some PtV games…
Thanks for the challenge! I’m fine with most edit-corrections, but am not so keen on LL.
Suggested Topics
