@andrewaagamer
Ah. I hadn’t understood that subtlety. It’s a bit like assuming that, as an attacker, I’m going to win - so, retreat isn’t an option. Thanks a lot for your help.
Open letter to Larry Harris: Feedback on your excellent creation
-
I agree that 10 is a realistic option for cruisers - it would make them a fraction weaker than destroyers, but a definite step ahead of battleships. At 11, they are a fraction weaker than battleships. I don’t mind where they are placed 10-11, but at 12 IPC they are pricing themselves out of the market. Bombarding doesn’t make up for a weak, expensive unit.
I disagree. Yes it does.
Also, if you “buff your fleet” with a bunch of destroyers, you’re right that they’re more efficient than cruisers - against other fleets only. But my land and air units on land are not afraid of your destroyers coming closer, but your cruisers are menacing. Also, Larry had a great point about the cost. Battleships “only” cost 1.67 times more than a cruiser, but many times I do not want to commit 20 IPC’s to one unit. Or what if I have 12 IPC’s I want to spend on my fleet? Which is better, a destroyer or a cruiser? I can’t buy 2 destroyers with 12 IPC’s. I don’t think 12 IPC cruisers should be in the top 20 of our suggestions for improvements to AA50. We’ve come a long way from 24 IPC one-hit battleships and 18 IPC carriers, though, haven’t we?
All good points.
Put it this way, if I had 5 cruisers I wouldn’t want to attack 3 battleships with them
You wouldn’t want to do that in real warfare either so no problems there in my opinion.
Hold on a second….why are ships always getting AA guns?
The vulnerability of the big ships was one of the top 5 lessons of WWII!
Battle of Taranto, Pearl Harbor, Guadalcanal, Midway, etc.No AA guns on boats, it doesnt solve anything. It just makes the UK fleet stronger if germany can only attack it by air late game.
Agreed.
Cruisers are fine, a 3/3 for 10 is a fighter. A 3/3 for 5 Is a tank A 3/3 for 12 is a Cruiser.
Small discrepency, but its all realitive. In the water a 3/3 for 12 is fine, considering the 2/2 is 8 (66% of cost) and the 2/2 on land is 80% of the cost of its 3/3 counterpart. Boats cost alot of money folks, remember if you drop it low enough Russia might buy one and thats pretty ahistorical. 12 makes it an investment, not a bargan.Again, I agree.
@Cmdr:
Move the Chinese fighter to Sikang. As it stands now, and feel free to pass this on to Larry, I kill every last Chinese unit in Japan 1. From there, it’s pretty easy walking to Moscow.
There is a counter to that strategy. If you go after the Chinese fighter on Turn 1 that opens the door for an India industrial complex.
If you do not send any fighters to sink the UK destroyer and transport in SZ 35 the UK player can use the transport to pick up the 2 infantry from Trans-Jordan to fortify India. That coupled with 4 or more Russian infantry from Caucasus and/or Kazakh S.S.R. as well as a russian tank or fighter can make India invulnerable to a Japanese attack on turn 2. Once there is a complex in India your quick train to moscow gets derailed.
If you send 1 fighter to SZ 35 and manage to sink the boats there is a 50% chance your fighter is going to be destroyed as well giving you less firepower in India (fortified by Russian forces again) on turn 2. The result is an India complex again slowing down your march.
@Cmdr:
Up bombers to 20 IPC in cost, but give them AA Gun protection.
Bombers are about the only thing that needs some tweaking in my opinion. Change the cost or make the optional fighter intercept rules (from the Anniversary FAQ) standard perhaps?
-
@Cmdr:
Move the Chinese fighter to Sikang. As it stands now, and feel free to pass this on to Larry, I kill every last Chinese unit in Japan 1. From there, it’s pretty easy walking to Moscow.
There is a counter to that strategy. If you go after the Chinese fighter on Turn 1 that opens the door for an India industrial complex.
If you do not send any fighters to sink the UK destroyer and transport in SZ 35 the UK player can use the transport to pick up the 2 infantry from Trans-Jordan to fortify India. That coupled with 4 or more Russian infantry from Caucasus and/or Kazakh S.S.R. as well as a russian tank or fighter can make India invulnerable to a Japanese attack on turn 2. Once there is a complex in India your quick train to moscow gets derailed.
If you send 1 fighter to SZ 35 and manage to sink the boats there is a 50% chance your fighter is going to be destroyed as well giving you less firepower in India (fortified by Russian forces again) on turn 2. The result is an India complex again slowing down your march.
India IC cannot simply hold, no matter what do you send. If you don’t lose it round 2 or 3, you will lose it round 4: Japan starts with 5 trannies and at least 6 figs, and can buy ICs pretty near to take India, being East Indies the more nasty
But even a attrittion battle will be lost: you have no China to aid, opposite to Revised, so it’s 3 guys against all the japanese power: even 1 IC to Manchuria, 1 IC to FIC will beat India soon or later, and you have still enough income to stop USA’s fleet
Of course, you could send tons of soviets there, but then Germany and Italy will have a party day in Soviet Union. And western axis is now stronger than ever
Still, in better of cases, you are trading China for India. And you need both in long race. It’s a puzzle without solution because Japan solves it to her profit before even allies can make UK’s turn
One more thing: in 1941, soviets move before Japan. So if soviets send troops to aid India, Japan can simply focus her moves on that place as reply as allies will probably want a India IC. There are 4 figs that can attck Yunnan, you can still attack indian fleet with 2 figs and Yunnan, and I have done that with success
-
I agree with what Funcioneta says about India. When I saw the game map I was a bit surprised by the exclusion of Singapore from the game, which was supposed to hinder expansion towards India. Of course it turned out to be a victory for Japan, but at least Burma was invaded by land and not by seaborne invasion as you can do in this game easily. Right now a UK IC in Africa is the only one viable against good Axis play in the '41 scenario, and most of the time those units arrive too late to hinder a Japanese Caucasus rush.
What would be the effect of a UK fleet in sz37 off Burma at-start, say a cruiser? This would represent the UK naval presence in Singapore at the start of the Pacific war. Japan would then probably have to deploy the Formosa fighter against Phillippines sea zone or against sz37, making a Yunnan attack more difficult. Unless Japan sends those carrier-based fighters against Yunnan, but then UK can use the India transport to attack Egypt or reinforce India with the Transjordan force. Trade-offs that could just make the Axis be less invulnerable than they seem to be at the moment, perhaps together with an infantry addition to Allies set-up.
-
What would be the effect of a UK fleet in sz37 off Burma at-start, say a cruiser? This would represent the UK naval presence in Singapore at the start of the Pacific war. Japan would then probably have to deploy the Formosa fighter against Phillippines sea zone or against sz37, making a Yunnan attack more difficult. Unless Japan sends those carrier-based fighters against Yunnan, but then UK can use the India transport to attack Egypt or reinforce India with the Transjordan force. Trade-offs that could just make the Axis be less invulnerable than they seem to be at the moment, perhaps together with an infantry addition to Allies set-up.
I like this idea. Probably is not enough but at least gives Japan something to think. Mmmm… maybe also move the chinese fig to Sikang and add 1 inf to sik, chi, nin?
+1, Lynxes
-
Ya pulling 15 and then 9+ ipcs away a turn from UK, and russian units off the eastern front to India to be exposed to the entirity of the Japanese Juggernaut is a BAD plan of action.
that Sz35 fleet should NEVER survive, barring extreme luck, beating 2 fgt’s. and YUN should also NEVER survive any good J1 strategy. Other locations on J1 are negotiable to the success of those battles, barring the bat in Sz 53 that must also be destroyed.
The only time and India complex is viable is if, J1 is Horribly botched, or you are playing against a Japanese opponenf, who is VERY new, or VERY inept.
-
India IC cannot simply hold, no matter what do you send. If you don’t lose it round 2 or 3, you will lose it round 4: Japan starts with 5 trannies and at least 6 figs, and can buy ICs pretty near to take India, being East Indies the more nasty
But even a attrittion battle will be lost: you have no China to aid, opposite to Revised, so it’s 3 guys against all the japanese power: even 1 IC to Manchuria, 1 IC to FIC will beat India soon or later, and you have still enough income to stop USA’s fleet
Well I don’t think it will hold indefinitely if the Axis are really determined to take it. I said it will slow the Japanese push to Moscow. It’s also a lot more fun than focusing solely on the European theater.
One more thing: in 1941, soviets move before Japan. So if soviets send troops to aid India, Japan can simply focus her moves on that place as reply as allies will probably want a India IC.
Well, it’ll look that way but the Russian player can always pull the forces back and if he does he will have succeeded in getting Japan off their regular game plan. Therefore, advantage Allies. :-D
Ya pulling 15 and then 9+ ipcs away a turn from UK, and russian units off the eastern front to India to be exposed to the entirity of the Japanese Juggernaut is a BAD plan of action.
that Sz35 fleet should NEVER survive, barring extreme luck, beating 2 fgt’s. and YUN should also NEVER survive any good J1 strategy. Other locations on J1 are negotiable to the success of those battles, barring the bat in Sz 53 that must also be destroyed.
The only time and India complex is viable is if, J1 is Horribly botched, or you are playing against a Japanese opponenf, who is VERY new, or VERY inept.
I disagree. If we ever get a software version of the game I’ll show you how it’s done mate.
-
Ya pulling 15 and then 9+ ipcs away a turn from UK, and russian units off the eastern front to India to be exposed to the entirity of the Japanese Juggernaut is a BAD plan of action.
that Sz35 fleet should NEVER survive, barring extreme luck, beating 2 fgt’s. and YUN should also NEVER survive any good J1 strategy. Other locations on J1 are negotiable to the success of those battles, barring the bat in Sz 53 that must also be destroyed.
The only time and India complex is viable is if, J1 is Horribly botched, or you are playing against a Japanese opponenf, who is VERY new, or VERY inept.
I pretty much agree with you, man. In this game I think UK needs to be concentrating on Germany. Any complex within 6 spaces of Japan in the first few rounds is going to get captured. And I can’t imagine a scenario where that is good for the allies.
-
Well I don’t think it will hold indefinitely. I said it will slow the Japanese push to Moscow. It’s also a lot more fun than focusing solely on the European theater.
It will not slow the japs. They simply will stomp indian army and get a free IC
I agree, it’s a lot more fun than focusing only in Europe, but it cannot be done: you will lose India and have to focus on Europe anyway after losing many IPCs and giving Japan a free IC. That’s one of the reasons of 1941 scenario being broken (the other is crappy China, more a puppet for Japan than an aid for allies). And that’s one of the reasons I prefer 1942 scenario all the way: India can hold and China is slightly less crappy, so allies have a chance
-
I still think China going first will solve much of these problems. They get to beef up AND save their fighter. The restriction on movement keeps them from doing anything too ahistorical as well.
-
Well I don’t think it will hold indefinitely. I said it will slow the Japanese push to Moscow. It’s also a lot more fun than focusing solely on the European theater.
It will not slow the japs. They simply will stomp indian army and get a free IC
I agree, it’s a lot more fun than focusing only in Europe, but it cannot be done: you will lose India and have to focus on Europe anyway after losing many IPCs and giving Japan a free IC. That’s one of the reasons of 1941 scenario being broken (the other is crappy China, more a puppet for Japan than an aid for allies). And that’s one of the reasons I prefer 1942 scenario all the way: India can hold and China is slightly less crappy, so allies have a chance
I don’t want to hijack this thread with an Indian IC debate so I’ll just say this: When and if we get a software version of the game I’ll show you how it can be done.
-
WOPR there is always Abattlemap and play by forums.
And I don’t see why Japan has to decide between hitting SZ35 and Yunnan on turn 1. I do both every game I play. The only place I could attack with the infantry used in Yunnan is Burma anyway and that irreplaceable sole offensive Chinese piece is worth the price of skipping Burma anyway.
-
WOPR there is always Abattlemap and play by forums.
Abattlemap and play by forums is not fluid enough for my tastes. I can’t get into it.
And I don’t see why Japan has to decide between hitting SZ35 and Yunnan on turn 1. I do both every game I play.
And that’s exactly why if you tried that against me you’d lose. :-D
-
WOPR there is always Abattlemap and play by forums.
Abattlemap and play by forums is not fluid enough for my tastes. I can’t get into it.
Just give it a shot. I was on this forum for over a year before I tried it, but after I finally tried it and found out that it wasn’t so bad, now I’ve almost always got 1-3 games going on.
-
Anytime you want to back that statement up WOPR feel free to challenge me at a Play by Forum game. I may not be the best on this website but I can hold my own.
-
Same here WOPR, I’m new to AA50 but understand that two IC’s or India IC isn’t that hard for Japan to knock down. Even in revised unless you are playing no bid and all Allies go KJF holding an IC in India is hard to do for more than couple rounds.
So I’m up for a game as Axis on AA50. I’m willing to learn. No sense keeping this big strategy away from the AA world.
If it’s good it should be shared with the forum. God knows how many people tried or trying to solve the Japan problem.
-
it entirely depends on if you are doing NOs or not (and also slightly depends on 1941 or 1942)
-
it entirely depends on if you are doing NOs or not (and also slightly depends on 1941 or 1942)
I think WOPR was talking about 1941, I assume NO and tech from the way he was inferring. I could be wrong.
-
I think WOPR was talking about 1941, I assume NO and tech from the way he was inferring. I could be wrong.
Yes. 1941, NO and tech.
Anytime you want to back that statement up WOPR feel free to challenge me at a Play by Forum game. I may not be the best on this website but I can hold my own.
I’ll take a rain check for when we receive a proper software game.
Same here WOPR, I’m new to AA50 but understand that two IC’s or India IC isn’t that hard for Japan to knock down. Even in revised unless you are playing no bid and all Allies go KJF holding an IC in India is hard to do for more than couple rounds.
So I’m up for a game as Axis on AA50. I’m willing to learn. No sense keeping this big strategy away from the AA world.
If it’s good it should be shared with the forum. God knows how many people tried or trying to solve the Japan problem.
Well, I’m not exactly eager to present my solution to the Japan problem because I like to play as Japan. I’d hate to play against my own strategy.
Devising strategies is half the fun and I’ve given you the set up already. Play around and see what you can come up with. I recommend TripleA and it’s odds calculator for testing purposes.
-
WOPR,
I think everyone tries and comes up with a strategy but until it’s tested against good/great players you won’t know it succeeds.
When the game first came out for the 1942 scenario someone came up with what they called a fail proof strategy for Axis, the 1-2-3 punch on Cauc. It works against unsuspecting players and newbies but not against veterans. Also it causes Japan to commit it’s airforce so taking Asia is harder but it gets the job done but at a heavy price.
On paper the strategy was great but our play group implemented and it worked but only because we knew about the strategy and it was eveyones first time playing AA50. This game was no NO and also the Russian player left Cauc open.
In my opinion, if Allies go after Japan hard or if UK goes for a 2 IC or India IC early to stall Japan, it might work against normal players (myself included) but at what cost? How is the European theater? Until you factor in all aspects of the game, the strategy can’t evolve and adapt.
AA has come a long way from the infantry push mechanics by Don Rae (although his papers on deadzone management did wonders for my game) to now. One of the joys of this forum is learning and interacting with others. I would have to say that most people on this site like to learn and contribute to the growth of the game. That’s where the bids come in, house rules, etc. But overall everyone enjoys the competition and the game, I take more pride in winning against an experienced player than against a newbie due to the challenge. Although, dice rolls are part of the game and I don’t mind winning due to some lucky dice rolls.
My two cents. Good luck on your gaming!
-
Anytime you want to back that statement up WOPR feel free to challenge me at a Play by Forum game. I may not be the best on this website but I can hold my own.
I’ll take a rain check for when we receive a proper software game.
Boy that could be a long wait……
Are you averse to battlemap/PBF? Triple A is underground but still out there.
Seems a shame that someone is professing to have a solution to the Japan problem but… won’t play anyone.
Suggested Topics
