Revised objectives and Victory Cities chart to correct error spotted by beaudoin996:
Hopefully no more corrections will be required…
Cred
How to create action in the pacific
-
Australia worth 4, money islands each reduced to three.
India not part of Japan’s NO (already a strategic target, no incentive needed).
Pacific NO’s built around zero value islands.
All Chinese TT’s worth zero (necessary money sink for Japan to get rid of thorn, but no real economic benefit).
China go before JapanThe risk that is run with more resistance in Asia is people might just use that extra time to KGF more aggressively so perhaps a minimum Pacific theatre purchase by USA (TT values and any NO’s gained in theatre) to go along with it.
-
Here is an idea I still think will work…
Things we know
1. Japan is a monster.
2. KGIF seems to be the best way of winning the war as the Allies. This equates to not much of a pacific campaign because there is not enough $$ for the Americans to go east and west.If the American NOs were changed to
-Collect 15 ipcs if the allies control 3 of the 4 territories…Alaska, Hawaii, Wake Island and Midway.
-Homeland NO is deleted (east, west, central USA for 5 ipcs)
-Add American destroyer to HawaiiWhat would this do?
- Extra destroyer would force Japan to go all out on Hawaii instead of attacking WUSA ships.
- America would have a large value NO close enough to reasonably defend. This would put American ships in the pacific for sure. This would lead to a pacific campaign, even if limited.
- This would also get America closer economically to the Japanese.
- There would be enough $$ to go east and west. 53ipcs to America each turn as long as they have this NO.
- Since axis have advantage OOB this will put the allies on an even level with the axis powers
-
@Flying:
Here is an idea I still think will work…
Things we know
1. Japan is a monster.
2. KGIF seems to be the best way of winning the war as the Allies. This equates to not much of a pacific campaign because there is not enough $$ for the Americans to go east and west.If the American NOs were changed to
-Collect 15 ipcs if the allies control 3 of the 4 territories…Alaska, Hawaii, Wake Island and Midway.
-Homeland NO is deleted (east, west, central USA for 5 ipcs)
-Add American destroyer to HawaiiWhat would this do?
- Extra destroyer would force Japan to go all out on Hawaii instead of attacking WUSA ships.
- America would have a large value NO close enough to reasonably defend. This would put American ships in the pacific for sure. This would lead to a pacific campaign, even if limited.
- This would also get America closer economically to the Japanese.
- There would be enough $$ to go east and west. 53ipcs to America each turn as long as they have this NO.
- Since axis have advantage OOB this will put the allies on an even level with the axis powers
Not a bad idea…
-
I have to agree with gamerman that most of the '42 games we have played have extensive action in the pacific. It basically comes down to how much the US feels like distracting IJN from getting land units to India.
SOL is obviously huge for the US. UK and US get a 5 IPC bonus from NO, and Japan has a hard time taking it back if purely focused on Asia. Since JAP usually has at least one warship in sz53 after Pearl attacks, the earliest the US can get down there is y2. To achieve this, the US must build warships y1 to fend off a JAP counter. From Solomons it is possible to get to PHI or DEI unless JAP commits to protecting all of them, which means fewer JAP land units in Asia/India.
We usually see at least one US carrier y1 in sz56, with a tr or 2 for the Atlantic to keep units moving to Eur. It seems to work pretty well in slowing JAP down and keeping GER honest.
-
SOL is obviously huge for the US. UK and US get a 5 IPC bonus from NO, and Japan has a hard time taking it back if purely focused on Asia.
UK does not get an NO for Solomons. UK only gets the NO when an original Jap territory is taken. Solomons are originally UK ('42 or '41 scenario - does not matter who starts the scenario with it - it goes by what’s printed on the map).
The UK NO is attained by taking Iwo, Carolines, FIC, etc. You have to take two different islands at a minimum, to get both NO’s.
-
Hm. I hadn’t seen the rule that specifies ownership always reverts to the symbol on the map. Another ambiguity that I shall have to bring up with our gaming circle. It isn’t listed in the OOB rules or FAQ, so how did this rule clarification come about?
Either way, I still think SOL is a solid early target for the US.
-
From the FAQ :
Q. When the rules refer to the original controller of a territory, do they mean the controller at the start of the scenario or the controller printed on the map?
A. The controller printed on the map. The original controller of a territory is the same whether you’re playing the 1941 or 1942 scenario. China is considered to be the original controller of Manchuria and Kiangsu, and Japan controls these territories as an enemy power at the beginning of both scenarios -
Not sure how we missed that. Thanks yoshi.
-
Another ambiguity that I shall have to bring up with our gaming circle. It isn’t listed in the OOB rules
I think ambiguities are their specialty. The OOB rules leave an awful lot of questions, don’t they?
Either way, I still think SOL is a solid early target for the US.
Absolutely! Solomons still counts toward 2 NO’s - USA and Japan, and of course the location is very good for the USA in the early going.
-
Changes to UK
- Factory in Australia
- Cruiser off Indian Coast
Changes to China
Collects IPCs as any other power
+2 Infantry at set up
Infantry only cost 2 IPCsChanges to US
- Cruiser off West Coast 1941
- Island bonus changed to “Control Hawaii and 2/3 of Wake, Solomons, Midway”
-
split the game up in 2 smaller games
-
Two cents: Lot of action in the Pacific without changing anything from my experience.
-
If you wanted to change the allied set up to deal with the ‘monster of japan’ you surely have to change the axis powers to suit. The game has surely been play tested a million times! Maybe the axis players your playing against have better luck or are just better players!
-
I totally disagree.
I have several AA50 experiences with loads of Pacific action.
…
There is no need to change anything in the game to get Pacific action. Maybe you just need to change your opponent.
do you still feel that there is as much action in the pacific as there is in europe? i have changed my opponents many times online, and still see very little action in the pacific theatre
-
The only way to really encourage the US to fight in the Pac is to give them things that can be achieved early but also prove too deadly if they ignore it. I’d also go back to making China part of the US or something just to open up a US Asia IC strat
I agree with both. I’ll not add more about China to prevent being repetitive, but Perry Channel should be unfrozen to ensure Japan can keep busy USA. Also North America should be split in more territories
I like your idea about a 4 IPCs Hawaii
can you clarify your opinion func? in one post you say there is lots of action in the pacific theatre, then you give options on how to create action in the pacific.
-
…
Right, but I think allweneed was trying to point out that that is a lot harder to do then just dump units to Europe b/c the incentive for those goals at earlier stages isn’t there…I agree with allweneed, in that there should be more incentive to fight in the Pac…
The only way to really encourage the US to fight in the Pac is to give them things that can be achieved early but also prove too deadly if they ignore it. I’d also go back to making China part of the US or something just to open up a US Asia IC strat.
i like your creative ideas on how to create action
-
Australia worth 4, money islands each reduced to three.
India not part of Japan’s NO (already a strategic target, no incentive needed).
Pacific NO’s built around zero value islands.i like all these ideas. i think these would help create more action
-
@Flying:
Here is an idea I still think will work…
Things we know
1. Japan is a monster.
2. KGIF seems to be the best way of winning the war as the Allies. This equates to not much of a pacific campaign because there is not enough $$ for the Americans to go east and west.If the American NOs were changed to
-Collect 15 ipcs if the allies control 3 of the 4 territories…Alaska, Hawaii, Wake Island and Midway.
-Homeland NO is deleted (east, west, central USA for 5 ipcs)
-Add American destroyer to Hawaiicombining the usa NOs of controlling pacific territories and homeland territories is a great idea. i would play it if usa controls 6 of solomons, hawaii, wake, midway, east, west, central usa collect 10ipc.
i do not like the idea of giving the usa a free destroyer.
-
Changes to UK
- Factory in Australia
- Cruiser off Indian Coast
Changes to China
Collects IPCs as any other power
+2 Infantry at set up
Infantry only cost 2 IPCsChanges to US
- Cruiser off West Coast 1941
- Island bonus changed to “Control Hawaii and 2/3 of Wake, Solomons, Midway”
all of your changes are to add units to pacific theatre. i like the idea to create action but i think it is better to just say bids must go in pacific theatre. this has the same effect but gives the player more choices (fun) and the game more variance (more fun)
-
@Frontovik:
split the game up in 2 smaller games
nice one frontovik
Suggested Topics
