Does Japan need to be house ruled to weaken them?

[Nomarclegs]

Good point on the Suez.  :-o I never had the cruiser survive G1 (high spirits I suppose), we’ll have to resolve that before we continue…
Glad you pointed that out before we had some sort of butterfly effect.  Thanks.

[Mr.Biggg]

@Nomarclegs:

This is the state of the game, just before J1 (I’m playing Allies, I opponent has retired to think it over):

I’m enacting Operation Iron Horde (detailed under “Russian moves to start the game”).  He faces: India (2 Russian fighters, 1 Russian tank, 2 UK inf, AA and IC); China (2 US inf, 1 US fighter, 1 UK fighter); Borneo (1 UK inf); New Guinea (2 UK inf); Buryatia (6 Russian inf), Sinkiang (2 Russian tanks, 2 US inf); SZ45 (UK sub, JP sub); SZ15 (2 UK cruisers, UK carrier); Egypt (1 German tank).

Would you still make your standard J1 move?

Hrm, that’s exceptionally Japan focused and rolls went pretty well for allies, but lets go with it. Also, Germany let you keep that second cruiser alive? So lets go through a couple mental rounds of this scenario with two IC’s. J1 retakes borneo. Pearl Harbor (for the sake of argument goes overwhelming). Knocks off UK cruiser. Not sure where you have UK carrier, so we’ll leave that be. J1 takes china, leaves buryatia alone. This leaves, say 2-3 inf in China, 2 inf 2-3 planes in French Indo-China and an IC in Kwangtun and FIC.

US1 builds some fleet, in the scenario described Japan would have 1 bb 1 cr 1 sub 1 ca and 2 ftr in hawaii and is safe from counter.

R2 takes Manchuria with 6 inf, could try FIC with 1 tank and 2 FTR, but would have almost zero chance. Probably uses 2 ftr + 2 tanks in China. loses 1-2 tanks lands back in India.
UK2 builds 3 units in india, Maybe has a bomber in range? not sure, any attempts would be risky.
So lets see J2, could go with 5 planes 1 bomber, 3 inf 1 tank + 1 bombard into india, gives about a 75% chance. Then land fighters in Kwangtun to defend against remaining 6 R inf and tank. Or just turtle up, Build 3 units in FIC, 3 in Kwang, land 4 planes in Kwangtun, 3 in FIC. That would leave something like 3 inf 1 tank 5 planes 1 bomber plus whatever 6 units you build to defend against a round 2 push, should be more than enough. Pull the Navy into, say, sz 49. Meanwhile what is defending Russia?

[Mr.Biggg]

@Nomarclegs:

This is the state of the game, just before J1 (I’m playing Allies, I opponent has retired to think it over):

I’m enacting Operation Iron Horde (detailed under “Russian moves to start the game”).  He faces: India (2 Russian fighters, 1 Russian tank, 2 UK inf, AA and IC); China (2 US inf, 1 US fighter, 1 UK fighter); Borneo (1 UK inf); New Guinea (2 UK inf); Buryatia (6 Russian inf), Sinkiang (2 Russian tanks, 2 US inf); SZ45 (UK sub, JP sub); SZ15 (2 UK cruisers, UK carrier); Egypt (1 German tank).

Would you still make your standard J1 move?

Oh lol, just noticed you said SZ15, thought this was up in England. But yeah, as other guy pointed out, this is not possible. Also, you didn’t send anything to help with Borneo then?

[Nomarclegs]

So… We decided that I could do only moves, no attacking with the fleet that… sneaked through Suez… in the dead of night?..
UK Indian Ocean fleet stayed put Med cruiser went to the other side of Gib.

My opponent bought: IC, transport, destroyer; attacked India with literally everything he could (4 fighters, 1 bomber, 2 inf); I got one with AA.  He pulled back to FIC with 1 bomber and 1 inf (fighter to carrier of Kwangtung). leaving me both Russian fighters and the tank (weird dice there).  He killed both UK transports with East Indian battleship and cruiser.  Pearl-lite: Battleship, sub, 2 fighters (BB lived). He turtled in Kwang adding 2 inf from Japan and 2 from Manchuria (East Indian carrier (with fighter) protects transport off China; Central Pacific carrier and new destroyer protect new transport off Japan.

Must go to work now.  More to come…

[nutbar]

Yes, Japan’s setup needs to be changed in order to weaken them. Germany’s setup should be weakened OR the allie’s setup be strengthened.

[Mr.Biggg]

@nutbar:

Yes, Japan’s setup needs to be changed in order to weaken them. Germany’s setup should be weakened OR the allie’s setup be strengthened.

I wouldn’t agree with #2. I think this game is fantastically well balanced. I was just arguing that the original setup of Japan encourages a Moscow vs Berlin race.

[newpaintbrush]

@Nomarclegs:  I’m not going to dig through another thread to look for “Iron Horde”.  You want comments, give good details.  Like my saying Japan should use the “Voltron” strategy probably isn’t going to help you understand what I’m talking about.  (Clearly you could ALSO use “Macross” or “Robotech”.)

@nutbar:  You’re claiming Japan should be weakened, and that Germany should be weakened or Allies strengthened.  Please provide specific reasoning if you can.  Otherwise, the discussion devolves quickly into one side claiming apples are better, and another side claiming oranges are better.  Of course, maybe that’s what you want, a show of hands.  For my part, I preferred apples a couple years ago, but I like oranges a lot more these days.  Tomatoes are also very nice for chicken dishes, or for throwing at angry young gophers.  Perhaps the gophers are angry because I’m throwing tomatoes at them, but I digress.

@Biggg:  Claiming it’s a Moscow vs Berlin race is, I think, correct.  Particularly given Japan’s large starting navy and air force, with US having little to match, plus difficulty for UK and Russia in getting reinforcements to that area, plus the difficulty of 1) UK maintaining control of Africa, and 2) of UK threatening a West Europe invasion without US support (threatening West Europe forces Germany to either add a lot of units to Western Europe to defend, removing units from attack on Russia, or has Germany abandon West Europe, giving Allies a much easier time moving fleet in the Atlantic.  (For example, German bombers on Western Europe threaten a lot of the African coast, can hit points in Africa, can hit any number of territories in Russia, threaten all sea zones around London, and threaten any US transports maintaining a East Canada-London transport chain (forcing Allies to build additional escorts for such transports).

BUT I’d say that’s just the nature of the game.  If you want a different experience, try looking for something like Pact of Steel (it’s a version of Axis and Allies on the TripleA platform).  There, Australia and Union of South Africa are worth 3 IPC, and China and Italy are added as powers, changing the game dynamic to the point that Kill Japan First strategies are (in my opinion) feasible.  You could try house rules too, but strengthen Germany to compensate.

[Mr.Biggg]

@Bunnies:

@Nomarclegs:  I’m not going to dig through another thread to look for “Iron Horde”.  You want comments, give good details.  Like my saying Japan should use the “Voltron” strategy probably isn’t going to help you understand what I’m talking about.  (Clearly you could ALSO use “Macross” or “Robotech”.)

@nutbar:  You’re claiming Japan should be weakened, and that Germany should be weakened or Allies strengthened.  Please provide specific reasoning if you can.  Otherwise, the discussion devolves quickly into one side claiming apples are better, and another side claiming oranges are better.  Of course, maybe that’s what you want, a show of hands.  For my part, I preferred apples a couple years ago, but I like oranges a lot more these days.  Tomatoes are also very nice for chicken dishes, or for throwing at angry young gophers.  Perhaps the gophers are angry because I’m throwing tomatoes at them, but I digress.

@Biggg:  Claiming it’s a Moscow vs Berlin race is, I think, correct.  Particularly given Japan’s large starting navy and air force, with US having little to match, plus difficulty for UK and Russia in getting reinforcements to that area, plus the difficulty of 1) UK maintaining control of Africa, and 2) of UK threatening a West Europe invasion without US support (threatening West Europe forces Germany to either add a lot of units to Western Europe to defend, removing units from attack on Russia, or has Germany abandon West Europe, giving Allies a much easier time moving fleet in the Atlantic.  (For example, German bombers on Western Europe threaten a lot of the African coast, can hit points in Africa, can hit any number of territories in Russia, threaten all sea zones around London, and threaten any US transports maintaining a East Canada-London transport chain (forcing Allies to build additional escorts for such transports).

BUT I’d say that’s just the nature of the game.  If you want a different experience, try looking for something like Pact of Steel (it’s a version of Axis and Allies on the TripleA platform).  There, Australia and Union of South Africa are worth 3 IPC, and China and Italy are added as powers, changing the game dynamic to the point that Kill Japan First strategies are (in my opinion) feasible.  You could try house rules too, but strengthen Germany to compensate.

Yeah, true, I have been busy with school and not able to check out your version. I wonder if it would be possible to replace an existing Japanese ship with a few German Infantry for team balance.  I’ll look into Pact of Steel ASAP (screw grad school).

[Col.Stauffenberg]

The axis do not need to be weakened. I find the opposite is true. They still need a bid. I do wish there was some way to get some more Pacific action going but we play KGF all the time now.

[coorran]

@Col.Stauffenberg:

I do wish there was some way to get some more Pacific action going but we play KGF all the time now.

Why not move the E US fleet to the coast of L.A. (as a house rule)? That’ll change your game and probably get the Pacific going.

[Hobbes]

@Bunnies:

BUT I’d say that’s just the nature of the game.  If you want a different experience, try looking for something like Pact of Steel (it’s a version of Axis and Allies on the TripleA platform).  There, Australia and Union of South Africa are worth 3 IPC, and China and Italy are added as powers, changing the game dynamic to the point that Kill Japan First strategies are (in my opinion) feasible.  You could try house rules too, but strengthen Germany to compensate.

I’ve played Pact of Steel quite a bit before Spring 1942 came out. It is a nice game but Axis has the advantage if German/Italy go straight to Russia through Ukraine - it is very hard for the Allies to defeat such a strat and going Pacific with the US would make it even worse.

[mtngoatjoe]

My buddies and I played two games one Saturday a while ago. Everybody played the same power for both games. Allies won the first, and axis won the second. A&A Spring 1942 is very balanced.

[Col.Stauffenberg]

@coorran:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

I do wish there was some way to get some more Pacific action going but we play KGF all the time now.

Why not move the E US fleet to the coast of L.A. (as a house rule)? That’ll change your game and probably get the Pacific going.

You mean switch the fleets or put everything over there?

We play with house rules, but those seem a little extreme. We try not to move pieces but we’ve found switching the tank in Africa with Art in Algeria and movie the german FIG in Ukraine to Southern has helped. All the games we’ve played since doing that have been very close.

[Mr.Biggg]

Here would be an interesting added ruleset, not intended to shift balance, but shift motivations.

1. Pearl Harbor- If Japan gains control of SZ52 on J1, US player loses 10 IPC, representing naval losses on ships not in use.
2. Awoke a Sleeping Giant- If Pearl Harbor happens. US can place 20 IPC worth of free naval forces in SZ52 during the deployment phase of US1. This is scrambling the remaining fleet in Hawaii.

The result is that Japan would have to either kill SZ52, hurting US efforts to go to the Atlantic(10 IPC), but face a significant counter force, or Leave SZ52 alone and face a significant counter force anyway. I like it because it is not just adding to US power, there is a trade off. Though the 10 IPC damage and 20 IPC of navy may need to be tweaked.

[ragnarok628]

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

[Mr.Biggg]

@ragnarok628:

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

You could still go lite, you would just have to deal with the fact that you are killing SZ52 to slow down America in the Atlantic. Alternately you could go big as Japan, but it bogs you down for an extra turn.

[coorran]

@ragnarok628:

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

Really? With 20 IPC, he could place AC+ 1 sub. Add to that the submerged sub already in SZ52+ W US BB + 1-2 FTR, that’s no small fleet to sink!

[Mr.Biggg]

@coorran:

@ragnarok628:

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

Really? With 20 IPC, he could place AC+ 1 sub. Add to that the submerged sub already in SZ52+ W US BB + 1-2 FTR, that’s no small fleet to sink!

The only quirk there is that the BB can’t move into SZ52 without starting a combat. So if there is already a Japanese fleet in SZ52, you couldn’t combine the way you are saying. But…. since we are making up a rule anyways, you could always temporarily allow the BB to move in without starting a combat.

[ragnarok628]

i guess i didn’t factor in that you would land 2 fighters there.  and yeah biggg is right about the BB.  still, if i’m thinking this out correctly, this change basically just forces japan to take more effort in dealing with the US in the pacific.  maybe this makes KJF a bit more viable?

[coorran]

I did expect to run into the leftover Jap fleet, but I usually face Pearl lite in my games, so maybe I underestimated that.

But even then, you could deal a major blow to that fleet. Because the US attack will be:
BB, SUB, 2 FTR. Depending on the opposition, I would also consider bringing the BMB. That should be enough to anihilate any fleet leftover. And then the US can begin to use its economical advantage.