That makes sense. I wasn’t aware of that. Thanks for responding! :+1:
Changes still needed to the game, IMHO
-
IF I had the time, I’d challenge Jennifer’s theory as well.
But my gut tells me, her theory against say, someone like Jim010’s Axis theories would equate to 9 out of 10 losses for the allies, and requests for alterations to axis setup.
-
I agree for the Allies the game is more about not losing than winning. Gargantua made a thread awhile back about bypassing the money islands and doing a turn four India crush. My opponent did this to me in a game and I had managed to smash Germany and Italy pretty good with the US while UK London got a fleet up and Russia grew some teeth. The problem was I was too focused on crushing two Axis Capitals that I did not make it back to Hawaii in time for the crucial battle and lost the game. Since then I have a won a couple of games as the Allies as I have been focused on denying necessary victory cities on both sides of the board.
My opponent Chompers almost always builds a naval base in Hainan J1 and sends his whole fleet to Sea Zone 36. From there I have seen him crush India turn 3 by building an Airbase in Siam J2, landing the Air Force there, making sure he has either Yunnan or Shan State on lock down for Japan so the planes can land there after attacking India J3. He attacks the Allies J2 to insure he holds the necessary territories and also to clear any potential blockers. Then on J3 India is a done deal because the entire Japan Air force can hit it as well the 3 starting transports and the transport that is built J1. India only has 2 turns of building to prepare for this. Even all Infantry builds the first 2 turns is not enough to save India.
It is also possible to land in Australia J2 with the Hainan Naval and land the Air Force there J3 and then on J4 take Sydney if the Allies do not put blockers in place right after J1.
The craziest thing I have seen the Hainan Naval base used for is to punish US for going to Europe first 100%. On J2 he sent the Navy from Hainan to Caroline’s and then from there took Hawaii from me J3 and on J4 was putting pressure on America. Yes I could have prevented this if I had built in both theaters US1 but I had decided before hand to reel in Italy and Germany first and stop Japan from winning the game after. This game is currently in progress and the outcome is uncertain.
So my thoughts so far is the game is pretty balanced but this thread has giving me a lot to think about.
-
My opponent Chompers almost always builds a naval base in Hainan J1 and sends his whole fleet to Sea Zone 36.
I have done this with Japan also- I tried to get Larry to install the NB in Hainan in the Alpha+2 setup but he wouldn’t go for it. That NB build in Hainan creates a nice triangular shipping route that can be deadly both on offense and defense for Japan for the reasons you stated- I think its been one of my better moves for Japan in the game.
-
@mantlefan:
@Cmdr:
Yes, that build is standard for a non-sealion and a sealion Germany. The other standard is a major complex in Romania.
Neither really works well.
Who are you playing that a Major IC in romania is standard? Blowing 30 IPCs to get units one turn closer; no wonder Germany can’t take Russia in your scenarios. That strat was debunked over at HGD even before Alpha+.2
How much money does Germany need to spend to fend off a britain that is trying to keep the Italians down?
What exactly is Germany doing in these scenarios where Russia has Denmark and all of E euro?
One turn closer??? You mean two rounds closer and thus you are 74 IPC faster against Russia. (37 IPC for the first round, 37 IPC for the second round.)
-
How about -30 for buying a useless complex?,
and lets not forget, the turn you build it, you could have built 10 units instead that could basically be there the next round anyways.
Talk about cart before the horse.
Any decent Axis and Allies player knows that logistics and mathematics are the key point of the game.
Why should one go about wasting IPC’s on a needless complex, when they could build ground units instead that through logisticall planning - can be there anyways? And not to mention they’ll get the “threat” benefit of said units because they exsist on the board immediately. All because someone is willing to look more than 1 turn ahead.
No wonder some people think the axis are losing. Sounds like they are wholly defunct of decent strategy.
-
You’d actually slap the ten infantry down on round one move them to Hungary on round two and then to Romania or possibly East Poland on round three vs a complex on round 1 and builds placed in the south on round 2. So you are simplifying logistics somewhat. That being said, I’m not sold on the complex in Romania myself, but, I can see some merit in it.
-
I think the Romanian complex could be useful in late game to help the Axis gain the final victory city when time is of the essence, as US is working to deny Axis victory.
In a game I recently played I did go Pacific first as US and was successful in maiming Japan. The problem I faced was my opponent was kicking down the door to Moscow when I got the US in major force in the Atlantic. By that time Germany had grown too large IPC wise for me to have any hopes of taking Berlin. So I basically was using the US to deny his 8th victory city by locking down Cario and London. After I locked down Cairo my opponent conceded because we have been playing the game for 15+ hours over two days and he figured it would take another 8 hours to get back to Cairo.
Had my opponent built the Romanian complex once Russia’s demise was certain and starting producing ten tanks a turn he could have invaded Turkey and drove to Cairo. His line of supply with Mega Germany would have been quicker than my line of supply with Mega US. I thnk that would have allowed him to smash through and win the game. There was no way I going to be able to revive Russia.
Also I think someone mentioned on here somewhere about using Germany to take India at the cost of even letting Berlin fall if need be as long as Japan took Australia first. If that was the tactic than I think the early Romanian Complex might prove quite useful.
-
So the complex is ONLY useful in the instance of moving strictly infantry and artillery 1 zone closer to the eastern front?
Mec / Armor it makes no difference?
The question is raised, is it worth giving up 10 of your own infantry, to get a 1 - up move on Mother Russia in terms of front line logisitcal replacement?
My answer is no.
-
The question is raised, is it worth giving up 10 of your own infantry, to get a 1 - up move on Mother Russia in terms of front line logisitcal replacement?
My answer is no.
I would probably agree if the Romanian complex is used for only attacking Russia. I also think the Baltic Fleet G1 provides the most bang for its buck.
That said I think you can do some funny things with that Romanian complex late game once Russia’s fate is sealed. One idea I mentioned was to attack Turkey and drive Tanks to Cairo. Another would be to attack Turkey, build 10 subs from the Romanian Complex and then use the Air Force with the subs to sink the US fleet in Med.
I know it is considered a No No to attack strict neutrals but I think the consequences are not as severe late game and it can be worth it to achieve an important objective.
-
After some thought and analysis, I am drifting away from the NO idea simply because I believe it will give Japan a reason to do a strong J1/J2 gambit.
Some players online have almost cracked a good J1 gambit sacking the game from the beginning- it is proven to fall a little short though and too risky so putting some easy NOs out there would just feed this idea and cause some major problems.
However, Japan is still shortchanged in the sense that the US overwhelms them in later rounds. We need to beef up Japan yet not give it an advantage in the beginning as to break the game with some easy J1/J2 gambits.
We had a similar problem on the Europe side until Larry fixed this in Alpha2 by adding some infantry. The only way to beef up the Pacific side a little for Japan w/o giving them a huge advantage in the beginning is to add some slow moving land units.
Therefore I propose a slight beef up on the Pac side of the board that sprinkles some more land units for the Japs:
Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to ShanghaiThats $31 worth of land material boost for Japan equivalent to a bonus $5 NO for Japan for about 6 rounds- enough to weather the oncoming economic storm from the US in later rounds.
-
Remember the European board that came out 1999 I think the additional $12 that was given to the Germans and the other $12 was spent by the Allies made it a great game, so what if you did something similar with this game. Maybe $12 to Germany and $12 to Japan and split $24 between USSR UK London UK India and maybe ANZAC. Its just an idea. Try cutting the N.O.'s all, some or none. One thing we’ve done with the other games is to set up multiple boards 3 for 6 players 2 for 4 players then the players can try their ultimate moves, after the second or third round then its all about tactics to achieve the results your after. When the game is over,trade sides then see what your opponent has in store for ya, the next week switch teammates it can make for great rivalries and rematches. When the weather warms up I’ll be able to set up in my Carriage house and do multiple boards. In the 8 games my group has played its been 3Axis victories, 4Allied victories and 1 undecided, they all were Alpha +2. The Global with the original set ups we’ve only tried about 4 times that was last year and I cant remember the results. We played alot of the Anniversary edition until I bought both boards in Feb. I think I can’t make a judgment until we play a bunch more games.
-
I am horrible with the search function on this site, could you post a link to Gargaunta’s thread on the J3 India crush?
My .02 about the Romanian IC is that it helps Germany get infantry to the Russian southern front faster. Armor gets there 1 round faster, but the factory is really for supplying the russian front with infantry.
The other mission it can provide, if you expect your ally to leave the Med in axis control early, is build a trn in the Black Sea. This sea no longer borders 2-3 territories, it covers from Greece to the Caucusus. It borders an Russian IC and a german NO. If Germany can keep that trns alive, it will give them the power to outflank the Russians. Best part is, if it can survive it can unload Italians first on I3, and then Germans on G4….
What I don’t see is a cost effective way of protecting that trn from enemy aircraft. I suppose a carrier build would help, and those aircraft wouldn’t be horribly placed to support advances in the south, but now were talking an additional 23 ipcs spent on non-attacking units.
-
What I don’t see is a cost effective way of protecting that trn from enemy aircraft. I suppose a carrier build would help, and those aircraft wouldn’t be horribly placed to support advances in the south, but now were talking an additional 23 ipcs spent on non-attacking units.
maybe like a couple destroyers and an airbase in rom to put some planes in, but that make require too much cash to be taken away from the main front.
-
I think the problem with the airbase or naval builds in the Black Sea is that if Germany can really afford them, the game is probably close to being over anyway.
-
Why would you build a Romanian complex as Germany? The ONLY time where it would be beneficial to build one would be on G1, and you need to build a CV and naval units on that turn anyway to threaten England.
Scenario One
G1
Buy major IC
R1
Russia builds at least 10 land units
G2
Buy 10 INF/ART for Romania
R2
Russia builds at least 10 land units
G3
Buy more land units, usually blitzing units, Barbarossa
R3
Russia builds at least 10 land units
Scenario Two
G1
Germany builds 1 CV 1 SS 1 DD
R1
Russia builds land…
G2
Germany builds major IC in Romania, land units
R2
Russia builds land…
G3
Germany builds INF/ART in Romania, Barbarossa
R3
Russia builds…
OR
Scenario Three
G1, naval, G2, ART, G3 ART/INF or MECH/ARM - should be able to build at least 30 land units between G2’s $70 and G3’s $50. Germany still has unit advantage against the Soviets, also is able to threaten Sealion with G1 buy and force UK to spend on INF for several turns. Massive stack of INF and ART from G2 buy should be ready to go for G4 Barbarossa, much the same as if you’d built the IC on G2. G1 major IC build is slightly faster, but also has less options at beginning of game and UK won’t play so defensively.
Effectively you’re losing an entire turns worth of build by purchasing the major IC in the first place, either on the first turn or the second turn. If you build it on the second turn you have even MORE of a future land unit deficit in comparison to Russia’s builds (-20 potential land units to their +20). I could possibly see the need for the major IC with the OOB or Alpha +.1 setup with the starting minor IC in Berlin, but with 20 total production in Alpha +.2 its unnecessary.
Best bang for your buck is all ART on G2. Follow that up with stacks of MECH/ARM to keep the initial wave’s momentum going all the way through Moscow on G8.
-
Alot of my threads and posts get deleted, could be why I can’t find that link either :S
I’m with Blitz on this one. Skip the complex.
Questioneer’s not far off, but I don’t know… an extra 10 ground units in China, to be used to cap India, basically make the fall of india wholly inevitable.
How about a complex in Korea instead? Or the Naval Base in Hainan? Only useful if you use em, but wholly effective, without tipping the balance through malignant troop concentration.
Or double up on the units in places like Okinawa, Carolines, and Iwo Jima. Make it difficult for the U.S. to capture said islands… or well… atleast make it MORE difficult.
Or Maybe bring back the tokyo express rule, from the original Pacific? Japanese Desroyers can carry 1 infantry… ? Give Japan an extra sub and destroyer somewhere, to give the navy a little lasting power? Navy doesn’t win games after-all.
That said - it’s still pretty close folks. And whats the ruling on how to stop sea-lion now? I haven’t seen the theory…
-
How about if Russia only gets penalized for violating the non-aggression pact. That would allow Japan to invade the Soviet Far East territories to recover some lost ground in the IPC war with the United States while not inflicting yet more pain on Europe?
Or, an Airbase in Korea would work. Minor in Korea would work just as well, since I generally see or build those there anyway.
-
Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to ShanghaiHmm…maybe. Seems kinda heavy, but I don’t have a board in front of me.
How about:
Siam: +1 Inf
Korea: +1 Inf, +1 Mec
Jehol: +1 Inf
Shanghai: +1 Inf -
Why would you build a Romanian complex as Germany? The ONLY time where it would be beneficial to build one would be on G1, and you need to build a CV and naval units on that turn anyway to threaten England.
(snip)
Effectively you’re losing an entire turns worth of build by purchasing the major IC in the first place, either on the first turn or the second turn. If you build it on the second turn you have even MORE of a future land unit deficit in comparison to Russia’s builds (-20 potential land units to their +20). I could possibly see the need for the major IC with the OOB or Alpha +.1 setup with the starting minor IC in Berlin, but with 20 total production in Alpha +.2 its unnecessary.Best bang for your buck is all ART on G2. Follow that up with stacks of MECH/ARM to keep the initial wave’s momentum going all the way through Moscow on G8.
i was just comparing, and i suppose you don’t win much time with a Romanian IC (even on turn 1), in fact the opposite…
After 3 turns of building you can either have:
1 major IC (romania) + 30 INF (30 + 30x3 =120IPC)
who can reach Moskou in 4 turns and takes 4 turns to build.or (for the same money)
30 Mech’s (30x4=120IPC)(which start more faraway but are double as fast)
who can reach Moskou in 3 turns and takes 3 turns to build.edit: just comparing prices, i’m not saying to buy only mechs all the time ;)
-
Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to ShanghaiHmm…maybe. Seems kinda heavy, but I don’t have a board in front of me.
How about:
Siam: +1 Inf
Korea: +1 Inf, +1 Mec
Jehol: +1 Inf
Shanghai: +1 InfI’d be happier with a complex and no units. IMHO
Suggested Topics
