@nubnumber1 just like a fighter unit in A&A is meant to represent many aircraft,think of a destroyer unit representing a group (flotilla I think is the term) of destroyers.Military history has many examples of small,yet determined, forces delaying the progress of larger forces. eg 101st airborne in Bastogne dec 1944
Largest single turn IPC Increase?
-
Sumatra Calcutta takes UK1 and sends FTR UK2
Java - ANZAC takes A1 with 2 INF and send two FTR to defend A2
Malaya - By J4 I have 6 INF and at least 2 aircraft thereWhile I agree with some of what you said, as Japan I would jump at the opportunity to kill the few Fighters that these two have. If it meant taking one or two fewer islands, I would definitely consider it still to be a gain for me. This is probably a mistake as an Allied player.
-
Sumatra Calcutta takes UK1 and sends FTR UK2
Java - ANZAC takes A1 with 2 INF and send two FTR to defend A2
Malaya - By J4 I have 6 INF and at least 2 aircraft thereWhile I agree with some of what you said, as Japan I would jump at the opportunity to kill the few Fighters that these two have. If it meant taking one or two fewer islands, I would definitely consider it still to be a gain for me. This is probably a mistake as an Allied player.
No way, because you’re taking out Japanese INF. The more INF you kill the better - make them earn every single square inch of land because each battle whittles away from of their INF. Two FTR and two INF make for a nasty island to capture, and if you have a blocking ship there to ruin bombardments, all the better. It’s a LONG way from Japan to anywhere, especially when you gotta guard those TRN the whole way - and getting the TRN back to Japan is even worse. Once the Japanese player begins to build minor IC everywhere, you know he is beaten because he’ll undoubtedly make the error of building tanks, but that’s a fools errand and will lead to nothing.
-
I very much agree. Exactly the setup that would lure JPN into killing those two ANZAC fighters at the cost of all the ground troops they have in the area. If their transports survive, it’ll take them 2 or 3 turns to get back to an IC to load new troops
-
There is no way an Allied Player is going to let you do that….
The question was: What was your biggest increase. Her answer was not: I always get this. It was an example of one game. I take that to mean that happened, not that that is always going to happen.
Play styles differ, it is not unreasonable.
Seeing Russia get Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Finland, Norway and Korea on turn 4 is also not unreasonable in some play. That is a 5+6+6+2+6+3 increase or: 28 IPC jump. (Requires 1 Russian transport)
Again, that is not a standard jump, but one that is not impossible against some styles (such as Sea Lion)
She is more than capable of defending herself, I just wanted to chime in since it struck me as odd that you all pounced like she was Paris on Germany’s turn 1.
-
6 Transports + Fleet in SZ 36 gives me the option of hitting Philippines, Borneo, Celebes, Java, Sumatra, Malaya, FIC, Sham State, Burma, Guam and/or Dutch New Guinea
6 Transports + Fleet in SZ 33 gives me the option of hitting Midway, Wake, Hawaii, Jonah, Solomons, New Zealand, New Guinea, New Brition, Guam, Philippines, Dutch New Guinea, Java, Celebes, Borneo, Queensland, New South Wales, Nothern Territories, W. Australia
Having your fleet split in two is hardly going to let Australia or India sink all your transports or even half your transports by any wild stretch of the imagination. You don’t have the equipment, you don’t have the positioning and you don’t have the income to justify this.
Also, the question was what was the biggest jump you have seen. The first time you play this game it is very hard to notice all the little things that can happen to you or you can do to the enemy and what the long reaching and short term benefits are of doing them.
What I stated was seen (once) and is perfectly legal on J4 to happen. I did not include builds in SZ 6 which, in theory, would also be able to hit Midway, Wake, Hawaii, Guam, Philippines, Aluetians, Alaska, British Columbia, Siberia, Amur, and/or Soviet Far East. I also didnt include any inroads into China (mainly because I evacuate China, I would rather have Calcutta or Moscow than Beijing)
-
So you don’t go after China as Japan? Maybe that’s what we do wrong when playing Japan. Whenever someone in my group plays Japan (myself included), we usually try to stomp China out as quickly as possible. Yes, it takes quite a bit of man power but I’ve always saw it as the best way to get to Calcutta through Yunnan. If you do this, won’t you end up losing Shanghai and Hong Kong? Eventually, China will build up enough infantry, with a few artillery while the Burma Road is still open, to take those territories from Japan. Both of them are 3 IPC territories. Granted, taking Calcutta is better, but don’t you want to get those other VCs back?
As for the largest increase I have seen in one turn, I think I have you all beat. In one game, Germany took London so Italy was able to spread out all over the Med, Middle East and Africa. Most importantly, they also had Gibraltar and it’s naval base. The US was in a protracted battle with Japan and in the process of taking many islands in the Pacific and even threatening to invade Japan itself. After the Royal Navy was sunk and London captured, Germany was busy invading Russia and Italy busy taking over Africa so there was ZERO activity in the Atlantic (most of the German subs were taken as casualties in sinking the Royal Navy and never replaced). Now, as I said, the US was planning for a big invasion of Japan and desperately needed more land units to fill the transports waiting on the west coast. With Germany busy in Russia and Italy busy in the Middle East, the US player felt safe on the east coast and pulled ALL units over to W USA to head for Japan.
Well, little Italy still had a small navy left, which included 3 transports. As soon as the last units left Central US for Western US, Italy moved it’s small fleet over to SZ 91. I don’t know if the US player was blind or simply thought Italy was doing something else, but on the next turn Italy moved in and took Eastern US, Central US and Central America all at once. Other Italian forces also took the Caucasus and Persia that same round. Total territory grab= 37 IPCs. Plus two more NOs (2 IPCs Persia, 5 IPCs Caucasus) for a grand total of 44 IPCs in growth in a single turn.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I know this move was a TOTAL fluke and will probably never happen again. However, it did happen once. Needless to say, this won the game for the Axis. All US ground troops were on transports heading for Japan and all that was on WUS was 4 or 5 bombers that were going to be useed in the invasion of Japan (US had Long range Aircraft tech). Even if they had ground troops, they couldn’t get through Central US to save Washington. The US fleet couldn’t get throught the Panama Canal since Italy had that too. Even if they took Tokyo, which they did just for spite, the Axis still win on the Europe board.
Anyway, like I said, I doubt we will ever see a fluke like that again. Ever since, whomever plays the US ALWAYS leaves 4-6 infantry in Washington. -
I used to go after China hard, but once I realized that China cannot leave China and cannot liberate Korea or Calcutta, I stopped. Sometimes I try to punch a hole through the north, but more often than not, I grab 24 ground units from China and move them into the islands or out towards America or, more likely, into Russia to weaken them as fast as possible so that the American Pac-Strat will fail (due to German victory cities)
-
One time I played a game against someone who used to be an Arthur Anderson accountant (you know, the firm that did Enron’s accounting) and somehow Anzac went from 10 ipc on round 1 to 110 ipc on round 2. He swore it was an honest “accounting error”……
-
No way, because you’re taking out Japanese INF. The more INF you kill the better - make them earn every single square inch of land because each battle whittles away from of their INF. Two FTR and two INF make for a nasty island to capture, and if you have a blocking ship there to ruin bombardments, all the better. It’s a LONG way from Japan to anywhere, especially when you gotta guard those TRN the whole way - and getting the TRN back to Japan is even worse.
As long as one infantry survives that battle, it’s definitely a losing proposition for you. I’ve still taken it, and you’ve lost your fighters. India needs its fighters, and Australia gets a whole lot of utility out of them too - like covering the American fleet in newly taken islands, for example. Now you don’t get that. This is great for Japan. I really don’t care that some of my infantry died. They’re supposed to. As long as the Japanese flag is on that island, however many died is fairly irrelevant. I’ll just evacuate and take some other island next turn. Infantry aren’t that hard to get from Japan really. 1 DD between Japan and Hawaii means that I don’t need to protect them in SZ 6.
-
Agreed. I am willing to trade 5 infantry for 1 British or Australian fighter/tact bomber in the Pacific. Also willing to trade 2 fighters for the Chinese one.
-
No way, because you’re taking out Japanese INF. The more INF you kill the better - make them earn every single square inch of land because each battle whittles away from of their INF. Two FTR and two INF make for a nasty island to capture, and if you have a blocking ship there to ruin bombardments, all the better. It’s a LONG way from Japan to anywhere, especially when you gotta guard those TRN the whole way - and getting the TRN back to Japan is even worse.
As long as one infantry survives that battle, it’s definitely a losing proposition for you. I’ve still taken it, and you’ve lost your fighters. India needs its fighters, and Australia gets a whole lot of utility out of them too - like covering the American fleet in newly taken islands, for example. Now you don’t get that. This is great for Japan. I really don’t care that some of my infantry died. They’re supposed to. As long as the Japanese flag is on that island, however many died is fairly irrelevant. I’ll just evacuate and take some other island next turn. Infantry aren’t that hard to get from Japan really. 1 DD between Japan and Hawaii means that I don’t need to protect them in SZ 6.
I also completely agree with Alsch91.
UK planes are the most precious units for India, and those units can never be replaced with proper Japan play. Spending 2 of them to “protect” an island usually makes no sense.I follow your comments very closely and your opinions are always so skewed towards an outcome you desire…
Well, so do i with your comments Shadowguidex, and i have to say that what you say of Jennifer is sometimes true with your own comments … Often you’re writing with the same degree of certainty you would have if you were THE A&A. Oracle…
Let me just give you an example from one of your last posts :
Once the Japanese player begins to build minor IC everywhere, you know he is beaten because he’ll undoubtedly make the error of building tanks, but that’s a fools errand and will lead to nothing.
At first sight, that might appear a “cute” statement…But when you think of it seriously, you have to conclude that while it is true in a lot of positions, is is also completely false in a lot of other positions…
I don’t know, maybe you should spend less time tracking down Jennifer’s inacuracies and spend more time thinking about yours…
-
There is no inaccuracy, it was a one time thing. Never claimed you would ALWAYS be able to do this, nor am I expecting too. I am not entirely certain you would WANT to fracture yourself in such a way for a modest one round gain. It did work out very well.
Another such was the opening round hitting Hawaii and stacking the crud out of SZ 26 before swooping down to take New Zealand and then New South Wales. Do I expect this to always be possible? No. It is not all that hard to stop really, but that does not mean it cannot happen (it did and that opponent was on these boards and if he wishes to make himself known he may do so). Point in fact, I actually lost that game, despite having all of the Pacific (including Australia). But I did get all of the Pacific!
-
interesting, wish I had been around for the debate.
I have come to the same conclusions as Jenn. If Japan is heading for Calcutta, then why detour through China? You’re better off diverting to SEAsia where China cannot touch you to support your amphib attack on India.
The /only/ caveat about this move is you are ceding the coast to China and Japan won’t realistically ever be able to return. However, since in this strategy the Axis are trying to win on the Europe board, Japan is better off trying to impact that board than try and create their own empire. Therefore the best ways for Japan to influence the Europe board is to advance quickly through Russia to try and create another front. To attempt an attack on India to prevent India from reinforcing the Middle East or Moscow. Finally Japan’s mission is to tie up as much American attention for as long as possible to give Germany the breathing space their need to take Moscow.
The latest moves I have been experimenting with to try and defeat the 100% Pacific strategy is to have Italy focus on troop builds in Europe. This means when war comes to Russia Italy can create enough pressure to hold Europe during that crucial round where Germany reinforces the Russian front. This is all in an attempt to drive to Moscow/Stalingrad as fast as possible, while Italy begins to switch to a more Mediterranean (Cairo) strategy.
-
I am currently having great success ignoring the Pacific and China (India and Australia as well, of course) and pounding Russia into dust in my current game with EM. Japan’s earning next to nothing with India, Australia and China earning equivalent income and yes, I will most likely never be able to take China with Japan but with 6 loaded carriers and a couple battleships, and with America going Kill Italy First, it seems to be working out okay. Not great, but okay.
Russia just lost 6 Infantry, 7 MI, 19 Armor and an AA GUN taking out 23 MI, 11 Armor, Artillery, 2 Fighters, Tactical and an AA GUn taking out the Japanese stack, but this leaves Russia naked against Germany.
It wasnt the best trade ever in a game, but it seems to be effective. Yet again, I would not expect this to happen often, hell the defending AA Gun got 50% accuracy and that’s not to be expected routinely either.
-
Hey Jen, I know what you mean about those fluky AA Gun successes. I once had a Sealion go very bad for me because of that. I went in with 2 fighters, 3 tacs and 1 bomber. The dang British AA Gun killed 1 fighter, 2 tacs and the bomber. 2/3 of my airforce whacked out just like that.
So the way you guys play Japan is more or less as fodder for the Allies so less pressure is on Germany/Italy so that they might win in Europe? You don’t try to have Japan win on the Pacific side? Some people have said that if USA goes mostly for Europe, then it is somewhat easy for Japan to get their 6 victory cities and win the game for the Axis. If USA goes all Pacific, then Japan is probably doomed anyway and best choice would probably be to try and tie up US forces as long as possible so Germany can take down Russia. However, if you see US going heavy in the Atlantic, don’t you want to try to win with Japan?
Suggested Topics
