I got it - thanks!
Crush England First - The War Story
-
Given 1 player vs 1 player there is a pretty good method to remove England from the game, entirely and by that, I mean to capture both London and Calcutta.
There are ways that make the Calcutta operation risky for Japan, and if your opponent KNOWS you are going to try for Calcutta early, then you should definitely avoid doing the operation AT…ALL…COSTS!!! I cannot stress that enough! You must play agianst your opponent’s strategy, it is the major downfall of any strategy test - that your opponent knows what you are going to do and what your plan is and can thus move accordingly (even if it totally screws his position elsewhere) to stop you.
Here is the basic, very basic, outline:
Round 1: Germany takes Yugoslavia, W. France, France, SZ 106, SZ 109 and SZ 111. Shouldnt be too hard. 70 IPC for round 2. (AC, 2 Trn build or AC, DD and SS - more trans easier Sea Lion, but your choice if you want to tip your hand or not!)
Round 1: Japan takes Chahar, Anhwe, Hunan and Yunan, builds 3 transports and has 45 for round 2.
Round 2: Germany takes S. France (important, you want to be able to get that infantry to Egypt! This makes it a helluva lot easier!) and drops transports in SZ 112/113 your choice. 112 is better, but if there is a british contingent in SZ 92 you might be unable to defend this.
Round 2: Japan drops an AB/NB in Yunnan, pummels the British stack if there is one in range, retakes Yunnan, and clears any potential blockers for the fleet (fleet should be south of Burma at this point.)
Round 3: Take England
Round 3: Take IndiaWhat can screw this up?
A) IF your opponent know what you are doing he won’t attack SZ 97 or SZ 95, since he needs every last possible unit he can get to England ASAP. This is not NECESSARY for Sea Lion to work, but it certainly helps!
B) IF America abandons the Pacific they can get in range to sink the German fleet after Sea Lion. This is very irritating and it can strand a lot of good units. Since America would never do this in a normal game, then this is purely designed to screw up the test (it works pretty well too, but is not foolproof and I can show you a game where it worked perfectly, but still the axis won.)
C) IF America moves up to SZ 16 or SZ 17 this can really screw with you. The idea is to have a destroyer left behind to block the more normal position of the American Fleet, which is in SZ 26. To be honst, the only possible reason for America to move the fleet past SZ 26 is if they KNOW you are trying for India. I have never seen it moved to SZ 16 or SZ 17 if they thought there was a chance that the Japanese fleet would be back in SZ 6 because they have no way to stop the Japanese from sinking them then.
D. DO NOT TAKE MORE THAN YOU NEED! Now is NOT the time to be greedy! Take Egypt (IC for Italy) and the Middle East, take England and Scotland sure. You dont need Gibraltar -fun, and be nice to get the Italian fleet out, but it also gives America a Naval Base later. Remember, the allies can take any British territory for themselves, so don’t take it unless you can defend it! Same for France!
E) Build at least 3 infantry a round in England until you have 9-12 there. It’s an expense, and it slows you down in kicking out Russia, but you’ll thank me for it if the Americans come a knocking. Drop a few fighters and you have a really nice defense against America’s 3-7 transports.What can the allies do that they think will help them but really help you?
A) If they stack Burma you’re as happy as you can possibly be! It’s never fun to send 21 aircraft after 7 or 8 infantry and 2 AA Guns but do the math and you’ll see the wisdom of this attack! 1 Aircraft lost to AA Guns, 3 or 4 lost in the attack but you remove 9 or 10 defenders. Cost benefit to India for the attack, but net benefit to Japan after they get India, the NO for India and the Indian treasury (at least 17 IPC, probably 21 since most people take Sumatra or Java.) In one case I bagged the 3 Australian Fighters he moved to India as well - an unrealistic scenario of course, no one moves the Australian fighters to India in a normal game, the are better served out by the American fleet if at all possible!
B) Attacking SZ 97. You lose a Battleship and a Cruiser and that sucks, but it keeps the enemy carrier from getting close to England and that rocks!
C) Using the Indian Transport to take C. Persia. (Thank you! Now you did not get an extra 4 IPC!)
D. Trying to slip the Australians in through Java. For one, you could kill them and still have the units left over ready for India the next round. For another, it’s a long time before Australia can afford to replace 3 fighters = even in a Kill Japan first game!
E) Moving the American fleet to the Atlantic. (This is a good reason to start bragging your butt off on how you are going to take England. Just make sure you don’t really try to take it unless you know you can hold it and not lose your fleet in the process!)Remember the idea of Kill England First (Europe and Pacific) is to allow Japan to win the game. All else is unnecessary. Take what you can hold, don’t take what you don’t absolutely need (I am talking about Morocco, Tunis, anything south of Sudan, etc.)
-
looks like our games helped you :-D
-
looks like our games helped you :-D
That would be the beneficial part of telling your opponent what you are going to do and when you are going to do it. They can give you the worst case scenario, not the most realistic scenario, not the most likely scenario, but definitely the worst case scenario!
-
But the original point of our games was that your strategy, even if known, was unstoppable and game breaking! I’m very happy you changed your mind.
Axis should be a game where you try to invent new moves everygame, not do scripted crap. Don’t do sealion EACH game. It will get boring in the long run.
-
Yes, Barbarossa every game was very boring!
-
Jen I’d like to respond quickly to your post from our little 3 v 1 debacle.
Generally round 2 is accompanied by a naval base in Kwangsi - I did not do that this game for other reasons (just as I failed to leave a few planes on the carriers like I usually do as well, which would have helped with that weird destroyer placement.) I had never seen the destroyer put there, it is (to be honest) the weirdest move possible and I can only see it being marginally effective if you planned to sail back to the cost of malaya and put something else on the coast of Burma.
The destroyer move was not that strange. If Japan stacks its navy/air in 36/Kwa, then I’m fearing an attack on India - a perfectly reasonable response. Thus I will arrange for ships to be in range as blockers in SZ 37. The French destroyer and the South African destroyer can both help with this. The utility of blocking Japan for a turn is more than worth the 8 IPCs. In order to get either of those ships into position - Malaya - quickly enough, they must go through SZ 58. Nothing about that was a “weird” move. If, for some reason, you feel it is necessary to risk planes killing a single destroyer, then by all means, do it. I will have replacements: either another British destroyer or one of Anzac’s ships, launched from SZ 54.
Germany almost always goes naval build, so what you’re saying is you almost never attack the Italian fleet. Okay. I can buy that. One reason I like the 2 transport build instead of the destroyer/submarine build is that 3 transports for Germany really is not a whole lot and it looks like it forces England into a panic to race home. (Note, in any typical game, even this would not help you!)
Yes, I more often than not leave 97 alone. I will not simple give Germany an easy Sealion. And I disagree that running to 92 won’t help me. If I can make Sealion difficult enough to stop Germany from a G3 invasion, of course I’ll do it. What part of preventing a G3 Sealion “would not help” me? Of course it does. To imply otherwise is silly. Stacking in 92 is not a “panic”, it is the move that gives the most options to UK for UK2. If Germany buys Transports, UK can sail up and make Sealion very difficult for Germany, perhaps even pushing it back a turn.
If Germany goes Barbarossa, UK uses its heavy 92 stack and dives into Italy.
Moving to Gibraltar is far from a “panic”. Nothing about my UK moves was assuming you’d go Sealion/Calcutta. I did very standard moves that gave me as many options as possible. If you felt threatened by a lone Destroyer in SZ 58, then I did my job quite well, I think.
Sorry if that was long-winded.
-
Okay, before I head out to lunch, my first blush reaction:
1) If I had remembered to put fighters on my carriers, that destroyer wouldn’t have been in range to block, it would be dead.
2) If I had attacked Sumatra on round 2 instead of Burma, the destroyer and anything else would not have been possible to block.
Between 1 and 2, I feel the destroyer move is a very poor choice of use for the destroyer as it should have been easily negated and if I had been paying more attention to my written plans, I would not have allowed it to do anything (it still was not going to block me, I was going to have to block it with one of my destroyers in SZ 41 so it couldnt move to block the transports.)In regards to Germany, that’s fine. But in a game where you are not testing a theory, Germany and Italy might have snickered at your response and turned their sites (pun intended) elsewhere. As I said, 2 transports being built on Germany 1 - while hampers your offensive and defensive power a little - is a great way to make England panic and run for home. If those 14 IPC can save a Battleship, Cruiser, Transport and maybe even 2 Italian fighters, it’s the best investment in the game, by far! It’s not wasted money either, because you’re going to want to have 3 or more transports for Germany, just so you can put threat on Novgorod, Karelia and Arkhangelsk and thus encourage the Russians to leave defenders up there.
-
My impression? It’s a win/win for the Axis. Either they get India and London for minimal investment (buying things on round 1 you need for your countries anyway) or they save a lot of money in units they won’t lose or won’t lose attacking other territories and fleets - places where defenders were stripped to go “protect home.”
The protect home strategy in response to round 1 axis script is very sound if all you want to do is protect home. I think it’s a bad move either way, since you are sacrificing Russia or you are sacrificing all of England (both hemispheres). However, if you are in a game where the axis are forced to follow the plan, then yes, protect home works by either successfully defending or costing too much for the battle to realistically have been waged at all.
-
@Cmdr:
- If I had remembered to put fighters on my carriers, that destroyer wouldn’t have been in range to block, it would be dead.
Agreed. But potentially taking down a Japanese fighter more than justifies the use of that destroyer. Feel free to risk air against what is otherwise a useless ship.
- If I had attacked Sumatra on round 2 instead of Burma, the destroyer and anything else would not have been possible to block.
Nope. I’ve got a French destroyer, a second British destroyer, and an Australian navy that grows every turn and is perfectly fine with running to Malaya to block you. You’re missing the point of that one single destroyer. Obviously you can stop it, it’s not like I’m relying on it. You’re placing far too much importance on this once ship. But I have many ships coming from many angles, and you will not be able to stop all of them from blocking. Ultimately, your ships are going to be blocked in SZ 37, end of story.
Between 1 and 2, I feel the destroyer move is a very poor choice of use for the destroyer as it should have been easily negated and if I had been paying more attention to my written plans, I would not have allowed it to do anything (it still was not going to block me, I was going to have to block it with one of my destroyers in SZ 41 so it couldnt move to block the transports.)
See above.
In regards to Germany, that’s fine. But in a game where you are not testing a theory, Germany and Italy might have snickered at your response and turned their sites (pun intended) elsewhere. As I said, 2 transports being built on Germany 1 - while hampers your offensive and defensive power a little - is a great way to make England panic and run for home. If those 14 IPC can save a Battleship, Cruiser, Transport and maybe even 2 Italian fighters, it’s the best investment in the game, by far! It’s not wasted money either, because you’re going to want to have 3 or more transports for Germany, just so you can put threat on Novgorod, Karelia and Arkhangelsk and thus encourage the Russians to leave defenders up there.
Well of course the threat of those extra transports is worth the cost.
Even in Alpha 2, the CV + 2 TT was an absolutely fantastic G1 purchase. Incredible flexibility, great threat, great utility. It does its job very well.
But from the 92 fortress, UK still has many options. They can run back and defend if Germany proceeds with Sealion. Or, if Germany does what you says - and I agree, switching gears away from London would be a great idea - UK can turn right around from Gibraltar and put the hurt on Italy. You can’t respond to both of these threats. I had to choose not to attack Italy, and you must choose between a difficult Sealion and a British presence in the Med.Just as CV + 2 TT gives Germany many options and areas of threat, so does moving to Gibraltar do the same for UK.
But are you implying that it’d be better to attack Italy’s navy and simply hand London to Germany? Because I would disagree.
Also -
But in a game where you are not testing a theory, Germany and Italy might have snickered at your response and turned their sites (pun intended) elsewhere.
Uh… what pun? :lol:
-
sights not sites - that was the pun.
Anyway, no, the ANZAC fleet cannot stop it either. You miss the point, you stack next to SZ 39 so that there can be no blocking of the Japanese fleet. That’s why it takes as long as it does to do the maneuver, you have to ensure your strike team (6 or 12 ground units + whatever you can get to Burma that is not hit by the British + 21 planes against that pitiful band of rebels.)
So depending on what’s in India, you hit on round 4 instead of round 3, so you can get those 6 more ground forces (and the Yunan stack you probably have now) in range without worrying about a blocker. England might help you out by stacking Burma…seen this A LOT of times. Trade you 2 Fighters and a Tactical Bomber for 7 or 8 Infantry and your AA Guns any day of the week - as Corrigan!
As for Europe side, no, Germany causes England to fear for it’s life - so to speak, and Italy would have to follow up, but that’s a lot easier now that you dont have an Airbase in Gibraltar. Odds are that British fleet is a Cruiser, a Carrier, a Fighter and a Tactical Bomber, perhaps a second cruiser and maybe if you hit SZ 96 with all air, you could have another destroyer - but to be honest, that usually goes to stop the submarine from attacking. Against that Italy has 3 Fighters, Strategic Bomber, 2 Cruisers, Destroyer, Battleship which is a stronger position than England in the Med.
-
Well the 110 fleet will also swing down into 92. I have slightly more, but Italy will have an airbase.
So with those positions, we’ll have a stalemate in the Med - neither able to destroy the other. And that position favors the Allies, as I have a green monster coming to help me.
Note that I’m not disagreeing that Alpha 3 is unbalanced. I also think it favors the Axis heavily.
I also see what you’re saying regarding India’s position. I prefer to preserve my air power as the Axis, so I tend not to consider attacking ground stacks (Szechwan, Burma) with my planes. I know it can be worth it, but there’s always the chance of total dice failure, and losing half my airforce for some infantry. And I don’t like to put the fate of entire games on one-round battles.
I will say though, that I will force you to wait until at least round 4 to take India with my blockers. That was my point.And how are you using all 21 planes against India when you finally attack? Where will you land?
I guess if you’re hitting a stack in Burma with air, then yes, you will have Shan State to land in. Just curious. Because China will do its part to take back Yunnan and stop you from landing there. Unless, again, you’re hitting Sze with air power. But that’s an awful lot of planes to lose just for ground forces.Just curious, again.
-
Oh, Airbase in Kwangsi. I can land in Yunnan, Burma, Sham State or the fleet in SZ 39. Sorry, I never got to putting down the Airbase.
Stalemate that early in the game favors Italy. Italy can reinforce it’s fleet, England cannot. It’ll be 3 rounds before America can even get into range and by then they have to worry about the German Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe before they can get to SZ 91. That’s at least 2 submarines a round for 3 rounds, or 6 submarines which should be plenty of firepower to take out the British fleet. Odds are England will retreat instead of stay and fight, once they do that, they have to keep going to be safe.
-
How do you take india round 3? don’t they turtle? (like not give you an attack outside of india or china side burma road)
It’s fairly easy to identify japan going for india. What round do you bring USA into war? Axis acts first and how you set up r1 gives things away.
What is the overall strategy of the allies that you play against? do they race the europe half vs japan in the pacific half? do they do a containment strategy?
Allies are trickier to play. But yeah 21 air units in range of burma… it’s pretty obvious to leave nothing there. I feel. considering 3 inf = 1 fighter kill… -1 TUV for Japan, is totally not worth the cannon fodder factor for holding india.
-
@Cow:
How do you take india round 3? don’t they turtle? (like not give you an attack outside of india or china side burma road)
It’s fairly easy to identify japan going for india. What round do you bring USA into war? Axis acts first and how you set up r1 gives things away.
What is the overall strategy of the allies that you play against? do they race the europe half vs japan in the pacific half? do they do a containment strategy?
Allies are trickier to play. But yeah 21 air units in range of burma… it’s pretty obvious to leave nothing there. I feel. considering 3 inf = 1 fighter kill… -1 TUV for Japan, is totally not worth the cannon fodder factor for holding india.
Indeed, with the old AA rules i liked sending units + an AA to Burma, provoking the Jap airforce, but with the new AA rules i’m not getting out of India much anymore…
Edit: also, if i was in Burma, and i see Japanese fleet (with TRP’s) withing range of Calcutta, you can count on it i’ll be running back.
-
You are one of the few good global players I’ve noticed special forces. Pretty solid play overall. I opened up a few of your games.
Gah I am still waiting for beta to start playing live games or triplea devs to finish coding this + figuring out how to not infringe copy rights. you guys are crazy for playing this game over a forum. I thought PBEM chess was bad lol.
-
@Cow:
You are one of the few good global players I’ve noticed special forces. Pretty solid play overall. I opened up a few of your games.
Gah I am still waiting for beta to start playing live games or triplea devs to finish coding this + figuring out how to not infringe copy rights. you guys are crazy for playing this game over a forum. I thought PBEM chess was bad lol.
Thanks, though you might be mistaking me with someone else, as i haven’t posted that much detailed strategy stuff here, nor played on the forum (though i might some day) :)
And me too, i’m also waiting for the triple AA Global adaptation.
-
hugh I thought I saw a game where you were playing axis.
fuk yeah trip a global adaptation would make this game playable for me lol. I mean I own the real life boards, but 15 hour + games are kind of nuts. Plus taking axis taking london over is rough for allies, logistically and otherwise. In the Pacific half, things are so weird.
I liked the pacific 1940 OOB, it was fun. Europe 1940 OOB was kind of bad, I liked the old death in europe board (which was okay for most). Combining the two made the game kind of strange. I never see europe 1940 half played alone.
-
@Cmdr:
D. DO NOT TAKE MORE THAN YOU NEED! Now is NOT the time to be greedy! Take Egypt (IC for Italy) and the Middle East, take England and Scotland sure. You dont need Gibraltar -fun, and be nice to get the Italian fleet out, but it also gives America a Naval Base later. Remember, the allies can take any British territory for themselves, so don’t take it unless you can defend it! Same for France!
Wait so once a country’s capitol falls its teritories can be captured and added to the IPC value of an ally? I must’ve missed that rule somewhere…
-
@Cmdr:
D.� DO NOT TAKE MORE THAN YOU NEED!� Now is NOT the time to be greedy!� Take Egypt (IC for Italy) and the Middle East, take England and Scotland sure.� You dont need Gibraltar -fun, and be nice to get the Italian fleet out, but it also gives America a Naval Base later.� Remember, the allies can take any British territory for themselves, so don’t take it unless you can defend it!� Same for France!
Wait so once a country’s capitol falls its teritories can be captured and added to the IPC value of an ally? I must’ve missed that rule somewhere…
Only if both the territory and the capitol were both taken by the other side. For example, suppose Germany takes Paris and Japan takes French Indo China, and then USA takes it back. Because Paris is occupied they don’t liberate FIC for France; instead they occupy it until Paris is liberated. In the meantime, USA gets the IPCs, they can build an IC there and mobilize units, etc. It is a good reason for the axis to never take FIC (or Western France for that matter) unless they intend to defend them (e.g. it really sucks when USA has the IC in Western France).
The same would go for some places like South Africa after sea lion, Suppose London falls, then Italy takes it, then USA takes it back. USA would occupy it until London is liberated.
-
does a foreign built ic become the power of the original country when there capital is liberated?
Suggested Topics
