How likely could America fall if all the Axis work together?

[ronrye]

@Cmdr:

@ronrye:

@Cmdr:

I never did it, but that’s along the lines of what was being done.  I always meant to try it, but Larry said no, and then made it illegal to set up the attack. wink  Makes me wonder if it would have worked, or if it was along the lines of the CASPIAN SUB - Canadian Shield strategy.

How is this attack illegal? Japan is in range of Hawaii, and when you attack Hawaii, you have to declare war on America, which means you can come that close to America, right?

The whole attack hinged (at least as far as I can tell) on being adjacent to SZ 10 from the south and the west.  That’s no longer a legal move - so the strategy as written is illegal.  That does not necessarily mean it cannot be reworked and made legal again.

There’s a rule that says Japan can’t be adjacent to sz 10 even when they are at war with America?

[ronrye]

@theROCmonster:

Problem with that ronrye is that Germany needs 11 transports. If Germany takes Gibralter R2 how are their 10 transports going to be protected from at least 4 UK planes?

That is a good point, but if the Axis really are bent on this strategy, then it (hopefully) wouldn’t be too much to have Italy use its tac and ftr on a suicide mission to bring down a couple of UK’s planes.

[Jennifer]

@ronrye:

@Cmdr:

@ronrye:

@Cmdr:

I never did it, but that’s along the lines of what was being done.  I always meant to try it, but Larry said no, and then made it illegal to set up the attack. wink  Makes me wonder if it would have worked, or if it was along the lines of the CASPIAN SUB - Canadian Shield strategy.

How is this attack illegal? Japan is in range of Hawaii, and when you attack Hawaii, you have to declare war on America, which means you can come that close to America, right?

The whole attack hinged (at least as far as I can tell) on being adjacent to SZ 10 from the south and the west.  That’s no longer a legal move - so the strategy as written is illegal.  That does not necessarily mean it cannot be reworked and made legal again.

There’s a rule that says Japan can’t be adjacent to sz 10 even when they are at war with America?

If America’s at war, then they have Major Complexes and you ruin the other side of the strategy: That America cannot build enough units to stop the invasions.

Basically, as far as I can tell, Kill America First as written for Alpha +2 is dead in Alpha +3.  You needed the following really:
1)  To be adjacent to the Americans
2)  To be at peace with the Americans
3)  To have strikes set up for Japan in W. USA, Italy in C. USA and Germany in E. USA (if one was to fail, then Germany/Italy in C. USA was the better option.)

Without them, well…as I said I never used this strategy.

[Spendo02]

It all comes down to what US purchases on its first three turns.  Unfortunately, the US3 purchase is unknown to Germany and Germany has to decide on its third turn to Sealion London or stage off Gibraltar for a KAF.

US places all units in the Pacific on US1 and US2, the door is open for KAF.  US3 will only be able to field at best an AC with 2 fighters, 1 Cruiser and a scrambling Ftr in response to a staging off Gibraltar and will lose to an Italy3 and Germany4 strike on SZ101 and Eastern US.  US can misplay this further by not flying fighters from the Pacific to Eastern US on US3 and make it easier to pull off.

If US Places an AC on US1, a Ftr on US2, and either 2 BB + 1 Ftr or an AC + 2 Ftr on US3 in SZ101, your in for a fight but its still winnable with 6 or so Trn with Inf/Art pairs.  I’d say 75-25 in favor of the Axis.

If US Places an AC on US1, a Ftr on US2, places 3 inf on Eastern US on US3 and flies 2 fighters from the Pacific into Eastern US on US3 you are going to need 9-10 pairs of Inf/Art landing to take Eastern US and its around 60-40 in favor of the Axis.

US can play blocker with its cruiser, but the Italian fleet can clear that out for the G4 landing.  However the German fleet is going to have to beef up a bit to handle multiple fighters and capital ships which = less transports.

Biggest issue is that G3 has no idea what US3 is going to see and do and it gives up a Sealion on London to try to pull it off.  Relying on misplays is dangerous when looking at seasoned players, and its highly unlikely you’d pull it off more than once against the same opponent(s).

[cenator01]

I don’t see Italy ever in the position, to can open for Germany. There is quite a large British fleet floating in the Mediterran sea. Depending on what i have read on sea-lion in alpha+3, i don’ think the Italian fleet will ever leave the mediterran sea.

To set up a good sea-lion, most people are sugesting to leave sz110 (Battleship and crusier). These ships will most likely move into the mediterran sea and combine with the rest of the fleet next to Gibraltar. On turn 2, Germany sets up the real sea-lion thread. Most probably, Germany can not take Gibraltar without major losses (at least 2 transports, if UK put a tank, a Infantry and a fighter on Gibraltar).
Germany will have to fight its way through the british Navy (or Italy, but they won’t win this fight), leaving them with not enough ships to break through any decent US Navy.

I don’t think this is ever doable, except against an very, very unexperienced player.

[special forces]

@cenator01:

I don’t see Italy ever in the position, to can open for Germany. There is quite a large British fleet floating in the Mediterran sea. Depending on what i have read on sea-lion in alpha+3, i don’ think the Italian fleet will ever leave the mediterran sea.

To set up a good sea-lion, most people are sugesting to leave sz110 (Battleship and crusier). These ships will most likely move into the mediterran sea and combine with the rest of the fleet next to Gibraltar. On turn 2, Germany sets up the real sea-lion thread. Most probably, Germany can not take Gibraltar without major losses (at least 2 transports, if UK put a tank, a Infantry and a fighter on Gibraltar).
Germany will have to fight its way through the british Navy (or Italy, but they won’t win this fight), leaving them with not enough ships to break through any decent US Navy.

I don’t think this is ever doable, except against an very, very unexperienced player.

And if Germany doesn’t attack SZ110, those UK ships might just stay there (backed up by scramblers), which would block the whole German sea-route.

[Jennifer]

@cenator01:

I don’t see Italy ever in the position, to can open for Germany. There is quite a large British fleet floating in the Mediterran sea. Depending on what i have read on sea-lion in alpha+3, i don’ think the Italian fleet will ever leave the mediterran sea.

To set up a good sea-lion, most people are sugesting to leave sz110 (Battleship and crusier). These ships will most likely move into the mediterran sea and combine with the rest of the fleet next to Gibraltar. On turn 2, Germany sets up the real sea-lion thread. Most probably, Germany can not take Gibraltar without major losses (at least 2 transports, if UK put a tank, a Infantry and a fighter on Gibraltar).
Germany will have to fight its way through the british Navy (or Italy, but they won’t win this fight), leaving them with not enough ships to break through any decent US Navy.

I don’t think this is ever doable, except against an very, very unexperienced player.

Wait…England cannot move again until after Germany - so why wouldn’t Italy be able to can open?

As for KAF, on Round 3 you can have your fleet off the coast of Gibraltar.  Italy’s fighters could, theoretically, pop the American destroyer in the way and allow the Germans to land up to 26 units somewhere in N. America.  As I said, I never actaully did this, I am just trying to remember how it went.

Lastly with blockers for Japan (due to the change in the rules) America should get at least 1 full round of 10 Unit Build ability in W. USA.

[Funcioneta]

I usually don’t talk about DLC  :-P versions, but if I’m right, Japan still wins taking 6 VCs, true? If so, taking WUSA will mean automatic Axis victory in most cases (Tokio, Shangai, Manila, Hong Kong, Honoluly, San Francisco). So, holding Whashington in this scenario is irrelevant. Even if Shangai or Hong Kong manage to survive due chinamen spamming (I doubt), there is no way that Sydney can hold without yankee reinforcements, so in best of cases, is a victory for Axis in turn 6-8.

You could aim even Whashington instead Sydney… but I guess that would be more difficult because of the rule that prevents from building mayor ICs at enemy’s land (I find that a unnecesary rule, but that’s matter for another thread). A Alaska and Mexico minor ICs could aid, I guess …

[knp7765]

What I was thinking of for Japan was for them to build up transports and inf/art right in SZ 6/Japan while also staging their warships there.  With the naval base, they can get to Alaska/British Columbia in one move.  Of course, Japanese troops landing in N America will bring the USA into the war but they will only have 1 turn with a Major Complex on WUSA before the Japanese force in British Columbia attacks.

Now, I understand that the US could place a blocker, but they wouldn’t necessarily.  Usually the US wants to mass their fleet in either SZ 10 or off of Hawaii to be ready to strike at the Japanese.  USA doesn’t know that the Japanese are planning to head east to America.  All that buildup could just as easily be getting ready to go down and take the DEI or even attack Australia.  I guess you could say that USA would send a ship up by Alaska to prevent Japan hitting British Columbia as a preventative move.  Perhaps some players always do that, but I usually don’t see it happening unless USA catches on to what Japan is doing.

[Jennifer]

Functioneta:

Correct, 6 Victory Cities to win for the Pacific.
or
8 Victory Cities for the Atlantic

San Fran is the hardest of all to get and hold.  Under Alpha 2 (probably OOB too) it is theoretically possible to get and hold it if you can do it on round 3.