Alternate Axis Opening

[phunwin]

Hey all, long-time lurker, first-time poster.

Classic Axis doctrine seems to be to take out Russia first, then turn on the Anglo-Americans.  But has anyone had success with an early attack on the Americans?  Once Japan takes out the fleets at Pearl Harbor and the Indian Ocean, there’s practically no naval resistance in the Pacific other than perhaps occasional sub harassment.  In the game I’m playing, I’ve taken Alaska and Hawaii (as well as China and India), have Japan at 38 IPC, and knocked the US down to 38.  Best case scenario, I can take the Western US in a couple turns.  Worst case, it forces the US to concentrate on self-defense, leaving Germany to deal with a 2 front war instead of 3.

[ColonelCarter]

I’ve only played Revised, so my information might not be 100% accurate, but I’ll give it a shot.

A big disadvantage I see with Japan going after the US is that it’s either significantly more expensive to build up enough threat to directly assault the WUS, or quite slow if you take the cheaper route building up in Alaska. It also puts Japan at a 2 front war depending on how much Russia helps against them.

The other main thing is that while Germany gets reduced to a 2-front war, without large Japanese investment in the mainland, Russia’s basically only gonna have a 1-front war, which ends up actually making an Axis capture of Moscow harder.

[phunwin]

Thanks for the response.

So far, I’ve thrown the Americans out of China and the British out of India.  Russia is just doing a holding action in the east at this point, and is about to retreat to Yakut and leave Buryatia, so no real threat from the Asian mainland.  I was toying with the idea of an Alaskan factory, but I don’t think that’s practical since I can transport from Japan to there and base fighters/bombers in Hawaii.

[Ceadda]

Unless you are playing against the woefully inept AI on Triple-A (as GTO is currently not even an option - not that it’s AI was wonderful either) or a similarly, woefully inept human opponent, Japan stands no realistic chance of capturing WUS within a short time frame.  If you ARE playing against the AI, then virtually anything is possible. The last time I played the Triple-A AI, the AI left WEur bare at the end of G1, I captured it on UK1, and the Ger AI never attempted to take it back. If you captured Hawaii, Alaska, and China, the US would be at 37 IPC, not 38, so I assume the US opponent probably captured Algeria from Germany.  Regardless, if Japan and the US are at an IPC parity of 38-38, the advantage goes to the US unless the Japanese already have a significant material advantage.  Japan has no chance to take the WUS by surprise.  They are telegraphing their intent to strike the WUS at least one turn in advance due to the travel involved, giving the US a turn to build up their defenses. Even if the US had been focusing their efforts solely in the Atlantic theater and all of their available units were in EUS or ECan, they could drop 2 tanks and 8 infantry on WUS before Japan could get there as well as bring any tanks or air units from EUS or ECan. Impossible for Japan to succeed, certainly not.  However, it is highly unlikely to be successful against any decent US player.

[phunwin]

Yeah, I considered that.  The Allies took their KGF strategy to an almost ridiculous extreme, practically abandoning mainland Asia altogether, so my main goal was to try and take some heat off Germany.  So far, the US hasn’t dropped a ton of troops on WUS and I’m planning to launch my first of what will probably be several attacks this round.  If I can disrupt his production and force him to send troops west and not to Europe, I’ll be happy enough with that.

[redrum]

@Ceadda - I tend to agree that it isn’t usually viable for Japan to go after W US. Also, the AI has improved significantly in the latest release and there are pre-releases that you can try out as well: http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/AI-Development-Discussion-tp7585227.html

[Ceadda]

Redrum, the current AI was what I am talking about…engine 1.8.0.5 game version 2.8.  In fact, I just started another game playing as the allies. On G1, the AI left Western Europe totally bare again. The AI even pulled the AA off also.  What is even more pathetic is that the AI didn’t even advance the AA from Germany eastward. 2 AA were left sitting on the German capital at the end of G1.

Playing the AI is pointless unless you want to test out an extremely high-risk/high-reward strategy, and you simply need the AI to dice you in the key battle(s) that your strategy hinges upon, and thereby teach you to play more conservatively.

[Ceadda]

Redrum, the AI is better than I gave it credit for, but it is still lousy. I never bothered to complete the first couple games I tried it. Hard AI setting is much more aggresive and effective than the AI for the first A&A computer game (2nd edition - MB Gamemaster version) and it is better than the AI on GTO, but that is not saying much.  The AI makes some great moves, but some are just mind-bogglingly stupid.  In my most recent game, Germany left the SZ15 DD alone. On UK1, I consolidated it and the Egyptian FTR with the Indian fleet in SZ 34. I brought the UK Australian SS to SZ38 and the TT to SZ 39, baiting Japan to attack the TT with the SZ37 fleet. On J1, the AI took the 2 FTR from SZ37 down to kill the TT. It then moved the BB and CV from 37 northward to SZ59 during NCM causing the 2 FTR to crash into the sea. Kamikaziing one FTR is one thing if you can justify the sacrifice, but there was no sense in taking TWO FTR’s against the TT at all.

[Ceadda]

Redrum, I didn’t realize you were a Triple-A Developer.  I hope you take no offense.  I didn’t mean to insult your baby.  I appreciate the work you guys have done on Triple-A.  As of late, I have found myself playing the AI more often than I would like (as I cannot get my friends together to play often enough).  I am confident the AI will continue to improve over time.  I guess I should put up or shut up.  I ought to be submitting my bug reports to help you guys tweak the game.