• I don’t think it’s possible…but I’d like to hear thoughts.

    It creates more problems than it solves for the Axis, in my mind…

    Can Germany play defense against Russia and bottle up Britain at the same time, while directing an attack at America? Can Britain’s economy even be effectively lowered to permit such a tactic?

    Can Japan forgo early mainland gains in favor of an more immedeate attack on the U.S.? Can in build up the necessary income with much more conservative expansion elsewhere, or are early moves on the U.S. simply not economically viable?

    If the Allies are clearly going KGF, then I might see Japan going full bore on America…it would likely disrupt American aid to Europe, at least for a while. But beyond that, I think America is beyond the reach of the Axis…

    What do others think?


  • Aretaku,

    In a word, “suicide”…America has too much economic power for Japan to be able to directly invade.  Any roundabout route, such as Alaska or Central America, would give them too much time to prepare militarily.

    Without Japan’s invasion of Asia to deplete Russian IPC’s, England and Russia could at least hold their own against Germany.  They might even win, if England could set up a good shuck for reinforcements in Norway, Karalia, or Archangel.

    Left alone, England could set up a stable and defensable IC in India and take control the Asian east coast, threatening Japan with invasion and/or SBR losses.

    England could defend Africa with Russia’s help through Persia and TransJordan, because after a few skirmishes Germany would run short of infantry at the front, giving Russia time to build reinforcements with England’s aid.

    Not a promising outlook for the Axis powers.


  • Agreed.

    The only way to attempt it is with a move like C-Sub’s Canadian Shield (the double threat of Germany and Japan hitting North America).

    But it is an ultra high risk move and easilly blocked by any number of standard/traditional Allied moves, and leaves both Axis powers wasted if it fails.


  • Not building and concentrating on getting Japan forces to Moscow gives the UK and Russia too much time to at least contain Germany. Given enough time the Russians can defend Moscow or make its conquest very, very costly. If Japan is not pressuring Moscow and Germany is contained the US can just do its thing in the Atlantic and shuck troops to Africa and Europe via WUS, WCA, ECA.

    The US needs to establish an Atlantic transport system. As long as Russia is not hard pressed the US can divert those TRNs to Africa or Europe. The only thing that can kill the US first is incompetence on the part of the person playing them.

  • Moderator

    I think it might be possible, but I don’t think you should consider it until rd 2 or 3 at the earliest.

    I think you should do G1 and J1 normally, then see if it may be possible.  For example, if on US 1 they keep their BB at the Wus sz, or move the DD there, or buy units for the Pac I think you can write it off.

    By doing a normal G1 and J1 you are still set up to go after Mos, and more importantly Japan should still gain Chi and Sin, SFE, Bury, Yak, and probably Ind with very little cost.  (provided no KJF by the allies).
    And Germany has a chance to pick up income from Afr.

    A normal J1 and J2 still leaves Japan in positions to take Hi and Ala on J3 with bb-shots and inf from Japan/Bury.  While you should have at least 1 IC from J1 to maintain a defensive postion in Sin.  Also if things are going really well, you can nix the US idea and just continue on to Moscow instead.

    Ultimately by waiting until rd 3, you can now survey the land, making sure the US BB is in the Atlantic and will take 2 turns to get back to Wus sz or 3 if you wait until J4.  You can also see if US set it shuck-shuck through Eus or Wus.  If it is through Wus, you can write this off.

    In theory under the right conditions on say J4, Japan can drop off about 4 inf on Hi and 4 onf Ala, or better yet, 2 on W can, 6 on Ala, while they non com infantry from Bury to Sfe (instead of yak), then they could do a follow up drop off, while buying more trans and inf.  I don’t think the US will fall, but you may be able to make a play at Wus.  IMO the key would be making sure all the US power units (bb, dd’s, bom, ftrs) are all in the European theatre.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Only way would be a feint.

    Pretend to go after Russia slowely.  Don’t build ANY complexes, only transports, infantry, artillery and armor.  Get 16-24 transports, get enough ground forces to load them and dump on Alaska in one swoop.  Next round, get an IC there, put your fighters in and put out a blitz blocker.  Send trannies back to Japan.

    Reload

    Keep sending 8 units to Alaska, build two there, maybe get more ICs on Asia now to keep filling transports.

    Hope America doesn’t kill of Germany before you get established.

    Not a great idea, IMHO


  • That should be just enough of a breather for Russia to power up, build more INF, add a few offensive units to whatever they have saved from their opening pieces, and regain some territory and boost their income.

    When you grab a tiger by the tail, you do NOT let go.


  • You are still talking 3 turns of no Japan TRNs to Asia.  That is one round for Russia to set up to counter a Japan force, a second to destroy it, and a third to sweep through into rear areas.

    And if Russia is already set up for it when Japan tries this (say, a Novo mini-stack), then Russia can be Kwang, FIC, or Manch by the time Japan’s fleet is back to land units.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Problem is, if you aim to hit the United States, America’s going to see it comming.  1 Round of full infantry and suddenly you go from undefended land to 10 infantry defending it.  Or worse, 5 infantry, 3 artillery and 2 armor.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    But America should ahve been building on the West side and walking to the East anyway.  So by round 3, the earliest it can be attacked, we’re talking 24ish infantry some artillery and tanks.

    It’s just not feasible for the axis to take out the US.  Even if Germany does kill off the American fleet, you’re still building masses of beef for the grinder with America.

    I just don’t see how you could do it without landing 12+ transports worth of units in Alaska and W Canada simultaniously and even then, you’d have to do it without America suspecting anything.  THat means trying to mass in SFE and doing a shuttle over to Alaska.

  • Moderator

    #1)  You’re right.  If US sets up it’s shuck-shuck through WUS starting on rd 1 then it is a NO GO.  that is way you should do Rd 1 and 2 normal as the Axis

    #2)  No, you can go from Bury to Ala, not SFE.

    Here are some things to consider:

    1)  Axis gets a bid (with at least 1 IPC going to Japan)
    2)  US builds in Eus on rd 1 and 2
    3)  US sends BB and DD in Pac to the Atlantic.
    4)  No Allied IC on either Sin or Ind

    Now to Japan
    Rd 1:
    Normal buy 1 IC, 2 trns (gives you 3 total trns).  Earn ~33 (up Chi, Bury - if Yak stack) 
    Note:  Nothing out of the ordinary for this buy.

    Rd 2
    Buy 1 trn, 8 inf.
    Fleets back to Sz 60 and Fic sz respectively.  You get troops to Bury and Fic via trns and place 3 at IC.  Earn ~36-39 (up Chi, Bury, SFE, Sin, possibly Ind)

    Rd 3
    Buy Inf/Arm for IC, Inf for Japan (possibly a trn if you can still get 6 inf on Japan).
    Move Fleet to Sz 60 offload about 5-6 inf to Bury(from rd 2 buy), non-Com inf to Chi/Sin and Yak.  Earn ~36-42.

    Againg there is nothing unusual about thse three turns and what you’ll end up seeing after Japan 3 is something like this: (Japan Troops only)

    Sin: 1 inf
    Chi: 4-8 inf
    Fic:  IC, 3 inf, 5-6 ftrs, 1 bom
    Kwa, Man: mt
    Bury:  5-6 inf
    Yak: 2-4 inf, 1 rt, 1 arm
    Ind: 1 inf
    Japan: 6-8 inf
    Sz 60:  1 dd, 4-5 trns, 2 bb, 2 ac

    Now you can even keep the up the illusion by having a trn, ac, bb off the coast of Fic, again assuming US left for the Atlantic.

    So Fic Sz: 1 trn, 1 bb, 1 ac
    Jap sz:  3-4 trns, 1 dd, 1 bb, 1 ac

    You can also back out and contiue pressing on Moscow f you think you are being successful or just get squimish.  Maybe Ger is doing really well.

    But now you come to Japan 4 this is where you commit to the US move.

    Rd 4
    Buy trn (possibly IC or both) and inf.  Make sure you have enough inf to cover your IC (3) and your new trn (2) and 1 trn you left behind (2).  ~7 inf total.

    Now you Combat Move 2 inf to W can (if open), and 4 inf to Ala.  Move rest of your fleet to Japan (if at Fic), or entire fleet to Ala sz.
    Now You non Com 4 inf to SFe from Bury, others go to secure Yak, you fortify Sin (don’t move to Kaz or Novo no matter how tempting), and fortify Fic (or Ind).

    Rd 5
    Buy trn and inf.
    You can still get 6 inf to Ala while you should end up having 6 inf 3 trns in Jap sz for rd 6.
    Move Asia inf to Sin and Yak again, keeping e/n/k deadzone-ish.

    This is very possible and does not require millions of trans or a vastly different game plan then the typical normal crush moscow of rds 1 to 3.

    Now IT DOES REQUIRE several assumptions about Allied play.  Namely the US vacating the Pac and NOT setting up shuck-shuck through WUS.

    Will the strategy work in the end, I don’t know, but it is possible given the right circumstances and DOES NOT hurt the early push to Mos.

    All this being said, this is why I always try to start my shuck-shuck through WUS (this goes back to classic as well).  I simply don’t want to have to worry about a Japanese player trying to mess up my European landings mid game so I just plan from the start to take that out of the equation.

    But I think there is generally enough sloppy Allied play to where you could probably catch a few players napping on the West Coast of the US and while you won’t take WUS, you can certainly disrupt them for 2-3 turns and give Germany some mid-game breathing room, and it won’t cost Japan much at all in Asia with well placed/timed IC’s and trn buys.


  • In general, it is a bad idea for the US to both abandon the Pacific AND not set up their shuck from WUS.

  • Moderator

    @ncscswitch:

    In general, it is a bad idea for the US to both abandon the Pacific AND not set up their shuck from WUS.

    Yes.  VERY bad.


  • @ncscswitch:

    AND not set up their shuck from WUS.

    what does these mean, is it a phrasis?

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    WUS: Western United States.

    And it’s bad, but not untennable.  As I said, you could land in Alaska/W. Canada, but the US can just make a ton of units and drive you off.  No way you can set up a sustainable invasion against a determined and unthreatened (unthreatened by Germany) American.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Pardon my ignorance, what is a shuck-shuck?


  • Sending forces to Europe via a continuous stream from North America… landings in force every turn.


  • From what I hear shuck shuck is what you say when you transport American infantry from shore to shore. A classic player, Don, who wrote a bunch of essays on how to play, calls it the sound of doom =P

  • 2007 AAR League

    yea if this happens usa is a continuois supporter in europe nd its hard for germany to win if they haven’t taken moscow bc US keeps coming  :-(

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Basically, the goal is to get 8, 10 or 12 transports in the Atlantic.  50% to get units from north America and 50% to take them into EurAsia either through the Med or through England (the latter being more popular since you can lend fodder to England should they be attacked.)

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 6
  • 107
  • 10
  • 82
  • 59
  • 17
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

43

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts