Why should the US be called “God’s own country?”
Where does it say that the US is God’s own country?
Our religions change continually… just like every other country in the world…
Here’s an interesting plan that heightens the USSR’s role in the game to more than a mere roadblock for the axis. It has worked fairly well in the games I’ve used it in, but I’d like some feedback.
This strategy depends mainly on two principles that some people over-look; 1)the infantry are the most important unit(see next paragraph), 2)as the attacker you do not have to fight out every battle to the bitter end.
Infantry are very important especially to the USSR and Germany. Observe: After capturing a territory on the european front (either german or russian) one needs a large number of infantry to repel the inevitable counter attack and to take hits so that there are still enough tanks to continue capturing more territorys on subsequent turns.
This established, the USSR should buy eight infantry on the first turn just to see how Germany will react to you. For combat russia should attack Ukraine with five infantry from the caucasus and a tank, Eastern Europe with three infantry, two tanks and a fighter and manchuria should be attacked with everything (five infantry, a tank). In these three territories the objective is to eradicate the enemy’s infantry, so once this has been accomplished a hasty retreat is advisable (you usually won’t have enough troops to take any of these, and if you do you probably won’t hold on to them). These sorts of tactics make it virtually impossible or very difficult to attack the USSR. Germany’s Baltic fleet should also be destroyed by your remaining fighter and submarine.
The infantry in Evenki National Okrug should be moved to Yakut where the surviving forces of the manchurian assualt have fallen back to. Two infantry should be moved east from Russia to futher boster defences there, the rest should be moved to Karelia where you should have about two tanks, a couple infantry and two fighters already (I like to retreat the ukrainian strike force back to the Caucasus). Then you should place six infantry in Karelia and two in Russia (in case the east needs further reinforcement).
By continuing hit and run tactics against Germany and Japan you can eventually begin building more offensive units like tanks so that in several turns you can begin taking the weakened territories and you will still be able to withstand any counter attack thrown at you.
[ This Message was edited by: bossk on 2001-11-15 16:26 ]
[ This Message was edited by: bossk on 2001-11-16 21:52 ]
Hmm, interesting idea. I would change it just a little. Why not attack to kill on Ukraine. Send in the 5 inf 2 fighers. Then Strafe (retreat after 1 or 2 rounds) Eastern Europe. Manchuria I wouldnt attack at all that turn. but instead attack on R2. I might just try this next time.
just one question:
i thought that russia wasn’t allowed to attack on their first turn….
Russian not being allowed to attack on the first turn is an optional rule.
indeed, a pretty terrible optional rule also. If the german is very good this can doom the russians.
I disagree, if Russian can attack first turn then Germany is screwed, but if they dont attack first turn Russia can recover.
I disagree, if Russian can attack first turn then Germany is screwed, but if they dont attack first turn Russia can recover.
I (respectfully) dissagree with both of you. The game is fairly balanced the way it is. This “Russia cant go first” optional rule that I keep hearing about sounds like a load of garbage.
I normally play Axis (because thats what I usually get stuck with ) but I’ve had a lot of practice at it and I can tell you this… If Russia was not allowed to go first against me, I would unwaveringly mop the floor with the Allies every time (unless I rolled horribly throughout the entire game).
Axis players who can’t cut it against a normal Allied first turn need to try a different strategy.
Its not that Russia cant go first. Russia cant ATTACK first turn. Russia gets to buy, do noncombat movement, and place and collect. This is done because it is found without it Russia puts 5 inf 1 tank 2 fighters into Ukraine and Germany has little if no chance for attacking Russia in 5 or 6 turns. Axis usually lose in this situation because Russia is strong enough to keep Japan back.
Oh… Now I understand.
I still think it may be an unnecessary rule. In my experience, the allies have no extra advantage over the Axis that would warrent denying Russia its first-turn attack phase. (That’s just my experience though).
Japan should be making Russia sweat in only 2 or 3 turns. The key is for Japan to NOT attack the US fleet on its first turn (but instead consolidate in Japanese waters).
I’d like to play a game against you when you do that. Standard Rules, no bid, and Russia can attack First turn! You gonna be around this weekend?
i have to disagree with you drunken.
1. If Russia keeps attacking Eastern Europe, then Germany will never be able to launch a full scale attack on Karelia.
2. What can you do with ur fleet at home? Theres no ships to fight against and you should be able to capture most of the mainland without any help from ships. You better send them out to destroy US fleet at Hawaii, because the US player might use it to protect its vulnerable newly build fleet or he might send it into atlantic ocean.
Absolutely… I think I can swing a game this weekend. But if we chose Saturday, then we’ll have wait until after my Mechwarrior4 clan match is finished. Fri and Sun are relatively open though. BTW, since you’re in Jersey and I’m in Honolulu, I think our time difference is 5 hours. We’ll have to take that into consideration when we settle on a time to play.
Greensleves, (cool name BTW…and a terrific song too)
If the Allied players are good, then the Axis won’t be able to win with Germany. Therefore, Germany doesn’t try to take Karelia (unless Russia makes some huge mistake or something). The Axis game is usually won with Japan. But having a healthy transport fleet is essential to this. Hence, the fleet is not wasted on attacking Hawaii.
I’ve done it both ways many times. The attack on Hawaii is the riskiest move in the game. After the American counter attack, Japan is usually LUCKY to have just one battleship left out of their total fleet (and they usually will have lost a couple fighters too). After that mutual annihilation, the US can quickly rebuild, but Japan is screwed. It will have no access to the mainland because any new transports will easily be picked off by American air power (and believe me, an IC wont cut it). And without Japan nipping at Russia’s heels, Germany WILL fall.
But these are just my silly little stratagems (i guess we all have our own)…But its fun to debate them with intelligent folks nonetheless
BTW, when you say “the Zone”, are you referring to the MSN Gaming Zone? If not, could you tell me which zone you’re talking about? I’d love to get some practice in because I’ve never played A&A online
yeah msn zone, we should play soon =).
im just an average player hoping to learn things to improve my game in here =).
Your right about the hawaii thing, it depends on the dice rolls whether or not the attack is succesfull. But i dont think the US pacific fleet can easily recover, because MOST allied US players focus on the atlantic, and i dont think they will even consider building a new fleet in pacific if the old one is destroyed. Cause US has its most expensive units near hawaii, destroy these and the US will need to retreat into atlantic or build a new one, which means about 3 transports and 6 infantry less to attack germany.
But the “loss” of those fighters and bombers will seriously hurt the japanese war effort in asia and africa as well, true that. I have allways considered doing that, but this little american fleet if not destroyed often attacks unprotected transports. Time to test it =).
I like to attack the US fleet at Hawaii with my airforce, keeping my navy safely out of range. It doesn’t help the mainland but with enough transports one can easily build a nice attacking force there.
Well that is where you and I disagree. I personally think that its GOOD to have America on your ass AND NOT ON GERMANY’S ASS!! Germany can beat Britan and Russia, and America will have a tough time beating Japan. Btw I usually keep my trn out of the attacks, NCM them below Hawaii, then move in to Threaten Brazil and South Africa. Hope we can get a good game in.
As far as the russia first turn attack goes:
Germany CAN and WILL defend against russian and a Uk assault. Germany gains much more money than russian every turn and therefore has the power to purchase a minimum of 4 tanks 4 men every turn to push eastward…protecting the western flank is not difficult if american is not involved…russia must attack on the first turn to survive otherwise germany can take karelia in about 2-3 turns despite the hoards of infantry and from there its just a matter of time before they take russia…and when one capital falls the game is basically over.
Finally someone who agrees with me
I also dont think if Russia doesnt attack 1st turn it dooms them. Without allied help, yes Germany can take Russia 2nd or 3rd turn, but at the very least you’ll have some british fighters in there. that could make all the difference.
Back on the original topic - attacking the Axis with Russia to reduce their infantry to zero is a good idea - unless you get lucky. What if you accidentally win? That’s happened to me before and I wound up stuck in an exposed territory.
Also, it’s a tough strategy to pursue when the Axis concentrates their fighters. When Germany has 4 fighters in Eastern Europe - you can expect high casualties if you attack them.
Also, if the Axis bring AA guns into those territories - using the precious Russian air force will be risky.
I guess it really depends on how formidable the Russians’ offensive capability is. If the Russians devote a lot of tanks to the attack - they may get good results - just pray they don’t win. Otherwise, the Russians may wind up with significantly more losses than kills.
Personally, I like to go after exposed fighters and tanks when I get the chance - but who doesn’t?
Drunken Lies’ strategy of not recreating Pearl Harbor is one I toyed with in the past. The biggest problem, in my mind, is that it creates a huge question mark. What will the US do with that aircraft carrier?
The US consolidates their Pacific Fleet and sets out to destroy Japan. This is what Japan wants. One of the drawbacks of attacking Hawaii is that it leaves Japan’s fleet exposed to counter attack from the US battleship and air force. If Japan makes the US come to them off the coast of Japan, the US fleet will be exposed to counter attack from the Japanese airforce and any other naval units that were on duty elsewhere. It will also draw US resources away from the battle in Europe.
The US consolidates their fleet in the Pacific and starts island-hopping. Again - this requires a major investment from the US. They have to bulk up their fleet with subs and transports, commit men to those transports, commit fighters to the aircraft carrier, possibly commit their bomber to any attacks. This all spells good news for Germany and is not really a major threat to Japan. Sure, Japan will loose a few IPC’s, but it also could potentially bring the US fleet in range of Japanese land-based fighters and bombers. Meanwhile, Japan is pushing hard on Russia.
The US sends their Pacific fleet to the Atlantic. This is problematic. In many games I’ve played, Britain buys an aircraft carrier on round one and the US lands their fighters on it on their 1st round. If the Americans sent their Pacific fleet to the Atlantic, that need for GB to buy a carrier is removed - freeing 18 IPCs for other use - say a bomber. OR, GB could go ahead with their plans of building a carrier and the US could send their fleet into the Mediterranean - ending the German dreams of African conquest.
2 of the 3 scenarios are good for the Axis, but the huge question mark still remains. What will the US do with their fleet?
Any good U.S. player will do #3. No matter what happens at Hawaii, the US and Japan annihilate each other there, then the US turns to Germany. Any Pacific offensive early in the game dooms the Allies in Europe.
Japan must destroy the fleet so the US doesn’t already have a navy to use against Germany.
[ This Message was edited by: Kycan on 2001-12-14 15:58 ]
I agree. Hell, I even TRY to make the Us attack spend resources on me, even luring him over with unguarded transports.
I’ve seen it where Japan attacks Hawaii and be left with two battleships.
My question to the board is this…
Would you counterattack the two battleships at Hawaii?
Most definitely. Attack them with your battleship, transport, 2 fighters, and the bomber. You’ll lose your transport and a fighter or two, but now your lined up to take out the Japanese transports in the home islands. Japanese fighters will commited in Asia, you rebuild your US fleet for amphibious operations in Russian Asia. This secures Russia’s north-eastern back door, threatens the Japanese in south-Asia, and forces defensive unit build up in the Japanese capitol. This gives all Russian attention to Germany, and with British help in both regions, this will spell Allied victory…
…. In Asia, and dooming the allies in Europe. Think, If you want to put 10 infantry onto the Russian Mainland, thats 5 transports (You don’t have to buy each one to get 10 ther, but you do need to account for losses from Japaneese fighters) And 10 infantry. Thats 40 + 30 = 70 IPCs. Thats 2 and a half turns of buying. 2 and a half turns less in europe or africa. Germany will overun britan and russia.
In response to your question, I would counter attack the 2 battleships with 1 battleship 1 figher, the odds arent that great, but they arent that bad either. And there is more potential for Japaneese loss. I’d not attack with the transport purely so I can get it into the Atlantic faster.