Y'all need to add some relevant posts for AAP

If I add cruisers to the game, I will go to a 12-sided die roll to increase the differentiation in combat abilities between destroyers, cruisers, and battleships. With respect to AA fire, the Japanese were pretty bad when it came to ship-borne AA weapons, while the US cruisers were on par with the battleships.  I allow for shore-bombardment by all ships, but only in support of an amphibious invasion.  No battleships standing off shore and clearing the area without an invasion. No aerial attacks on infantry either except in conjunction with an infantry unit, whereupon the infantry get a plus 1 on their attack roll, similar to artillery support.

As a side note, the US refitted an older British Light Cruiser with an armament similar to that of a Fletcher-class destroyer, but with less automatic weapons due to top-heavy problems.  The British rated it as an Anti-aircraft Cruiser.  Just something to think about when defending against air raids with US destroyers.

Once you take it, it’s yours until someone takes it from you.  You don’t have to leave units there.

@yucatan:

What happens in this case:

Attacker has 2sub, 2ftr, 1ac vs 2sub, 1dst

No dst for attacker so defender’s sub are invisible to 2ftrs.
No surprise attack because the defender has 1dst.

Attacker rolls 2hits: 1 from sub and 1 from ftr.
Now the defender has to choice the casualties. Could he choice the dst as casualty from the sub and no more else because the subs cannot be hitten by ftrs?

No.  All the hits must be assigned if possible, so the fighter hit must be assigned to the destroyer.

@yucatan:

Other thing:
The attacker starts the turn with an enemy sub within his navy. Let’s assume 1sub, 1trn vs 1sub.
The attacker decide to stay and combat, but, after the 1st round of combat (trn lost) he decides to retire. Where?
The rules say “in a sea zone from where at least one combat unit comes”. What happens in this case? They were already there…

In order to allow for the possibility of retreating, they must first move out of the original sea zone and then back into it during Combat Movement.  The sea zone moved through must of course be free of enemy units, otherwise they couldn’t leave it again once they entered.  If this isn’t possible, then neither is retreating.  Of course, the attacking sub may submerge in any case.

I am so pathetic that I would be almost willing to pay you to be my friend…. J/K. The truth of the matter is that I have purchased the game about 2 years ago (after owning/playing A&A for years) but have never found anyone else that plays it. Trying to play with my daughter (8 yrs old) and myself just doesn’t cut it. If you could find time this would be a very casual game in that I am not in a rush. If you need 2 days to find the time to make a move that is fine with me. ‘Even a crumb is a feast to a starving mouse.’

Cheers,
Dustin

I’m a newcomer to this site although I have been playing A&A for maybe twenty years now.  I got A&A Pacific a couple of years ago but unluckily  :-) my gaming group has always had more than three players available, so we tend to end up playing A&A revised and A&A Europe.

However, we do play Pacific now and then and we by the second Pacific session we had learned what Saburo Sakai lays out in this essay– Japan had better buy subs and India had better start stacking land forces up in anticipation of an India assault.  Couple that idea with the realization that territories such as New Britain are vital due to the Naval Base rule and you are well on your way to an enjoyable and hard fought Pacific campaign.  Cheers!!

Sun Tzu said:Â

Carefully compare the opposing army with your own,
so that you may know where strength is superabundant
and where it is deficient.

When a general, unable to estimate the enemy’s
strength, allows an inferior force to engage a larger one,
or hurls a weak detachment against a powerful one,
and neglects to place picked soldiers in the front rank,
the result must be rout.

In order to carry out an attack, we must have
means available.

For experienced players of AAPacific, it will soon become apparent that the Out of the Box rule permitting a Japanese victory upon reaching 22 Victory Points (VPs) unbalances the game in favour of Japan.  With the option of going for an India or Australia capture or playing to 22 VPs, Japan has too many avenues to victory for the Allies to overcome.  Therefore, as Sun Tzu says, it is necessary for the Allied general to carefully compare the strength of his army to that of Japan and acquire the means to carry out an attack.

Generally, a bid comes in one of the following four forms:

1.  VP Bid
2   IPC Unit Bid
3.  IPC Bid
4.  Inverse IPC Bid

The VP Bid

At 22 VPs, Japan has the advantage.  In a future essay, I will discuss the tactics used to achieve a VP victory but suffice it to say that with the OOB rules (even using the corrected setup), Japan can usually count on a VP track of 3-4-4-4-3-3-1 = 22 which will result in victory by J7.  A victory is quite achievable by J6 if Japan can get 4 VPs on J5.Â

A VP bid stretches out the VP track to at least J8, giving the Allies one more turn to set up an SBR base from which to rob Japan of VPs or capture territories or convoy routes taking Japan below the IPCs it needs to stay in the game.

The mechanics of a VP bid are simple.  Both players secretly record the number of VPs at which they would like to play Japan and the higher number wins.  If both players bid the same, the Japanese player is chosen at random.Â

VP bids usually range from 23 to 26.  In my view, the game is fairly balance at 24 or 25 VPs.  At 24, the game slightly favours Japan.  At 25, the game slightly favours the Allies.  However, this slight advantage can easily be overcome by the dice or superior play, so the game is essentially balanced by the VP bid.

There is, however, one problem with the VP bid.  If the Japanese player chooses to initiate a KIO attack (see previous essays), the bid has no impact on the game and Japan may have an insurmountable advantage.  The KIO attack assumes the game will be over by the end of round 4 which means that VPs will never come into play.  In some cases, a Japanese player who wants to go for a KIO attack will enter a bid of 99 or some other impossibly high number to ensure that they will play Japan.  After that, it is really up to the dice to determine the outcome of the game as the counter to the KIO attack is so difficult and dependent on a significant amount of luck.

To counteract the disadvantages inherent in the VP bid system, various IPC bid systems have been created.

The IPC Unit Bid

An IPC Unit Bid is an equivalent number of IPCs bid by the Allied player that he will be able to immediately place on the board in Allied units prior to the start of J1.  IPCs can also be saved to spend on Allies 1.  The VP target for Japan remains at 22.  The Allied player can only place units in territories already controlled by the Allies or in which the Allied player already has units.  US units cannot be placed in China.  The player who bids the lower number plays Allies.

As will be clear considering the type of bid, the combination of bid amounts and unit placement are many.  In most cases, however, the Allied player should place his new units in a way that will provide the most assistance to India.   Bids will range from 16 to 24.  Some Allied players prefer to place all of their units on land in Asia (4 Rtl in Burma is popular) while others look to enhance the naval strength of their UK forces by the addition of submarines in key locations.  The most important point to remember is to not waste your bid units by placing them where they can be easily hit by a J1 surprise attack.

The IPC Bid

This bid adds IPCs to the Allied total that can be used to purchase units on Allies 1.  The IPCs can be divided amongst all Allied nations.  The lower bid plays Allies.Â

As the units purchased with this bid cannot be placed until the end of Allies 1, bids will tend to be higher using an IPC bid only.  Bids in the 20 to 28 range would be typical, with the majority of the extra IPCs awarded to India, a few to Australia and sometimes 1 to the US.

The large purchasing power for India usually prevents the Japanese player from attempting an India Crush as India will be too strong for a J3 or J4 attack to be successful.

The Inverse IPC Bid

In an inverse IPC Bid, both players bid for a number of IPCs to be awarded to the Allied player.  The player that bids higher will play Japan and the Allied player receives IPCs equal to the Japanese player bid that can be distributed amongst the 3 Allied nations and spent on Allies 1.  The game is then played to 24 VPs for Japan.

With a 24 VP target, bids using this format tend to be in the 12 to 15 range.  This is just enough to provide India with enough defensive units to discourage a KIO attack but not so much as to unbalance the game in favour of the Allies.  This bidding method was adopted by Days of Infamy AAPacific Club after their 2005 tournament “Battle for India”.Â

IPCs tend to be allocated mostly to India with some players providing 1 to the US (to permit a 2 Sub, 4 Bmr A1 purchase) and 4 to Australia (for 3 subs).

In my view the inverse IPC bid creates the right balance between the two sides while at the same time creating many strategic options for the playout.  The bid tends to push the game in the direction of a VP victory although it does not preclude an opportunistic India or Australia capture.  What this bid system does do is generally eliminate the KIO option for the Japanese, which, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Saburo Sakai

I had to modify this essay.  One sea zone reference was incorrect.  I had referred to a sz28 sub surviving when it should have been sz27.  This should be changed in the published essay.  The error in the essay was in the paragraph immediately following the summary of the UK India purchases.

SS