US - BUY ONLY WARSHIPS (here's why)



  • Everyone wants to get some us troops into the game. We’re all guilty of it at one time or another.
    I’m thinking in this version of A&A the US might want to stick to Naval Warships only. This lets the UK/India, France, Russia, Italy focus on destroying the ground troops the C.P. already possess in quantity.
    By turn 4 the us is rolling and ready to strike and it makes the navies purchased by the C.P. a waste of money because only the US is buying warships. I think England can defend herself from any german threat and still produce good forces from the Indian factory. If a co-ordinated attack can be patched together from the Allies then the ridiculous naval arms race becomes a joke, a waste of everyones time and something you don’t spend all your cash on.
    Finally, I don’t think trasnports will ever win this game for the US or UK, you would just need too many to move your army.


  • Customizer

    How many ships do the Allies build after round one?

    The UK will usually make an all naval build R1 after the German attack has wiped them out, and maybe a couple more transports R2; but that’s usually it.

    These ships are needed immediately to get British units into Picardy or Karelia, but thereafter the Allies have more than enough naval power, and can easily match anything the CPs might spend on shipping.

    Now, if the game gave more power to CP submarine warfare, then American navy would be more valuable, but as things are I see no need for more US ships than are needed to carry the infantry across.



  • How many ships do the Allies build after round one?
    Except the US, after round 1, zero, nil, zilch, nadda.

    The UK will usually make an all naval build R1 after the German attack has wiped them out, and maybe a couple more transports R2; but that’s usually it.
    The R1 UK naval buy is a great move I agree. But then get down to business and make India your main production facility.

    These ships are needed immediately to get British units into Picardy or Karelia, but thereafter the Allies have more than enough naval power, and can easily match anything the CPs might spend on shipping.
    Agreed. My main thought was not to waste allied cash on navy, let the US clean the slate after turn 4. By then any money spent on CP navy is going to show in their lack of troops as your 4 vs. 3  (India, Russia, Itlay[if lucky] and France  VS  Central Powers) gets underway. Gameplay is always fluid though, and adjustments are needed from time to time.

    Now, if the game gave more power to CP submarine warfare, then American navy would be more valuable, but as things are I see no need for more US ships than are needed to carry the infantry across.
    We’ve never thought the sub warfare for Germany would ever do enough damage to make it worth the cost. Also, while you’re buying subs to take a few bucks from the Allies France is teaching French to your citizens and storming the Capital. Subs don’t defend against any land unit.

    Thanks for the reply.



  • If the CPs are buying warships, then yes, I agree the US should consider making warship buys as well. But a smart CP player won’t make naval buys for precisely the reason that they are so easily countered by US navy (which will destroy them before they have any decent effect), and naval buys make them weaker on the ground, killing their initial advantage.
    @Starlight:

    Finally, I don’t think transports will ever win this game for the US or UK, you would just need too many to move your army.

    It only takes 9 transports for the US to shuck 6 units to Piedmont/Tuscany/Albania/Greece or Picardy every turn, and Spain isn’t too hard to take to let them gradually push it up to 8.

    I agree with Flash that Submarine Warfare should be made powerful enough that either UK/US has to focus on navy to prevent them from getting starved.



  • When playing recently with my buds, the CP have purchased navies with all 3 CP to great effect. My solution was to make the US the main Navy Combatant and let the CP waste their money on ships. This clearly depends on what the CP decide to do with their currency.
    If the seas are clear:
    As the US I’d love to hit spain on turn 4, and then you’re in every turn.
    As France, can’t do much with a navy and we’re not at war with England, best to stay dry this war.
    As Italy, if the seas are clear marching east to grece is a strong supply line to some good coin. Like France, stay dry like a martini.
    The sneak move as far as I see it for the Allies is for Russia to build transports/navy in Sevastapol and take some Mediterranean area cash, Mines be damned!!
    I figured the only people who need to transport are the UK and US, so take the UK out of the equation by building mainly in India then the US has only one option left, the destruction of any CP naval forces threatening Europe.


  • Customizer

    I do not understand the Spanish invasion - why give the CPs 8 free units?

    I’d rather send the Yanks to where they’re needed straight away.



  • @Starlight:

    When playing recently with my buds, the CP have purchased navies with all 3 CP to great effect.

    How is every CP power affording navies? Germany+Austria have less income than Russia+France+Italy, who don’t need ships to get their troops to the front lines. And the Ottomans can be easily outspent by the British, especially if they aren’t making an effort to get troops into Europe.
    An Austrian navy will require a huge investment (like 2 BBs) to clear out the Italian navy because the British can add a cruiser to it the first two turns and even then Italy can just plop another BB down since A-H clearly won’t be threatening them on the ground without dying horribly to Russia.
    A German navy will at best stop the flow of troops from the British Isles into France that may not happen anyway. Even so, the French can (most likely) sink any Canadian subs that live, pick up some Canadians, and then sail to SZ 8 to have 1-2 Brit BBs built into the SZ. It would take tremendous amounts of resources to break 3-4 BBs+1 CA, especially because if you want to only deal with one mined SZ, the Brits get another turn to “panic build” navy.
    The Ottomans don’t really have enough money to float a navy. Maybe, maybe they could buy a BB R1 to deal a second punch to remaining fleet in SZ 17 after an Austrian hit, but if Austria bought any navy R1, as Russia I would definitely throw my 2 cruisers against the Ottomans. Heck, I would probably do that anyway because the Austrian threat on Sevastopol from Romania is much greater than any amphibious threat from the Ottomans.

    To summarize, the problem with CP navy is that it has to be offensive to make any significant impact, while mines, split powers, and key locations make defense so much easier.

    @Flashman:

    I do not understand the Spanish invasion - why give the CPs 8 free units?

    I’d rather send the Yanks to where they’re needed straight away.

    You’re right, if you’re planning on just dumping fodder into France/Italy, skipping Spain is probably the better option. But if you want to divert Austrian troops by breaking through the Balkans, the extra cash to make 8 units/turn happen is very useful. Also, due to the nature of the game, a very large production advantage is required to actually push very large stacks back.


  • Customizer

    Isn’t it better to wear down Spain with America and then let France take it to get the extra income into action sooner?



  • US wears down R4, France takes R5, uses extra income R6, extra money gets to Picardy R7.
    US wears down R4, US takes R5, uses extra income R6, extra money gets to Picardy/Italy/Balkans R8.

    The money gets on the front line 1 round sooner, but those French troops that took it are off the front line for some turns.

    I would say there’s no “right” way to do go about it; it comes down to personal preference.



  • I do not understand the Spanish invasion - why give the CPs 8 free units?
    I feel confident I could clear the zone in one attack, but if not, my backup is there the next turn. I like the idea because you only need two fleets of transports, and in a few moves you’re mopping up what france can’t do on her own. It’s a slow grind but the supply lines rarely falter for the States this way. The other main reason is the extra cash. Valuable land is hard to come by for the US. If you go for spain you know where the money is and how many defenders there will be. If you set sail for CP zones, there’s no way of knowing what will be waiting for you when you get there. It’s also a good jump of point if you want to sail the Med. Just making conversation after all and in a game as complex as this, the more strategy you can get under your belt the better.

    I’d rather send the Yanks to where they’re needed straight away.
    Where would that be? The other options I’ve tried have been an allies focused attack on Turkey, and I failed when I landed in the Holland/Belgium area and make little difference.
    Cheers  8-)


  • Customizer

    That would be wherever they’re most needed; though it could be argued that if the Central Powers haven’t achieved their objectives before the Americans start arriving in Europe in significant numbers then they’re unlikely ever to do so. US entry is the ticking clock the CPs have to beat, though as I’ve suggested its start could be linked to Russian collapse rather than a mandatory turn 4.

    Therefore plugging the gaps in Allied lines, notably stopping western capitals falling, is the most usual use for US imports.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 14
  • 10
  • 2
  • 14
  • 8
  • 20
  • 24
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

48
Online

13.7k
Users

34.0k
Topics

1.3m
Posts