• @Argothair:

    Hi, MarineIguana. Please keep in mind that I’m well aware of the orthodox strategies for 1942.2, so when I write about other strategies, I usually either (a) have a niche scenario in mind where given the particular circumstances of that scenario, another strategy can be just as good, or (b) am purposely exploring other strategies that are fun but not optimal. You’re more than welcome to point out where my suggested strategies would go wrong – but please be careful not to just point out that my strategies are different from the orthodox strategies and then promptly conclude that my strategies must be wrong because they’re different from the orthodox strategies.

    Yeah, I am assuming that the goal is to maximize the probability of winning a game. As an alternative challenge, one can try to place a Japanese AA gun in greenland before the end of the game. I’ve done that once and it was amusing.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    Well when you get down to it, there are really only two kinds of Axis and Allies games, the long ones and the slightly shorter ones  :-D

    Self imposed time constraints can be important (whether you are playing digitally or face to face) and also understanding the general disposition of your opponent, like whether they have endurance for the long slog or if they’re more impulsive or inclined to take gambles.

    If the expectation is for a long game against a patient opponent, or a low luck game, or on the computer where it’s possible to play a large number of rounds in continuous sessions, then you pad the odds, and use the scripted openings, and try to trade units at advantage until the center crush is resolved one way or another. Games like this feature huge mountains of ground units at the center of the gamemap and monster stacks of aircraft. In that type of match, anything that distracts from the contest at the center is usually bad for business for the side that deviates first, or else it pushes out the game’s resolution if the opponent follows suit and starts doing deviant stuff of their own.

    On the other hand, if its a short game, or against an impatient opponent, face to face, or a single session with no prospects of a continuation, then all sorts of things can happen that might make it advantageous to double down or make audacious plays.

    It’s helpful to know how risk averse your opponent is. Take Burma as an example. If Japan holds Burma with 1 infantry unit, are they the sort of player who will attack it with 1 infantry and air support (and run a slight risk against your defense for an optimal trade) or are they the sort that will bring 2 infantry, to ensure you can’t stack it with defensive air? Similarly, are you the sort of Japanese player who is willing to take a risk to trade at advantage, or are you the sort who will pad it and bring the extra dude to ensure you take the territory? If they play the risk, then you should probably focus on aircraft. If they like to bring the second dude then you should probably focus on ground, so you have enough units to compensate for the losses you’re likely to sustain over many rounds. The latter requires slightly more production/transport capacity than the former.

    For the most part I see pretty similar UK openers these days…

    The most common purchases for UK are:

    Max Air Builds:
    2 artillery, 1 inf in India and 2 fighters in England (best for India round 3 defense)
    3 infantry in India and 1 fighter 1 bomber in England (fun for an early Med push, and killing German Battleship outright)

    Max Tank builds:
    3 tanks in India and 1 fighter 1 inf in England
    3 tanks in India and 1 bomber in England
    (Both of these builds are best when the tanks are conserved for later use against Germany on the Eastern Front or for the eventual Berlin battle, not against Japan.)

    Often these same purchases are repeated over several rounds to magnify the effect.

    90% of the time, the UK is best served going for the Max Air builds because you get more out of them in the long run due to the mobility factor. The 2 fighter build is the most common by far for the critical defense of W. Russia/India, though the UK can also be very effective with additional bombers especially when trying to hold the IJN at bay.

    Sometimes the UK will get a chance to mix things up in the second round, instead of repeating the purchases mentioned above.

    All the other less common builds usually fall into one of two types, saving to purchase an Atlantic carrier fleet to set up early KGF pressure (usually with US fighters on deck), or else some kind of wily KJF oriented build in an attempt to break the IJN quickly somehow. This latter rarely comes off, unless Japan has a disastrous first round. Saving for an early Atlantic carrier, likewise only really works if Germany had a poor opening, losing a bunch of fighters etc.

    Usually I’ll see the sz61 attack, as outlined by MarineIguana, though whether it involves the cruiser fighter combo, or the carrier fighter combo, or just the lone fighter, depends on whether the Germans expose their battleship. If the battleship is a potential target, sz 61 takes on a new dimension. In those cases it might make sense to use the India fleet in slightly different ways.

    The sz 37 hit is much less common, though not uncommon enough to write off entirely, since the UK can definitely get annoying if they elect to use their bid like that. Going cutthroat with no conditions other than trying to win, I prefer a med bid for the UK, as I know we’ve discussed in previous threads, but if the UK claps down on 37 and does well, it can certainly turn the Japanese opener on its head right quick. But usually I see 61 from UK to kill the destroyer/transport, and most of the time, as Japan, you’re facing down max ground in India with air being shuttled over from the West, every round until the India pocket collapses, when it is no longer possible to hold Calcutta against an all out ground assault from Burma, or if Russia is threatened and it’s no longer worth it to stay in India for fear of losing all your critical air power. Until then the IJN will basically be stuck off coastal China unless it is expanded early on with a third carrier, some defensive DD and the like, because UK will have enough air in India to keep them from making a break towards Suez (or so the British logic goes.)

    My favorite play for the UK pacific sub is to attack into sz 37 with only the sub and dive immediately, avoiding combat. Then clear the destroyer in sz 61 so the British sub cannot be sunk on J1. This can cause some definite headaches for the IJN, especially if the british starting bomber is flown in range for UK2.

    As the Japanese the only truly safe harbors are sz 61 or those sea zones immediately adjacent to the home island. But as long as you preserve your transports or keep them out of range of Allied air, the Japanese don’t really need much to threaten the center. From Yunnan a Japanese ground stack is only 3 moves from Moscow, and only 2 moves from India. That’s still pretty close, even for  slow moving units like infantry.

    If developing an all purpose gameplan for Japan, it would probably look something like this…

    Round 1: expand transport capacity and fleet defense. 2 transports 2 destroyers can be fun. Or 2 transports one carrier. Or 2 transports 1 fighter. Or 2 transports 1 bomber (I consider bombers as part of fleet defense and deterrence, even if they can’t land on carriers, because they can be used to deadzone such a large area of the pacific ocean from Japan.)

    Round 2: buy another air unit and the rest ground to shuck, or one more transport and the rest ground to shuck.

    Round 3: expand production and spend the rest on ground, or just make the same kind of build you did in round two, until such time as production expansion makes sense…

    From round 4 on, you can pretty much just park your fleet in sz 61, dump everything into Yunnan and stack heavily with successive shucks until an opportunity presents itself somewhere. If the Allies come at you, keep your air close to home and build more air to support what you already have. If the Allies ignore you then send that air to cover the German advance on the center, and build more to send their way in subsequent rounds.

    It can be fun to expand your transports up to one more than you actually need for your max production. A transport in your back pocket, can be fun, esp if you break it away from the main fleet with a cruiser say, to pick up some extra income from Australia, or cause distractions in Alaska or Hawaii etc. More than a few times I’ve seen a sneaky transport in the southern hemisphere lurking around, all but forgotten, until they magically reappear from the shadows like a ninja assassin, to royally screw an unsuspecting Allied opponent haha.

    Eventually the center will break and Japan can start to do more interesting stuff, or the center will hold, in which case Japan should probably just concede lol.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    Ps. Couple thoughts on the Polar Express concept as an endgame play rather than an opener…

    A version of this strat can be made to work in the final rounds, provided that Japan is no longer needed at the center, and has sufficiently outpaced the Americans on income. It’s also helpful if the Allied player is a good sport, or just wants to play out a few more rounds before calling it a night.  :-D

    An example might be, if Germany is poised to take Moscow alone, such that Japan has a free hand to redirect early against North America, instead of Africa. Or if it seems like the Allies might be able to trade Moscow for Berlin in the same round, and Japan wants to keep going.

    It requires that you have a large number ground units at the ready preferably in Yakut and Munchuria. The basic idea is to spam transports at the last minute before the planned invasion. So say you have 5 or 6 transports with 12 or more units ready to transport out of sz 60 to Alaska, and several more ground units in Yakut or Manchuria, that can move to Bury at the same time so that they can be shucked the following round. Then you spam 5 more transports to set up the double shuck, from Japan and Manchuria to Buryatia with one transport group, and from Buryatia  to Alaska with the other transport group.

    To pull this off, you have to be able to match US production a full round ahead of their ability to equal your forces from their production centers, and this with already existing Japanese units, which is why you need the Yakut stack at the ready. If you can rapidly amass a large stack of ground in Alaska by using existing Japanese units, it may be possible to walk them to Western Canada without fear of a crushing counter attack from the US, and then you can use your transports to threaten W. US on amphibious, while you attempt to can open Central or Eastern Canada with German bombers for a blitz on DC. Although not a particularly likely deep endgame, it can sometimes be a more direct route to the ultimate Axis smackdown, than taking London.

    Again, I don’t think its something that you can really plan for from the outset, but more of a redirect at the last possible second, where you make as if to threaten Moscow from Yakut, but then rapidly double back for the Alaskan crossing. It’s also pretty simple for the US to cover against this play, if they see it coming, so you really have to catch them with their guard down.

    I think there are only two times I’ve seen it work. Once was in a KGF game, where the Russian player made a strategic withdrawal from Moscow in an attempt to triple team G. And another game where Germany got lucky on their tank drive and smoked Moscow earlier than anyone expected. In both instances the Allies were playing a masochist’s game, fighting on rather than conceding haha

Suggested Topics

  • 13
  • 6
  • 4
  • 18
  • 5
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

27

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts