A0 Turn (New turn order for 1942.2 map)


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    In an A0 game, America gets a “turn zero” before any other player acts. America’s turn zero is limited to noncombat movement, purchase, and placement – so, no combat on the American zero turn. This idea was invented by Black_Elk and Baron Munchhausen, with a little help from the old Hasbro CD that used to have a similar ‘restricted first turn’ for Russia. The idea is to give the Americans a chance to save their otherwise helpless transports in the Atlantic, save their otherwise helpless carrier group near Pearl Harbor, and get a head start on the extremely long supply chains that they have to cover to cross either (or both oceans) on the 1942.2 map.

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39104.msg1618838#msg1618838

    Because this results in a minimum of +42 IPCs for the Allies, some players may want to give the Axis a bid on an A0 map, probably in the range of 6 to 12 IPCs.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    I tested this map just now against the Hard AI on tripleA. I gave the Germans an extra infantry in Ukraine and Libya (so, bid of 6 IPCs for Axis), and then played all of the Allies against the AI-controlled Axis.

    The results surprised me! I played a reckless 100% KJF, moving all available units to the Japanese theater as quickly as possible. The Flying Tigers went to Buryatia to suppport the stack of 5 Russian inf that would gather there on R1, the American Pacific fleet congregated in the Solomon Islands, the American Atlantic fleet dove west through the Panama canal, and the 6 Chinese infantry concentrated in Szechuan. As Russia, I attacked only West Russia, and then flew one fighter to Buryatia (5 inf, 2 ftr total). As the UK, I executed a successful Kwangbang (!) after the AI-controlled Germany declined to hit Egypt, moving CV + CA + 2 ftr to the Kwangtung sea zone, and using one of those fighters plus 2 infantry from India to take out Kwangtung’s 1 inf, 1 art. Meanwhile, the Australians joined up with the US fleet in the Solomons, and successfully occupied the Solomon Islands.

    So the Chinese theater went better than expected. Japan was slowly forced to back away from Manchuria, which went to Russia almost without a fight, and the 6 American infantry, plus the Flying Tigers, plus the starting US bomber that flew in via Hawaii, were able to slowly clear out and take Kiangsu and Kwangtung. Meanwhile, most of the Japanese reinforcements went southwest, toward India, giving the British a really hard time. The British narrowly took Burma, French Indochina, and Malaya, but were unable to conduct any successful naval operations, and they didn’t hold Burma long before the Germans were knocking on India’s door from the west – Britain didn’t even attempt to hold Africa.

    The Japanese fleet was driven out of Tokyo’s waters on J4, fleeing to the coast of Alaska with no transports, and all Japanese possessions outside Tokyo were conqeured on B5/A5, but Japan was able to stack Tokyo itself with about 6 fighters and 4 bombers, plus 10 land units, which was tricky for the Allies – the Allies didn’t have any realistic hope of conquering Japan before the Germans arrived on the Pacific coast, but with all that air power lying around, plus the Japanese warships near Alaska, it wasn’t safe to redeploy away from Tokyo to use all those American ships/fighters in, e.g., India, where they were sorely needed.

    Moscow fell once on G3, which was just a blunder on my part – I let a stack of tanks from Ukraine blitz through an empty West Russia to hit Moscow, and I could have easily covered West Russia with one infantry. The Russians were able to retake Moscow on R4 with their enormous stack from the Caucasus, and Moscow didn’t fall for good until G7. The Germans only had 3 tanks left over after killing my stack in Moscow, but Moscow’s fall exposed China, Kazakh, and India to irresistibly large follow-up forces. Instead of trying to defend these territories, I focused all efforts on killing Tokyo, but it still wasn’t enough, and I resigned when the Germans made it to Kwangtung on G9.

    In hindsight, if I were trying a similarly reckless 100% KJF strategy with the A0 turn, I would make no effort to conquer Tokyo itself – once Japan was cleared off the mainland and the money islands, it’s time to start gearing up for defense of Moscow and India. I would have built a factory in East Indies instead of Borneo (easier to reinforce India; harder for Japan to harass it), and I would have used the Kwangtung and Kiangsu factories to crank out tanks to fight the Germans, instead of buying a mix of inf/art/bomber for invading Tokyo. At one point, around turn 6 or turn 7, the Allies were outproducing the Axis by roughly 110 IPCs to 65 IPCs, so the game was very winnable; I just played the endgame wrong.

    Looking forward to seeing if anyone tests a KGF or balanced strategy with the A0 turn!


  • 2017 2016

    I feel a bit hurt being not credited for my “non-combat” addition to USA R0 turn, which is Black Elk idea.
    😢 😢 😢
    Also, the non-combat russian turn 1 was almost official in Classic A&A because it was an option of official Iron Blitz CD-Rom.
    Which idea in itself, should be on the same level as a bid for official ways of dealing with unbalancing issue.


  • '14

    Yeah the restricted idea and calling it a “Zero turn” was Baron’s. Both of which I like.
    🙂

    I played that old Hasbro cd to death, so the concept was very familar.

    I just suggested that America open the game with a full regular turn, which might be too overpowered, though I think could still have promise for an inversion (Axis bid.)


  • '14

    Sounds like a fun game! Haha triple team! Yeah Tokyo is hard to take down, even in a situation where Allies are running the board on the Pacific side. The machine is surprisingly adept at stacking Tokyo, even when it does weird stuff like pulling their fleets away from their production centers.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    I’m so sorry, Baron! I did not mean to leave your name off of the credits. I’ve fixed it in the original post. 🙂


  • 2017 2016

    :mrgreen:@Argothair:

    I’m so sorry, Baron! I did not mean to leave your name off of the credits. I’ve fixed it in the original post. 🙂

    Thanks Argothair.
    I’m still playtesting M3 Cruiser and TP.
    UK have much more fun in South-East Asia.
    It allows to split Cruiser and invade Borneo with Australian fleet.
    I retreat 1 Cruiser in India SZ, and built a DD to defend SZ and TP left.
    Not possible OOB however.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    I tried another A0 solo playtest against the Hard AI on TripleA, this time taking the Axis powers. I kept the same 6 point bid for the Axis, but I “allowed” the computer to take a full A0 turn, including combat. (Good luck stopping it!)

    Anyway, the results were very interesting. America used its A0 turn pretty conventionally, killing the Japanese sub in the Solomon Islands, stacking the Solomons with the entire US and Australian fleets, landing the Flying Tigers on the India carrier, killing the German subs in the North Atlantic, and moving the Atlantic transports to the coast of East Canada. USA also made some moderately aggressive attacks in China – I think the AI hit my 1 inf, 1 art in Kwangtung with something like 4 inf, 1 ftr.

    What surprised me was that on A1, the USA followed up by attacking not France or Morocco, but Scandinavia! USA took both Norway and Finland with unescorted transports, and because the US took both territories, I could not attack those transports, because my planes were a little too far out of position and had nowhere left to land. That slowed Germany down a bit, because it meant that Russia was able to trade Leningrad for several turns despite making a very aggressive trio of attacks (Baltic OOB, West Russia OOB, Ukraine vs. +1 inf bid) on R1.

    The large Allied navy in the Solomons plus the temporary loss of Kwangtung slowed Japan down by a couple of turns as well, since Japan had to spend almost all of the J1 and J2 builds on warships. I built a third Japanese carrier group, a few Japanese destroyers, and a second transport, and I was able to pick off the Indian fleet on J2 in exchange for a couple of fighters. America never reinforced the Solomons fleet with anything except what started off the coast of San Francisco and Panama, so by J3 I had naval parity and by J4 I had naval superiority. Meanwhile, Japan crawled up to about 38 IPCs/turn by picking off territories one or two at a time. It was very satisfying when I finally occupied all of China and southeast Asia! Britain was able to attack the East Indies on about B4, which drew one of my transports out of position, but because I had six fighters in the region, I was able to retake the East Indies with only one transport, so it wasn’t too big of a disruption. By then the Allied Pacific fleet was retreating from its high-water mark of West Australia back toward the Solomon Islands. I built a factory in Kwangtung on J4, and after that Japan didn’t have any serious problems.

    Meanwhile, Germany was able to soak up most of Africa following a successful G1 attack on Egypt (+1 inf bid in Libya, and British never reinforced the Suez), which prompted the Americans to direct most of their IPCs toward reclaiming Africa via French West Africa and Morocco – I think they built 8 new transports and loaded them and sent them all south. Germany took and held Leningrad around G4 or G5, retook Finland, and was trading with advantage each turn in Archangel, Belorussia, and Ukraine. The Russians were down to about 10 units, with about 7 Allied planes helping to hold Moscow. Russia wasn’t out of it yet, but it was rapidly bleeding to death. Meanwhile, a large German air force (about 3 bombers and 6 fighters) plus a large garrison (about 15 infantry total in France and Italy) was holding the Allied Atlantic fleets away from prime territory. I don’t think they even made it to Morocco until A3 or A4. The Germans didn’t have all that many units to spare on the eastern front, but the large air force meant that even a couple of infantry could still knock out the Soviet garrisons at a profit.

    I stopped playing after R6, mostly because it got late and I got tired, but also because I could sort of see where the game was going. The Allies were no longer putting any serious pressure on Japan, so Japan was going to get huge – with a focused effort, Japan probably could have seized India by J8 or J9, or Japan could add additional troops to the central route and stack in Kazakhstan to really wipe out the Russian economy, or Japan could just buy bombers and bomb Moscow. Either way, the Allies didn’t have anything going against Germany in time to counteract that; Germany was collecting 45 IPCs and had enough reserves to maintain its pace for several turns. It would have been a long game, but it was Germany’s game to lose.

    I really enjoyed the variant – it felt more historical, and it felt more satisfying. Germany opens a bit bigger out of the gate because of the bid, but it also has more to worry about from the Allies in the early turns because the Allies still have about half of their starting Atlantic ships – it really does feel like 1942! Japan has to deal with genuine threats coming from multiple sides – the British threaten to break out of India and take Sumatra and/or Thailand, the Chinese are threatening to break out of Szechuan and take Kwangtung or Kiangsu, and the US/Australian fleet is threatening to kill the Japanese transports and/or take the Philippines or Borneo. There’s really a lot to keep tabs on! If you’re able to beat back all of those threats and start conquering territories as Japan, it feels like you earned the victory, instead of just effortlessly expanding while the American “Hard AI” awkwardly shuffles troops back and forth between the Eastern US and East Canada.

    I don’t think I can recommend the A0 combat turn against a human player, especially with only a 6 point bid for the Axis; I think it would be seriously unbalanced in favor of the Allies. The only reason I was doing well this game is because the TripleA AI is so clumsy with the Americans on the 1942.2 map. Even so, I thought the AI did a great job with the actual A0 turn itself, and the overall pattern of American play seemed stronger when the computer was allowed to retain the core of the Atlantic fleet vs. when the Ai is required to rebuild from scratch. The AI sent four well-guarded, loaded transports in a very reasonable attempt to conquer Italy, and I had to abandon my Persian campaign in order to defend against it. That’s a lot more than an AI-controlled America usually pulls off in the first six turns of a 1942.2 game!


  • '14

    Sounds like a fun match! It’s cool to see the AI trying to pull out some new tricks with A0. Clearly the AI is not the strongest strategist. It works pretty well in Classic and Revised, but struggles under the v3 or later rules, owing to defensless transports, and subs not creating a hostile sea zone. In my experience it’s too timid on the water, and too bold on the ground, relative to what a human would typically do. Still, it’s fun to see it open a bit differently. I was using some pretty astronomical bids and income bonuses for the AI Allies and still working em as Axis. So if A0 gives the AI Allies a bit more to work with, definitely couldn’t hurt.

    I think I’d have to agree that a human would take much better advantage of a full turn. Not sure what the optimal Axis bid would be for those conditions, but their production spread is still pretty strong, so they might not need too much. Maybe double digits, but probably not as a high as the typical Allied bids for OOB. Eager to try it out in a live game sometime.



  • Cool to read about the different style with turn A0.  Also cool to see that the vets still make errors… not just me!  Definitely want to read more if you keep playtesting.  Originally I was against the +42 bid + saved Allied TUV + destroyed Axis TUV as way overkill for balance (I thought non-com only might be enough), but an Axis bid would keep it interesting.

    I would like to try my proposed 4 or 5 IPC value India, but I’m not sure how to modify the game like that.  I’m also more green than you guys (by several hundred games, apparently) so I’m not sure how well my playtesting against the AI would be as validation.


  • 2017 2016

    @Russiangoat:

    Cool to read about the different style with turn A0.  Also cool to see that the vets still make errors… not just me!  Definitely want to read more if you keep playtesting.  Originally I was against the +42 bid + saved Allied TUV + destroyed Axis TUV as way overkill for balance (I thought non-com only might be enough), but an Axis bid would keep it interesting.

    I would like to try my proposed 4 or 5 IPC value India, but I’m not sure how to modify the game like that.  I’m also more green than you guys (by several hundred games, apparently) so I’m not sure how well my playtesting against the AI would be as validation.

    Do you believe a 5 IPCs India can be able to repulse IJN with 5 units produced each turn?


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    If you can get into the “package” of TripleA, there will be a text file for each map, and you can just edit the production value of India in that text file for Solo playtesting. If you want to playtesting online, you need your opponent’s to have the same map, which is beyond my ken. Someone more active on TripleA might know. On a real board, of course, you just declare that India is worth 5 ipcs, and it is so! You can use a sticker or post it note if you need a reminder.

    I think a 5 IPC India could protect itself from Japan, but at what cost? 15+ IPCs per turn to India leaves Britain without the funds to build a serious Atlantic fleet. You might build one destroyer and fill one transport in the Atlantic each turn, or you might not even manage that, if you want any British air support for India or Russia. It becomes very easy for Germany to ward off your tiny fleet with even one German fighter purchase per turn, so Germany will probably get huge, and eventually India gets attacked from both sides, by Germany and Japan.

    If the UK abandons a 5 IPC India factory, then Japan can singlehandedly out produce the Caucasus, without the need to build any new factories of its own.

    I agree that Britain needs more starting production slots, but I’d rather accomplish that with extra starting factories in South Africa, Australia, and/or Canada.


  • 2017 2016

    @Argothair:

    If you can get into the “package” of TripleA, there will be a text file for each map, and you can just edit the production value of India in that text file for Solo playtesting. If you want to playtesting online, you need your opponent’s to have the same map, which is beyond my ken. Someone more active on TripleA might know. On a real board, of course, you just declare that India is worth 5 ipcs, and it is so! You can use a sticker or post it note if you need a reminder.

    I think a 5 IPC India could protect itself from Japan, but at what cost? 15+ IPCs per turn to India leaves Britain without the funds to build a serious Atlantic fleet. You might build one destroyer and fill one transport in the Atlantic each turn, or you might not even manage that, if you want any British air support for India or Russia. It becomes very easy for Germany to ward off your tiny fleet with even one German fighter purchase per turn, so Germany will probably get huge, and eventually India gets attacked from both sides, by Germany and Japan.

    **If the UK abandons a 5 IPC India factory, then Japan can singlehandedly out produce the Caucasus, without the need to build any new factories of its own.

    I agree that Britain needs more starting production slots, but I’d rather accomplish that with extra starting factories in South Africa, Australia, and/or Canada.**

    If UK doesn’t have enough money to feed UK up to 5 units, how can UK can feed other IC?
    Do you believe that building slowly units in Eastern Canada will help UK in India?
    I don’t see how Australia or South Africa ICs can help…


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    In a 100% KJF game, the UK needs extra Pacific build slots, to drop 3 inf/turn in India, plus some sea or air elsewhere in the southeast quadrant of the board. The Indian sea zone is rarely a good place to drop Allied boats, because Japan can usually dead zone it, so other sea zones (Australia, South Africa) make for better staging grounds, and the loss of one turn to fly a plane from Sydney to Calcutta is only a minor disadvantage.

    In a KGF game, the UK needs to be able to gracefully abandon India without gifting Japan 5 Build slots in the center – Japan could eventually take, e.g., Sydney, but it’s not nearly as useful to an expanding Japan as it is to a defending Britain. A factory in Western Canada can be used to poke at the North Pacific, and a factory in Eastern Canada is admittedly useless for KJF, but it does give you a place to drop air/sea units in KGF after you are using London to fill four transports each turn.


  • '14

    I think the issue with India is that it’s just more production than the British economy can really handle, even at just 3. Although if it was 5, there is good chance they could hold it long enough to have an impact. The question then becomes, what do you do with it? 5 tanks a turn? Hold it for like 4 turns and then bounce, sending 20 tanks to the Eastern front? Stick it out with 5 artillery and a fighter in UK? It’d pretty much be the only game in town, Japan would have to go south I’d think, or give up on the center. I don’t know it might work actually. But the game would still be pretty one dimensional for UK. It’d be an even bigger magnet at 5 than it is at 3.

    I wish Australia was a single territory worth 3, and a starting factory on it. I had it that way in Pact of Steel, and it seemed to work pretty well. Japan had a tougher decision to make.

    I had an idea that every factory gets +2 production over the printed value on the map. This would give UK 5 at India, but also gives everyone else the same advantage. Japan could spam factories on the mainland, but then again UK/US could do a fair amount of spamming themselves.

    I think such a rule would be pretty interesting, since you could a factory anywhere really and be guaranteed at least 2 slots (even on an empty tile.) Turns the factory into more of an outpost unit.Then the board becomes more about building as many outposts as you can in the chosen theater, but balanced against the then fill those outposts with combat units.

    I would make all factories auto-destroyed upon capture. As a way to cull the spam. But it would make every theater more interesting for both sides. Otherwise valueless islands might actually be worthwhile with an outpost factory  (easier to defend, less to lose if they fall.) Any theater could be activated. You imagine Germany being able to put 3 production in North Africa. Or 5 on the Eastern Front. Japan able to put 3 production in Bury with 5 and Manchuria. Could get pretty intense. Then again US/UK could put them pretty much anywhere. And Russia would also benefit from extra production on the front lines, and less fear of captured Soviet factories being immediately used against them.

    I love the factory unit myself, I think it’s the most interesting unit in the roster. One of things I don’t really dig in G40, is that there are so many restrictions on where it can go. The minor could have been such an outpost unit in that game, but the way the rules are you can’t put them in most of the locations that might make the unit interesting. This rule for 1942 gives you a similar dynamic, but with no restrictions on placement, and no need for a multi-tiered production profile. The unit is still limited by the values on the map, just has a bottom floor at 2 production, that makes it useful pretty much anywhere. It would be fun for A0 escapades in China or Alaska or Hawaii hehe.

    Basically like v3 tech, and then auto-tech everyone with the advanced factories? Just remove the restriction that says “only on territories +3 or greater”?

    It’s that restriction that prevents the unit from becoming an all-purpose outpost that could function on any tile, and limits its full gameplay potential. If you’re not wedded to the idea that IC’s have to actually be Industrial Complexes, this sort of rule turns them into a more abstract “front-line deployment” unit.


  • '14

    ps. Here is a game save with the American zero turn for v5, where the AI has a 10 percent income bonus. I think the AI handles itself a bit better with the boost.
    You can edit a bid if desired. You can adjust the bonus to whatever you like, in the game options.

    The game simulates A0 by skipping the first round to US1. Its starts on Japan’s non com (to give the US its proper income boost) if playing vs AI Allies. Basically you just click done with Japan, and it goes straight into the A0 (full turn). You could go higher on the income boost too, if this isn’t challenging enough, but I definitely think the machine does better with the income boost than with an AI bid. The logic for the AI bid is pretty busted, whereas the income bonus gives the AI something consistent to work with over time, to make up it’s for strategic deficiencies in other areas like with fleet mangement haha.

    Just finished messing around vs AI Allies with no bid. They went 8 rounds before Moscow collapse, mostly focusing on the Atlantic. Not spectacular, but still a lot better than OOB hehe.

    Pps. The AI doesn’t really know how to leverage their advantage with the western Allies, it’s very aggressive and somewhat shortsighted on the ground, decided less so on the water. I think for AI Allies to be challenging it is advisable to give the Russians more to work with. You can edit more units for the Soviets on the J1 non com if desired. Also it should be noted that the gamesave below allows you to play vs AI Allies. If you want to play as Allies vs AI Axis,  you can just start a save from US1.

    1942 sec ed USA starts AI income 10 percent.tsvg
    1942 sec ed USA starts AI income 10 percent J8.tsvg


  • '14

    Just for kicks I went at the machine again. There’s not a whole lot the AI can show you, because skynet still doesn’t play as a human would, but it can be amusing to see how Redrum’s hard AI deals with the A0.

    This time I gave the AI Allies a 20 percent income bonus in the game menu, and edited a bomber to Russia.

    The AI Allies performed much better, with UK bombing the hell out of G for the duration, and the US mounting a pretty effective KGF. All the Al Allies were more aggressive, but the Soviets in particular, which is always fun.  They smoked a stack of 10 Japanese fighters in a final glorious offensive, before the center unraveled. I went a little fighter crazy with Axis, instead of the usual Axis stratB type game.

    Here in the 14th round, the Allies are way way ahead in naval TUV and the American AI has just landed a major expeditionary force in Italy. Japan just barely managed to snake Moscow, to try and open things up for the bad guys hehe. But yeah, a lot more entertaining vs AI Allies at 20 percent, and the Russian Bomber.
    😄

    ps. took another 4 rounds for Japan to stabilize Germany, but Allies are still pretty thick in Europe. The British just bought themselves a factory in France haha. Will probably call it a night here, since the Axis have nearly turned the production spread despite being totally outclassed on the water. Just a matter of building up the Eurasian air defenses to bully the AI fleets around, but it was still pretty fun facing down a KGF with the AI at 20% income boost.

    1942 sec ed USA starts Rus StB AI income 20 percent G14.tsvg
    1942 sec ed USA starts Rus StB AI income 20 percent G18.tsvg


  • '14

    Also here is a gamesave for the A0 turn, US1 start… I have it posted elsewhere, but might as well stick one here too.
    😄

    One more for the long night… This time I gave the AI Axis the 20% bonus and played as Allies under A0 (restricted opening). A slow burn, dual-theater, Japan stall type game. Took 17 rounds to get a comfortable line on Tokyo, but it was pretty safe play throughout along the center wedge. AI Germany made some curious decisions for the opener, that I hadn’t really seen before from the AI, they basically gave the Royal navy a pass, which was almost certainly their undoing. I grabbed the ball and ran with it, taking the oppertunity to push in both directions. I find that on the Pacific side AI Japan is pretty easy to manage if you just purchase enough carriers and bombers to put the zap on the IJN right away. Not quite as intense as I expected for an Axis +20% income game, even with the boost the Axis couldn’t crack the center. I made firebombing a top priority, revenge against the machine for the last game hehe. Basically I have to push the limits pretty hard with the bonuses to see a credible threat from the AI, but its still pretty fun for a low stress stomp. Its come a fairly long way under Redrum’s mad science, compared to the older AIs which were pretty useless. This one can sometimes make a breakout if you load it up with enough cash haha

    1942 sec ed USA starts AI Axis 20 percent R17.tsvg
    1942 sec ed USA starts.tsvg


  • '14

    I was bumming that I had to miss a local area game of 42.2 today on account of work. So I called my buddy out of retirement to play A0 tomorrow.

    The plan was to go otherwise OOB, but he’s probably rusty, so still debating whether to throw a red bomber his way haha.

    rps20170227_003718_500.jpg


  • 2017 2016

    Will you try StB C5?
    If the case, will you allow TcBs to be buy?
    Playing USA R0 restricted?



  • @Argothair:

    I think a 5 IPC India could protect itself from Japan, but at what cost? 15+ IPCs per turn to India leaves Britain without the funds to build a serious Atlantic fleet. You might build one destroyer and fill one transport in the Atlantic each turn, or you might not even manage that, if you want any British air support for India or Russia. It becomes very easy for Germany to ward off your tiny fleet with even one German fighter purchase per turn, so Germany will probably get huge, and eventually India gets attacked from both sides, by Germany and Japan.

    If the UK abandons a 5 IPC India factory, then Japan can singlehandedly out produce the Caucasus, without the need to build any new factories of its own.

    I agree that Britain needs more starting production slots, but I’d rather accomplish that with extra starting factories in South Africa, Australia, and/or Canada.

    @Black_Elk:

    I think the issue with India is that it’s just more production than the British economy can really handle, even at just 3. Although if it was 5, there is good chance they could hold it long enough to have an impact. The question then becomes, what do you do with it? 5 tanks a turn? Hold it for like 4 turns and then bounce, sending 20 tanks to the Eastern front? Stick it out with 5 artillery and a fighter in UK? It’d pretty much be the only game in town, Japan would have to go south I’d think, or give up on the center. I don’t know it might work actually. But the game would still be pretty one dimensional for UK. It’d be an even bigger magnet at 5 than it is at 3.

    Good comments. � I did manage to figure out how to edit the 5 IPC India, and played one game as Allies and one as Axis against Hard AI (no bonuses, but did also use the Red bomber bid game 1 and AI used the 12 IPCs for Russian ground). �

    In the first game AI Japan built a factory in Manchuria, but didn’t build up their fleet much (and they never do Pearl) so I hit them with the starting US fleet from Hawaii and the east coast (at 45% odds) and wiped out their fleet. They turtled and were overrun in Asia so it was an easy Allied victory. I was dropping 5 ground in the UK and 1 fighter in London for Moscow support, but Germany never made a real play for Moscow, just played cat and mouse with Russia.

    Second game I was Axis, and UK dropped 5 inf in India first turn, which was daunting for Japan. � However, the US transport and destroyer survived G1, so US went Atlantic fleet heavy and UK followed suit, and left India to rot. � Germany was mostly playing defence for the rest of the game, and once Japan had India the Orange monster was in full swing. � Moscow fell after Germany’s main stack peeled all the ground and Japanese tanks rolled in, which is fairly standard when you ignore Japan completely. �  �

    The 5 IPC India definitely means the UK has to drop some more IPCs away from Europe, but I feel like this makes a KJF strategy a lot more plausible, since Japan can’t compete on the ground with UK and on the water with US. � Kick Japan off of Asia and then pivot the ground troops to Moscow. �

    In a KGF the UK has to balance between the Atlantic and the Pacific, but Japan has to focus resources more on taking India (if dropping even 5 inf per turn) it delays the center crush, and keeps Japan from being the Orange Monster early on. And since they get 2 bonus IPCs per turn and to starting income, some of the costs of stacking extra infantry are mitigated.  � If Japan is distracted, the extra Indian units can pivot towards Africa or Moscow, and provide relief in those areas. �

    It is hard for me to gauge how realistic this is from just playing the AI, but those are my thoughts. � A good human opponent may make way more hay with Germany with some of the pressure off in the Atlantic.

    I’m interested to hear how your face to face A0 games goes. � What bid are you thinking for the Axis?



  • I played another game with India at 5, but I played against myself instead of the AI (first time doing that!).

    Russia got absolutely diced in the heavy Ukraine strafe, and so West Russia was abandoned R2 and with no fighter support (Iceland gone G1, no other good routes) Germany rolled over them on turn G5.

    Once the fighter route was gone I went heavy tanks in India, hoping to swing out against the Japanese and provide defence for Moscow.  I did have 8 UK tanks about to rush in to Moscow for defence (on UK6), but that would have exposed India on J6 AND Japanese tanks were closing in on Moscow as well, so it would have been a 1 or 2 turn delay at most.  Japan had the luxury of building a factory in Manchuria for north route tanks and just stacking Yunnan with art and inf (with their fleet in the adjacent SZ) and deadzone Burma, so the UK troop buildup in India couldn’t really pivot out of India as much as I thought.  Any foray out of India, and the 5 IPC factory would be gone, so the two armies stayed in the gravitational pull of one another.

    I’ve never really done a KJF, but I think that might work a lot better with 5 IPC India.  I might read some KJF strategies and try it out.  So far, 5 IPC India is a failure, haha.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 4
  • 1
  • 14
  • 5
  • 21
  • 16
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games

46
Online

13.4k
Users

33.7k
Topics

1.3m
Posts