Aggressive UK Pacific Strategies



  • Hello Axis and Allies Global 1940 Community,

    I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version, and have moved through the different versions to the 1940 second edition global for the last 2 years.

    I am curious to hear about some aggressive UK Pacific strategies. I currently have been playing with a Europe attacks Taranto, stabilizes Africa, builds in Persia and South Africa strategy, while maintaining a defense in Calcutta with my Pacific power. In this strategy, UK Pacific essentially tries to move its remaining Indian ocean fleet out of reach from the Japs after a J1, builds infantry, and essentially just holds on for dear life (for the first 5/6 rounds at least).

    I want to try something more aggressive. I have been contemplating using the transport in the Ceylon sea zone to either drop 2 infantry in Sumatra (and return to the protected waters in the Ceylon seazone), or 1 in Sumatra, 1 in Java round 1 (which most likely a sacrifice of the transport). And build an aircraft carrier and land Burma and India fighter on it in the non combat. I play as Japan 50% of the time, and any of the Axis 75% of the time, and taking the money islands is essential… and even a single infantry defense on a few of the islands makes the whole ordeal a much more difficult endeavor.

    The goal would be to set up for a round 2 where I purchase infantry for defense, land my 2 fighters back in India for defense, however, immediately start using my navy based around the aircraft carrier to set up a perimeter in the money islands. I would in turn have the Anzac land 2 of its fighters on the British aircraft carrier, and if its destroyer is still alive, have it join the armada as well.

    Any thoughts on this strategy? Any examples of similar moves and their outcomes? And any additional ideas would be appreciated.


  • 2018 2017 2016

    I could be wrong but I think the only way UK can be aggressive early in the game against Japan is if they do it on the land. If you try to go up against their navy you will lose it all quickly and end up with nothing on Calcutta because you bought expensive ships. You could pull your boats out of the Med and use them but then you’re leaving Italy with a chance to contest Africa and the Middle East instead of knocking them out of the water in the first 2 turns.

    This strategy works very well for me. It allows me to support the UK Pacific forces and keep control of the Med and Africa.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4vpY_DGQJY


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Definitely step on Sumatra. Sometimes if there’s no J1 DOW I might position the US DD as a blocker on SZ37. You should also buy a fighter UK1 to stop SBR for a while if you’re playing OOB SBR rules.

    You can’t land on Java and Sumatra as UK though. Once a transport unloads, it can’t move or unload to another territory.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Watched your strategy. You have some interesting ideas. With a J1 it may well be worthwhile to step on Persia instead of Sumatra with the SZ39 TT.

    I’m wondering if the 3 transport shuck is overkill though? For the 15IPC cost of the naval base you could put an IC on Iraq. You could put the naval base on West India if you want to support Calcutta although Calcutta has to pay for that.

    You don’t activate Brazil as UK with the Atlantic TT from SZ109? Does getting to SA two turns earlier help that much?



  • It depends on the situation but yes as the allies in general be agressive.

    If japan does a J1 DOW, try to hit them where it hurts ( the land units ).
    Use every weakness they leave open as long as you dont have to declare war on them for doing so.

    A J1 Dow leaves Japan weak in some spots, and some players make minor mistakes with their movement, losing 2 inf and a transport as japan can be deadly if those are the only 2 inf in range of something that turn.

    But as india Focus on the land war, assist china where you can because if china is making a lot of money early on is painfull for japan.

    The transport can be used to take java or counter something japan did.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Unless there’s a real reason to do otherwise, Java should be left for ANZAC. It’s the only money island within one turn of Sydney.



  • @simon33:

    Unless there’s a real reason to do otherwise, Java should be left for ANZAC. It’s the only money island within one turn of Sydney.

    Ok i dont have the board here but i ment the 4 ipc island closest to india.


  • 2018 2017

    I think you have to see whether its J1 or later, there is a fine art to making India look intimidating and picking off japans ground forces vs. being ready to abandon the position altogether at a crucial moment.  When you do Per/Iraq MiC+India, the point can sometimes be to save Russia, not India.  If japan wants india, its going to happen–-the question is how much do you force them to concentrate on it and lose units/position vis a vis America in the process

    In G42, a lot of our guys are building the UK1 Persia and putting beefy $$ there so that there are like 7-10 fighters on india by UK3-4 and then Japan struggles to take it at all with less air and less navy

    But in G40, most of the time your income gets torn to shreds and you are on the defense (if Japan is all over you),

    OR if Japan lets you rage, then you are setting up to intervene in China/FIC by staging into Burma with the stax


  • 2017 2016

    @tambo264:

    I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version.

    The 1984 MB version of Axis and Allies isn’t anymore the original version of Axis and Allies than George Washington was the first President of the United States, but most people believe both to be true, so I guess we’ll give you a pass!  😉



  • I am playing a 6 man game this weekend, playing as the UK and Anzac, and have had 2 weeks to discuss strategy with my fellow Allies. Depending on whether it looks like the Germans might go for a Sealion strategy, and as well depending on how far south the Japanese navy goes (with a 95% chance of a well executed J1), I am going to buy the aircraft carrier in Calcutta and attempt to play through my strategy that started this thread.

    I’ll update the message board with the results.

    With all of my experience playing as the Japs, and playing a very similar strategy to the J1 depicted by Young Grasshopper, I have found that the Japanese navy in all its might, is not replaceable unless they have managed to expand successfully into the money islands, and at least onto the doorstep of India by around round 3/4. In the early rounds it is all about building transports, minor industrial complexes, and ground units in Asia. The Americans on the other hand, can out-build the Japs, and sustain that growth until the Japs have reached the goals above.

    The Japs must expand to that $60-$70 IPC income before they can start hammering out battleships and aircraft carriers. Therefore if the British and Anzac fleets cause a prolonged battle over the money islands on turn 2/3, the Japs will have to either bring their entire fleet down to take care of the threat, and ensure they get the money islands, or they will have to guard against the entire round 2/3 American fleet (which becomes scary quickly).

    Prolonged battle for money islands in early rounds, split navy, decimated main fleet without money islands all equal eventual defeat for the Japs…

    The aircraft carrier with 2 ANZAC fighters, plus Ceylon destroyer and cruiser, and Anzac destroyer and cruiser in the sea of Java (S42), or at the port of Singapore (S37) at the end of round 2, is going to give the Japs more of a fight than they can handle. It is going to allow the Americans to Smash the ��� navy early, give the Allies naval dominance, and result in an early halt to the Japanese expansion in the Pacific, and inevitably
    their eventual total destruction.

    … That is the goal at least.

    Cheers!


  • 2018 2017

    America can indeed grow that fast, and the primary reason is the J1.  J1 has many advantages, but the downside is that America’s power vs SZ 6 is not in Japan’s favor, at least until some fleets straggle back home and you build some new stuff to supplement it.

    I think the objection is that you’re trying your UK strategy on the water.  Japan is going to have 10+ planes that can strike Burma, India, etc, so they can also probably blow up/ward off your navy.  You could really save a bunch of sea junk from Taranto and gather it all up there, but IMO its actually easier for japan to kill that navy than kill a huge stack of turtle troops supported by planes (esp. b/c were talking J1 and you lost your battleship).  No matter what, were not talking about a UK sea force that can step to Japan unless japan is off on some other adventure on the other side of the pacific.

    In our games, it has become popular to abandon india, since it is a lost cause, and then attempt to retake it, or at least try to save something of those assets rather than just fortifying up and waiting to die.

    once you lose that fleet, that’s where you’ll be at, japan takes Africa too.

    "2 ANZAC fighters, plus Ceylon destroyer and cruiser, and Anzac destroyer and cruiser in the sea of Java (S42), or at the port of Singapore (S37) at the end of round 2, is going to give the Japs more of a fight than they can handle. "

    Only if they J1 and stretch themselves all over the place.  If they wait, the entire fleet/air fleet marshals up, and they can easily kill all that stuff.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    I agree with taamvan. I have one thing to add. If you do a max 3 fighter Taranto but keep the CV out, there is a good possibility of a scramble. You can then send the CV east on the NCM.

    Buying a CV virtually assures SBR on Calcutta J2. You might only produce two more inf the whole game out of Calcutta. I strongly advise you reconsider this buy.

    I think you should consider house ruling SBR fighters to be A2 D2 as in Balanced Mod.

    @Wolfshanze:

    @tambo264:

    I have been playing Axis and Allies since the original Milton Bradley version.

    The 1984 MB version of Axis and Allies isn’t anymore the original version of Axis and Allies than George Washington was the first President of the United States, but most people believe both to be true, so I guess we’ll give you a pass!   😉

    Really! What was first?


  • 2018 2017 2016

    @simon33:

    Watched your strategy. You have some interesting ideas. With a J1 it may well be worthwhile to step on Persia instead of Sumatra with the SZ39 TT.

    I’m wondering if the 3 transport shuck is overkill though? For the 15IPC cost of the naval base you could put an IC on Iraq. You could put the naval base on West India if you want to support Calcutta although Calcutta has to pay for that.

    You don’t activate Brazil as UK with the Atlantic TT from SZ109? Does getting to SA two turns earlier help that much?

    Good questions simon. Rather than highjack this thread I’ll start another one to answer that and lay out my UK strategy.



  • @tambo264:

    I want to try something more aggressive. I have been contemplating using the transport in the Ceylon sea zone to either drop 2 infantry in Sumatra (and return to the protected waters in the Ceylon seazone), or 1 in Sumatra, 1 in Java round 1 (which most likely a sacrifice of the transport).

    hi, just noticed this one.

    Are you planning on using one transport to take two islands in a single round? that is not allowed in the rules. The transport has to stop its move once it unloads. 🙂



  • @taamvan:

    I think you have to see whether its J1 or later, there is a fine art to making India look intimidating and picking off japans ground forces vs. being ready to abandon the position altogether at a crucial moment.   When you do Per/Iraq MiC+India, the point can sometimes be to save Russia, not India.  If japan wants india, its going to happen–-the question is how much do you force them to concentrate on it and lose units/position vis a vis America in the process

    In G42, a lot of our guys are building the UK1 Persia and putting beefy $$ there so that there are like 7-10 fighters on india by UK3-4 and then Japan struggles to take it at all with less air and less navy

    But in G40, most of the time your income gets torn to shreds and you are on the defense (if Japan is all over you),

    OR if Japan lets you rage, then you are setting up to intervene in China/FIC by staging into Burma with the stax

    Its not a question of picking off ground forces, the idea is to slow down japan expansion and help the allies.
    2 inf in FIC are with a J1 the only 2 ground forces in range of yunnan, picking those 2 off gives china an instant 6 ipc bonus that japan cannot do anything about.

    If there is a defenseless or weakly defended transport and you can take it out do so, that transport means 1 less money island.
    Contest the islands, sure japan can take it back again so your trading 14 ipc from anzac for 14 ipcs from japan. This forces japan to spend those forces there. Its next door to the anzac factory but 2 turns away from japan. Its also 1/4th of japans income at this stage of the game.

    Japan can do anything it wants but not everything at the same time, it has 21 planes but those planes cannot hit korea and india and a fleet of hawai or queensland and china at the same time.
    If china can kill 5 inf a round, anzac takes out a full transport a round and india takes care of a few inf/art a round japan is actualy stalled while US is building up.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    In my experience it’s worth going to war with Japan in the Pacific on UK1 IF you will set Japan’s ability to take the money islands back by at least an entire turn. That is typically the case when Japan’s southerly transports are only lightly guarded.

    If this is true, then you gain ground by going to war early because Japan is in no position to take Burma until J3 and India is collecting it’s NO for at least one full turn, China holds onto Yunnan for an entire extra turn (another 6 IPCs for the Allies), and ANZAC is collecting it’s NO for at least three turns.

    In short, this is really only good when Japan screws up on J1.

    It gets even better if Japan really screws up and doesn’t even build transports J1.

    If Japan goes to war on J1 or J2, you must be aggressive with the China, UK, and ANZAC. You have to take and retake money islands with ANZAC and the US, and do whatever it takes with China and the UK to drain Japan’s ground troops on the mainland and kill planes. Doing so creates a situation in which Japan finds it extremely difficult to stabilize its income and also defend itself against a constantly growing US threat. If you just lay back and turtle up against J1 and J2, Japan has already beaten you.

    Marsh



  • @Marshmallow:

    In my experience it’s worth going to war with Japan in the Pacific on UK1 IF you will set Japan’s ability to take the money islands back by at least an entire turn. That is typically the case when Japan’s southerly transports are only lightly guarded.

    If this is true, then you gain ground by going to war early because Japan is in no position to take Burma until J3 and India is collecting it’s NO for at least one full turn, China holds onto Yunnan for an entire extra turn (another 6 IPCs for the Allies), and ANZAC is collecting it’s NO for at least three turns.

    In short, this is really only good when Japan screws up on J1.

    It gets even better if Japan really screws up and doesn’t even build transports J1.

    If Japan goes to war on J1 or J2, you must be aggressive with the China, UK, and ANZAC. You have to take and retake money islands with ANZAC and the US, and do whatever it takes with China and the UK to drain Japan’s ground troops on the mainland and kill planes. Doing so creates a situation in which Japan finds it extremely difficult to stabilize its income and also defend itself against a constantly growing US threat. If you just lay back and turtle up against J1 and J2, Japan has already beaten you.

    Marsh

    Finaly someone that agrees 😄

    As the allies it is always hit them where you can and hit them hard. Japan has a mighty fleet and airforce but is lacking land units and planes cannot work alone.

    Anzac taking 1 of the money islands each round costs the anzac 14 each round But japan also has to spend 14 to take it back.
    But killing the transport ties down either 1 air unit or a ship which you will kill making the total units to kill even higher.

    Anzac is just 1 step out so those 14 are invested only 1 round, japan has to dedicate those 14 ipcs for 2 turns. It also has to protect its investment for 2 turns.
    That is the same as 3 mechs going towards india and china. So just spending your money and taking stuff with anzac ( what else are they to do ) is helping china and india.
    If japan does not take it back ( or stretches 2 far and cannot take it back your suddenly taking away 9 ipcs from japan thats 1/6th its total income )

    As long as japan isnt moving forward it cannot win, if japan cannot win you can dedicated more towards germany to stop them.
    Each turn the allies make more money then the axis and trade 1 for 1 they are winning the game.



  • You often have the opportunity to try to hold Yunnan on turn 2/3 with China recapturing the territory, UK moving infantry in if Japan does a normal J2 DoW, and then Russia sending in a few fast movers + fighters on R3.  If you can hold that pivotal territory for one round, you might be able to hold it for the rest of the game as China builds another 4 or 5 infantry a round and UK Pacific rushes mechs to support.

    Japan losing hold of Yunnan early in the game usually means a loss for the Axis.



  • @Arthur:

    You often have the opportunity to try to hold Yunnan on turn 2/3 with China recapturing the territory, UK moving infantry in if Japan does a normal J2 DoW, and then Russia sending in a few fast movers + fighters on R3.  If you can hold that pivotal territory for one round, you might be able to hold it for the rest of the game as China builds another 4 or 5 infantry a round and UK Pacific rushes mechs to support.

    Japan losing hold of Yunnan early in the game usually means a loss for the Axis.

    Holding it and having the burma road open can be nice but by no means is a loss for the axis.
    If japan can hold FIC and has a NB there india will not be reinforcing so japan can take it back quickly.

    Having china in yunnan and japan not in any position to take it back for a while that can be killing for the allies. But it is just as bad as losing the money islands for a few rounds.



  • SH: I agree that losing the money islands for a few rounds is devastating for Japan unless the Allies are spending massive amounts to hold them.  Usually they are throwing away a two or three destroyers a round to ship block, or building large stacks of fighters to hold the island.  Either way getting and keeping a money island for the Allies in the early game often is not a massive economic net gain.  Obviously if you can get one and keep it against a novice opponent, you are going to do well as Allies.



  • @Arthur:

    SH: I agree that losing the money islands for a few rounds is devastating for Japan unless the Allies are spending massive amounts to hold them.  Usually they are throwing away a two or three destroyers a round to ship block, or building large stacks of fighters to hold the island.  Either way getting and keeping a money island for the Allies in the early game often is not a massive economic net gain.  Obviously if you can get one and keep it against a novice opponent, you are going to do well as Allies.

    O normaly japan should not let this happen ofcourse. But it was aimed at your comment about yunnan.
    Basicaly everything japan does not have is good for the allies, every NO the allies get or block is good for them.

    I would not bother destroyer blocking japan off the islands as this is way to expensive, but well a transport + inf + art to take back 1 each turn can become quite a money drain for japan as well.
    Some players say its a waste for the anzac as your throwing away 14 to gain 4, but they neglect that japan also has to spend 14 to get its 4 + NO back. And if anzac does not win a round its not big deal, if japan rolls bad a round it is a big deal.


  • 2018 2017

    UK should almost never declare unprovoked war.  This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.

    Apologies if that is not what you meant



  • @taamvan:

    UK should almost never declare unprovoked war.   This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.

    Apologies if that is not what you meant

    I agree that they normally should not do this. Unless Japan did not do a J3 attack as USA is in the war after that so no point no doing it then.
    But being agressive does not mean also declaring war, just once they declare war hit them everywhere it hurts.
    So no dont pull your transport and air to afrika but if no J1 take some money islands. Its more work taking an island defended by 2 inf then an empty one and gives you more money.
    Make sure your in position to counter japanese agression, not to far forward but far enough forward that if japan attacks forward forces you can counter.

    If Japan does a J1, try to kill a transport if exposed ( happens sometimes ) or kill land forces in FIC if you can get to them.
    If things went really your way kill something more then a transport is even better.
    J1 is powerfull but can leave japan volnerable as well as it has a vital lack of land forces available for followup attacks, if you can kill those land forces japan is forces to attack inf + AA stacks with planes only.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    @taamvan:

    UK should almost never declare unprovoked war.   This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.

    Apologies if that is not what you meant

    I disagree.

    I do a DOW on Japan w. Anzac everytime when Japan has empty TT’S on Hainan and me having my UK Pac. DD parked in Hainan as well.
    So i get at least one time the NO in the early game for Malaysia and Kwan.
    Also the Money Islands are secured one full turn.



  • @aequitas:

    @taamvan:

    UK should almost never declare unprovoked war.   This decouples USA/UK war trigger and loses the allies 2 turns and 60$, where Japan can now just whale on UK and China instead of going with whatever J2-J4 plan they originally had.

    Apologies if that is not what you meant

    I disagree.

    I do a DOW on Japan w. Anzac everytime when Japan has empty TT’S on Hainan and me having my UK Pac. DD parked in Hainan as well.
    So i get at least one time the NO in the early game for Malaysia and Kwan.
    Also the Money Islands are secured one full turn.

    If japan is in a good position doing this will ensure that japan gets all the money islands the turn after but US will not be in the area for at least 2 turns.
    And you will not own kwan anyway because japan can just take that with other forces available.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 14
  • 21
  • 22
  • 2
  • 2
  • 11
  • 15
  • 17
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

44
Online

13.7k
Users

34.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts