Australia first? Kind of?



  • Assuming it’s J3 or J4, the money islands are secure, Malaysia is done, you’ve got the Chinese handled, or will in the next move. You’ve got IC’s in FIC and about to place in Malaysia. India is on their heels and in full turtle.

    What happens if folks take, or start trying to take, Australia at this point? Pause on India and go for Australia.

    Does anyone have experience with this?
    (I read some posts from 2010, but it seems that no one ever really tried to do it)

    Also, if your goal is to get the US out of the Atlantic this would seem to be the way to do it. They have no choice but to g all in to stop it.



  • @Stough said in Australia first? Kind of?:

    Assuming it’s J3 or J4, the money islands are secure, Malaysia is done, you’ve got the Chinese handled, or will in the next move. You’ve got IC’s in FIC and about to place in Malaysia. India is on their heels and in full turtle.

    What happens if folks take, or start trying to take, Australia at this point? Pause on India and go for Australia.

    Does anyone have experience with this?
    (I read some posts from 2010, but it seems that no one ever really tried to do it)

    Also, if your goal is to get the US out of the Atlantic this would seem to be the way to do it. They have no choice but to g all in to stop it.

    First India (kicking a player out and it’s a NO). After that yes make your way to Sydney. From india to the West coast of Australia and so on to sydney. Depending on how well Anzac has been turtling this could take a while but with US occupied in Europe, you don’t have a major threat because your way out of range of Hawaii



  • You usually would launch your Australian invasion from SZ56, dropping off 3 or 4 transports of troops into W Australia. If you miscalculate, they get immediately strafed off the land by Allied ground forces+planes and your efforts are wasted. Alternatively, the Allies can pile all of their planes into NSW and move their fleet a safe distance away, such as Philippines or Korea. Very annoying for the Japanese player because so much of the Pacific has opened up.

    You will have to move a sizable number of the Japanese airforce to reinforce the ground troops and threaten a more significant strike at NSW around turn 7. It probably will fall then, but China+India should be having success in the mainland, and the United States should have been able to make progress in whichever theater they focused on.

    With OOB rules and no bid, this plan could potentially work. Having said that, a standard Axis strategy works 75% of the time so the only reason to try would be for the thrill of doing something new.



  • Well if you can sort of fake out an India move by moving transport to malaya you could move then towards queensland in 1 move. If australia has massed it forces there and might be light on stuff because they send their planes towards india you can easy pick them off.

    And those transports can be used to capture the DEI or recapture it. IF you can land a sizable force in queensland and the australian capital isnt well defended you can easy take it and have your fleet in a strong position on that same turn. But it just depends a lot on what the allies do.


  • 2018 2017

    The main deal is to watch what he does. A typical ANZAC buy is TT and a inf, or a fighter. The best time to rush ANZAC is when the planes fly away, or he pulls his men over to SA or the Islands. If the USA is looking elsewhere and hasn’t stationed substantial units in Queensland (or counterstrike SZ 26), its not hard to overwhelm him.

    A more cadgy ANZAC strategy saves money or builds a deeper stack for the long game. I’ve beaten dave before by slowly turtling Sydney and after he struck me with everything Japan could bring, he gave up because all or almost all of his land units were dead.

    Its also a good reason to strike (axis) or hold (allies) malaya because that plays into an NO and its an LZ for fighters too.



  • @taamvan said in Australia first? Kind of?:

    The main deal is to watch what he does. A typical ANZAC buy is TT and a inf, or a fighter. The best time to rush ANZAC is when the planes fly away, or he pulls his men over to SA or the Islands. If the USA is looking elsewhere and hasn’t stationed substantial units in Queensland (or counterstrike SZ 26), its not hard to overwhelm him.

    A more cadgy ANZAC strategy saves money or builds a deeper stack for the long game. I’ve beaten dave before by slowly turtling Sydney and after he struck me with everything Japan could bring, he gave up because all or almost all of his land units were dead.

    Its also a good reason to strike (axis) or hold (allies) malaya because that plays into an NO and its an LZ for fighters too.

    If you send the Anzac Fighters to India, don’t you expose Anzac to a Japanese invasion? Yes turtling in the first turns as anzac is a must do, especially when japan pulls his fleet together around Carolines with some transports.


  • 2018 2017

    @Cornwallis my grammar may have been a bit confusing; we agree. The fighters depart, ANZAC is vulnerable, Japan steps up.

    I usually leave at least a few USA units to lurk down there, along with at least 1 boat of USA troops. Actually taking Sydney requires the Japan fleet to move several turns out of position so its not a wise move when Japan is under pressure. Once Japan gets some serious money, they may be able to divert those ships and transports. And, its a 1 shot–they can’t usually shuttle more stuff in for a second round. That’s why its usually an attempt by Japan to end the game by attaining VC on the Pacific Board–Sydney battle is win or lose



  • @taamvan said in Australia first? Kind of?:

    @Cornwallis my grammar may have been a bit confusing; we agree. The fighters depart, ANZAC is vulnerable, Japan steps up.

    I usually leave at least a few USA units to lurk down there, along with at least 1 boat of USA troops. Actually taking Sydney requires the Japan fleet to move several turns out of position so its not a wise move when Japan is under pressure. Once Japan gets some serious money, they may be able to divert those ships and transports. And, its a 1 shot–they can’t usually shuttle more stuff in for a second round. That’s why its usually an attempt by Japan to end the game by attaining VC on the Pacific Board–Sydney battle is win or lose

    So what do you usually do with Anzac. Our allied players turtle when US is going KGF, and when it’s a KJF then he starts annoying japan with a more offensive buy.


  • 2018 2017

    Yep. In a KJF I buy them an extra US carrier or 2 to land on. Because of the Kamikaze Gambit (if you disable US carriers with the kamis the US planes may end up with nowhere to land) its always pretty good to have extra carrier capacity. Solid U1 move is to buy 3 carriers.

    If Japan does not J1, and the BB survives, that often heads to Queensland 37 as well, though it can also join whatever ships are left over in the Red Sea, and/or you can buy a CV to round out that new fleet in South Africa (not in BBR though)

    Dave has a really interesting strategy where he has the USA (all), the UK (1-2 planes, 1-2 ships) then ANZAC (couple subs, 1 CA 1 DD, planes, etc) all attack one after another. Since Japan goes early in the turn, even when the Japanese Fleet partially survives, the small allies swarm what’s left and finish it off. There are also plenty of ways to have the USA clear the way and the smaller allies pick off all the land territories. Or, you can have the small allies take a key zone like Java and build an airbase there for whoever to use (or vice versa)

    I suppose the best plan though is to get the Z fighters to Java, then India, then Moscow…its not impossible for the allies to have 6-8 extra planes waiting to guard moscow until it loses archangel early on the game.



  • @taamvan said in Australia first? Kind of?:

    Yep. In a KJF I buy them an extra US carrier or 2 to land on. Because of the Kamikaze Gambit (if you disable US carriers with the kamis the US planes may end up with nowhere to land) its always pretty good to have extra carrier capacity. Solid U1 move is to buy 3 carriers.

    If Japan does not J1, and the BB survives, that often heads to Queensland 37 as well, though it can also join whatever ships are left over in the Red Sea, and/or you can buy a CV to round out that new fleet in South Africa (not in BBR though)

    Dave has a really interesting strategy where he has the USA (all), the UK (1-2 planes, 1-2 ships) then ANZAC (couple subs, 1 CA 1 DD, planes, etc) all attack one after another. Since Japan goes early in the turn, even when the Japanese Fleet partially survives, the small allies swarm what’s left and finish it off. There are also plenty of ways to have the USA clear the way and the smaller allies pick off all the land territories. Or, you can have the small allies take a key zone like Java and build an airbase there for whoever to use (or vice versa)

    I suppose the best plan though is to get the Z fighters to Java, then India, then Moscow…its not impossible for the allies to have 6-8 extra planes waiting to guard moscow until it loses archangel early on the game.

    Yes i have been playing with the idea of expanding the UK pacific fleet with an extra carrier and save the one from the Medd (so no taranto).


  • 2018 2017

    @Cornwallis After years of waffling, Taranto is a must do in the alignment of the OOB game. Italy is crippled 90% of the time you do it, which turns them into a liability for the Germans. When you dont do it, they RAGE. Dave suggested splitting the Adriatic into two sea zones to mix up the convoy/movement such that the bomber and the extra fighters cant come.

    But, when you do that, the Allies just attack the other Italian navy and kill that instead.

    So, to keep the CV, you have to dramatically increase the chance and costs of failing by not bringing it into the battle, though it would be committed to come if any 0 move planes survive, which makes the order of casualties much more fraught.

    Probably a better approach is to hope that some of the planes survive to land on Crete, or Syria, then rebuild the carrier later. (As I mentioned, the BBR rules add Shipyards such that you can’t build CV or BB. This is a fun choice but it limits what you can do in this regard for both Johannesburg and Sydney). The UK cant really determine whether they live or not–but part of the Taranto Gambit is to force Italy to sack most of the rest of its forces in the counterattack.

    So, to create the British Pacific Fleet Strategy we can onlyrely on having 2 DD, 1 CA, and 1-2 Fig 1 Tac to start. It only needs 1 CV–it cant stand up against an IJN force. What it really needs are transports, because the USA will have to defeat the IJN, the BPF fleet is mostly to keep Japan honest, augment the US effort, and shred the Japanese money/keep the Indian Ocean Rim safe.



  • @taamvan said in Australia first? Kind of?:

    @Cornwallis After years of waffling, Taranto is a must do in the alignment of the OOB game. Italy is crippled 90% of the time you do it, which turns them into a liability for the Germans. When you dont do it, they RAGE. Dave suggested splitting the Adriatic into two sea zones to mix up the convoy/movement such that the bomber and the extra fighters cant come.

    But, when you do that, the Allies just attack the other Italian navy and kill that instead.

    So, to keep the CV, you have to dramatically increase the chance and costs of failing by not bringing it into the battle, though it would be committed to come if any 0 move planes survive, which makes the order of casualties much more fraught.

    Probably a better approach is to hope that some of the planes survive to land on Crete, or Syria, then rebuild the carrier later. (As I mentioned, the BBR rules add Shipyards such that you can’t build CV or BB. This is a fun choice but it limits what you can do in this regard for both Johannesburg and Sydney). The UK cant really determine whether they live or not–but part of the Taranto Gambit is to force Italy to sack most of the rest of its forces in the counterattack.

    So, to create the British Pacific Fleet Strategy we can onlyrely on having 2 DD, 1 CA, and 1-2 Fig 1 Tac to start. It only needs 1 CV–it cant stand up against an IJN force. What it really needs are transports, because the USA will have to defeat the IJN, the BPF fleet is mostly to keep Japan honest, augment the US effort, and shred the Japanese money/keep the Indian Ocean Rim safe.

    If you do taranto UK has 80% chance of winning is it not? If they get diced (20% of the times) it’s game over. So yes i look for other alternatives like Siredblood has one or the Gibastion. Experience with that?


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 23
  • 3
  • 8
  • 34
  • 81
  • 6
  • 14
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

47
Online

14.8k
Users

35.4k
Topics

1.4m
Posts