• '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Well, the NEW units are hitting Norway in USA 3.  The OLD units are hitting on USA 2.

    There is no physical way to hit norway with America on USA 1 without cheating.


  • I think Romulus was trying to figure out how to hit Norway with OTHER than the original forces that went to Algeria.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Well, you can do it that way too.  It would take just as long.  E. USA to Algeria to Norway.


  • Ok now I understood!!! Thanks!
    The key is to have both UK and US fleet always togheter in the same sea zone, to minimize chance to be attacked by German airforce, and then leaving UK troops to fight in Africa while US troops go to Norway, regrouping fleets again in sz6. Thanks Jennifer! It is a very effective coordination of movements! What seemed strange to me was the fact that US troops land in Algeria on US1 and then embark for Norway in US2, but now all is clear!

    I know, naturally, that without cheating it is impossible for US troops to hit Norway on US1, and this is the reason that in our games we have never landed US troops in Norway on US1.  🙂


  • @Romulus:

    The key is to have both UK and US fleet always togheter in the same sea zone, to minimize chance to be attacked by German airforce, and then leaving UK troops to fight in Africa while US troops go to Norway, regrouping fleets again in sz6.

    I would only add that they stay together until BOTH are able to withstand the German thread from Air and any remaining naval forces independently… then the US has other duties to attend to besides nursemaiding UK TRN’s in the North Sea…


  • Pardon me switch but… what it means “nursemaiding”?

    Ok, I agree, I am only referring to the first three turns. Whit allies I alway try to have two task force composed by 1 AC, 2 Fig, 1-2 DD and several TRN (at minimum) prior to separate UK and US Fleets. But you are right for sure!


  • Nursemaiding would be being the protector…

    USA Atlantic Fleet having the job of protecting UK TRNs

    Initially combined fleet for mutual defense is a good idea, but UK needs to build their own fleet defense so that the US Atlantic Fleet can go pursue other activities instead of just keeping UK TRNs from being sunk by German Air Force.

  • Moderator

    I like to try and avoid buying Capital ships with the UK if at all possible.
    Sometimes it is unavoidable, and I kind of like the 1 dd, 1 trn, 1 ftr buy on UK1, but sometimes you may need the UK AC right away.

    I usually send the UK fleet to Sz 8 and then merge with the US ships in round 1.  I buy the AC with the US (possibly another ftr as well) and then on Round 2 merge the fleets in Sz 12 and take Alg.

    Round three the Brits go to Norway (new trns placed in Sz 6) and the US AC/ftrs and possibly a DD following for added defense with the UK BB and DD.  It really depends on the German threat.  While the US BB and new naval buys from the US go to Sz 12.  From here, the US can continue to supply Afr with troops while the UK focuses on Nor, then Kar.

    By Round 4 or 5 you can shift the US north as well, since Afr should be well covered, but I actually perfer to keep supplying Afr (since you need less trns)or then shift the US to Med or to the Pacific.  But before you shift make sure you’ve killed the Baltic Fleet and the Med fleet.  I usually target the Baltic for round 2 or 3 and the Med for round 3 or 4.


  • I love the way some of these threads morphe. J1 turns into a B1 and then a USA1.
    I’d like to get back to the J1 though.
    I’ve tried many different starts with Japan, 9and am play-testing a new one now).
    I have used the 9 bid to buy a Transport and put it with the East Indies fleet. Lots of places you can hit with that! The spare IPC goes to Japan as well. My first buy is always two Tps’ and 2 or three tanks, depending on the UK luck on my lone transport off of Kwangtung.
    This Strategy puts Japan in the Axis drivers seat. And if the Allies don’t shift to a KJF strategy then they are in for a very yellow world.
    The other bid buy I’ve been working on is a tank in Kwangtung and an artillary in FIC. Both China and India fall nicely on J1, and the 2 extra land units help my advancing armies in Asia look tougher against counter-attacks. My J1 buys are still pretty much the same.
    Oh, and I don’t consider a IC or Bmbr untill J4 or later, Just keep buying a Tp a turn untill then and buy tanks, infantry is too damn slow. Just grab what you already have in the Islands. grab, Australia, NZ, and Hawaii too. I also like to harass the Alaska and Western Canada as well.
      Happy gaming,
      Crazy Ivan


  • @Crazy:

    I love the way some of these threads morphe. J1 turns into a B1 and then a USA1.
    I’d like to get back to the J1 though.

    Also I love this thread-morphing!
    As I said in our games we do not use bidding, so we can not test your ideas!  😞

    If I can say my opinion, the TRN in east indies fleet is powerful boost for Japan opening move!
    IC on J4? I have read somewhere that an IC in J2 is also useful for Japan.


  • Romulas,
      In your play group, how often does your Axis team win?
      The bids used by the “TripleA ladder” and other groups on line and at home, have found that it really helps to not only balance the game, but also helps to get rid of that same old first turn, by giving the Axis at least, some veriables in the game, different strategies to try and win with. Keeps the Allies on their toes as well.
    You and your friends may as well try using the bid system, soon enough you will all want to test yourselves against the convention crowd, and they all use it there.
      C.I.


  • I completely agree with you Crazy Ivan! I am not saying that we do not use bidding because we are more smart. The problem is that only in the last few months I have been able to assemble a stable group of A&A players (previously I played casual game with a collegue that had changed work and city and after a long pause I restarted to play from April).

    So we are still exploring the old opening moves. I know that I am a green player compared to most of you, and that my question and problem seem older and already resolved to you. Some question of my may also be obvious or stupid, but for now are the question that I may ask related to the problem I have.

    You have my word that as soon as possible I have intention to use bidding system.

    How many times Axis won in our games? In the last 10 games played Axis won 3 times.
    But, as I have discovered reading the threads on this forum, we are not making the optimal moves with Allies (ok also with Axis we are not doing the optimal moves, so this is the reason of my interest in the forum!)

    Said this, when I play Japan, I usually build 3 TRN and 2 INF first turn. How did gone the game? Quite good for Japan, invaded Africa, make distrubance attack in Alaska, conquested Moscow. But Berlin fall in UK following turn, because my German buddy have lost Baltic fleet and leaved open Eastern Europe and after weakened Berlin defense to counterattack. Leaved alone with Japan after some turn of friction battle in Europe, I realized I cannot win against UK and US and conceded the game.

    Thanks to this thread I have switched first turn buying to 3 TRN and save 6 IPC. Then on J2 to build a IC in FIC and buying INF in Japan. And I am going to test it this week end. To you this may seem archeologic A&A strategy, I know. But this are my problem.
    I still do not feel ready for convention or for Triple A ladder, maybe between some other months!


  • Just remember this when you think of "old"strats in A&A….

    If it works it does not matter.

    And A&A is cyclic, especially online.  You get beaten by a North African Dominance strat, then you work out how to prevent that, and you win several games in a row against the NAD.  Then you get hit with a different strat, lose, adjust your strat, win some more, etc.  Then someone comes back with the North Africa Dominance and kicks your butt because your modified strats no longer defend against it.

    There is no one single always winning strat in Revised.


  • @ncscswitch:

    There is no one single always winning strat in Revised.

    And this is a beautiful think! What I am trying to do is: avoid using a flawed strategy thinking it may be good, and trying to fix it!  😄

    What you said is one of the reason I like A&A. Every one may came out with his own strategy, there are two important things, however, it should be a reasonable strategy and he should be able to make it works (that it is not an obvious thing).

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I agree, DM, I don’t WANT to buy capitol ships for England, but sometimes you just don’t have a choice.

    Sometimes you do.  But sometimes you dont.

  • 2007 AAR League

    @DarthMaximus:

    I like to try and avoid buying Capital ships with the UK if at all possible.
    Sometimes it is unavoidable, and I kind of like the 1 dd, 1 trn, 1 ftr buy on UK1, but sometimes you may need the UK AC right away.

    I usually send the UK fleet to Sz 8 and then merge with the US ships in round 1.  I buy the AC with the US (possibly another ftr as well) and then on Round 2 merge the fleets in Sz 12 and take Alg.

    Round three the Brits go to Norway (new trns placed in Sz 6) and the US AC/ftrs and possibly a DD following for added defense with the UK BB and DD.  It really depends on the German threat.  While the US BB and new naval buys from the US go to Sz 12.  From here, the US can continue to supply Afr with troops while the UK focuses on Nor, then Kar.

    By Round 4 or 5 you can shift the US north as well, since Afr should be well covered, but I actually perfer to keep supplying Afr (since you need less trns)or then shift the US to Med or to the Pacific.  But before you shift make sure you’ve killed the Baltic Fleet and the Med fleet.  I usually target the Baltic for round 2 or 3 and the Med for round 3 or 4.

    I disagree here, Early job for the UK is to clear out the Baltic fleet and hold out in Africa and hit Algeria/Libya and then have the States reinforcing it, it is well worth the money to buy capital ships with the UK to protect her own fleet and trade Karelia to help out the Russians and to move the UK fleet into the Baltic to put preasure on WE/Germany and EE.

    By splitting the 2 Naval powers, you can now let the USA fleet jump into the Med and put more preasure on Germany by making her protect SE and reinforce WE more heavily and now Balk and UKR are within range, this should make the allies IPC advantage that they already own weigh more heavily on the Axis.

    By having the US fleet in the Med, they force Germany to play more careful and they can hamper any African plans by the Japs and also reinforce Cauc, In my opinion there is endless posibilities here and I recommend to any player to split the Allied Navies.

    By stating above it was the UK’s job to clear the Baltic, it’s the USA’s job to clear out the Med as soon as possible.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have yet to find US presence in the Med helpful.  It has cost me two games I am currently in.  Well, it hasn’t cost me them YET, but that is just a matter of time.

  • 2007 AAR League

    And back to the subject about Japan’s first turn…

    I always had some standard moves etc… Ussually it was 2 Trns, 1 IC (I would donate 1 IPC to Japans total starting income through the bid)
    I have come to realize and personally think all of the Bid money should be diverted to Germany and her plans, Japan doesn’t need anything extra.

    My plans will now assume you only have the 30$ starting position…

    Scenario 1
    First you need a set plan of action for Japan and fall-back plan… and then you need to see what UK does with Pacific Naval ships first…
    if they combine there fleet in SZ 38 or SZ 30 (I do have the SZ patch now Switch) you “may” have to assume a Pacific maneover by the allies with the UK/USA. You may want to purchase something like 2 trns, 1 DD 1st turn to be safe, and then add an extra AC later on for your extra 2 figs.

    In this case, hit Pearl Hard (bring the SZ 60 trn for fodder) you need to survive the pearl encounter with as much as possible to not risk a serious blow from a US counter-attack (which is very possible), and of course still hit China with your remaining forces.

    scenario 2

    UK split’s her forces (they try to kill your sub around the solomon islands), they send a AC/DD or just a DD at your trn in SZ 59
    and with there transport, they either reinforce a Southern Africa Position or try and re-take Egypt.

    In this case, I have been floating the idea of a double IC build… (1 for FIC, 1 for East-Indies) I just used it in my current game vs Akreider and I actually love it!!

    With this purchase in mind I would again hit Pearl hard as I could (with the trn for fodder if need be) and I would send my East-indies Navy to the Solomons islands to wipe that small UK fleet (1 trn, 1 SS or less depending) I would ignore the UK fleet around KWA (I have no trns to guard so they are no danger to me) and I would ignore the trn around Africa)

    if your lucky and your trn lives the pearl harbour encounter (you can use it to grab Nea-Zealands on turn 2), buy 2-3 trns on turn 2 and on turn 3 you can grab Australia and then make sure you shuffle 8 troops a round from Japan to Bury to preasure Moscow.

    The IC in East-Indies allows you to quickly reinforce Southern positions like India/Persia/Egypt/IEA and to quickly send forces around Africa to lets say Brazil to through off the USA a bit (grab Hawaii around turn 4-5 as well) and if possible make a run at Alaska)

    Japan can be a IPC monster quickly if done right…
    I just performed the above maneovers…

    Turn 1 = 30 IPC
    Turn 2 = 38 IPC (I gave them 2 IPC in a bid but didn’t use it yet)
    Turn 3 = 40 IPC
    Turn 4+ = 40+ IPC

  • 2007 AAR League

    @Jennifer:

    I have yet to find US presence in the Med helpful.  It has cost me two games I am currently in.  Well, it hasn’t cost me them YET, but that is just a matter of time.

    Any allies game I play I try to do this…

    Please ask Darth and Switch how effective a USA med fleet can be…it can really choke the Axis…trust me…


  • Agreed, a WELL PLAYED US Fleet in the Med can be totally devastating to the Axis.  It forces Germany to defend Southern, Balkans and Ukraine; allows the US to directly reinforce Caucuses with land units (effectively neutering any push by Japan along the southern prong); and of course removes Germany from Africa completely and quickly.  However a poorly executed USA Med Fleet is a bonus for the Axis as it allows very high dollar forward positioned units to be wiped out, or left without purpose, very easilly.  The trick of course is for the US to have a full logistics chain in place by the time they move into the Med, and for the UK to likewise have their chain in place into Norway/Karelia/Eastern when the US moves into the Med.

    As for Japan…
    That 2 IC first turn is not something I have seen advocated since Octopus was on the boards.

    I also think that the UK turn result is key to the Japan Round 1 purchase.  For example, if you lose your SZ45 SUB (glad you have that patch now NoMercy!) AND your SZ59 TRN while UK suffers zero losses, then you need to forget an IC purchase on J1.  You need to replace lost naval power AND take out Allied naval power QUICKLY, or you will be overwhelmed with a south Pacific KJF.  In that scenario, the position of Allied air forces (Mostly the UK BOM but also the Russian FIGs), will determine what ships you purchase… TRN’s, or DST, or AC.

    Japan MUST gain control of the Pacific and Indian Oceans to be fully effective.  However, they must also make landings into Siberia ASAP in order to reduce Russia’s income, lest Russia become too powerful for Germany to make advances on.

    As with most nations in this game, it is a balancing act.

  • Moderator

    @NoMercy:

    @DarthMaximus:

    I like to try and avoid buying Capital ships with the UK if at all possible.
    Sometimes it is unavoidable, and I kind of like the 1 dd, 1 trn, 1 ftr buy on UK1, but sometimes you may need the UK AC right away.

    I usually send the UK fleet to Sz 8 and then merge with the US ships in round 1.  I buy the AC with the US (possibly another ftr as well) and then on Round 2 merge the fleets in Sz 12 and take Alg.

    Round three the Brits go to Norway (new trns placed in Sz 6) and the US AC/ftrs and possibly a DD following for added defense with the UK BB and DD.  It really depends on the German threat.  While the US BB and new naval buys from the US go to Sz 12.  From here, the US can continue to supply Afr with troops while the UK focuses on Nor, then Kar.

    By Round 4 or 5 you can shift the US north as well, since Afr should be well covered, but I actually perfer to keep supplying Afr (since you need less trns)or then shift the US to Med or to the Pacific.  But before you shift make sure you’ve killed the Baltic Fleet and the Med fleet.  I usually target the Baltic for round 2 or 3 and the Med for round 3 or 4.

    I disagree here, Early job for the UK is to clear out the Baltic fleet and hold out in Africa and hit Algeria/Libya and then have the States reinforcing it, it is well worth the money to buy capital ships with the UK to protect her own fleet and trade Karelia to help out the Russians and to move the UK fleet into the Baltic to put preasure on WE/Germany and EE.

    By splitting the 2 Naval powers, you can now let the USA fleet jump into the Med and put more preasure on Germany by making her protect SE and reinforce WE more heavily and now Balk and UKR are within range, this should make the allies IPC advantage that they already own weigh more heavily on the Axis.

    By having the US fleet in the Med, they force Germany to play more careful and they can hamper any African plans by the Japs and also reinforce Cauc, In my opinion there is endless posibilities here and I recommend to any player to split the Allied Navies.

    By stating above it was the UK’s job to clear the Baltic, it’s the USA’s job to clear out the Med as soon as possible.

    You can do all of this without buying a capital ship with the UK.
    Now, I do occasionally buy a dd, trn, ftr on UK 1.  But a UK AC does no good in sinking the baltic fleet.  I like to let the US do the heavy lifting (buying ht emore expensive units) whenever possible.
    In most games you will already have: 2 BB (1 UK, 1 US), 2 DD (US) already on the board.  One US AC works perfect in being able to protect both the North Fleet (which will be in Sz 5 or 6) and the one off Sz 12.  I like to add a 2nd US AC because I do like to go to the Med OR shift to face Japan once I’ve crippled Germany.

    On the J1…
    Switch is right it can really vary on what UK does.  If UK is extremely aggressive in the Pac (more then just the sub vs. sub and sz 59 battle), it is not a death sentance for Japan to have to buy a DD or AC on J1.  You may need the DD if the UK sub sinks yours at Sol is.  You don’t want to leave Sz 60 undefended with a potential sub vs. trns where he can submerge.  I like to go Max attack at Chi and Pearl so I don’t like holding any ships back at sz 60 (other than trns).
    I actually really like the AC buy to give you 3 (if UK is ultra agressive).  This way your fighters are even deadlier in terms of range and there is a lot you can do with it later on.

    But if the UK bomber isn’t in range of Sz 60 and they do a simple Sz 59 and Sol is. sub attack, I like the 3 trns and 1 arm (or 3 trns + save cash).


  • As I said I face following UK attack moves:

    • DD attack TRN in sz 59
    • FIG from India AC attack Sol. SUB

    After they concentrate AC and two TRN near Australia. UK Sub moves depends on the success of FIG against japanese SUB: if succesfull SUB goes in Solomon Sea, ready to attack Sz 60 otherwise, if Jap Sub submerge, the sub goes with the TRN reinforcing the fleet. The FIG on Sol Sea land on american AC in Pearl Harbour

    Japan buying strategy, to face this UK strategy, has been previously advocated to be optimal if I buy 3 TRN and save 6 IPC and then on J2 buying an IC in FIC and the remaining as infantries.
    Now it seems that if a UK sub lurks in Solomon sea, I have to buy at least a DD and a TRN for Sea zone 6, and I agree, but this move, even if increases Japan fleet potentiality, might slow down assault on Asia mainland or not?
    Maybe should be at least 1 DD and 2 TRN, saving 2? Or 1 DD 2 TRN and 2 Tank?


  • @Romulus:

    As I said I face following UK attack moves:

    • DD attack TRN in sz 59
    • FIG from India AC attack Sol. SUB

    After they concentrate AC and two TRN near Australia. UK Sub moves depends on the success of FIG against japanese SUB: if succesfull SUB goes in Solomon Sea, ready to attack Sz 60 otherwise, if Jap Sub submerge, the sub goes with the TRN reinforcing the fleet. The FIG on Sol Sea land on american AC in Pearl Harbour

    1.  Combat movement is simultaneous.  You can’t wait to see if you hit with the UK fighter, then attack with the UK sub.  You attack with UK fighter AND UK sub, or JUST the UK fighter, or JUST the UK sub, or neither.  The UK sub and transport cannot reinforce the Pearl Harbor fleet.  What do you mean by “reinforce the fleet”?
    Japan buying strategy, to face this UK strategy, has been previously advocated to be optimal if I buy 3 TRN and save 6 IPC and then on J2 buying an IC in FIC and the remaining as infantries.
    Now it seems that if a UK sub lurks in Solomon sea, I have to buy at least a DD and a TRN for Sea zone 6, and I agree, but this move, even if increases Japan fleet potentiality, might slow down assault on Asia mainland or not?
    Maybe should be at least 1 DD and 2 TRN, saving 2? Or 1 DD 2 TRN and 2 Tank?

    No, it is not necessarily optimal to buy 3 TRN and save 6 IPC.  Even if the UK destroys the Kwangtung transport, you can reliably have 4 transports on J2.  Suppose you use the transport at Japan on J1 to offload two units from Japan.  After producing 3 transports (and nothing else), you have 4 units on Japan, 1 on Wake, 1 on Okinawa, and 2 on Phillipines.  As previously mentioned, you want to build 5-6 transports minimum, so on turn 2, you may produce a transport and seven infantry, but when you do so, at least one of your transports isn’t going to be filled, unless you do the following -

    CONSIDERING the Allied move, you can probably use one of the Japanese transports to empty Phillipines into French Indochina on J2, and use that same transport to empty East Indies on J3.  If you do that, you don’t bump up against the problem of empty transports.

    But that is very situational.  Because if the UK sends a bomber to Ssinkiang, or to Italian East Africa (the last after using the UK bomber to help retake Anglo-Egypt; the UK fighter lands with the bomber to prevent the Germans from attacking with 1 German bomber and 1 German fighter landed in Libya at the end of G1) - if that happens, then the Japanese transport sent west early is unsupported and an easy target, especially considering that you probably want to use the Japanese navy to destroy the UK fleet AND to protect your newly built Japanese transports AND to blow up Pearl.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Actually, it is optimal to save the $6. Like you said, Japan has enough units to fill their transports on J2 so there is no reason to buy extra ground units that won’t be moved next turn. And in my games, on J2, two of those four TP’s will be moving to clear the islands and take Haw, NZe, and Aust so saving the money will allow me to build the final 2 TP’s without losing the ability to fully load them. Saving the $6 gives japan more flexibility to respond to the Allied moves without sacrificing momentum.

    The only reason to spend the extra money is if you are really desperate to land a 2nd armor on J2, but with all of Japan’s aircraft, a 2nd armor doesn’t add much in the way of firepower.


  • Paint, I think you misunderstood Romulus.

    He was not posting subsequent combat, but subsequent NCM’s.

Suggested Topics

  • 10
  • 50
  • 7
  • 6
  • 33
  • 29
  • 9
  • 38
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

63
Online

15.1k
Users

36.0k
Topics

1.5m
Posts