AA50 1941 w/NO - Allied Allways Win


  • @Sk:

    Hi. This is my first post here. I hope I got it right.
    How does Russia back it’s troops out of these territories on R1? Germany goes first in the '41 scenario. These troops would be dead.


  • “How does Russia back it’s troops out of these territories on R1? Germany goes first in the '41 scenario. These troops would be dead.”

    I have to admit that I don’t know.  I’ve not played the Russians yet (I’ve always been focused either on Japan or the Atlantic, and have never paid much attention to Russia-my buddies have always played the Russian/German battle). I was basing that statement on what some of my colleagues said they do.

    Tonight, I play Russia.  I’ll let you know.

    Sk


  • No problem. I’m curious to see how it goes for you. I play Germany regularly and don’t usually take Karelia G1. (Save that for G2) This keeps me strong in Baltic & E. Poland with the only realistic R1 counter-attack being in Ukraine which is fine. Bring that Russian tank out there where I can kill it.

    After that, pump in the new tanks and keep the Russians plugging holes


  • Another game, another axis defeat.

    Broadly:
    Germans take all three front line russian territories on GT1 (they can’t take Karelia w/o using most of their air: that leaves the British fleet intact). Note that this only costs Russians 7 infantry.
    Russians BACK UP on GT 1, leaving a screen of 1 inf in the 2nd line.  With builds (3 tanks, 5 inf), they build up in Russia and Caucus.  If Germans attack into one (say, Karelia), Russians counterattack in the south and cut off German bonus. 
    Meanwhile, the entire American Pacific fleet moves to Panama (whatever survives-probably not the battleship in Pearl Harbor).  They build forces on the east coast to threaten western Europe/Africa.  The British build a fleet in the northwest.  They will be able to invade somewhere on Turn 2.  Americans possibly on turn 2, definitely on turn 3.
    The Japanese rampage, but ultimately it doesn’t matter.  In each game, Japanese end up around 50 (+ bonuses) on about turn 4/5, have taken India, all of the Pacific, possibly even Australia.  But they are too far away to make that count in Russia.

    As long as the Germans are stalemated in Russia (and they will be, by turn 3), and threatened in the west by US/Britain (and they will be, by turn 3), It is irrelevant what Japan does.  Japan gets to 50 or so, has bonuses to have an income of 60 or so, and has reached its high water mark around India/western China (while conquering all of the Pacific).  At that point, their next step-threaten Russia, isn’t viable because they produce too far away, or don’t have the transports, to have a strong threat.  Germany/Italy are being squeezed by this time, so Russia is able to start shipping ground forces east towards the Japanese front lines.

    By turn 5, its over-no axis is conquered, but Germany/Italy are shrunken, and Japan has maxed out.

    Sk
    Sk


  • 1)  “I don’t think Japan should be going to Russia full blown. Just invest enough in Asia to gain a territory every turn, slowly creeping up to Russia.”

    Again, that means you will be in Moscow on Turn 6/7/8.  Which means the western allies have been invading western Europe for 4 straight turns.  Which means Germany/Italy are done.

    I know that that will take you 6/7 turns to get to Moscow, that’s what I said.
    Regardless what Japan does, it will take 'em 6/7 turns to get to Moscow at least.

    What matters is what Japan is doing in those 7 turns, as it slowly creeps up Moscow.
    Is it threatening USA, so that USA can’t go all out on Europe?

    I notice you mention timing a lot, so let’s look at it from Allied POV.
    They need, what, 5 turns, before Berlin falls? And that is with a crappy German/Italian combo.

    By turn 5, Japan should have at least taken all of USA’s NO’s except 1, and Uk should be down to <20 IPC.
    Sure, there might be a big force in Europe, getting ready to smack some Axis ass, but that will be just one smack.
    There will be no reinforcements, as money is low, and the few units are occupied defending the homeland.
    And Japan should be threatening both the US, the USSR and maybe even UK if they managed to sneak one transport to Brazil and plant an IC there….The options are unlimited.

    Can I ask one question? How many rounds does it take the Allies in your 100% Allied win games for them to capture Berlin?


  • I think y’all might be giving up before its truly over. The Axis still likely have the econ advantage at that point and Japan is probably just on the verge of making her weight felt. You should have 2-3 ICs in Asia by this point with Japan and Bombers coming from home. The Axis econ should be every bit as strong or stronger than the combined Allies. And 2 of the 3 Allies have to be shipping stuff in rather than building ‘on site’.

    Unless Germany proper is about to fall, I think the game is not over if Japan is humming along at 65-70 IPCs a turn (not uncommon if the US abandons the Pacific.


  • @Uncle_Joe:

    The Axis still likely have the econ advantage at that point and Japan is probably just on the verge of making her weight felt.

    I’ve tracked the income on two of our games.  The total Axis income, including National Objectives, has never at any point in the game been greater than the allies.

    Craig

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Timing is an issue, which is why any defensive posturing with Germany or Japan results in defeat of the axis, at least in my experience.

    All out, total, thermo-nuclear warfare seems to work quite well.  The idea being to neuter USA/UK’s NOs, and plunder Russia and China with everything possible to knock them on their heels.

    The downside is you have to get over your reluctance to trade tanks.  Sure, in classic and revised tanks were the holy grail, you didn’t push them out until you had a good shot at keeping them, but the action in AA50 is so fast, so dirty, and planes are so expensive you don’t have time to build 40 fighters like you did.


  • If Japan is really pouring it on (which they should be if the US isnt fighting in the Pacific), I cant see how that is the case:

    Germany 26 (-5 for Finland/Norway), +5 for 1st NO = 31 (minimum - this is with NOTHING in Russia)
    Italy 10  - lets say they are being squashed in Africa and have nothing
    Japan 70 - Japan should have ALL of Asia, Alaska, bits of Africa and the Mid-East + all 3 NOs

    106

    US 36-38+5 = 41 to 43 (-Phil, Alaska, Hawaii and with 1 NO)
    UK ~25 to 28 They should have NOTHING in Asia, have no NOs and be missing bits and pieces of Africa
    USSR ~20-25 + 5 = 25 to 30 tops. Again, assuming the German have NOTHING and that Japan has not made major inroads

    94-100 or so

    And that is assuming that Germany and Italy are really rolled back on their heels which wont always be the case. Its hard to keep them completely down if they are playing a defensive game (which they should be from turn 2 on once they know the US is not playing in the Pacific). If they continue with a ‘standard’ game plan once the US is commited, yes, they’ll likely lose before Japan can intervene.

    Also, this is pretty far along in the game to reach this state. Germany and Italy should have enjoyed their bonuses a few times before being reduced to this. If the Allies are really pushing Africa, then yes, Brit money will be higher, but then again, Germany and Italy wont be being hit on the Continent as hard if Allied resources are going to Africa.

    At any rate, if the Axis have never gone above the Allies, then that would lead me to believe that the Japanese player is just moving too slowly. They can really explode out of the gate if there is no opposition. And they can easily threaten the US West Coast (forcing a response there) as well as moving to Russia and pushing into Africa/Mid East. They make a LOT of money if unopposed, but they have to be extremely aggressive and not waste time.

  • Moderator

    Even an unopposed Japan still takes 5, 6 turns to get to Mos.  That is a lot of time for the Allies.  Just because the Allies may initially ignore Japan does not mean they aren’t planning to confront them.  Remember the early Japanese push forces them to go three routes to pick up all the Asia IPC.  They have to go north, central, and south.  Well the Allies can have the option of picking off one or two of those stacks as they approach Mos if Japan doesn’t plan things right.  For example a Russian stack in Novo can threaten North and Central, while Cauc can threaten Per.  This alone could be a huge set back for Japan.  It is definitely not a gimmie that Japan can control the ME or even get to Afr in a KGF type game.

    I haven’t played enough games to say one way or another which side might have the adv from the start, but from an attackers pov I don’t really like the number of Germany and Japan attacks that must be done in round 1.  Yes for the most part they are all very winnable (Egy aside), but still the odds are pretty decent 1 or more go south.  I’ve already had one game where Germany got smoked trying to take out the UK DD/CA in sz 12 and even lost another ftr in Sz 6, another game where Japan got hammered at Pearl and the US BB lived, and yet another where Japan took a beating trying to sink the UK DD at Ind and US DD in Sz 56 and they lost 4 ftrs in those two battles alone. 
    The additon of Sud also really slows down the Axis expansion in Afr as well.


  • Yep, I agree that the Axis are very reliant on most if not all of their turn 1 attacks succeeding. If they pooch a few of them, they are going to have an uphill fight most of the game IMO. And yep, even if they are all 90%+ battles, odds are at least ONE of them is going to go poorly. I think in that sense, the Allies do have an advantage.

    But if you play the odds and dont get totally zapped, I think it balances out very well on both sides. It is amusing that popular consensus around here back in December was that the Axis couldnt lose in 41….

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Uncle_Joe:

    But if you play the odds and dont get totally zapped, I think it balances out very well on both sides. It is amusing that popular consensus around here back in December was that the Axis couldnt lose in 41….

    Which is precisely why I, and many others, rejected all forms of bidding or other changes to help the allies out and why I (and I think many others) am rejecting all forms of bidding or other changes to help the axis out now.

    As soon as you have 1000 games under your belt, THEN and only then, do I think you are qualified to say the game needs a balance adjustment.

    Right now the allies have gone 100% KGF.  This results in a 90+ IPC Japan before Berlin falls.  That’s a bloody aweful lot of power to put in the hands of one nation, IMHO.  It’s almost better to have 90 IPC in one nation than 50 IPC in each of two nations.


  • 90 ipc is probably enough money for japan to supress UK and russian income via strategic bombing, as well as sinking the atlantic fleets. As long as germany can turtle up and get a massive stack of infantry to hold off the current forces there may be no reinforcements.


  • Which is precisely why I, and many others, rejected all forms of bidding or other changes to help the allies out and why I (and I think many others) am rejecting all forms of bidding or other changes to help the axis out now.

    As soon as you have 1000 games under your belt, THEN and only then, do I think you are qualified to say the game needs a balance adjustment.

    Yep, I absolutely 100% agree. I just remember seeing those ‘How do we balance the 41 scenario since the Axis never lose’ threads and its amusing how the pendulum has swung. ;)

    Its just going to be strategy and counter-strategy for a while. I cant imagine changing the game based on a few games worth of play. I’ve played prolly close to 20 game and I still see new things EVERY game (especially if you play with completely different people).


  • “Right now the allies have gone 100% KGF.  This results in a 90+ IPC Japan before Berlin falls.”

    No way.  Even Uncle Joe (who thinks the Axis can win) says Japan at 70.
    I think Japan peaks at about 65 (50 + all 3 National Objectives).

    Uncle Joe-
      In both of your and our games, the situation appears to be about the same. I agree with your numbers in the broad sense (though I think Japan is slightly lower-65 rather than 70). Its what happens next that matters.

    At roughly the end of turn 5, your numbers are approximately right.  Japan has taken India, China, Australia, all of the Pacific (more or less-maybe not quite all of China, maybe all of China but not yet Australia, but generally right).  US/UK have landed in Morocco (or have landed, and perhaps been kicked out of, western Europe).  Germany is on the defensive in the East (probably holding Poland, perhaps holding one or two of the border regions in Russia).  Russia is getting the strength to continue pushing west.  italy/Germany hold the top part of Africa (minus Morocco) and perhaps part of the interior of Africa (from blitzing German tank).

    But now, US/UK threaten to either permanently hold western europe or conquer Italy (and take their money), and will be pouring 6-10 ground forces into Europe per turn.  Thus, Germany/Italy have to defend western Europe.  Which allows Russia to continue to press from the East (into Poland, into Rumania/Balkans, wherever Germany is weakest).  Germany/Italy lose their national objectives (US/UK in western Europe as well as Morocco-sometimes Gibraltar just to ruin the NO).  ON TURN 6:  Italy probably falls.  Poland possibly falls (and Germany proper is now threatened by all 3 allies).

    Japan: to achieve 65 income, at the end of turn 5, they have: a fleet down in Australia.  A fleet in India.  Some (not alot) ground forces in Western/central China.  some (not alot) ground forces in India.  Factories in Japan and a few coastal areas-perhaps Manchuria, Vietnam, maybe even the islands in the Pacific worth 4.  Thus, ON TURN 6: Japan build a whole bunch of ground forces-in Japan, in Manchuria, in Vietnam (which are 3 turns from the front lines!!-they won’t be in the fight until turn 9!).  The fleet near India can threaten Madagascar or the east coast of Africa (worth maybe 2-3 income).  The fleet in Australia spends turns 6,7 and maybe 8 just getting somewhere useful.  The ground forces in China and India plod one space forward-to the space west of India, to the space west of western China-for another 2 dollars.

    In short, I think your and our games are pretty similar at the end of turn 5.  But turn 6, Italy falls, Japan builds a bunch of stuff in Japan, and captures 4 dollars worth of irrelevance in central asia and east africa.  Japan may be a monster, but its an irrelevant monster.

    Steve


  • I disagree. Without the USA projecting any force into the Pacific, there is no threat on the Japanese Carrier fleet whatsoever. Ever seen what that fleet can do when it moves into the Atlantic? Three Carriers, a Battleship, a Cruiser and 6 fighters will be more than a match for anyhing the US/UK have built. If the US/UK build more because they can see the fleet coming, that will be another 40-60 IPC not being converted into units sent against Europe.

    I played a game yesterday where the USA built a Pacific Fleet but took too long to take the fight to the Japanese (me). The Japanese ran away with the Pacific, taking everything in two turns. On turn three, Japan took India (with UK factory). On turn four, Heavy Bombers were bombing Moscow and Stalingrad, making sure that Russia had to spend money repairing the factories.

    Whatever strategy you may come up with, there will be a counter-strategy. Ofcourse, finding it is step one and executing it well enough to make a difference is step two. However, imho it is a serious mistake to not put any pressure on Japan at all, other than that posed by the Chinese (Japan taking out the fighter on turn one will take care of that), Russian Infantry (if Russia creates a stack next to Manchuria, Japan needs to take it out ASAP to make room for a Factory) and two small fleets of British ships (who can take undefended islands from Japan). Without a India Factory and/or a USA presence in the Pacific, the Japanese Fleet will be able to do what it wants (project power) and move wherever it wants (support of Germany/Italy through the Mediteranian), taking all NO’s from the USA/UK that are based there.

    Japan can take India on turn two and move into Stalingrad from India. Supported by fighters and bombers, Japan will take it from Russia and Russia cannot afford to loose the income and grant Germany 5 IPC as well as Japan a factory next to Moscow. Russia’s main weakness is that, while it has the capacity of producing 12 units, half of it is located outside moscow and can be taken away by a savvy Axis player. The new Tank Drive to Moscow goes not through Siberia, but through India!

    Ofcourse, executing this strategy in such a way that it makes a difference early enough will be a challenge.

  • Moderator

    When dealing with Japan in a KGF, you aren’t as much concerned with what Japan does in rds 1-5 (b/c Germany is the primary early threat), it is after that where it is key.  That’s why UK ICs on India are a mistake as are Russian stacks in Bury.  Tactical retreat is the way to go.  Russia has like 10+ inf that they can simply retreat from the East and the UK has a decent sized delaying army that can be retreated to Per and then Cauc.  By the time that happens the UK and US should be going from Lib to Egy.

    Just because you don’t confront them early doesn’t mean you don’t plan on fighting them, you are just picking a more advantageous battle ground where you can potentially use all three Allies, not just one.

    In a KGF you do not have to take Berlin/Rome you just have to neutralize their ability to actually take Moscow.


  • This thread alone displays the balance between the Axis and Allies perfectly.

    Here we have half of the posters saying Axis rule, and the other half saying Allies rule.
    Let’s all switch sides and try and prove how wrong the other half is!  :-D


  • I think you are giving the Japanese wayyyy too much space to do as he wishes. Retreating means that you are not putting any pressure on Japan at all. This means that Japan can do those battles easily and without commiting any fighters. I know Japan starts with 9 fighters, but playing as Japan there never seem to be enough of them. Ofcourse, if I only face resistance made up of 1 infantry then there will be enough of them.

    If the UK/US retreat and let Japan have their way, those fighters will be in StalinGrad on turn 4/5, along with Japanese Infantry and/or Tanks. And moving those paltry four UK units from India to Ukraine is not going to change that.

    When dealing with Japan in a KGF, you aren’t as much concerned with what Japan does in rds 1-5 (b/c Germany is the primary early threat), it is after that where it is key.

    Yes, and in those 5 turns, Japan grew into a monster, receiving 55-60 PC a turn, moving the Japanese fleet into position near Italy, buyng bombers to start threatening Moscow (and with any luck on the Japanese side, those will be Heavy Bmbers), having a Factory in India turning out 3 tanks a turn to throw against Ukraine along with a smattering of infantry (another idea I’ve seen is to build a Factory on one/two islands, producing another 4 units).

    That’s why UK ICs on India are a mistake as are Russian stacks in Bury.  Tactical retreat is the way to go.  Russia has like 10+ inf that they can simply retreat from the East and the UK has a decent sized delaying army that can be retreated to Per and then Cauc.

    I might agree about the Russian stack in Asia, but the India Factory might be a good one, depending on wether the UK can hold India for another turn (Russian support possibly needed). But this has to be combined with a US pacific presence that threatens Japan from the west. This will cause insane amounts of logistical problems for Japan. If you leave Japan alone it will come back to haunt you.

    By the time that happens the UK and US should be going from Lib to Egy.

    You might get there when? About turn 4/5? Precisely in time to get kicked out by the Japanese, who will take Egypt with an insane amount of planes and several tanks.

    IMHO a good Japanse player will know what to do with the room that he is given. Japan can do a lot, and if its allowed to run free through the pacific it will conquer the pacific in 2-3 turns at most. By that time, its fleet and airforce is positioned near India, its army has pacified large chucks of chineese territory. A turn later Japan might even think about conquering Hawai just to deny the US its National Objective.

    That, and given that a good German/Italy player will start buying more defensively when it sees the US coming will make sure that the strategy in itself can be countered. Then it is only a matter of skill……


  • (another idea I’ve seen is to build a Factory on one/two islands, producing another 4 units).

    Hey! That wa smy idea!  :-P

    It’s a long shot though, but I like it. If you place an IC on East Indies, you can pop out two ground units, a transport, and a fighter every turn (and after two rounds, you dont need to buy any more transports, and just shuttle). A nice combat force that can hit Australia, 50% of Pacific Islands, India, Persia, Trans-Jordan, Egypt, and the rest of the African East coast.

    It’s an expensive gimmick, but a fun one  :-)

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 44
  • 1
  • 10
  • 18
  • 4
  • 80
  • 5
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts