• @Funcioneta:

    @atarihuana:

    KGF doesnt ignore Japan 😛

    Sure? KGF utterly ignores Japan in the 3-4 first rounds. Enough for lose the game for allies

    i dont think this  game is decided in 4 rounds, unless u play really bad.  there is no kings-way. you can fight the pacific or can go full throttle KGF. both are viable options.


  • Trying KGF is playing really bad. It concedes economic advantage to axis from round 2, 3 as much, menaces facing a Polar Express and cannot crush a well played western axis

    Pacific must be fought if allies want the marginal chance of winning they have in 1941 against a well played axis. Economics are simple, axis will have them pretty soon, and they have starting military advantage and positional advantage with one enemy power killed in 1st round and a 2nd enemy power (USSR) bottled between axis power, and a 3rd power (UK) that loses many of her territories in the first rounds. I still cannot find a way of wining with allies that not involve massive luck for allies or bad axis playing, and this way cannot be KGF. This way only can be bidding for allies or modding China in some way


  • i  disagree 😄

  • 2007 AAR League

    @atarihuana:

    i  disagree 😄

    I agree with you that I disagree.  😄

    I think against a good Allied player, the Axis are at a disadvantage. the Allies can easily focus on the Atlantic with only a minimal investment, if any, in the Pacific.


  • @wodan46:

    Most of my exotic strategies are based around the opponent not being sure of what’s best.  Sure, if they know exactly what you are going to do, and what permutations you are going to do, they have a better chance, but there is no assurance of that.

    Though the key to any strategy is adaptability.  Every strategy has a counter, and if the opponent knows what your strategy is and you can’t change it, you are screwed.  Hence, you keep your options open.  If Japan is contained but not killed, Britain could simply start massing a fleet, which they can afford thanks to having their eastern assets liberated.  Or if Russia is still alive, you could just make a run for the VC condition with a quick capture of Western Europe and East Poland.

    a strategy based on the your opponent not knowing what to do is hardly a strategy.  What, are you playing children or something?

    maybe we should look for strategies that involve playing someone of at least equal skill.
    Any strategy stands a good chance against someone who doesn’t know how to respond.  I could build all bombers and plan to parachute into London and Ottawa and someone who didn’t know how to respond could think to build more AA guns because of all my planes rather than see my severe lack of ground forces.
    Strategy ought to be how to put yourself in position to best win the game, not take advantage of a new player and shank them.
    so like what, “exotic” here seems to be more like the kind of dance… ie you playing ‘dirty’ against unknowing players?..

    @wodan46:

    1. Russia moves its forces towards India, Buryatia, and Chinghai, accepting that it will lose its capital on turn 3 or 4.

    @wodan46:

    Germany shouldn’t be able to reach India until G6.  They shouldn’t be able to land Fighters in a Japanese territory until G6 as well, and that’s if they are careful.
    By G6, Japan should be dead.

    –so USSR falls on G3 or 4, Japan only has to hold for 1-2 more turns before Germany can hit India and US/UK have already had to reallocate to deal with a monster Germany/Italy and Japan can expand again “without” any Soviet reinforcements to hold them.  Not only have they not killed Japan, but they have lost USSR and given the Axis one front to fight on each instead of two…

    @wodan46:

    @atarihuana:

    if russia goes down turn 4, what stopping german sending planes to japan to help. or sealion?

    UK should be massing Infantry often.  By Turn 4, they should have 20+ Infantry.

    what about turn 2 if UK spent all it’s money on IC’s… or turn 3 if they are trying to defend a J2 attack on India?  With US/UK merely building ground troops (well, really the UK building ground troops and the US ignoring Germany) in Atlantic a SA IC will not hold Italy and the UK navy will be sunk quickly and give Axis control of the water.

    you have to expect them to respond well and then beat that move.  Giving up USSR, not taking Japan and allowing Germany to pressure India/England, Italy to overrun Africa (even with your 2 IC SA factory and Japan to reemerge by J6 is not a good plan…

    unless you are playing newbs…


  • @LuckyDay:

    a strategy based on the your opponent not knowing what to do is hardly a strategy.  What, are you playing children or something?

    Let’s test that.  Let’s say Japan sends all its transports to Iwo Jima loaded with forces and wipes out the West US units first turn.  They now have all 3 Carriers and 5 Transports within range of WUS.  What do you do?

    Strategies are not as predictable as one might expect.  If the opponent fails to evaluate ALL the possible permutations your strategy could take, they can still get screwed.

    @LuckyDay:

    Strategy ought to be how to put yourself in position to best win the game, not take advantage of a new player and shank them.

    Funny, when playing Revised (No Bid), I crushed an expert player by doing an extremely foolhardy kamikaze rush and taking Russia turn 3.

    The reason why things like beginner’s luck exists is because experts build their strategies around their opponents acting smart, and they do not plan for their opponent doing something stupid.  Furthermore, experts probably can think of countless permutations of common strategies and easily think of the mathematically best response for them, but they are unfamiliar with more exotic strategies because they are almost never used.

    @LuckyDay:

    -so USSR falls on G3 or 4, Japan only has to hold for 1-2 more turns before Germany can hit India and US/UK have already had to reallocate to deal with a monster Germany/Italy and Japan can expand again “without” any Soviet reinforcements to hold them.  Not only have they not killed Japan, but they have lost USSR and given the Axis one front to fight on each instead of two…

    No, my strategy is now built around USSR falling between turns 4 to 6, by which time Japan is dead or near death.  The Axis have to defend on two fronts (Germany and Russia) while attacking on two others (East Asia and the Pacific).  How exactly is Germany going to capture the Philipines or East Indies, while still holding onto all their conquests and all their home territories?

    @LuckyDay:

    what about turn 2 if UK spent all it’s money on IC’s… or turn 3 if they are trying to defend a J2 attack on India?  With US/UK merely building ground troops (well, really the UK building ground troops and the US ignoring Germany) in Atlantic a SA IC will not hold Italy and the UK navy will be sunk quickly and give Axis control of the water.

    There is no longer a SA build, and the UK masses Bombers. The UK navy gets sunk first turn anyways, but the Bombers will SBR the Axis and kill any fleets they put out.

    As for India, by R2, there should be 6-8 units in it, securing it, and by B2 there should be a sizeable fleet in front of it as well.

    @LuckyDay:

    you have to expect them to respond well and then beat that move.  Giving up USSR, not taking Japan and allowing Germany to pressure India/England, Italy to overrun Africa (even with your 2 IC SA factory and Japan to reemerge by J6 is not a good plan…

    Japan is dead.  It doesn’t come back.


  • @wodan46:

    @LuckyDay:

    Strategy ought to be how to put yourself in position to best win the game, not take advantage of a new player and shank them.

    Funny, when playing Revised (No Bid), I crushed an expert player by doing an extremely foolhardy kamikaze rush and taking Russia turn 3.

    The reason why things like beginner’s luck exists is because experts build their strategies around their opponents acting smart, and they do not plan for their opponent doing something stupid.  Furthermore, experts probably can think of countless permutations of common strategies and easily think of the mathematically best response for them, but they are unfamiliar with more exotic strategies because they are almost never used.

    (bold mine, words yours)

    the conflict with your argument and your analogy is a problem, because you give examples of what good players do and base your strategy on weak players. You expect them to play poorly rather than well.

    Experts do build their strategies around their opponents acting smart AND understand what to do when their opponent does something stupid.  An expert player thinks far beyond the move and accounts for permutations of each move.  the ability to see those permutations makes them strong players.  But you are apparently playing weak players who can’t see the next round.  And then you want to throw cheap scenarios out at someone to prove your idea?  Come on, the fact that I’m arguing this is enough for you to know that I can see the permutations.  Save the bubble gum for the fair.

    As for your revised example, gee, you start out right at the gates of Moscow, how unimaginable could it possibly be to take it by turn 3?  Assuming you were talking about taking it with Germany, despite using the term kamikaze.  On the other hand, should you have been talking about taking it with Japan (hence kamikaze) on turn three either you have proven that you are not playing ‘expert’ players after all or giving me another cheap example based on chance dice.  You did say it was foolhardy, not strategy, and extremely I believe.

    and big whoop to the whole thing, I’ve taken UK on G2 against 20 year experienced players…  you roll dice, chance comes into it, but you have been talking about poor players as the norm.  when you change your starting point we can discuss tactics.


  • I wouldn’t call it stupid, I would call it brazen. Although many times players do make huge mistakes. Some players try crazy tactics that sometimes work, and other times fail horribly.


  • @LuckyDay:

    the conflict with your argument and your analogy is a problem, because you give examples of what good players do and base your strategy on weak players. You expect them to play poorly rather than well.

    No, I expect them to play well.

    @LuckyDay:

    Experts do build their strategies around their opponents acting smart AND understand what to do when their opponent does something stupid.  An expert player thinks far beyond the move and accounts for permutations of each move.  the ability to see those permutations makes them strong players.  But you are apparently playing weak players who can’t see the next round.  And then you want to throw cheap scenarios out at someone to prove your idea?  Come on, the fact that I’m arguing this is enough for you to know that I can see the permutations.

    And how does what you say prove anything.  Experts account for permutations of common strategies, not uncommon ones.  When the uncommon strategy they are unlikely to have thought about the permutations before actually playing, and as such, don’t have a memorized list of counters, and have to think it over as they go along.  That they have to think at all puts them at a disadvantage.

    Its like going to a math test expecting problems spread out from chapters 4 through 6, only to have all the problems be chapter 6.  You studied for it, but you didn’t focus that hard on it, and as such, you will have to do much of the work the hard way.

    @LuckyDay:

    As for your revised example, gee, you start out right at the gates of Moscow, how unimaginable could it possibly be to take it by turn 3?  Assuming you were talking about taking it with Germany, despite using the term kamikaze.  On the other hand, should you have been talking about taking it with Japan (hence kamikaze) on turn three either you have proven that you are not playing ‘expert’ players after all or giving me another cheap example based on chance dice.  You did say it was foolhardy, not strategy, and extremely I believe.

    I abandoned Africa, Norway, Western Europe, and Southern Europe.  I threw everything I got at Russia.

    @LuckyDay:

    and big whoop to the whole thing, I’ve taken UK on G2 against 20 year experienced players…

    And this proves my point quite nicely.  Why didn’t those players see the possible permutation of an attack on UK, and sufficient ground troops to counter?  Because it was unexpected, and because the attack appears to be foolish.


  • @wodan46:

    @LuckyDay:

    the conflict with your argument and your analogy is a problem, because you give examples of what good players do and base your strategy on weak players. You expect them to play poorly rather than well.

    No, I expect them to play well.

    uh, no you don’t.  see what you said earlier was:

    @wodan46:

    Most of my exotic strategies are based around the opponent not being sure of what’s best.

    @LuckyDay:

    As for your revised example, gee, you start out right at the gates of Moscow, how unimaginable could it possibly be to take it by turn 3?  Assuming you were talking about taking it with Germany, despite using the term kamikaze.  On the other hand, should you have been talking about taking it with Japan (hence kamikaze) on turn three either you have proven that you are not playing ‘expert’ players after all or giving me another cheap example based on chance dice.  You did say it was foolhardy, not strategy, and extremely I believe.

    I abandoned Africa, Norway, Western Europe, and Southern Europe.  I threw everything I got at Russia.

    you really gotta read the other people’s posts, man, I said it was not unimaginable to take Moscow by turn 3.  I never asked how, because sure it can be done, against unexperienced players…

    @wodan46:

    @LuckyDay:

    and big whoop to the whole thing, I’ve taken UK on G2 against 20 year experienced players…

    And this proves my point quite nicely.  Why didn’t those players see the possible permutation of an attack on UK, and sufficient ground troops to counter?  Because it was unexpected, and because the attack appears to be foolish.

    again, gotta read the posts… here’s the whole statement.:
    @LuckyDay:

    and big whoop to the whole thing, I’ve taken UK on G2 against 20 year experienced players…  you roll dice, chance comes into it, but you have been talking about poor players as the norm.  when you change your starting point we can discuss tactics.

    there’s dice involved.  My Sea Lion was 1 transport with 1 art/1 inf and all my airforce.  Not because UK hadn’t prepared, they had built extra inf and they build ships, just on the other side of England.  So I sacrificed almost every plane and the INF and took it.  why?  amazing lucky dice.  it wasn’t a strategy though.

    and see, that’s been my point, that you had a plan-not a strategy. Like a hypothesis before it becomes a scientific law.  Your plan was to focus on Japan.  that’s great, but it wasn’t a strategy, because your plan was only going to work once against an experienced player and only more than once against an inexperienced one…. ie the point.
      Already you have changed your initial post with what you described as major changes.  That screams “not a strategy” -it’s a plan.  So great, you had a plan and you tossed it out for people to discuss, that’s a big part of the whole forum.  and you got feedback and now you’ve sharpened your plan and are heading it towards a strategy.  It may not be a ‘ignore germany’ strat, but it can become a strat. 
      You went from 2 IC’s pumping out ground units, one to focus on Japan and one to focus on Italy in Africa to one IC to focus on Japan and the homeland to amass bomber groups, apparently for Germany.  You went from throwing everything from Russia at Japan and losing Moscow on round 3 or 4 to being more moderate and thinking it could hold until round 6.
      You have to understand that when we discuss things here it is about making play better, so you get a bunch of people discussing your idea and actually helping you.  So don’t go taking it all personal and biting people’s head’s off when they take the time to read your idea and comment or discuss it with you.  Your plan has gone through major overhaul since you first posted it not too long ago because of all the people thinking and writing about it with you.

    Residual thoughts:  you originally mentioned that the Axis player gave up around the time Japan fell.  It might help to play on a bit, as the other 2 Axis nations could have struck back.  I have seen the game ebb and flow quite a bit even when captials fall and the possibility of liberation is not out of hand.  More play-testing will help solidify stuff.
      instead of revising the original post completely, you could also place the revised stuff in a new post and link it or simply add it to the other so the thought process can be seen.  Now you have a completely revised starting point and 3 pages of discussion that no one new understands…


  • The Axis should give up if Japan falls and Japan can’t recapture it.  If they can’t, neither Germany nor Italy is in a position to liberate it, meaning that they instead have to somehow capture 12-15 VCs by themselves, or capture London, which will be hard when they can’t build sea units without simply losing them.


  • What if when Japan falls they are in a position to put a major blow onto one of the allies? What If they are not as spread out and disorganized as one might think. What if they have a very organized defense and a plan to counterattack the allies on the turn Japan falls?

    All valid thoughts. I would keep playing. I would want to see if I could win back the game for the Allies. And as LuckyDay said: It’s all about the dice.


  • this is just ridicoulus. a “strat” killing the strongest nation on the board turn6. furthest away from all allied nations. it will simply fail if u really try it. by turn 2 latest axis know whats going on, and whoops, you die…

    tokyo will never ever be even close to falling  before either moscow or london fall…


  • @atarihuana:

    this is just ridicoulus. a “strat” killing the strongest nation on the board turn6. furthest away from all allied nations. it will simply fail if u really try it. by turn 2 latest axis know whats going on, and whoops, you die…

    tokyo will never ever be even close to falling  before either moscow or london fall…

    Russia falls between Turn 4 and Turn 6.  India is endangered between Turn 6 and Turn 8.  Britain is never in danger.  Any German Fleet will simply get sunk.

    As for Japan, they will be strongest nation for about 1 turn, before their income plummets as fast as it went up.  The only question is which parts go first.

    In the unlikely event that Japan turtles, the plan refocuses around Italy.  American Bombers focus on killing Italy by sinking their fleet, supporting a landing into Africa, and SBRing them into submission.  Britain uses their India IC to advance into Africa or Russia instead


  • About your comment about the German fleet being sunk: the same thing could be said towards the British Fleet. It’s never that cut and dry.

    Also, I would say the British empire is in trouble when Japan takes most of it over J1.

    You seem to be confident that every aspect of this plan will work flawlessly. What if say, the Germans prematurely break through into Moscow before your allotted few turns? What if Japan manages to hold onto it’s newly acquired colonies and fights off or decimates the US fleet? How will that work into your great strategy?


  • @Nickwins89:

    About your comment about the German fleet being sunk: the same thing could be said towards the British Fleet. It’s never that cut and dry.

    My presumption is that the British fleet gets sunk on the first turn.

    @Nickwins89:

    Also, I would say the British empire is in trouble when Japan takes most of it over J1.

    Which is why taking it back simultaneously kills Japan’s income while giving Britain the money needed to defend the UK on top of that.

    @Nickwins89:

    You seem to be confident that every aspect of this plan will work flawlessly.

    Or maybe I didn’t feel like listing all the contingencies, especially since I’m not even sure what the best counter-moves are.

    @Nickwins89:

    What if say, the Germans prematurely break through into Moscow before your allotted few turns?

    Several things.  They’ll still need to waste a turn in Persia before they can reach India, giving you time to respond.  Better yet, the British Bomber fleet is in range of Moscow, the Caucasus, and Persia.  Combined with a decent ground force, you should be able to counter the German advance, and maybe even restore Russia.

    @Nickwins89:

    What if Japan manages to hold onto it’s newly acquired colonies and fights off or decimates the US fleet?

    That would be extremely difficult for Japan to do.  If America loses their navy, they can still use their air force to kill Japan’s while also SBRing them heavily.

    Its possible that it might counter the Allied attack, but if Japan does this and fails, by the time they need to turtle, it will be too late.  Just as one wrong move can get the American fleet sunk, one wrong move can result in the Japanese fleet being sunk instead.

    If America truly feels threatened, they can build more naval units on A2 instead of the Bomber fleet.  However, the Bomber fleet is powerful cause it threatens the Japanese fleet without being exposed itself.

    @Nickwins89:

    How will that work into your great strategy?

    Why do you people keep acting like I assume that my strategies are be-all end-all autowins?  They are strategies.  They can lose due to bad die rolls, or they can lose due to proper countering.  Selecting the correct permutation of a strategy to ensure that you can prevent the enemy from countering you too much, and for minimizing the consequences of the occasional bad die roll, is the same for this strategy as it is for any other.


  • i changed my mind. dont ignore wodan strats.  ignore every single word of this forum troll  :evil:


  • everybody is just to negative about new ideas. For me AA is about having and overall objective and from then on organize your resources to acomplish your goal, however, the enemy reacts to your every move so you have to modify your actions acordingly but you must never lose of sight your final goal.

    I think you cant ignore any nation because then you let the other get to powerfull. Using all the Russian infantry in the east + 1 bomber would probably worry the japanese player and spend resources and effor tto retake manchuria, giving india a possible brake in order for the allies to secure. For me, india is key. How to build a IC there and effectively defend it is what i would like to know. Last i played the japanesse player simply went all out on taking india. Had I attacked using wohaan’s strategy maybe i could have taken manchuria and worried the japanesse player.


  • I’m not negative about new ideas, I just don’t like his “defend to the death” idea of his strategy. I believe that something like it could work, just maybe not in exactly the way he prescribes here. It is great in theory, but the plan changes accordingly to how the tides of war are shifting.

    I will try something like this strategy in my next game, but I don’t think it will end up exactly as it is planned out here.


  • just beacause its a new idea doesnt make it good. typical western thinking imho. its NEW! its GREAT! its BIG!. it MUST be good…

    look up “inner line”,  look at the board setup. japan is the richest nation. it has a huge fleet. without trannies thats 3 full US turns of naval production + 3 replacement planes.

    turn 2 35-40  income. turn 3 50 - 55.  there is NO WAY to kill japan against any decent player by turn 6 or even 8. or 10…

    look, the 7 inf will either get crushed J1, or will be ignored and get crushed J2. russia has no option what soever going on offensive against japan.

    india… this is more tricky but still in axis favour.  US is all out pacific. thats likely 3 turns of production / positioning before he can do anything ( like take solomons or such)
    if uk now is pumping 3 inf or even better 3 tanks in india, they soon will be out of cash cuz noone is fighting for africa. india cant help africa cuz u got japan right next door. so pretty soon u have a 40- 55 ish germany and a 20 -30 ish  italy  saying :

    Hello! you forgot us. 😄

    and while you managed to slow down japan it has cost you so much you will simply loose the game. its not like its a straightforward move to get japan below 40 or even 30 income easy.
    hence this whole “plan” is a nice dream and its only benefit is that it shows you what simply doesnt work because you ignore the board setup, the economics, basic strategic principles ( why u think russia can hold against germany just fine if it has no backdoor pressure from japan ( > inner line) and last not least the dice 😉

  • Moderator

    I have no problem sacrificing Russia if it means you get Japan, but I would not go into a game planning on losing Russia without seeing any rolls or any turns and certainly not before Japan and Italy go.  What if they get bad dice or make what you deem as a poor move, you’ve just cost yourself a turn with a bad Russian move in retrospect.

    Also, if Mos does fall to the Germans, I would not count on them chasing down the Allies in Asia (maybe they go to Ind to pick up the IC).  But Germany is going to go after London.  Remember Germany often has build capacity issues early so it is not uncommon for them to boost their ftrs and more importantly thier bomber core.  This means I would not be surprised to see Germany SBR London in anticipation on Moscow falling and then as Mos falls Germany will either go the fleet route or SBR London until they get them to 16 damage.  Ignoring the SBR thing and going strait to the fleet, since Ger should have 4 ftrs (at least) by rd 4-6, once you sack Mos all you need is 60 ipc to place 4 dd, 2 ac (with 4 ftrs) in Sz 5.  How do the Allies sink this?
    And how do the sink the followup fleet of AC+ ftrs + dds?
    With the SBR campaign you’ll probably see a German CA fleet to take advantage of the UK needing to make sure they can always place inf in London.  Finally a German IC on Fra could come into play and Germany drops its fleet directly in Sz 7 or 6, again they should have ftrs so I could even see a 3 AC + 3 DD buy which would only cost 66.  And if the Allies lack DDs the Germans can open up a moster Sub campiagn until they clear the Atlantic and then put down its fleet.  Also an Axis flett in Sz 12 threatens both Washington and London.

    My point is the game is not necessarily over if Japan would end up falling esp if Ger/Ita have Mos, Kar and Cauc, which they obviously should.


  • yes but i know  that this straight forward rush to japan will fail. u cannot take japan without sinking their navy first and that one tough job. really tough.


  • @atarihuana:

    just beacause its a new idea doesnt make it good. typical western thinking imho. its NEW! its GREAT! its BIG!. it MUST be good…

    look up “inner line”,  look at the board setup. japan is the richest nation. it has a huge fleet. without trannies thats 3 full US turns of naval production + 3 replacement planes.

    turn 2 35-40  income. turn 3 50 - 55.  there is NO WAY to kill japan against any decent player by turn 6 or even 8. or 10…

    look, the 7 inf will either get crushed J1, or will be ignored and get crushed J2. russia has no option what soever going on offensive against japan.

    Japan’s “huge” fleet can’t be everywhere at once.  Sure, they can do any of what you describe, they simply can’t do ALL of it.  And they will have large income for only a turn or two, before it starts rocketing down again.

    The Japanese fleet can’t simultaneously menace East Asia, hold off the American Fleet, AND protect newly built Japanese ships.

    I’m beginning to suspect that the last is critical.  If US has a big stack of Bombers on Alaska/Stc/Sui, it can simply decimate anything Japan builds.  Perhaps a Sub/Bomber fleet, even.


  • @wodan46:

    The Japanese fleet can’t simultaneously menace East Asia, hold off the American Fleet, AND protect newly built Japanese ships.

    I’m beginning to suspect that the last is critical.  If US has a big stack of Bombers on Alaska/Stc/Sui, it can simply decimate anything Japan builds.  Perhaps a Sub/Bomber fleet, even.

    I solved a problem of that kind in one of my last games with an IC on East Indies. Additional 15 IPC, sure, but it saved the japanese fleet and the whole game.
    The US player had a big fleet in strike distance of japanese sea zone (Okinawa, Wake or Iwo Jima, I’m not sure), but not enough trannies to march into Japan. My fleet was at sz 35 (before India) because I had amphibious (re)take the IC there. The US fleet couldn’t reach East Indies at the turn I build the IC there, and next turn I move my fleet in and build additional navy pieces.


  • I have a question. I was reading in another post that its a legal move to reinforce with land units in your NCM a teritorry you have just captured during the combat movement. For example if I invade finalnd with russian soldiers and take it over then I could move in my non combat movement some tanks that didnt had any action before in the turn as long as they are within range?

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 6
  • 9
  • 6
  • 98
  • 63
  • 18
  • 68
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

59
Online

15.7k
Users

37.2k
Topics

1.6m
Posts