• @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. :D

    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?


  • @gebs99:

    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?

    Reading under Non-Combat movement (page 21):

    @AA50:

    Land units can more into any friendly territories.  A just conquered territory is a freindly territory.

    The AA50 rules even point out that this is a good move:

    @AA50:

    This is a good time to gather your units, either to strengthen vulnerable territories or to reinforce units at the front


  • Why don’t you just say Russia gives itself up to support a 3 unit producing India?


  • I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.

    If I think a strat is vastly inferior, then I could possibly be interested in playing reg dice, eventually good dice rolls can only bring you so far.


  • This strategy is basically the same as my “Russian Sacrifice Strategy” that I wrote about in early January.  As I mentioned in my thread, Germany’s best chance of defeating it is if they get a good tech early on.  Also, in my thread, I assumed that Germany was going all out against Russia by building tanks and bombers so that Russia will fall as quickly as possible (probably turn 4).  This strategy keeps India and Australia in UK hands and keeps the Chinese alive.  It even keeps part of Russia alive (although admittedly they can’t collect income while their capital is occupied).

    Now, I know that most people in my thread stated that it wouldn’t work against a good player.  I see the same thing being stated in this thread.  Even if that’s true, remember that both Wodan and I are assuming that Russia falls quickly due to Germany building a bunch of tanks and bombers.  Every turn beyond turn 4 that Russia survives makes this plan even more effective.  If I encountered a German player who built mostly infantry/artillery on turn 1 AND if I were in control of all the allied countries, then I would seriously consider trying it.  In fact, I think that against a G1 inf/art build, it’s almost a guaranteed strategy, barring continuous bad dice rolls and/or Germany getting heavy bombers on turn 1.  Who knows, the next time I play the allies, I might give it a try.


  • Wodan set a premise for his theory, tech is off and NO is on. If it was a strat with tech then it would not be a serious theory. His statements are actually serious because, just like using the method of science, if a theory can be disproved, it can also be proven.
    Personally, I would not play with tech anyway.

    The main reason why this strat is inferior is because it assumes Jap will be taken down pretty fast.

    I also suspect that axis may have advantage in AA50 -41 with NOs, but I’m not sure.


  • @Subotai:

    I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.

    Indeed.  I wanna play it.  Play by Forum would give me carpal tunnel syndrome.


  • @Subotai:

    I would like to play against this strat in TripleA low luck game, but sadly AA50 is not finished yet for release in the stable version.

    If I think a strat is vastly inferior, then I could possibly be interested in playing reg dice, eventually good dice rolls can only bring you so far.

    There’s un anstable version, but it works perfect.

    http://triplea.sourceforge.net/mywiki/Forum

    The only thing I noticed so far are some error messages in History. But you can ignore them, and still look at it.
    For the rest, it seems to work great.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 64
  • 9
  • 27
  • 25
  • 93
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

28

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts