• you guys are way off topic, please continue properly.

    For myself, I like to hit the Hawaii and the India fleet, as well as the 4 Chinese territories available to me. This means China is mine! No more qualms. For buying, I like to take 2 tech and 3 trans. Turn 2, I move 2 trans to Philipines, and 2 to FIC, pushing further into China, and moving to Burma as well. This lets me hit both India and Australia turn 3. Of course, this isn’t always an option, depending on how the Allies react, but it is nice :). Say the Americans bolster Australia, I’d move all 4 trans to FIC to absolutely NAIL india. In any case, by turn 4, I usually take control of India, Australia, and Hawaii, and the east coast of Africa. The big trick is getting transports into the sea. People like the industrial complexes, but those can wait. They aren’t mobile. Does it really make a difference if you can produce those 3 tanks in Manchuria turn 2?

  • What is Japans 3 turn plan?
    What is their early goals (besides the obvious 3 Japanese targets for turn 1 (in order of priority):

    • Yunnan Chinese ftr
      sz35 UK fleet
      sz53 US fleet

    I think the UK india complex is very doable and an extreme pain to japan in 1942.  Russia can stand on her own much easier in 1942.  The chinese are much more powerful in 1942, and USA pacific navy is much more powerful in 1942.  I really don’t see any easy wins for the axis in 1942.  They have a much greater hill to climb than in 1941.

    When Japan sends a loaded carrier and BB to SZ35 to sink the UK fleet (necessary), that fleet is way out of position: 2 turns to get home and get cover.

    So the Japanese goal is to sit in sz62 and pump units, you better buy some surface vessels (not all tpts).  If you do not buy any navy (surface vessels), the US will come hunt you down.  They have 3 bombers that can be stationed in alaska USA1.  The USA start with so much more and can put incredible heat on SZ62 right away.  Buying a carrier and 2 bombers puts a sub (if Japan does not buy a DD), 2 ftrs, 5 bombers in range of sz62 for USA2.  scary.  That is planes alone, I didn’t even consider any of the starting navy the US may want to risk to threaten/draw Japanese units out as well.

    For these reasons (US navy, UK India complex) , I think it might be best to concentrate on the south pacific / southern asia area first.  I think 2 ICs might be a good opening move: French Indo China and Borneo.  Then the SZ35 fleet can move to borneo on J2 and have a DD or two added for safety or two inf, 2 tpt.  This solidifies the southern asia corridor and enables the Japanese to put some great pressure (in 2 rounds) on the UK india complex if desired.

    I like these J1 attacks:

    *** Indian Ocean Seazone (BEN/Z35)
    1 AC
    3 Ftr
    1 BB

    *** East Pacific Ocean (EPO/Z53)
    1 Ftr
    1 Sub
    1 Bmr
    1 Des

    *** East Chinese Sea (ECH/Z61)
    1 BB
    1 Trn
    1 Cru

    *** Fukien (Fuk)
    1 Arm
    2 Inf

    *** Suiyuan (Sui)
    4 Inf
    1 Ftr

    *** Yunnan (Yun)
    3 Inf
    2 Ftr

  • '16 '15 '10

    Some questions re. NOs…

    1. the OP refers to playing w/o NOs.  Does Axis have any chance in this w/o NOs?  I’m thinking probably not.  This looks fairly even with NOs.  Germany’s early strength and its ability to snag all 3 NOs G1 indicates a small Axis advantage, but Japan is in a way weaker position compared to 41.

    2. How does the British Pacific NO work in this?  For example, I’ve found that in TripleA, when the USA liberates Solomons, it goes to British control.  Do Borneo and Solomons work the same way?  How do the British get their Pacific NO…does taking Solomons and/or Burma count, or is it necessary to take a territory that starts as Japanese in the 41 version?

    I find any Jap attack on Pearl kinda risky, but I suppose it has to be done in some capacity–perhaps simply with a sub and whatever air can be spared.  For the Allies, an India IC is tempting given Japan’s weakness in that region–I’m not sure a FIC factory is Japan’s solution, it could become a liability.  I guess the main advantage to FIC is that unlike Manchuria it can’t be attacked by China.  Fortunately for Axis, Germany should have Russia’s full attention–otherwise the Russians could blitz China and it would be lights out on the mainland for Japan.

  • Playing w/o NOs is a real dry game- personally I hate in.  I think this is what makes the game.  The tech is great also, though you could live w/o it.  If you don’t play with the NOs, you might as well play Revised or AA42 (The Revision of Revised) 😉

  • In my experience with AA50-42 which is with NOs Japan is irrelevant. Germany will have the game won before Japan is anywhere close to getting to Moscow. China is not that much more to deal with than 41. An Indian IC does have a better chance of holding and annoying the Japanese and the US fleet can be a quicker pain, but again none of this matters as Germany will be in London or Moscow very quickly.

    As far as the UK Pacific NO it works the same way as 41. These are the territories that UK must take one of, Caroline Islands, Formosa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and French Indo-China. Solomons, Borneo, Philippines, and the East Indies are considered as liberations, not captures.

  • @a44bigdog:

    In my experience with AA50-42 which is with NOs Japan is irrelevant. Germany will have the game won before Japan is anywhere close to getting to Moscow. China is not that much more to deal with than 41. An Indian IC does have a better chance of holding and annoying the Japanese and the US fleet can be a quicker pain, but again none of this matters as Germany will be in London or Moscow very quickly

    Mostly agreed. Japan is not irrelevant but Germany has a big chance of arriving Moscow before the western aid comes. I think one of the big problems is that German IC at Karelia. I know, starts as soviet, but there is no way of holding, and as much soviets will trade it one or two rounds. Maybe soviets need a special rule in that scenario to moving ICs as in real life … but I guess the IC would be better at Arkangel or Novo (at start) than in Karelia. I don’t think germans can take London anyway…

    The India IC can hold and usually does, just you need also another at SAF if you want fight Europe and Africa at the same time. Also, SAF tanks will arrive to support India or Caucasus soon or later

    A uphill battle for allies but better than in fantasy scenario (1941). Seems they tried mimic Revised setup in various points but failed testing Europe (or China for that matters, it still falls too easy even if a bit slower)

    However, I think a triple strafe with soviets can work (bel, euk, ukr). I tried some times and usually keeps valuable tanks alive and makes easier trading kar (if you retreat bel attackers to ark)

  • '16 '15 '10

    Yup.  I need to play this game some more before forming any definitive observations, but I’m thinking that if UK goes all in on land ICs then India/Egypt is a better pairing than India/SA.   The rub is that USA needs to have Japan’s full attention right away.  So UK needs to deal with the Italians.  It’s tough to plop down and support a factory in India right away and still get the bombers needed to sink the Italian navy….  Sometimes it should be possible to buy India UK2 but sometimes not.  Late game, if UK has the Egypt/India pairing, while USA makes good progress and China hangs tough, Allies might have a shot at fighting on after Russia falls.  It’s a longshot though–there are soo many ipcs in Eurasia and air smashes navy.

    It’s perilous to reccomend a specific UK strategy since both J1 and G1 are extremely variable and Uk strategy ought to play off these turns.

    Every game of 42 I’ve played so far has been hella fun…but I’m guessing that a bid to Russia will be necessary, maybe as much as 6-10 like in 41…now that TripleA is back up we will have a better idea soon enough I think.

  • Usually allies cannot hold Egypt enough to build units there. There is a big menace of a 1-2 punch or even a 1-2-3 punch if Japan is near

    However, If it can hold, it’s obviously far better than SAF

  • I am curious what Germany is doing in these games you guys are playing. Funcioneta I do not see how England can keep its capitol if it is buying ICs all over the map, because in my mind in 42 a German navy is a must. It is SO very easy to pull off and has the benefits of threatening England while reinforcing Karelia. And since Germany should be knocking out all 3 of its NOs it can also keep investing in this navy. I do not see England being able to take it out alone, and if the US tries to help, I think we all know what that means. Japan had just been given the green light to run amok.

  • That’s the matter, USA simply has no money to fight both in Pacific and Atlantic (at least not a long campaign), but also UK needs keep Africa. It’s a big dilema: if you buy SAF IC, you risk a german naval strat but if not, you risk losing all Africa

    It’s a problem I have still to solve because I got beaten badly by a naval strat as you said and I have to rethink the things. Any case, SAF IC will be bought round 2 or later (or you will not have any navy to resist Luftwaffe even without Kriegsmarine built), so I guess the answer is not buy SAF IC if germans go navy and buy it if they skip Kriegsmarine

    For the record, the result is not the fall of England (it can be defended without much effort), the result is german control of Atlantic that is deadly because they can take Brazil and put a IC there, annoy Africa even more or trade Ottawa with USA (so UK has no chance of collecting income for it)

    I have not a magic wand for this scenario, but it’s better than 1941. I think soon or later we’ll solve 1942 scenario enigma, but I doubt 1941 has any solution with vanilla rules

  • Also, it changes much if axis rolls very poor or very good round 1

  • @Funcioneta:

    Also, it changes much if axis rolls very poor or very good round 1


  • '16 '15 '10

    We should probably start another thread for 42 strategy chat as this one is off topic.

    AA44Bigdog can you give me a link to a game where you used this naval strategy?  On its face I think I would welcome this tactic as Allies.  Obviously my counter would be KGF, with only minimal US income going to transports to contest Pacific NOs….so Japan would become a mainland monster.  This alone is probably solid justification for a naval strat.  Either way, I’m curious what your buying strategy is to keep a Baltic fleet in the water.

    More and more I’m thinking this is slanted to Axis and an Allied bid is needed, so lots of different Axis strats could work.

  • The problem with KGF is that Japan can attack Alaska or menace WUSA, they don’t need do a total assault as in Revised, just pin the yanks so you they forced to buy land units at your rear. That’s money that doesn’t goes to Atlantic boats (trust me, you will have no chance of putting any Pacific boats if you skip more than one round of Pacific purchases). At very least, you will be reduced to a 40 IPCs USA (Alaska and Haw lost). Do the maths: Germany will colect 50 IPCs, Italy 20-25 vs 30 from USSR, 20-25 UK and any money Japan let’s USA spent on boats. You are going to halt german naval expansion as much at price of losing all Africa and Asia (since I guess KGF means you don’t IC India). Of all those IPCs, only UK one and maybe 20-30 from USA will go for boats, not enough to do the job

    KGF cannot work in AA50, scenario doesn’t mind. I’m still waiting the people appear with a solution non involving KGF, but they stick to the past

  • @Funcioneta:

    KGF cannot work in AA50, scenario doesn’t mind. I’m still waiting the people appear with a solution non involving KGF, but they stick to the past

    Japan needs to be paid attention to… whether USA decides to do it or are forced to do it by Japan.
    USA used to be one of the easier countries to play, now they face very tough decisions on how to split their forces.

    Strong Axis play does not make it any easier on them either.

  • what is a bid and why is it used.it sounds to me like its a handicap rule for not so good players.is this correct

  • '16 '15 '10

    A bid is a way for advanced players to even the playing field and determine sides in mutually fair way.  It’s not really necessary for novices, though both versions of AA50 favor Axis.

    Returning to Japan 1 discussion… my J1 depends alot on whether its ll or dice.  If it’s dice, I tend to play conservative and target the India fleet and push aggressively on all Chinese targets.  In ll, Japan can perhaps afford to hit Buryatia as well.  I’m not a big fan of the Pearl strike as it seems that Japan has to deploy the cruiser to have overwhelming odds of success, and trading a sub, destroyer and cruiser for the Pearl fleet may not be worth it.  On the other hand, I suppose hitting Pearl is the only sure way to deny USA its NO.

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 4
  • 62
  • 36
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
  • 8
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys