Why wait as Japan?



  • yeah…it’s 7-0 japan in our games to date

    We had our first Allied win yesterday. The Japanese player was too conservative early on and then split up his fleet later on and lost too much of it piecemeal. Allied play wasnt perfect either, but even with admitted Japanese mistakes it seemed VERY hard for the Allies.

    Still, we learned some things as the Allies that we hope to exploit the next game when Japan doesnt make the same mistakes… 🙂



  • Yes, the abattlemap works well now, show us a map of the board after J1 if you do not mind MaherC, or even right before J2.



  • MaherC, what are you putting into the Philippines and is the U.S. player keeping the fighter in the territory or is he scrambling it? Attacking with 2 infantry, 1 artillery, and 1 tank, Japan should have about a 34% chance of taking the territory if the fig doesn’t scramble.



  • I see a lot of people mentioning the british taking the Dutch East Indies while they are still “neutral.”  This is not allowed as per the errata that is currently posted.  No neutral countries can attack other neutrals until japan attacks them.



  • I think you are mistaken.  The French and Dutch Territories are available to occupy in the beginning.  If the Japanese occupy a Dutch territory then that brings all the allies into the war.  However, I believe if the UK or ANZAC occupy a Dutch territory, the Japanese are allowed to attack that territory under the same circumstances as any other UK or ANZAC territory.  Check the stuff written about corrections to page 8, The Political Situation.



  • @Bridger:

    I see a lot of people mentioning the british taking the Dutch East Indies while they are still “neutral.”  This is not allowed as per the errata that is currently posted.  No neutral countries can attack other neutrals until japan attacks them.

    UK and ANZAC may take Dutch and French terittories.

    From the Errata:

    Page 8, The Political Situation: The first sentence of the second paragraph should read “If not yet at war, Britain and/or ANZAC are free to take control of Dutch and French territories (gaining their IPC income) by moving land units into those territories, as long as those territories have not been captured by Japan."


  • Official Q&A

    Yes, this is not considered to be an attack, and should be done during noncombat movement.



  • @Krieghund:

    Yes, this is not considered to be an attack, and should be done during noncombat movement.

    Krieghund,

    Why in noncombat?

    Is the purpose for noncombat move/take territory because Japan may have surface warships in the seazone of the Dutch territory UK and/or ANZAC is trying to take?

    I thought I read somewhere (rule Q&A’s are long and spread out on the forum): Does UK/ANZAC have an agreement with the Dutch AND the French to take their territories? (Whereas Japan does not have that type of agreement?)


  • Official Q&A

    It’s done in noncombat movement simply because it isn’t an attack.  The Dutch and French are Allied powers whose capitals are held by the enemy (Germany).  As fellow colonial powers, the UK and ANZAC are simply taking taking guardianship of the territories.  The US may not take guardianship of these territories, as it has an isolationist policy and doesn’t want to get involved.  Japan, on the other hand, is an enemy power (allied with Germany), so it must attack these territories to claim them, and it must do so with the French territories before UK/ANZAC units arrive if it doesn’t want war with the remaining Allied powers.



  • I’m not really all that fired up to post the moves to a group who dumps negative feedback on me for posting my opinion on a game.  I obviously won’t “win you over” to my belief that the game is horribly unbalanced, because I haven’t been on these forums for years, I must not know how to play A&A.



  • @MaherC:

    I’m not really all that fired up to post the moves to a group who dumps negative feedback on me for posting my opinion on a game.  I obviously won’t “win you over” to my belief that the game is horribly unbalanced, because I haven’t been on these forums for years, I must not know how to play A&A.

    No, it is just that when you add more people you see more things.  It is far too early to cry imbalance is all we are saying.

    Oh and we are not saying you don’t know how to play, we are saying the allied players in your group don’t know how to play  :evil:



  • It’s not that hard to fill in the blanks.  Take Hong Kong, Phillipines UK’s Battleship/Anzac’s fleet first turn.  Move your fighters from Japan to Carolines.  Send one sub to sink the US Transport at Hawaii.  Take Borneo.  Take FIC. Take some Chinese terr.



  • I still don’t understand how you are taking the Philippines. Are you using the transport from Caroline Islands to bring two more infantry? Or are you sending the Formosa fighter and landing it on a carrier?

    Also, what has the U.k. been building?



  • Is the U.K leaving fighters in India to serve as interceptors against you bombing raids, BigBadBruce? Also, what is the U.S. doing in your games?



  • The Advantages of a J1 strike is the early capture of Kong Kong, along with the destruction of the Brittish transports+Battleship. You can also get either the Phillipans, Hawaii or NSW. You can also take out the transport (USA), the Phillipans navy and the ANZAC navy. But you will be weak in Chain (Yunnan impossibe?) and have a huge US Navy ready to strike by J4. Unless you act fast you will loose you navy, the the DEIs will be taken off you, then its only a matter of time.

    I like J2, and sometimes J3.



  • so I’m still waiting to see a way for the US to win.  This “just buy navy” answer doesn’t work because the Japanese can match anything the US buys, and has enough on the mainland to finish the brits.



  • @MaherC

    Are you trying to build capital ships as the U.S. or are you buying destroyers and subs? And are you buying mostly infantry as Britain? What is your strategy with China?



  • I am gonna try a J1 or J2 attack tonight and see what happens.



  • So what do you really kill on the allied side with a turn 1 attack that is so huge?  Yes UK looses some cash, a BB, and 2 trans, but those trans are typically dead anyway J2.  Anzac keeps a DD/trans but that puts your boats out of position for a threat on Pearl, and where is the US DD/trans gonna go that it can’t die next turn?  I understand you get Kwangtung but is that really it?  What makes the J1 so powerful, i’m just not seeing it.



  • Yeah, I agree that a J1 attack isnt all that appealing to me either. I looked carefully at it last night in a game and whereas I certainly saw some advantages, none of them outweighed the gains of waiting to set up a more powerful blow.

    The biggest gain that I saw is that you can bag the Brit BB and both TRs at once and prevent them from ever making any significant IPCs. This prevents Britain from massing ground forces and drawing out the ground war in Burma/India. The flip side though is that you can’t land anywhere NEAR as powerful of a hammerblow to China, which in turn makes them more of a draw on the ground troops in the long run. I call that pretty much a wash.

    At sea, You can kill a few stray US ships, but the bulk of their fleet will survive in San Fran and be reinforced quickly with a lot of US money. I dont see any major draw here. Against the Anzacs, again you can kill off a few ships but then you are open to an aerial counter-attack. In any case, I rarely see those stray Anzac ships as a major threat making them less of a priority target.

    No, I still think the best Japanese attack is on J3. That gives you 2 turns to get all of your duckies in a row and take the maximum amount of territory with the minimum amount of risk. So far, I haven’t seen all that much the Allies can do that gives me pause for this strategy. Britain makes more money this way, but the US makes significantly less. I’m willing to make that trade-off because Britain’s money will soon dry up so there will be no long-term effects of that early burst. Japan’s money remains largely the same either way since she doesnt have forces in place to take the high-value targets on J1 anyways. Attacking on J1 still means that you probably wont have the DEI secured until J3 or J4 anyways.



  • I see what your doing and can see the value in it BBB.  By what turn does your income exceed the US’s, i’m guessing turn 3.  I also see that you make little to no threat to Pearl.

    I guess the only turn 2 big counter move I can see against that is stacking ANZAC figs in Western Australia or Queensland with UK figs in India and US planes that can reach into Queensland.  That will allow me to smash nearly, or atleast severly hurt, japan fleet in the indies, most specificly the one at Java as it would be in range of 6 US planes and 4 ANZAC planes.  Combine that will ANZAC/US transports basing out of New Zealand and I have a trade of Java set up as early as US2 continuing it as a deadzone for the foreseeable future of the game.

    The SBR with escorts of India concept is very interesting though.  With UK having 4 fighters to start it seems to be costly in japan fighters.  Along with the fact that India is about the only decent place to base the UK fighters and keep 'em safe you would expect to loose at least 4 jap fighters and tie down alot more in that effort but I havent seen it so I’m not sure.



  • I have it captured and untouchables at J2!
    So at turn 2, thats 19 income for Japan… instead of UK, so a potential difference of 38.

    Just that almost match the +40 US gets!

    Add that to the fact I take Philippines at turn 2 also, a difference of 9 (2 for Japan, instead of 7 for US).

    Add that to the fact I take Kwantung at turn 1 also, a difference of 11 (3 for Japan, instead of 8 for UK).

    Intersting. I’ll take another look the next time we have it set up but my inclination is that you have very little margin for error here. I just dont see how you can have the DEI secured against counter-attack by J2 without leaving yourself exposed elsewhere or letting China run rampant. Even the Aussies can threaten the DEI with airpower from Western Australia and a single TR. The US will likely have their fleet at the Aussie naval base ready to hit those islands as well (with bomber support).

    The wildcard is how weak the Brits would be and I admit that that is pretty appealing. Having to slog through 15+ Brit infantry with air support is a pain (but has been doable every time so far). I’ll take a look at the J1 attack and see if it is more efficient at killing the Brits than the slow and steady build up and smackdown. 🙂



  • The point remain that US needs time to advance in Japan’s “killing zone” with a strong enough fleet. If US do to soon, it’s more time for Japan to crush UK, as US will need to start over they fleet.

    But that’s OK as long as the US trades off acceptably and takes an island from the DEI forcing Japan to drag more troops/TRs in that direction. The US fleet at start is expendable and IMO should be expended to pressure the Japanese.

    Note also the one-two punch that US and Anzacs can deliver. For example, the US can take an island in the DEI and the Anzacs can immediately dump 4 Fighters on it. Japan is NOT getting that island back for a turn or two and as soon as things look grim, the Anzacs air can high-tail it out.

    Its raids and trades like that the Allies need to rely on in order to have any chance. As I said elsewhere, taken individually any of these types of raids/stalling tactics can be defeated by Japan. But as a whole they ratchet up the pressure on Japan and eventually hope to push her to the break point.



  • Anzac transport based in new Zealand can hit Java.

    US planes that can hit SZ 42 turn 2

    1 Fighter, 1 Bomber from Philippians to Queensland
    1 Fighter, 1 Tac, 1 Bomber from Hawaii to Queensland
    1 Bomber from LA to Queensland

    Granted they need Western Australia to land on but hey you gots to do what you gots to do.  By Anzac 2 there can be ground pounders there to defend them.

    I’m assuming you sink US trans at pearl, else that trans is at new Zealand US 1, if not tranny from LA will be there US 2.

    I’m not saying your game plan is bad, honestly I’m not.  I’m just saying it is FAR to early to say it is unbeatable.  And the US would be stupid to attack Carolinas, if they cant base at Queensland they can base at new Zealand and still get to Java.  As far as pearl as long as they keep a few planes on the island that can do the scramble or not scramble trick they can use it as a safe harbor to shuck boats south.

    You up for a game of PBF?



  • Yep, with sub most likely… or bomber.

    I dont think that’s possible. The US can just scramble the LBA at Pearl to kill the Bomber(s) or at least make it an ugly fight. I think if you want to kill that TR, it has to be the sub (which dilutes combat power elsewhere).


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 8
  • 4
  • 3
  • 4
  • 9
  • 6
  • 3
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

51
Online

14.0k
Users

34.4k
Topics

1.4m
Posts