@TG:
Anyone agree/disagree?
disagree. in '41, I think without NOs, the allies have the favor, with them, axis does. Its not balanced either way. With NOs, Allies are forced to slow down Japan in some fashion. You cant have an unchecked japan earning 70 IPCs a turn!! But without them, You need not worry too much about japan, as it will take some time for them to threaten Moscow. You can focus solely in the Atlantic and med. Italy will die pretty quickly without NOs.
How about 1 bomber 1 fighter and 5 inf instead? I love the German bomber r1, it threatens a landing in sz12 immediately. Also you have more r1 inf. Also, bombers are great for swapping eastern territory with Russia as they hit at 4, and have longer range, so you can keep your fighters home in France.
Yeah dude, OP bumped a severely old thread!! My bad, got to remember to check dates next time i reply!!!
@Cmdr:
Axis, there is a difference between Revised and Anniversary. You cannot pull arguments made in one game and try to use them against that person in a completely different game.
My bad, i forgot that the ability of the US to get equipment to Russia is completely different in this game then it is in Revised. Thank You for pointing out my error.
@Cmdr:
–
Thanks A44, my point as well. You can also move them to Karelia, Caucasus and Russia too.–
If Russia is being nailed for 20 IPC a round, I think losing 5 from the NO is worth having the American radar gun. Just me though.
You know, it’s quite humorous that you argued against these very points that I made in the Axis SBR thread. I’m not going to search for your exact quote, but something along the lines of, the US could NEVER get aa guns to russia in time if you were the Axis player. :roll:
to jeffdestoyer and daggaz –
first off my comments assume Terr turn limits for SBRs. Yes Sbrs can be effective on Russia, but i feel only in the end game. They can be effective early too, but i think that for it to be, its dependent on good dice. I will make some of the points I have made in other threads on the topic of SBRing Russia. Daggaz, u said that if u are aggressive with russia, they will have 24 ipc production, and u can reduce that with an SBR campaign. But an SBR approach on Russia is NOT free of cost. There have been claims by other posters on this forum that bomber bought by Japan and Germany are absolutely free of cost. As if they could buy all they wanted with no repercussion. this of course is hog wash. When you buy a 15 ipc bomber with germnay or japan, you are sacrificing the opportunity cost that 15 ipc could buy you. So when you buy axis bombers, you pass on buying axis ground units that battle russia on the fronts. And you aren’t as aggressive as you may have been otherwise. Yes, the idea of a bomber purchase is that it will pay for itself by eliminating more Russian units in future turns. An investment you hope pays of in the future, (and doesn’t get shot down the very first SBR!!). However, you sacrifice some position and leverage early with ground troop strength, you get this bomber. And it isn’t always clear how much that costs you.
oh well, i have just tried the strategy against an experienced player and i was destroyed terribly. SZ 12 IS NOT A SAFE PLACE R1. You would not have 2 UK trans in most cases. I played against bid 9 so there was one sub more from the start and an AC on G1. Any kind of convoying system is necessary for US but next time i am going to make sure that i control the atlantic solidly first. I made some childish mistakes too, but if the germans put an effort to contesting the atlantic you cannot just build trannies. You have to sink their ships first and you have to do it quick and as cheap as possible.
Btw if the convoying system is to work smoothly you need for US actually three sets of transport ships, two wount do.
Early allied shipping losses can really hamper your game plan. It is always vital to protect not only the transports, but that British battleship! If Germany invests 24 ipcs in the water, you will have to wait a round or two to be safe, however, thats all right, as Germany took away 24 ipcs from the Russian campaign, you have time to get going.
I have a couple of points on this thread.
First off, if there are other targets of opportunity on Japan r1, i don’t hesitate in letting the US pearl fleet live. i don’t think the pearl is a must hit in every situation. Cases where the allies are stacking India, maybe an IC built there, and stacking bury. When there is a red stack of inf in Bury, i like nothing more then destroying them. But if better targets arent available, you have to kill that fleet. AC and fighter are too juicey to pass up.
Second, producing only 3 tanks and 1 inf per round isnt going to generate the kind of pressure in asia you want. If the allies decide to put up resistance in India/China/bury, you wont be able to push with those forces alone on that, and if they don’t resist that strongly, you need more force at moscow/cauc doorstep than that. There will be several rounds you swap terr with Russia. And as a previous post noted, you want to swap inf with them instead of tanks. Russia will give up and inf for a tank anyday.
Third, As I have stated in other threads, i think a r1 Factory buy is a mistake. You already have one factory that produces 8 units per turn. when you buy the second, you can produce 11 units per turn. Japan isn’t ready to produce 11 land units to asia per turn by r1. So why buy the factory if you have not yet maximized the production potential you started the game with?
Fourth - I think your example assume the us is building navy to kill you with? otherwise, if the usa has pulled out of the pacific, no reason to turtle them. Even if they are building up navy, you still have time to do things like take Australia.
That is true, if UK sends bombers after the navy they will sink it, but Germany will take 2-3 bombers and also tie up the bombers for a whole turn. This gives extra time for Germany to produce more units and time for Italy and Japan to take over UK lands reducing UK income and making it more difficult for UK to replace destroyed bombers.
Germany time to replace the units they already wasted in the water? Think they call that sunk cost …
@Cmdr:
BTW, in the interest of a friendly environment, I’m going to ignore Axis’ last comment that struck me as a personal attack. I’m hoping he didn’t mean it that way and was just trying to be humorous.
This is fair. I wasn’t attempting to personally attack you. Only to make the point that there is a thin line between talking about Axis and Allies the board game, and the historical events that happen in WWII. You have characterized the Japanese motives as murderous. this may or may not be the case, but the comments can be taken as “unfriendly” to a certain portion of the community. Perhaps readers of Chinese or Japanese decent?