What is Cow’s playbook?
It’s 100 rules to picking up chicks. My guess is Cow wants a date!
Can’t agree with that strat knp.
Everyone is different, but I honestly like making Germany the Europe controller. I help Italy to the max, crushing UK fleet early, and building subs in the med. I tend to build transports to make UK spend on their island, and then Italy and Germany can tag team Russia while having the subs to fend off USA. Even better when Japan focus’s on Russia as well. Germany needs help, and I like to make sure I have a buddy with me.
Not to say knp strat doesn’t work, I played Russia once and Germany went all out on me with nothing but tank builds. He sacked Moscow in 6 turns.
So… basically if you have lots of subs, and germany has no destroyers, you just need to kill the battleships/cruisers/carriers in order to wipe out the remaining transports because subs can attack while not being hit by air?
Turn 2 buy depends on the board, but usually transports and men to capture Sydney.
Of course in doing so, you have 1 single goal in mind: Make the US spend in the Pacific for 4-5 turns because they won’t be interfering in Europe until at the earliest of round 8 or 9.
There IS merit in going full out Hawaii, because if the Allies ignore it and spend on Europe, Japan wins the game in round 5. If they don’t ignore it, and shut Japan down - which will take at least 4 rounds of purchases to do by the US, Germany and Italy should be well on their way to securing their side of the map.
I have no idea what you’re thinking here Spendo. It will not cost the USA 250+ IPC to ruin the Japanese navy stationed at Hawaii. Meaning, USA will be over in the other theater building turn 3. If you want the USA to spend in the Pacific for 5 turns, you have to threaten something.
I can’t get on board with this Hawaii base of operations. USA will ruin Japan, imho.
I actually employed that strategy once with the US and was very successful now that I think about it - the bait and switch that is.
I mostly just hate playing the same strategy, which is why I was trying to come up with a way to accomplish the same thing in a different way.
Back to the drawing board.
We’re talking about test of time strategies, and most optimal here from experience. My players are crazy and always try new strategies. You have to think outside the box sometimes. For instances, I had a Japanese player take all his starting fleet, and went south around Brazil and smashed his forces into the Union of South Africa!! How’s that for crazy.
ANZAC conquers all. At least it does in my games. ANZAC is to the USA as Italy is to Germany… the secret weapon.
Ever try the Bielefeldt maneuver? ANZAC takes Brazil and builds a minor there!
I thought about it, but it’s never been done in my games. Is my sea-zone counting correct, it would only take 2 turns from Sydney to get to Brazil? It’s interesting to think about anzac building there, if the Japanese lose face and give up the pacific, then they could spend everything over there. Hmmm… strategy would work best with a heavy German navy, and you need extra cannon-fodder for Gib.
I never considered the US option to give it up and consolidate - which appears to be a better and stronger play.
The ol’ bait and switch tactic, giving you Hawaii seems like a nice offering (bait), then USA sinks your navy into the deep blue (switch). But I agree with your assessment, one could try to defend Hawaii J2, but would fail if all Japanese fleet went there. Your topic confused us I think lol. You wanted experienced players to defend hawaii J2, and tell us our buys, but an experienced player would never be in that situation J2 haha.
*Unless Japanese split her fleet and USA could smash something US2.
My musings were less about keeping Hawaii and more about using it as a staging ground to hit Australia after getting America to commit away from Europe. Basically, draw the allies away from Germany and hope the Germans can push into Russia faster - or if the allies don’t respond, use it as a staging ground to cap a VC win (either way, using it to take out Australia is probably a win no matter what you do from that point on.)
The problem with this though, is going south to Kwangsi/FIC is a much better staging point for attacks. You can threaten India and ANZAC while getting money islands. Hawaii offers none of these payouts except a turn 4 take on Sydney (or a dumb USA that doesn’t build in the Pacific and you can take San Fran, but we’re talking experienced players).
A good USA player always commits to Japan first to get them under-control, so they can spend the rest of the time stopping Germany. (I suppose a great USA player can do both at the same-time.)
With that in mind, being able to sack Sydney on J4 (trading aircraft for minimal ground units), Flip on J5 from produced units on J3 and J4, its entirely possible to win and have the US spend nearly all its income in the Pacific for 5+ rounds - which leaves the UK and Russia on islands in Europe until at the earliest probably Round 7 or 8 before the US can intervene at all.
They would not need to spend 5 rounds of income to stop Japan.
What I’m trying to see is what the Allied response from experienced players would be if Hawaii was seriously threatened on J2. In particular would you move your starting fleet to Hawaii and reinforce it, and to what extent would the Allies reinforce it IE does ANZAC get involved or not? Are the US Ftr scrambling to defend or all possible aircraft landing on Hawaii itself?
From my point of view, and one I think many experienced players would agree on is…. Hawaii isn’t worth defending at the start of the game. Why defend it on J2 when I can pull everything off of Hawaii to the west coast and build up my navy to crush Japan Navy in 2 turns? By the time you hit Hawaii, the USA will have dumped most of their income into the Pacific. I can’t really say specifics because of variables, but it would be most of my income into navy and aircraft. Which will be close to even annihilation, when that happens, India and Anzac will have profited off of the money islands long enough to slap some navy of their own down. Not good at all.
Don’t think “what if they defend Hawaii”, no USA player is going to do that (whose experienced). You gotta get those money islands, it’s the life blood of Japan.
Taking Hawaii is never a good idea. You then pitch a 1 on 1 with the USA, and you will lose. If I was USA, I would outproduce your defending navy and knock you out of the game. Not only I’m I requiring you to stay at Hawaii, but I will eventually build enough fleet to destroy your Navy with a 1 turn distance from the west coast.
I would build USA subs and carriers with planes till I had enough to waste you, I always pull the fighters off Hawaii to regroup on carriers. I would save Anzacs income and build a carrier or 2 to make life hell on japan with the money islands.
You can’t split your navy and expect to win against USA. It’s never gone right for the Japanese player in my experiences.
I love the idea of using monopoly pieces for factories. Based on what I saw, the Hotels were major complexes and the green houses were minor.
But it also looks like you have red houses. What are those. In some you have a red hotel and a red house?
Those are victory city pieces! I snagged those from the same place I bought the Combat Dice, Field Marshal Games if I remember correctly.
Here’s some screen shots of our latest game. We’re deep into the game, and it was very interesting indeed. KRF order was given to Italy and Japan turn 1 by Hitler. German tanks rolled through Russia’s front lines turn 1. France was hit till it could no longer survive an invasion from Mussolini. Showing great danger from the South, Churchhill ordered a brave counter attack to the Italian forces in Africa and the Mediterranean. To do this, he ordered the Indian fleet to split, destroyer went east, and the rest went west to fight Mussolini. As the Russian onslaught continued, Tojo was weary and never attacked the allies till turn 4. Anzac saw this opportunity to take the rich money islands and construct a huge air force to stop the Japanese assault that should come.
Hitler saw through Churchill’s plan and gave birth to the Sealion. Taking London turn 4, Hitler was smug and thought victory was in his hands. Churchill smiled and laughed, for he had plans to take Rome turn 5. Hitler was naive, Churchill did follow through on his promise, Rome was his, but Mussolini quickly sent reinforcements to recapture it. Roosevelt nodding to Churchill’s sacrifice, took this opportunity to invade a weakened Italy. Japan seeing this destruction of Mussolini alerted her forces and attacked on all fronts turn 4. Splitting her navy into 3, she took the Philippines, and reinforced Carolina and Japan with carriers. Curtin and Roosevelt was ready, ANZAC threw her air-force at the Carolina fleet and sunk it to the bottom of the ocean. Regrouping, Tojo ordered the protection of Japan at all costs, and the navy came together at Japan. Roosevelt saw through this plan, and readied her navy from Hawaii to attack the Japanese at her homeland. The only thing left after the destruction was a damaged Japanese carrier.
Curtin, knowing full well Roosevelt would keep pressure on any of Tojo’s fleet rebuild efforts, took advantage of it’s increased production. Curtin sending a message to Churchill, “Get me to Greece.” Churchill was shocked, and after no Anzac deaths on Africa due to his early Italy crush, it was possible! Churchill ordered the transportation of the Anzac infantry to Greece, and the Anzac force marched north. Hitler knew it was over.
I am thinking about a J1 these days. The problem I have with the strike on Pearl Harbor strategy is the following. If I don’t bring the SZ 33 carrier+DD and every warships and planes from SZ 6, I won’t be able to repulse an american counterattack if the US brings everything available to him into battle.
If you bring only two carriers, here’s what you have to resist the american…
-2 CV loaded with fighters
-3 DD (one from SZ 33)
…for a total of 34 on defense averaging 5.66 hits on the first turn of battle.
The US player can bring the following…
-5 FGT (the one from Eastern US landing on the carrier)
…for a total of 32 averaging 5.33 hits for the first turn of battle.
A strike from the US navy, if not victorious, will still kill many Japanese ships that Japan can replace less easier than the US. That’s why, in my opinion, if you strike at Pearl on J1, you must bring the Carrier from the Carolines to help defend your fleet.
If an opponent of me try a J1 strike on Pearl with only two carriers, I would hit him with everything available everytime,
Exactly. Was going to post this myself. Never never do a turn 1 Hawaii, because then you’re stuck there defending it all game. More IPC’s in the money islands PLUS you threaten India and Anzac. Pearl Harbor is a trap, and why the Japanese burned to the ground in real life during WW2 as well. Don’t make the same mistake
Omg Gargantua. That’s ingenious! Not sure if it will actually solve the balance issue though, it would be funny to see allies pounding away at Russia if it gets too close to winning. Those games would take forever though.
Could Russia Ally with anyside and actually still win?
RAW = Says nothing about air units, just “additional units”. RAI = Means air included.
RAW = Can not move into a territory unless it’s occupied by enemy forces. This would include sea zones that don’t scramble. If you don’t scramble and don’t have any enemy forces and don’t amphibiously assault, moving airplanes into that sea zone is not a valid move. RAI = You can always bring air into sea zones just to cover what if’s.
Scrambling along with the Bombing raids could have been written better, and is very much an after thought mechanics.
Taking out SZ97 and SZ96 are crucial and easily obtainable.
Even with a german fighter on southern italy and the SZ 91 cruiser knocked out? I think your claim is very situational. I agree its crucial, but you can combine the India fleet with the SZ98 for a counterstrike into the med. I think it’s better, odd wise. I would want Italy buying navy instead of troops and transports. Losing the creditable threat of losing transports gives Italy a huge advantage on the Northern Africa/Egypt front.
You need to be more clear osu888.
Are we talking about an amphibious assault? Or no amphibious assault and no defending sea units? If there is no amphibious assault or sea units to defend, then no attack as been declared, thus, no scrambling. Then you can’t have your planes move on the combat phase.
The rules say that you can only attack zones that have occupied enemy territory/units in them, but is a special rule about scrambling that you can coast planes into friendly zones that may become hostile.
Is the suicidal attacks on Italy’s fleet obsolete? The only attack that’s somewhat viable is just moving a destroyer & fighter w/ tactical to get rid of a transport in SZ 96. An attack on SZ 97 (not assuming scramble with German Fighter) is a 50% chance, or if you steal a fighter from the cruiser attack on 96 it’s 80% chance. (With German Fighter) Taking it without 96 Fighter is 13% and with is 42%. Even if you do win those really shaky odds, the German Luftwaffe will burn your fleet to the bottom of the Med AND possible take shots at your landed bomber and fighter in Cyprus.
I’m I missing something here? Because I thought this game was more open minded about options, and this 2nd edition is way too restrictive. UK seems to only have the option of small attack on 96 and retreating the rest to 81.