Posts made by TheDesertFox

@superbattleshipyamato

I don’t know man, sure they had lots of China and Russia but Southern Asia was looking pretty darn intact. Also, how did Japan even end up invading all that? Did the Russians pull their infantry back?

@arthur-bomber-harris said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:

@andrewaagamer Throwing resources away for not enough value doesn’t work in a TripleA match but can sometimes work in face-to-face match against poor opponents. I have a feeling most of this strategy is designed for people who eventually make mistakes when faced with threats in multiple locations.

I think there is something to be said for that though. A perfect A&A player doesn’t exist and being that this amazing game originated from the good old fashioned person-to-person board game on the table, it’s not like people to have battle calculators in front of them either, especially when they’re playing the actual board game in person. That ultimately leaves a margin of error in play at all times for both sides that essentially forces them to eyeball with RNG in mind and the ‘rough’ averages that rolls can give in terms of analyzing the probability of winning and losing battles. Just like this strategy isn’t universal in all scenarios, it’s just meant to counter Japan when they so choose to do a J1 DOW. Atleast, that’s what I think.

I’d be find with posting my own response to the J1 DOW with my America and ANZAC turn 1 and maybe turn 2 as well depending on what you wanna see. I also do understand the concern for what’s being put on the Atlantic so I can include that to, but I dont think the moves over in the Atlantic will be super necassary with America. Plus I’ve been meaning to get some input on my starting Pacific build anyway.

@andrewaagamer said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:

Second, as for Russia; Moscow falling early is a problem. Moscow falling late is not. Taking Moscow does not win the game for the Axis. Taking Moscow and then taking Cairo does. Therefore, the key for the Allies is to have made enough progress against Germany/Italy and built up an Egyptian Wall that Germany still cannot win the game once Moscow falls.

Don’t forget that the Allies can’t just endlessly defend, defend, defend. At some point, they’re going to have to take the initiative and go on the offense. If there’s a method to defeating Germany while they’re still in the thick of war not having seized Moscow, then I’m all for that method since I think we could all agree that the Allies would stand a better chance against a Germany still fighting Russia then a Germany that’s already destroyed Russia. If the Allies try to just defend their victory cities there will be no thought of them winning at all.

@andrewaagamer

Exactly. Moscow is the only problem. The Allies in the Pacific to include Russia can stop Japan, the problem is stopping Germany. That’s why I’ve been trying to make some kind, any kind, of a floating bridge for America work because it’s the only hope the Russians have of survival.

@andrewaagamer

Then I suppose it accomplishes its mission fairly well in stopping a J1 attack from happening.

@arthur-bomber-harris

Not Java sorry, Sumatra. But I wouldn’t doubt that the result would be similar. Regardless, I only meant to devote 2 infantry to take the island and hold it atleast for a little while before Japan comes in and takes it. Any time the Allies can buy is time that is needed while they can continue building up Malaya and not be so far behind on IPCs.

@arthur-bomber-harris

When I do an Afrika Korps strategy as Germany, typically I’ll only ever building a carrier and a destroyer, then use my pre-existing boats to send down there and that’s the navy. Everything else will go straight to Barbarossa. Granted of course, halting Japan from taking Java with 2 infantry and a transport is indeed a sacrifice, and too many sacrifices will result in the Allies losing, but sacrifices need to be made in order to win regardless. Typically should the Japanese position their fleet in Sumatra/Java would be the optimal time for America and ANZAC to start advancing forward.

@andrewaagamer

Understandably so, however it’s sort of the same concept with Germany. Germany wouldn’t have to protect their Coastline with lots and lots of units if there was no sign of an amphibious assault from either the Americans or the British. If you can save time and units and money why not do it? Not to mention even if Japan does pull transports outta their pockets, the UK in India have the benefit of being able to move their units back rather quickly in the event that an invasion of Calcutta is on the horizon.

I understand what you mean with Persia, it’s just I feel like the UK Pacific should do everything in their power to try and make as much money they can and prevent the Japanese from jumping the money islands.

As for Russia, I’m glad you agree that it can be beneficial to leave troops behind. There’s definitely something to be said for taking troops to Moscow, but Russia could undoubtedly prove useful to the Pacific Allies by keeping their troops in Siberia. It will prove to be all the more beneficial if they can get a fighter or a strat bomber out there as well (assuming Moscow is not under any threat and the Russians are holding firm).

What I mean by Germany coming down into the Med is Germany actually taking units and ships down to the Med and helping Italy in North Africa.

@andrewaagamer

Do you always scramble into Taranto as the Axis? I always do especially if I plan on coming down into the Med as Germany but I don’t know if other people do as well.

@andrewaagamer

Really nice analysis here, there are a few things however that I’d like to add and get your opinion on as well.

One thing that neither of us have mentioned is the concept of the Soviet presence in Siberia (not the territory, just the general map location). One thing that I’ve tried recently is to leave the 2 AA guns as well as 9 infantry on Amur. That means that Japan will not only have to keep troops in Manchuria but also Korea as well. Granted, some might say that “Oh well you need those troops to defend Moscow”, and granted, that could be so, but that won’t be a problem for the Soviets if the UK and the US can get the Germans to start spending their money on both sides of Europe, hence the whole concept of Floating Bridge.

Another thing that I think is worth mentioning is that window that I was telling you about earlier. The Pacific Allies have a window of opportunity in the early/mid game where they can really square off with Japan before they start making lots of money. Aside from holding Yunnan, one thing that I’ve opted to do is send the transport with 2 infantry from India and take Sumatra with it. This will not only recover the 3 IPCs you lost from Kwangtung but give you a bonus IPC, meaning you’re now making more then what you originally were. On top of that, you’ve put down 2 infantry on the island which essentially means that Japan won’t be able to just transport blitz the island with a single infantry like they would’ve wanted to. Granted, 2 infantry isn’t a lot, either a cruiser/battleship landing shot or a few planes/artillery will do the trick, however thats the idea. To get Japan to pull their fleet/airforce/important heavy weapons away from the mainland.

The most important thing to remember is that Japan can spend their money to get ALOT of ground units or ALOT of ships, but never both. As you said in your Warfare thread, ships are expensive. This is ultimately what the Allies have to take advantage of. Now, in regards to Japan threatening Calcutta, I feel that the most common way they would take the city is by Amphibious Assault instead of trying to force their way through Burma and Shan State. Now, this ones gonna be a longshot, but hear me out: If Japan has no viable transports or ground units poised to attack Calcutta, then why keep ground troops there? I think that if the UK Pacific can build up a large enough airforce (courtesy partially to the UK Europe), then they can prevent Japan from just leaving transports out in the open for the taking. In the Good Captain’s J1 video, he moves 3 of his transports that he purchased on J1 down to Indochina on J2 and put an airbase there with no other ships protecting them. In my test run, I was able to bomb the airbase, then destroy the transports with no worry of a scramble happening. But tell me what you think before I move to the next stage of planning first.

@andrewaagamer

Just read over your warfare principles strategy and I am pretty impressed with how much detail you put into it. My only question however is, wouldn’t Strat Bombers still be a viable option after you’ve jazzed up the navy with your carriers and destroyers and cruisers?

@andrewaagamer

So then let’s start over, shall we? I wanna know how to beat Japan too as the Allies, and I feel like I to include the ideas that other people including you have presented, have been hitting close to home. For one thing, you’re right that in order to defeat Japan, the Allies need to be strategically offensive and take initiative. Players are going to find no luck if they just try to turtle up on Calcutta or even worse if they just don’t commit their resources to get stuff down. The other thing that I’ve also stapled is that there is a window that the Allies need to take advantage of. While Japan can get to the point where they’re making 70+ IPCs, they’re not gonna do it on the first three to four turns, atleast, not without having taken a decent amount of loses in exchange. That’s the window that the Allies need to take. The only question is how to assemble that in such a way that involves all three Pacific Allied nations working together that will ultimately stop Japan. With your help and wise notice of Yunnan being under threat, China and the UK should be able to hold Yunnan adequately for the time being. I’ll have a look at your Warfare Principles and see if I can pick up a thing or two since I’m genuinely curious about alternatives. Now, with Yunnan holding, it’ll require Japan to commit resources to it or branch off to try to go after say the money islands or some other National Objective that they might want.

My initial thought when it came to the U.S and carriers was not to buy fighters and tac bombers for them and instead buy 2 fighters for the carrier and then just purchase a strat bomber instead. That way you can hit with a hard offense of rolling at 4 with the strat bombers at a cheaper price then battleships and still be able to defend at 4 with 2 fighters incase Japan decides to take a shot at your navy. Just seemed what was logical at the time but if not that, would they just spam cruisers and destroyers and subs?

@cornwallis

You’re absolutely right, that’s my mistake.

Instead I would move the fighter and the 3 infantry to Shensi instead.

@andrewaagamer

You agreed with me on one point, that point being that you wouldn’t attack Yunnan on J2 if they had 13 infantry and 3 planes defending it because you realized the very apparent fact that Japan would lose a serious amount of planes as a result of it. It was a nice conversation we had but I don’t wanna get you all riled up and emotional man. It’s good that you wanna voice your opinion man. That’s what we do on these forums, just so long as we can all do it in good faith and share ideas with one another. I shared my ideas, you shared yours, and we came to a consensus that China can hold the Burma Road past turn 2, thus preventing Japan from grounding and pounding without devoting a significant amount of resources. And I do appreciate you taking the time to respond man, I really do. You indeed helped me realize a new possibility that Japan would be willing to go after Yunnan even with only 2 infantry. That possibility of an attack allowed me to readjust my strategy to ensure that Yunnan can’t fall. So I think in the end we both managed to reach a middle ground that shows that China won’t just fall under Japan’s boot. I’m not the best A&A player out there and even I know I still have things to learn. I know your passionate about your J1 take over the world strategy but atleaat try to make an effort to build on these ideas to better help the Allies lol. I didn’t dismiss my floating bridge strategy, nor is buying a battleship a “no no” as the USA either. Granted buying lots of battleships is a big no no, I prefer buying strat bombers instead for the Pacific. Way more cost effective then battleships but it’s nice to have something that can take a hit. Third and finally, you again missassume that I haven’t seen a 70+ IPC Japan when I have made 0 light to that. I have pal, its almost like I’ve done it myself AS JAPAN. You ought to keep yourself in check before mindlessly insulting me for made up crap. Because for the past 2-3 days you’ve essentially done nothing but tell me “Japan OP, Japan destroy all, Japan make 70 IPCs and win, Japan crushes everything with unlimited resources”. I’ve atleast offered some variation in what I’m saying.

@cornwallis

Here’s the video. Its a decent J1 but after play testing it has multiple noticeable flaws, one such flaw being his J2 purchase choice, but that’s just me.

https://youtu.be/fRi3aIsj8P8

@andrewaagamer said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:

Why would Japan lose a fighter to take Yunnan? It is worth only $1 to them. The only possible time would be if the Chinese had no way to retake it to deny them the $6 NO plus $1 for the territory, which is not the case in your original scenario.

Hence why I strategically put the word “IF” in there.

@andrewaagamer

Andrew I’m someone that’s willing to adapt and overcome. Since you want recognition here you go. You were right. Yes, you were right in your original statement that an attack with 2 infantry and a butt ton of aircraft would do the job well against 8 infantry on Yunnan. The partiality in what you neglected though was the fact that the 2 British fighters and Tac bomber would also be defending that as well, something you completely left out and something I very clearly stated would happen at the end of my original post… so don’t get on my neck about changing things up man. If you think the Allies are “foolish” for forcing Japan to take loses then I suppose it makes sense why you don’t have a hard time steamrolling them and collecting 70+ IPC’s a turn. It’s because all your opponent does is turtle up on Calcutta and keep his planes grounded there not doing anything or sending them to the West where they aren’t needed…

This strategy of mine involves them sending their aircraft in to defend Yunnan. I, in all respects, could care less if you think it’s foolish for the Pacific Allies to “play aggressive” by sending their planes in to defend vital territory. You can think its foolish for the Allies to take initiative, I see it differently than you do because I’ve seen the success it can have in the past. And now you opt to agree with my new proposition of putting 13 infantry down on Yunnan. Is it because you and I both know that Japan would suffer a heavy amount of casualties if they went through with that attack? Part of what it means to play the Allies is to be able to react to what your opponent does. Seeing as some people seem willing to throw in their entire airforce toward taking out Yunnan, thus calls for an alteration in strategy and tactics.

Andrew, people tried turtling on Moscow, they tried turtling on London, and they tried turtling on Calcutta and Honolulu, and it didn’t work. Every single time the Allies found themselves losing because they never thought to take the offense and take the initiative and force the Axis to actually commit to taking loses in battle.

@andrewaagamer

So since you brought that up, let’s talk about that. I’m always for adaptability in strategies and you know just as well as I do that there’s variation to the J1. If I knew you were going to try your hand at attacking Yunnan, which let’s say in this case you are, then let me propose an alteration to you. Instead of sending 2 infantry in you send 1 to Hunan and obviously send the fighter as well so that you can devote the other infantry to Yunnan. The artillery may hit, it may not, regardless, the battle is 90% in favor to China and it doesn’t really matter either in this case if they do have the infantry left to take it or not, just removing the artillery from the board is what matters. Then it’s just a matter of moving the other infantry from Kweichow to Yunnan and putting the 4 infantry you built on your turn on Yunnan as well, giving you a total of 11 Chinese infantry plus the 2 that come from the UK giving you 13, and on top of that their 2 fighters and their tac bomber that you neglected as well… this battle has Japan at a win, but a negative trade of 5 IPCs against the combined Chinese and UK force, which may as well be a loss for you at that point if you were really willing to throw in all your planes in the name of China not holding the Burma Road…

(Edit: Sorry, I forgot as well that if you wanted to actually take Yunnan from China then that would cost you an extra 10 or 11 IPCs due to having to keep the infantry alive, so it’s actually a 10+ IPC negative trade)

@andrewaagamer

With the risk of losing a large portion of Japan’s aircraft along with it? I’d be more than happy to have Japan throw away their 2 infantry and half their air force in the name of China not getting the Burma Road.

And on another not-so-important note, typically I like to send in the fighter from Formasa down to take out the British battleship along with the cruiser and 2 Strat bombers. Personal preference whether or not someone does this but with the things dice are capable of, it’s never an impossibility to get completely screwed over in that battle and end up having to lose a strat bomber… anyway, point is, I have to land the fighter on Siam which is why I leave 1 infantry on Siam to protect the fighter but that’s just when I do it.

I’m not 100% how other people play China and if they play China the way I do but after having watched The Good Captain’s J1 video on what he demonstrated as an Allied play from one of the “better players” I feel like this one may be an outlier after all. The only basis that I’ll be going with when it comes to this strategy of course is that Japan will be doing a J1 attack. Here we go.

With China starting off with 12 IPCs, the most obvious and only thing they should be buying is 4 infantry. Now, when it comes to reacting to what Japan has done, it can always depend. The one thing that will never change however is that Japan can attack a MAXIMUM of 4 Chinese territories that turn, 2 of which don’t even have units in them. Depending on what the Japan player does in their J1, they may attack Yunnan, they may not, but for the sake of this strategy let’s just say they’re gonna go all in on China. Japan can split up their forces in a multitude of ways but I believe this is more then like what most players would do when attacking China on J1. (Tell me if I’m wrong on this.)

For the battle of Hunan, Japan always will achieve a victory there, however most commonly China will atleast score 1 hit back against Japan.

The battle of Yunnan however is a lot more dicey and up in the air for both sides. I’ve rolled this battle a plethera of times and gotten mixed results but the most common thing I saw was Japan scoring 2 hits and China scoring 2 hits on the first round of combat. Japan obviously finishes the fight on the second round with the 2 leftover Infantry more often scored one more hit then they did get 2 hits or no hits at all, leaving just the artillery on Yunnan but they can just as often be left with an infantry and artillery. For Japan’s build, it’s not going to be super relevant for this strategy but for this sake of things I’ll say they built 2 transports and an IC to go on Kiangsu in good faith.

With those battles out of the way, this is where a lot of players differ in what they do next as China. This step is one of the most important ones for China, and will require specially placed counter attacks in a few territories. One of them being Yunnan and the other being Hunan. The Chinese figher will go into Hunan and the 6 infantry will go into Yunnan. Normally attacking with only infantry isn’t really the play, however with 6 of them you’re almost guaranteed atleast 1 hit you need to take out the lone artillery. Both battles have the Japanese at a 33.32% chance of hitting, which isn’t great odds, so for the sake of this strategy the Chinese will lose an infantry on Hunan. For the non combat move, China will want to move the infantry from Shensi up to Suiyuyan along with the fighter that fought on Hunan. At the end of the first round, China will have made 16 IPCs with the Burma Road Nat Obj in their hands. This is what the end result of round 1 in the Pacific should look like.

There’s no telling how different these moves could have been had Japan chosen to do something different. Their mainland troops are already going to have to split off as much as they can if they wanna hit all 4 mainland territories to include Kwangtung if they plan on sending their transports elsewhere in the Southern Pacific. Obviously the placement of the 4 infantry will vary as well if you had to fight against say an artillery AND an infantry on Yunnan as well. The most important thing that this strategy did was it prevented Japan from counterattacking on Yunnan again and it also put a big amount of pressure for Japan up North as well. Even if Japan went all in on Hunan with everything they could bring from Kiangsi making the counterattack in their nearly impossible to win, Yunnan will still be the same result where China will have their 6 infantry move in to take it and even have British infantry and planes move into help protect Yunnan as well, making an attempt at taking it very costly for Japan.

@superbattleshipyamato

I’ve taken a look at this and well, crap. It seems like that naval battle didn’t go very well for you. Without a fleet or even an airforce for that matter, your best bet is to just protect the homeland as much as possible with infantry as well as putting an IC on Kwangtung and pumping out as many units into mainland China as well as kicking the Americans out of Korea. Other then that, I really don’t know what else to say in regards to only Japan. I’m glad to see that Russia has made it easy on the Axis by turtling up on Moscow, lol.

@arthur-bomber-harris

Understandable, and by no means am I doubting Japan’s ability to impose their will. To get something straight, what Andrew was argueing was that the U.S would not be able to deliver an adequate amount of force in the Pacific to fight Japan should they choose to commit to building a floating bridge to fight Germany. I disagree. America has more then enough money to build up in the Pacific while continuing to do their floating bridge.

I’m not saying that you ought to send your fleet in immediately… even I know that’s suicide. I’m not suggesting that the UK is just gonna send in their cruisers and destroyers to try and fight the might of Japan. Moreover, part of this strategy also involves the British improving their airpower. My current testrun I’m using The Good Captain’s J1 that he made and so far it’s going terribly for Japan. Multiple destroyed transports, China is holding in Yunnan and the British and ANZAC aren’t letting up either all the while the Americans have built up a sizeable fleet that’s threatening the homeland. I’ll keep testing J1 openings though to see how Japan can casually make 70 IPCs without any opposition from the Pacific allies. Just know that the Two Nation Navy strategy that I’m developing doesn’t involve the UK China and ANZAC turtling up like most of these Allied players do… I’ve found in multiple testruns that Japan doesn’t have an easy time when the UK and China oppose them, but who knows maybe that’s just a fluke.

@cornwallis said in Was KJF really that bad?:

@thedesertfox can you elaborate on your combineren UK ANZAC fleet strategy?
What do you buy for each country and what are the moves?

Currently in the process of doing this strategy that I ended up calling the T.N.N strat, or the Two Nation Navy strategy in a test run. I’ll make another thread going more in depth of it once I’m finished.

@andrewaagamer

I have used it before. I’m actually doing a test run right now based on the constraints that you’ve laid down to see if the Pacific Allies can beat a strictly Ground and Pound devoted Japan.

@admirlscuttlebut

I’ll probably check that video out, I’m curious how he does his J1 attack.