I think that 22 IPC is from the 1939 war where they have overrun part of China. It should not be their “wartime” income in 1936 since Japan can declare war on the US on turn one but will not go up to 22 (Their initial wartime income is 16). However Japan can declare war on most any nation they wish. On the reference sheet for each nations is usually a chart showing whom they can attack and what condition apply. For Japan they can not declare on Germany or Italy but anyone else seems fair game.
Posts made by Warwick
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
-
RE: Convoy raiding
“Two U-boats had been destroyed 40 miles from the convoy he was protecting”
Walker was on escort duty. Those escorts are doing exactly what Walker did by patrolling the convoy line. Also each piece is not one DD rather about 20 DD, same with subs. The attack roll represents the efficiency of the DDs hunting down subs on that line. I do restricted escort to one roll regardless the number of subs. The term sub chasing does not mean “Subs were sighted of the coast of France. Move a small fleet to that position and start hunting.” rather an escort ships would make contact with a sub then pursue and kill. What Walker did was instead of turning back to the convoy to protect them he would finish the kill then return.
With the Brits having 2 carriers at the start this would limit them to killing 2 subs per turn (aside from coastal zones that the Germans can avoid). This would mean that Germany spending 15 IPP a turn on subs(9 with shipyards) would flood the Atlantic more subs than the UK could kill. This does not seem a realistic kill rate for subs.
-
RE: HBG GW39 v1.2: taking Rome
Allies have a strategic advantage in the Med. The US and UK are both naval powers in a theater dominated by navies. Italy should not have a great deal of flexibility, at least following a historical perspective. Italy entered the war prior to having its industry prepared and military unready for modern conflict. The Axis should have strength and flexibility where they are strong (Germany and Japan) and mitigate their disadvantages where they are weak (Italy).
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
Yeah, if you read the other war rules for nations they say things like “Yes when at full production” or other condition. That is from the Great Britain. The Axis typically can declare without any conditions.
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
Looking at the GW36 reference sheet for Japan it list the countries Japan can declare war upon.
-
RE: Convoy raiding
I think your house rules place too much benefit on the Sub. Allowing a sub to engage sub-warfare, one of the most dangerous mission in the war, without a risk seems a bit much. Since the escort process endangers the DD the hit along the convoy route is a nice balance. I would not get wrapped up in the physical position of the vessels. Since the Sub must go where the shipping is and the DD knows where that shipping is going to be having to chase a sub with ships is backwards.
-
RE: HBG GW39 v1.2: taking Rome
Italy has one job, do not lose Rome. If Italy can hold on to Albania to get a VP that is gravy.
Historically Italy was dragged into the war with little support. When Rome fell Italy quickly surrendered. Troops in the north (Turin space on the GW36 board) remained with Germany while the rest surrendered. In fact 55,000 Italy would join the Co-Belligerent Army and fight with the Allies along with 350,000 italian partisans. I would add a rule that if German forces are in Turn then Italian forces in Turn convert to German when Italy surrenders.
-
RE: Convoy raiding
An escorting vessel is committing its movement for a 6-month period to hunting subs. The DD unit marked as escort off Canada is actually ranging all along the convoy route from Canada to England but in a diffused manner. For game purposes the DD can be attacked in the Canadian coast space, however it is not present to block movement. Axis forces can enter the space with the DD and simply ignore it. If combat is conducted in the space the DD is included.
This process results in Allies ships spread out in the Atlantic. The German player must combine subs with land based air craft to produce “kill” zones that are difficult for the English player to control. An airbase in Normandy coupled with Medium Bombers and Italian air off Sardina for strike and significant portions of the Atlantic convoy lines, including all of the 6 line leading into England from the south. This allows the Axis to either pick out weak lines to raid or target isolated escorts for destruction. If the Axis hit a lone DD with a sub and a couple Medium Bombers then he is looking at an 8 IPP loss of the allies or a 3 IPP loss if the DD gets a hit. When the bombers can not find escorts to hunt they still can plague allied factories with some fighter support.
The escort/raiding rules in GW36 are an imperfect representation of a very complex operation, but that is true of most game rules.
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
I think you misunderstand the concept of this strategy. The basic concept is that Japan is not obligated to attack China immediately, and since China remains neutral until Japan chooses or until China effectively eats itself by attacking the warlords; means that Japan can choose when and who and where to attack first without an ongoing war leaves many options available.
In the long run, Japan should eventually attack China, to gain victory points as well wartime bonuses. But it is also is a viable strategy to keep peace on that front while focusing on others.
As an example: I just finished another game as Axis, where Japan again ignored China, and instead sent its strength into the Soviet Far East. That became combined with a 1-2 punch against the Soviets, when the Germans blitzed into Russia instead of France in its Lightning War and took out Moscow before they could even spend their IPC from first turn in Wartime Income, giving a massive boost to German funds, then the Japanese managed to take Novosibirsk and then Soviets where Finished and Done. It could not have been possible if Japan had been fighting a two front war with China and the Soviets.
Refusing the Dragon is not a strategy to win the game, but it is a Strategic Option.
This strategy can, of course, be expected and defended against, but because I did it in Game #1 and took Calcutta, the Allies expected it in Game #2 and poured resources in protecting it, and instead; Japan took out the Soviet Far East.
That is what I like about Global War, there is no one strategic play or military buildup plan, there are many many options and each can be expected and countered, but doing so detracts from resources elsewhere.
For my personal enjoyment, either if it is good or if it is bad, I chose to name this Strategic Play, Refusing the Dragon, a strategic reference to Refusing the Flank, and the Chinese Dragon, I found it fitting. Employed it twice successfully and I like it. :-P
Cheers!I understand the concept and support it. My response regarding the lost VP is based on the strengthen position of China and a late stage (US active) invasion. Against strong opponents this type of invasion would be difficult, especially since regardless of direction (Soviet or Dutch) you will be in an inferior IPP position. (The +1IPP per coastal zone in china is hard to make up.) Further a move against the soviets elevates them to 48 IPP which is certain defeat if Germany is not ready to invade Russia in tandem with Japan. Since Germany can not effectively invade Russia until after Paris falls this would leave Japan sitting on its hands for the first 4 or 5 turns. In that time Japan could secure the coastal regions and move against Russia with a 33 IPP economy instead of a 19.
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
The attack on Calcutta is entirely under the control of the allies, especially in 1938. By the end Jan 1937 UK can have 2 BB, 2 Lt CVs., 1 FTR, 1 TAC, 4 DD, 4 CA, and 1 Coastal SUB along with French assets of 1 CA, 3DD, 4 SUBs. The French will have a trailing fleet of 2 BB, 1 CA, 2 DD, and 1 SUB on the way. If the allies ignore Calcutta then take the free victory point and knock the FEC out of the pacific. However given the overall uselessness of the French navy in 1939 stationing them in the Bay of Calcutta get some value out of them.
These naval movements will leave the Italians the sole owners of the Med but they only receive a bonus when at war. Also once the French are on station the UK forces can return to the Med.
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
I almost always attack Chita on the first turn as Japan since most of my air force can reach and I am not doing anything else. Even if the Russian hedge hog (5INF 1 MIL and 1 Lt ARM) Japan will typically drop 1 MIL and 3 INF for 2 CAV. This eliminates 1.25 turns of USSR prewar builds. This leaves 1 MIL 4 INF (Kwantung Army/Imp Guard/MOT/INF) along with 3 FTRs in West Manchuria. (The attack on FEC can only support 3 aircraft due to carrier constraint) Coupled with the 19 IPP per turn Japan seems that they could well support a bleeding border with the USSR. I do not think the USSR can handle the 6 IPP losses per turn they would endure to execute this campaign.
This Refusing the Dragon variant does cost the Axis from a VP standpoint. All china need do is overrun Peking and they will score 2 VP for the allies at the end of the game while Japan while have trouble pulling out the Colonialism condition without access to the china coastal areas. That is a 3 point swing towards the Allies (2 to the allies and -1 to the axis for Calcutta but not getting Colonialism)
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
China can not declare war on Japan. If Japan ignores china there is nothing China can do until they defeat the CCCP and warlords.
Russia can do nothing but border skirmishes until 1939.
-
RE: 1939 Setup is finally here!
Fairly even distribution of IPP to both sides (418 or so).
The biggest difference is all 418 points are available for mischief on the Axis side while ~250 points are added to UK/France/CHina. 170 points are added to US and USSR.
For example USSR
INF type -22 IPP
ARM +20 IPP
AIR +31 IPP
NAVY + 35 IPPTotal 64 IPP gain
Germany
INF +79 IPP
ARM +50 IPP
AIR +108 IPP
Navy +35 IPPTotal 272 IPP Gain
Most telling loss though is Germany does not start with a TRS unless I missed it.
-
RE: 1939 Setup is finally here!
France built 11.17 IPP per turn … a +6.17 over their actual build ability.
-
RE: 1939 Setup is finally here!
Damn … Germany averages 49.5 IPP per turn to match their builds from '36 to '39 … wonder how the others fair?
-
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
When did you time the attack on India? Did it coincide with the start of hostilities in Europe?
-
RE: GW36: No Incentive to attack the Netherlands
In most games I have played Japan and Germany coordinate their strike on the Netherlands. Once Japan attacks it is silly to let England have the 2IPP from the European map.
-
RE: Who will win?
The US has 4 TRNS. This is the limiting factor. Even the additional FTR and TAC and 2 TRNS on the EAST coast make the fight a near run thing but that is a turn or 2 away. (Again I play a lot of Global War not Axis and Allies so there easily could be rules I am missing that make my position wrong. I already screwed up the turn sequence.)
Its attack on Southern Italy is limited to something like
4INF
2ARTY
2ARM
5FTR
1TACAgainst
17 INF
1 ARTY
3 FTR
4 AAUsing an Axis and Allies combat simulator this fight without the AAA results in a defeated attacking force and 8 or so survivors. This would leave the US navy off the coast of Italy needing a turn to return to pick up troops. (And empty of its FTRs a possible target for the Germany navy.) Italy would have 2 build cycles to recover before the next invasion. It does not seem with the current TRNS lift capacity the US can seriously threaten Italy.
-
RE: Who will win?
I play Global War '39 from HBG so I have lost a lot of my memory on Global '40 but I do not see how Italy is in trouble. This is most likely due to me forgetting the surrender conditions on Italy.
However looking at the troops strengths
Southern Italy
INF - 14
FTR - 2 or 3
MECH - 3
ARTY - 1
AA - 4US
INF - 10
MECH - 3
ARTY - 5
ARM - 2
FTR -2 (1 in reserve)
TAC - 1 ( 1 in Reserve)Lift = 8 (4 in reserve) transport lift capacity
Since Italy moves before the US Italy can have an additional 10 INF on the Italian Penisula, depending on Strat Bomber action. Italy also has Africa nearly empty of UK troop and several options to expand their IPC income.
What am I missing?
-
RE: Incorporating Global War 1939 units into Axis And Allies Global 2nd Edition
Once I got Global '39 I never went back to Axis & Allies. I would think provided everyone could build the same unit mix it should produce an even experience, however I am not versed enough on A&A to state that with certainty.
Why not just play a test game and see how it plays?