These questions are for gameplay only, please don't ignore them. :)

[TaoJah]

Hi!

As veteran SC player, I bought AoD (it is as good as I expected, great job there, again!!!) and have some questions...

Normally, I would try to find the answers out myself by playing the game half a dozen times, but because turns take so long now, I don't want to spend days only to find out I made a mistake at the start, so here it goes...

All answers are welcome, even if it is to only one of the questions!

1. Does anyone has a map of all the partisan spots? I keep units in all the old SC places, but they still pop up.

2. Can you ever Operate German units to Japan or Japanese to German?

3. What exactly is the effect of keeping eastern Poland? I get a popup about angry Stalin and war-readiness of USSR goes up a little bit, but are there other effects than that one-time increase?

4. I was heading to Alexandria with my Italian forces, through the desert lands, when all of a sudden Syria came Axis and I could just land troops behind the UK. Will that always happen, will Syria and Iraq always come to the Axis?

5. Amphibious transport are insanely expensive now. Do people still take Sweden, Norway with these new costs? And with what, with amphibious or paratroopers only and then transport or how?

6. The same with Spain in 1941 (without attacking Vichy) and northern Africa (in 1942), is it viable to invade these with the high amphibious prices?

7. Is research slower than before? I understand why it is nerfed in numbers (only 2 infantry, only 3 chits of research at once...) but is the % per turn lower than it used to be?

8. In the long run... how many ships do you need to buy to keep the USA off the Japanese islands (so that you don't need ground units to defend the Japanese islands from the USA)? Is that even a viable startegy or will you always have to defend them at one point?

9. If you take the first Chinese capital and cities west of the moutains, will the Chinese ever recover and make a counter attack in 1944 or so?

10. How heavily involved does Russia get in Japan, if I don't attack the Russian cities near China? Will Russia leave Japan alone?

11. After taking Port De France and all that gold (woot!), would it be a good idea to put that troop on amphibious tranport and go take some cities in central America? If so, where is it best to go?

12. And more in general... what's the consensus about Vichy France now? Do you allow France to surrender and form Vichy France after you take Paris or do you think it's best to keep fighting the French? I don't know the world map well yet, but it seems to me that the French get alot of stuff everywhere when you let Vichy form.

[Catacol Highlander]

Hi!

As veteran SC player, I bought AoD (it is as good as I expected, great job there, again!!!) and have some questions...

Normally, I would try to find the answers out myself by playing the game half a dozen times, but because turns take so long now, I don't want to spend days only to find out I made a mistake at the start, so here it goes...

All answers are welcome, even if it is to only one of the questions!

1. Does anyone has a map of all the partisan spots? I keep units in all the old SC places, but they still pop up.

2. Can you ever Operate German units to Japan or Japanese to German?

3. What exactly is the effect of keeping eastern Poland? I get a popup about angry Stalin and war-readiness of USSR goes up a little bit, but are there other effects than that one-time increase?

4. I was heading to Alexandria with my Italian forces, through the desert lands, when all of a sudden Syria came Axis and I could just land troops behind the UK. Will that always happen, will Syria and Iraq always come to the Axis?

5. Amphibious transport are insanely expensive now. Do people still take Sweden, Norway with these new costs? And with what, with amphibious or paratroopers only and then transport or how?

6. The same with Spain in 1941 (without attacking Vichy) and northern Africa (in 1942), is it viable to invade these with the high amphibious prices?

7. Is research slower than before? I understand why it is nerfed in numbers (only 2 infantry, only 3 chits of research at once...) but is the % per turn lower than it used to be?

8. In the long run... how many ships do you need to buy to keep the USA off the Japanese islands (so that you don't need ground units to defend the Japanese islands from the USA)? Is that even a viable startegy or will you always have to defend them at one point?

9. If you take the first Chinese capital and cities west of the moutains, will the Chinese ever recover and make a counter attack in 1944 or so?

10. How heavily involved does Russia get in Japan, if I don't attack the Russian cities near China? Will Russia leave Japan alone?

11. After taking Port De France and all that gold (woot!), would it be a good idea to put that troop on amphibious tranport and go take some cities in central America? If so, where is it best to go?

12. And more in general... what's the consensus about Vichy France now? Do you allow France to surrender and form Vichy France after you take Paris or do you think it's best to keep fighting the French? I don't know the world map well yet, but it seems to me that the French get alot of stuff everywhere when you let Vichy form.

1. Press "P"

2. No

3. No - pretty much it increases Russian mobilisation and that makes a later Barbarossa impossible and increases Russian production.

4. Syria and Iraq are fickle. Without going into the editor I am not sure of the triggers and the probabilities, but basically the better you do in Africa the more likely they are to go with the Axis. The Iraqis are quite capable of changing sides!

5. Sweden no. Norway with paras is the standard way. From there a land attack on Sweden... or perhaps a diplomatic offensive.

6. If you want to invade Spain do it from land via France - as the axis. As the allies I have seen successful amphib landings against Portugal in Gold and would imagine they are still possible in AoD.

7. Research is much slower in AoC. In AoD the % look to increase about the same speed, but the threshold for advance has been raised so that you HAVE to get your % up to a higher number before there is any chance of a tech. I think Bill has made it 35 now but that is from memory.

8. Dont know. In Gold the IJN was no match for the USN at any stage without land based bombers and fighters in support. Too early in the life cycle of AoD to know if it is still the same, but bearing in mind AoD was created from roughly the same OOBs as Gold I would say 95% certain that it would be really tough for the IJN to manage it without ground air.

9. You mean East of the mountains. Counter attack always possible if you havent reduced them or conquered completely.

10. In a game with the AI? I have no idea - never play the AI - but in a pbem most Russian players will look at Manchuria eventually by 1944 because Russian armour will mince the Japanese. However much of that depends on what is going on against Germany. You need to balance things out.

11. No idea. Sounds risky with US anger likely?

12. That is a choice. The pbem games I have played so far - not many of them - have all seen Vichy form.

[wlape3]

Unless you are planning a southern strategy I don't think the prolongation of the French campaign is worth it. If Vichy is created then you also get a number of useful buffer states.

[SeaMonkey]

The thing about Vichy is eventually you must fight the USSR, so this one event precludes a successful campaign "going South". Now don't get me wrong, against the AI, you can pull it off, but against a knowledgeable human opponent, forget it.

It would be nice if there was some way to avoid conflict with the Soviets, but with the present setup, it's just not possible. What an idiotic decision Hitler made to take on the USSR when he had yet to vanquish the UK. You would think as a role player in SC and examining the "what ifs" of WW2, we could dispense with such a stupid decision.

[Catacol Highlander]

The thing about Vichy is eventually you must fight the USSR, so this one event precludes a successful campaign "going South". Now don't get me wrong, against the AI, you can pull it off, but against a knowledgeable human opponent, forget it.

It would be nice if there was some way to avoid conflict with the Soviets, but with the present setup, it's just not possible. What an idiotic decision Hitler made to take on the USSR when he had yet to vanquish the UK. You would think as a role player in SC and examining the "what ifs" of WW2, we could dispense with such a stupid decision.

You are correct... and yet one of slightly weird things about SC is that so few players bother to do Sealion. Fact of the matter is that Sealion costs time and units... and in every game that I have seen it done it dooms the Germans to defeat in Russia.

I think it would be good if Sealion was a more possible option in the game - as it stands it just doesnt get tried.

[MonsterClaude]

Sealion itself isn't a problem as far as we talk of a strictly military operation. Right planning from the start will do the trick even against experienced players. UK reserve by late 40, early 41 should be gone by an all out Med attack coupled with a general convoy battle. Get 1 or 2 extra subs or Tac units, sound research in both sea/air areas, etc.

Low UK mmp revenu and severe forces attrition for a good 6 months set the table for Sealion around march/april 41. While it seems pretty late, the success is almost 100% by then.

The Real problem is USA/USSR activation. The German will face both Major Powers in 41 if he conquers UK. There is no way he can redeploy and catch up with land units building and research on time to meet the threat. So Sealion often means Axis defeat unless your opponent makes many mistakes.

[SeaMonkey]

Ahhh, since we have some players here, the question that always beckons in my mind but has yet to be answered is; does the 150MPP/diplo-chit investment in these two majors(USA & USSR) ever pay off at delaying their entry to a significance that allows the Axis to gain an advantage.

I have tried it once without success!

[MonsterClaude]

Hi SeaMonkey,

I tried that once on USSR. 300 mpp ! Got one hit for maybe 10% mobilization decrease, I can't remember well. Around March41, I realized I would not be able to launch Barbarossa in summer and Russia had something betwen 50-60%. Russia went to war anyway in January but my opponent didn't do any offensive move. So the full East front action started with my own offensive in April42. (lost the game by the way!).

Was my diplomatic attempt worth it? Not sure. USSR would have activated in November41 instead, not a true difference since the front would have been mostly dead through winter time. My diplomatic hit denied my russian opponent maybe 80 mpp revenu worth at best, I spent 300!

Diplomacy is a high risk gamble. It will not turn a losing strategy into a winning one so it has to be part of a deep thought plan not blind ways of opening opportunities. Plainly put, one must know in detail Allied Major mobilization% involved by his offensive drives and use diplomacy from the very beginning to keep his momentum.

Say you go for a large Middle-East campaign. According to mobilization% involved with Dow and conquest/occupation of Cairo, Syria, Iraq, etc without forgetting automatic 1942 mobilization increase you can calculate USSR activation and set a schedule for your advance and the breaking point where you must stop and reshuffle units for your Barbarossa attack. As a part of this strategy you may use early on 2, preferably 3 diplomatic shots on the Ruskies. You will probably manage to get the Russian out of the war until Summer42 and reach your other objectives.

That said Russia will be a lot stronger in 1942 no matter what ( a good Russian player will have Industrial tech max out and won't be too much annoyed by a 20-25% mobilization decrease he may suffer by diplomatic hits).

I never used diplomacy on USA . Japanese and German agenda don't have the same timing so USA war entry is usualy trigger by the Japs one way or another. I still have to see a game where the Axis player avoid Dow in the Pacific theater before 42.

[Strategiclayabout]

- The main problem about Sealion is that it will rise USSR mobilization, a big NONO for me .

*

- About diplomacy against majors (150 MPPs for USA and USSR), it's worth it in different ways:

1) For Axis:

- Just counter allied diplo chits if they go for USA or USSR.

- Reduce USSR income/mob % if you go for Eastern Poland or Baltic States.

- Reduce USSR income/mob % if Axis player forgot to GAR Poland or Manchuria.

- Reduce USSR/USA income/mob % near 0 early to weaken investments, especially tech.

(say you invest 3 chits in intelligence early for Japs, adding some diplo chits against USA as well can give you a tech edge)

- Reduce USA income/mob % when piling up "bad" events (Spain-Gibraltar, Vichy Gold...).

- Give more time to Japan before Pearl Harbor.

2) For Allies:

- If UK invests early in some chits for USSR it will give more MPPs to Stalin for any hit and more importantly put pressure on Barbarossa preparations.

- Just forcing Germans to launch their attack 1 turn early because USSR mobilization is about to reach 100% can pay big time.

- Nazis can also have bad weather, can have less units on the wrong tiles with lower stats, upgrades or steps, bad HQ attachments...

- Best case, a diplo chit can hit big just before Barbarossa and give Stalin free hands in early 41.

- Same thing about USA: screwing up Pearl Harbor schedule can save many units early that will hurt Japs badly later.

- UK can also use diplo raise back US mob % after DOWing on other countries (neutrals, Italy, Japan... make your choice !).

There are many vicious things to try as you can see .

[brianlala]

Has anyone experimented with a Sealion in 1940 to take the UK out & then combined that with a Japanese attack on the Soviet Far East in 1941?

I tried something like that against an opponent & having Japan hit the Soviet Far East can be helpful in either causing the Soviets to have to weaken the western front or else allowing Japan to take something like 40 MPP producing cities from the Soviets.

This strategy does force Japan to weaken their navy somewhat but the Japanese forces needed to cut off all of those Soviet cities in the east & then build a defensive blocking position is not huge either.

I wonder if this is a viable strategy to help out the Germans if they go Sealion.

[TaoJah]

This strategy does force Japan to weaken their navy somewhat but the Japanese forces needed to cut off all of those Soviet cities in the east & then build a defensive blocking position is not huge either.

I wonder if this is a viable strategy to help out the Germans if they go Sealion.

I don't know yet if the Japanese can help the Germand by keeping the USSR busy: I was trying this out, but I installed the patch so I had to restart from zero

I took the Chinese cities east of the mountains and kept a minimal Japanese defence force on the mountain paths (plus garrisons & divisions to prevent partisans). that way, the Chinese can't cross the mountains.

Then I used all the rest of the Japanese forces to go north and attack the USSR And there were ALOT of Japanese: I bought ALL Japanese land troops and research, ignoring any naval and air, totally ignoring the USA threath.

That was going okay, but... then I installed the patch and had to quit.

So, I don't know if attacking the USSR with Japan helps the Germand alot. Somehow I doubt it, the russians didn't put up much of a fight in the east, they just gave up the cities without alot of units to defend them.

.

Now, in my new game, I do it differently, I am focussing 100% on eliminating the Chinese with Japan: I go to their second and third capital ASAP (not an easy task with those mountains and pesky supply problems). I figure that a strong Japan will help the Germans too, by keeping the USA busy.

But I don't know yet if that theory will work, I'm not far yet. We're all newbs at the moment, isn't it exciting !!!

Another thing I want to try is attacking the UK with Japan, in Africa. I got the impression that the UK puts ALOT of effort in Addis Abeba. I held it pretty long pre-patch, with my Italian corps, HQ, 3 airplanes and the Italian special force there (with +2 infantry research on them). The UK puts ALOt of troops in it, planes, armies, carriers... Like ALOT ! Maybe if I land there with some Japanese troops, it will help, I donno yet.

[Eisenhammer]

The farthest I got in my game without any diplo-chit investment before war was declare is April 42 for the Russians and may 42 for the United States. Both declaring war on Germany. The turn after that I had Japan declare war on them. Also the Japanese fighting the Russians in my game is helping the Germans out a lot. As the Russians are moving more and more troops over to fight the Japanese.

[numdydar]

Getting through North Africa as the Germans/Italians will help the most for Addis. Once Egypt is overrun, I send all the Italians south and the Germans East. This also allows the Itlian fleet to operate in the Indian Ocean and Red Sea which is a big help in that area.

As Japan you really do not have the assets to capture India, hold off the US, and deal with Austrila as you are limited by the number of ground troops you can get. Limiting Japanese to X amount of Ibf troops is obviously a game balancing issue since the one thing Japan had plenty of was manpower. So there should be no limit on Corps/Armies for Japan. Tanks Art, etc types should be limited since Japan had limited abilities to made those. There should be a lot more Inf units than the game allows imho

As Japan your priorities should be, China, India/Burma, Austrila, and once the US is in the war, the Eastern Pacific. If you manage all of that then you can go on an Africian adventure Of course by then, you should have been able to overrun most of it just with the Italians.

[steel32]

I see things different with Japan. Each and every game I have played PBEM so far Japan is a beast. They can easily have around 100 land units in 42' which is far above anyone rather than maybe Germany and a little absurd.

Perhaps I have not played the right opponent but find them quite able to do all required with India, Australia, and fight the US, in fact most islands are taken right away and india/Australia threatened and under assault in the summer of 42. Yes you could say the Japanese had plenty of men but did they have the supplies for such a large sphere and the answer is strongly no. Most of their men were starving, living of the land, with little support once dropped off in each area. They barely had enough transports to feed their people let alone the men across the globe.

You do not need to defend most of your possessions as the US has no way to bring a real assault until 43'.

[numdydar]

Has your game been modded? I reloaded one of my games around that same time frame and the max number of Japan Inf type units is around 75. If you add in Tanks, Art, etc then you may get to 80-85 before maxing out.

My priorities as noted above, China, Burma/India, then Oz. Once China falls, I usually have several groups at the far Western border to keep the Russians honest. Plus I keep garriisons in China/Manxhuria as well. Which ties up a bunch of troops. Now whether I need to do any of this is an open question

But I found that I had a cronic shortage of troops until India fell. Even though my Inf builds had been maxed out.

[steel32]

No mod. One choice I make is for the 4 garrison instead of the Indochina Army then put these 4 units in garrison mode to free up 4 other units.

I count around 100 units Japan can have, I also buy more of the special forces before the free ones are put on the map to over max out. This does not include 3 Thai units I get as I do invade but let them join once Burma is over run.

What I normally do not do is put more units in Manchuko than is needed to garrison and let the Germans fight it out. Now if the soviets abandon Siberia then I will march a small army thru there.

100 units is more than enough considering this is more than the Soviets/US have in any game I have seen and is actually not accurate as they had the largest armed forces during the war. Brits can not readily defend all of India/Australia meaning overwhelming Japan forces are not needed but just enough to do the job, and China the same as there is only so many ways thru the mountain pass and once thru China is done and forces are freed up for other tasks or supporting other fronts.