australian defeat

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

everton
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:47 pm

australian defeat

Post by everton »


as a newbie, i read somewhere that the ai will not invade oz (not sure if this is true), however in a pbem what are the ramifications of the total loss of australia.......... does it affect australian troops in other areas such as burma, and replacements etc, can the game still be won by the allied player
User avatar
Quixote
Posts: 773
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: australian defeat

Post by Quixote »

In a PBEM, the ramifications for losing all of Australia would probably be a Japanese auto-victory. If that doesn't happen, though - yes, the Allies could still win. The Aussies still on the map would continue to fight like normal and receive replacements like normal throughout this process. Additionally, you would get special reinforcement troops (and planes) if your Japanese opponent chooses to cross a certain line while invading Australia (or India or North America) that you would otherwise never receive during play. There are a few threads around detailing these additional units and exactly how you get them- if you're searching the forums, I seem to remember that Bullwinkle wrote/started a good one.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: australian defeat

Post by John 3rd »

In my Racing the Sunrise AAR I chronicle how I have taken Australia in my RA Game against Lew. Within it are the exact reinforcements that the Allied Player gains. Our VP score is roughly 4-1 right now but Lew is still soldiering on looking, with hope, to 1943.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

rockmedic109
Posts: 2407
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: australian defeat

Post by rockmedic109 »

The AI will invade Australia in DaBabes Ironman. Something I discovered the hard way. I won't say where or with how much, however. That way if someone else gets blind-sided by the "unintelligent" AI, I can feel better about my generalship...or lack thereof.
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: australian defeat

Post by crsutton »

A top player can take OZ vs maybe an inexperience Allied player. But it is not easy to do. There are lots of counters. Don't fear it too much. Unless of course, you are playing John in his own RA mod...[;)] If you get into an email game and feel like you are over matched or in trouble then just come to the forum and ask for advice. Plenty of it here fer sure....[:D]
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: australian defeat

Post by topeverest »

I never lost or took Oz in any stock scenario in PBEM. I've lost it in my current PBEM mod, against a much stronger empire though. It's a pretty big deal to be sure. If the game can still be 'won' by the allies, you will have to check back with me a bit. I can't say yet.

The logic awards allied Oz invasion reinforcements under certain conditions. There is some magic in not knowing what or how you get them. IMHO I wouldnt seek the answer out if you dont know it.
Andy M
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: australian defeat

Post by John 3rd »

Sutton is correct. If this is a real fear or concern ALWAYS pose your situation to the Forum. The number of quality people with this game is amazing.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
Quixote
Posts: 773
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: australian defeat

Post by Quixote »

By the way everton, welcome to the game! (I should have noticed this earlier - obviously patience is something you don't need much practice at since you joined the forums a year and a half ago and this is your first post! That kind of patience will serve you well in this game.) If you haven't already figured it out, the learning curve here can be steep (which is occasionally very frustrating) so if you have any more questions, by all means don't wait another year or so to ask them. [:)]
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: australian defeat

Post by John 3rd »

Well said Quixote!
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
btd64
Posts: 10451
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO

RE: australian defeat

Post by btd64 »

Yeah, I was playing the game for awhile before I even joined the form. once I did it was a little easier to play the game by reading some of the forums. In perticulair, read the "for Newbees" post. A lot of very good info from very smart people. Welcome and Cheers
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
everton
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:47 pm

RE: australian defeat

Post by everton »

thanks for the advice,

i did join the forum awhile ago but got sidetracked anyway i am totally obsessed by the game,it sort of sucks you in,

i asked the question about australia as i read it somewhere in a post here and was wondering wether the ai in the stock campaign as the japs does ever attempt to take australia, it would sort of alter the way you play the game in a big way if it were true


User avatar
btd64
Posts: 10451
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO

RE: australian defeat

Post by btd64 »

I dont think the AI will or can attack OZ. I've played the stock scenario 1 six or so times and it has bombed the hell out of Darwin a couple of times, but have yet to see it attack OZ. [:'(] I am now playing the Ironman game. im at the end of dec 41 and other than a few ijn air units and the early taking of Rabaul, nothing out of the ordinary yet. But i hear it gets interesting.[:D] Have fun. its the name of the game.
Cheers
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: australian defeat

Post by Sardaukar »

AI did attempt few invasions of Australia in my Allies vs. IJ AI game. Not doing to say where, but it was bit scary first.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: australian defeat

Post by DivePac88 »

Australia is always doable in an evenly matched Pbem campaign, by an experienced Japanese player. As the Allied player is; by in large, incapable of influencing the major events early in the game. If the Japanese player really wishes, then uses power-projection and force concentration correctly. He can realistically take any target on the map, but holding and supplying this position after six months is another question.
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
everton
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:47 pm

RE: australian defeat

Post by everton »

glad to hear that i was kinda hopin the ai had that trick up its sleeve

guess i can cancel my plans to move anyone in oz who can hold a rifle to pt moresby then
User avatar
Blackhorse
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Eastern US

RE: australian defeat

Post by Blackhorse »

ORIGINAL: crsutton

If you get into an email game and feel like you are over matched or in trouble then just come to the forum and ask for advice. Plenty of it here fer sure....[:D]

Reminds me of a quote by Brooke or one of Churchill's top generals (that I'm paraphrasing from memory): "Each day he had a dozen new ideas. One of them was brilliant, and the rest were bulls--t. The trouble was, it was hard to tell which were which."
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
User avatar
Jim D Burns
Posts: 3938
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Salida, CA.

RE: australian defeat

Post by Jim D Burns »

When pondering the ramifications of a Japanese capture of all of Australia in game, I personally think it's a strategic mistake for Japan to do so. The trick for Japan is to get the allies heavily invested in trying to defend Australia vs. a Japanese invasion so he keeps pumping assets into the place. A single cargo ship run to OZ might bring in 5000 supply. But if the allies give up on trying to supply the place, that same ship can make 3 or 4 times as many trips into the closer Pacific bases in the same time frame as the single run to OZ, building up supplies and fuel for campaigns much faster.

The consequences to the allied player if Australia is lost (other than VPs lost) is exactly zero. In fact it frees the allies of the burden of defending and supplying the place. And allows them to concentrate all their assets into a Central Pacific and Burma push at the exact time when Japan is now spread out across a vast southern continent.

So if going to Australia as Japan your goal should be to keep the balance of power on that continent on a knifes edge to goad your opponent into bringing in more and more stuff. The longer the allies stay invested in a fight for Australia the longer Japan's perimeter will stay safe from serious attack. Kill off Australia and the allies will simply bypass the south and head straight towards the Marianas.

Jim
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6380
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: australian defeat

Post by JeffroK »

It is a balance, and it could be that the JFB spends more resources in keeping OZ alive than he would in taking the place?
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Jim D Burns
Posts: 3938
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Salida, CA.

RE: australian defeat

Post by Jim D Burns »

ORIGINAL: JeffK

It is a balance, and it could be that the JFB spends more resources in keeping OZ alive than he would in taking the place?

Right but Oz is an end point to Japan's expansion for the most part and will see allied counter-attacks begin either during or right after the campaign there, so you have to ask yourself why are you going there if not to help your defense timelines? Taking all of OZ is probably doable if you commit to it, but by the time you're finished the allies should be poised to start making their first serious strikes into Japanese territory and you'll have a lot of stuff out of position in an area the allies will no longer even care about.

If you can get the allies to bring a ton of stuff into OZ to try and stop a perceived Japanese conquest, all that stuff won't be sitting out in the Pacific just waiting to load onto ships to head into the Marshall's. Instead its committed to fighting Japan in OZ and until they push you out they are not likely to shift a large enough force to the Pacific to make early strikes into your outer perimeter probable.

But if the allies see OZ is a lost cause early on with no real chance to save it, all the stuff normally sent to the SW Pacific, South Pacific and Australia commands will more than likely just head to Pearl to get ready to strike west instead. From a strategic point of view I think it is far better for Japan to spend time and resources on a huge grinding attrition fight in OZ than on a dangerous island hopping campaign in the Pacific.

The timing of when to pack up and leave OZ comes into play of course as you don't want the eventual initiative shift to the allies to overwhelm you before you can leave the place. But keeping the main allied effort in 42 and 43 focused on a huge fight in OZ is to me a victory for the Japanese cause. It can easily set back allied timelines by six months to a year if they commit a lot of extra stuff to the fight there that normally would see service in SEAC or Pacific commands.

Jim
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: australian defeat

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

When pondering the ramifications of a Japanese capture of all of Australia in game, I personally think it's a strategic mistake for Japan to do so. The trick for Japan is to get the allies heavily invested in trying to defend Australia vs. a Japanese invasion so he keeps pumping assets into the place. A single cargo ship run to OZ might bring in 5000 supply. But if the allies give up on trying to supply the place, that same ship can make 3 or 4 times as many trips into the closer Pacific bases in the same time frame as the single run to OZ, building up supplies and fuel for campaigns much faster.

The consequences to the allied player if Australia is lost (other than VPs lost) is exactly zero. In fact it frees the allies of the burden of defending and supplying the place. And allows them to concentrate all their assets into a Central Pacific and Burma push at the exact time when Japan is now spread out across a vast southern continent.

So if going to Australia as Japan your goal should be to keep the balance of power on that continent on a knifes edge to goad your opponent into bringing in more and more stuff. The longer the allies stay invested in a fight for Australia the longer Japan's perimeter will stay safe from serious attack. Kill off Australia and the allies will simply bypass the south and head straight towards the Marianas.

Jim


The main advantage is destroying Allied units IMO! Supply? It doesn't matter where I send my freighters with supply, there are so many of them around, it doesn't matter if they go to CENTPAC or Australia, India or will just stay in port.

In 42 a Japanese player shouldn't look at where the Allied player is weak to overrun empty territory, he should aim at targets where the enemy is actually "strong", but not strong enough to defeat an attack. Why am I saying this? Because in my ongoing PBEM against Cuttlefish, we are in 7/43, the Allied have taken everything back except CENTPAC, Luzon and Formosa, Chinese hordes are running amoc and by early 44 I can attempt to land on Japan. The Japanese have lost nearly 7000 pts for ground losses already and are facing 30,000 Chinese av, 10,000 Commonwealth av and 10,000 US av that are preparing for Japanese targets and are taking them out one by one.

So the Japanese are facing roughly 50,000 Allied av in mid 43. All I have lost during the Japanese storm early on was the stuff in the SRA (minus 1000 Dutch av that never surrendered on Java). 50,000 Allied av was more than I expected, granted, 30,000 Chinese av included but have you ever seen a fully supplied, fully prepped Chinese Army of 15,000 av attack the Japanese? It's like an avalanche, so the Chinese are definately worth it. Destroying a couple of thousand Commonwealth/US av during the course of 42 would really mean something though. The Chinese need supply, they get supply from Burma, lose Burma, "activate" the Chinese. Hold Burma and you don't face the 30,000 Chinese av on the offensive. So by saying this, I would aim at destroying Commonwealth units in India as those are the key for Burma. Australia is the key to the SRA, but as the Japanese you probably can only lock one door, not two. My logic would be to keep the Commonwealth Army from taking Burma, stall the Chinese by doing so and bringing Japanese units from China to either North Australia or the Southern SRA to defend the fast track into the SRA. You can't defend Australia as the Japanese, the Allied can land a couple of thousand av anywhere in Australia in early 43, a strong defense in Northern Australia would be the better option then IMO.

I think the most important thing to do in 42 early 43 (as long as the Japanese offensive runs) is to destroy Allied ground troops. Taking empty terrain if the Japanese don't kill Allied troops would pretty much mean nothing to me as an Allied player.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”