India Crush?

Naval strategy and wise economic moves are both critical in waging this far-flung war across an entire hemisphere. To the familiar elements from Axis & Allies, Axis & Allies: Pacific adds convoys, island air and naval bases, kamikazes, destroyers, and the Chinese army.
User avatar
Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:29 pm

Comments noted

xxstefanx
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:46 am
Location: Hamburg

Post by xxstefanx » Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:44 am

Krieghund wrote:
xxstefanx wrote:And: if Japan did throw everything they had at India it would certainly have fallen, maybe even easier than in our games! ;)
(so it must at least be possible!)
Possibly, but I hardly think that the US or even the UK would have settled for peace simply because India fell. If anything, it would have been a reason to fight harder. With all its resources ties up in India, Japan would be vulnerable.
Perfectly right, Krieghund!
But on a sidenote, would USA and UK have surrendered if Moscow had fallen? Maybe we need a rule change for A&A:E in this case, too? ;)

Seriously, I just think the Victory conditions are set right by Larry;
that the fall of India would not automatically have meant an allout MILITARY defeat is out of question, but it would have been such a major loss that it justifies the VC condition in my opinion. If India fell there could have been dramatic political consequences as well for the combatants as for the whole Asian world there, so we cannot be so sure, what might have happened.

Therefore I join Fletcher's opinion that all that is needed is a little more breathing room for India to adjust the situation.

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:01 am

xxstefanx wrote:Perfectly right, Krieghund!
But on a sidenote, would USA and UK have surrendered if Moscow had fallen? Maybe we need a rule change for A&A:E in this case, too? ;)
The fall of the Soviet Union would have put a severe damper on the Allied war effort in Europe by eliminating a major front, if not the major front, for Germany. You simply can't realistically compare that to a Japanese conquest of India. These cases are different on just about every level.
xxstefanx wrote:Seriously, I just think the Victory conditions are set right by Larry; that the fall of India would not automatically have meant an allout MILITARY defeat is out of question, but it would have been such a major loss that it justifies the VC condition in my opinion. If India fell there could have been dramatic political consequences as well for the combatants as for the whole Asian world there, so we cannot be so sure, what might have happened.

Therefore I join Fletcher's opinion that all that is needed is a little more breathing room for India to adjust the situation.
Sure, the consequences to the Allies would have been severe, but the drain on Japan's limited resources would have been just as severe. It would have left Japan in a position of being unable to defend its core gains in Asia and the Pacific (the reasons for the war in the first place), and vulnerable to attack from the US. Why talk peace when your enemy's weakness is exposed?

For an interesting discussion of the AAP victory conditions, check out this thread on the AH boards. It starts out as a rules question, but turns into a great discussion of the victory conditions from both game play and historical perspectives.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

AC
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Australia

Post by AC » Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:53 am

The thought of Japan ever totally conquering India in incomprehensible anyway. This would have led to widespread guerilla warfare that would have drained all of Japan's resources rendering it extremely weak and vulnerable to attack from US, UK and USSR.

Empire building by military means is expensive and draining particularly if hearts and minds are not won.

User avatar
Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:55 am

Comments noted

xxstefanx
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:46 am
Location: Hamburg

Post by xxstefanx » Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:47 pm

The "problem" is Japan would never have won ANY of the 3 Victory conditions including a VP win with their ridiculous island defense belt idea.

So I pledge for an automatic loss for Japan! ;)

AC
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Australia

Post by AC » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:02 pm

I agree with the Victory conditions designed by larry however. I can't see any other way to make the game even to both sides.

In reality I can't see a point in history where Japan was ever close to winning the war. The attack on Pearl Harbour sealed their fate.

User avatar
Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:42 pm

comments noted

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests