Archive for Axis & Allies ForuMINI Specialised in the World War II Axis & Allies Miniatures and War At Sea Games
 


       Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WaS Clubhouse
firesdstny

Which major nation do you think is hardest to play?

I'm curious to find out from the clubhouse people.  Which of the 5 major nations do you think is the hardest to play as, and why?  

I'm guessing Italy might be front-runner, but I'd be curious to know why.  I'm not talking about wins and losses either although that might factor into your decision.  

But which of the 5 major nations do you think is the most challenging to play as?  I considered having France as part of the poll, but as they are an "incomplete" or even minor navy in WAS terms I decided to leave them off the ballot.
firesdstny

My vote was for the RN/Commonwealth because even though you have some of the most varied units in the game, none of them are really the best at anything.  

You get excellent SA's and Synergy, but you also have negative SA's on your capital ships, and if playing without US support, you currently have major holes in your unit availability as well as a disproportional amount of "junk" units.  Things like class or year limits only exacerbate the problem.

Also, in my experience, building consistently competitive RN fleets is challenging because while the RN can counter almost any threat, when you choose which threats to focus on, you are often left open to other unanticipated weaknesses.  This does not seem to be as much a problem with other fleets.

IMO this is why RN vs. RM battles are as exciting as RN vs. KM.  RN vs. IJN (early) can also produce some fun results, but the absence of certain options for the RN tends to be more pronounced in those battles.

Absences:
cheap and/or powerful dive bomber
early war sub or ANY other sub
Advanced fighter
BB without Negative SA
TD on early BB's
UK DD variety.  Lots of options in reality - few in game - especially for straight up England.
Aircraft variety/utility
Flakstruk

I'm with you fires - the RN comes down on the fragile side for a lot of units
Tincancaptain

I got to go with  the RM. RN is hampered by very little, even less when the commonwealth and European minors are included, mainly it's lack of early war subs and lower average AA. But they have the best value battleships in Repulse and Warspite which while vulnerable to torpedoes offer you some serious gunnery for a very low price. The RN also has the 3 best naval air force behind Japan an the US, their destroyers are second only to the LL destroyers, and their cruisers while not having particularly high gunnery, torpedoes, AA, or armor have some of the best SA combinations and are exceedingly cheap for what you get.

Meanwhile the RM has it's best attack aircraft and only escort locked on the landbase, it's best sub while a point cheaper then the RN sub must first torpedo something to get the same torpedo values as the RN sub and lacks Run Silent as well. The RM battleships gain TD but suffer from substantially poorer gunnery at the various point levels and even the Big ships only have 2 attacks each. The RM DDs and cruisers have significantly poorer AA then the RN counterparts with little to no reduction in cost, most RM DDs have only have 4 and only San Giorgio has AA 7 while the most RN DDs have AA5 and at least 2 RN and one commonwealth cruisers have AA7.
Tricki Vic BB71

Yeah it can be difficult to play. We need a ship that has AA value of 8 or Special Abilities that can boost AA. Such as AA barrage, AA Specialist. Also a good fighter maybe a land base Spitfire could be used?

That's what I think.
Brigman

It's all luck dependent.  I've played many a game where Soyuz stomps around the map like a tank, to much gnashing of teeth and writhing, and crying about "fantasy units".

Then I just played a game as the RN and vitaled Soyuz with Warspite at range-2.  So go figure.  It's all dice. Wink
nrnstraswa

I agree with Italy being hard to play with. Second would be Commonwealth.
Tincancaptain

Who was the joker that voted for USN?
Solomiranthius

Tincancaptain wrote:
Who was the joker that voted for USN?


I would be that "joker".

Arguably the USN is the best navy in the game, but that is not what the question asks. The USN, out of all the other nations, faces the strongest incentive to go either heavy BB or heavy air. Neither of these are terribly sporting unless you are going up against IJN, and even then the air is questionably cheesy. If you want to build a fair-to-your-opponent-yet-competitive fleet, the USN offers, in my non-expert opinion, some of the fewest choices.

USN cruisers are expensive and mostly serve as DD or cruiser killers. They stand little chance (owing to lack of torps) against BBs, even 8 armor ones. Their guns are good, but not consistent enough to punch out BBs. All other nations can still rely on their cruisers getting some torps or having other unique SAs to offer other strategies (speed is the main one that comes to mind, but also crippling salvo).

USN also lacks the 30-40 point battlecruisers/weaker BBs I love, and find surprisingly useful. These ships can offer remarkable flexibility when building a fleet.

Out of the three sub options, Barb is the only really useful sub, and the lack of more than one torp at range 2 can greatly reduce its value if you're trying to stay away from sub hunters.

The DDs seem fairly similar (surprising considering the number of them).

I'm on my phone and I grow tired of typing on it, but the essence of my argument is, out of all the nations, I feel most pidgeon holed into a certain build type when building USN fleets. this makes them the most difficult to be creative with and thus the hardest for me to play.

No one has to agree with me, but there you have it.
Brigman

I was figuring someone thought the USN was the hardest because of all the complaining about "Pro-USN bias" in the game. Laughing

But I like Solo's explanation.
Tincancaptain

Solomiranthius wrote:
Tincancaptain wrote:
Who was the joker that voted for USN?


I would be that "joker".

Arguably the USN is the best navy in the game, but that is not what the question asks. The USN, out of all the other nations, faces the strongest incentive to go either heavy BB or heavy air. Neither of these are terribly sporting unless you are going up against IJN, and even then the air is questionably cheesy. If you want to build a fair-to-your-opponent-yet-competitive fleet, the USN offers, in my non-expert opinion, some of the fewest choices.

USN cruisers are expensive and mostly serve as DD or cruiser killers. They stand little chance (owing to lack of torps) against BBs, even 8 armor ones. Their guns are good, but not consistent enough to punch out BBs. All other nations can still rely on their cruisers getting some torps or having other unique SAs to offer other strategies (speed is the main one that comes to mind, but also crippling salvo).

USN also lacks the 30-40 point battlecruisers/weaker BBs I love, and find surprisingly useful. These ships can offer remarkable flexibility when building a fleet.

Out of the three sub options, Barb is the only really useful sub, and the lack of more than one torp at range 2 can greatly reduce its value if you're trying to stay away from sub hunters.

The DDs seem fairly similar (surprising considering the number of them).

I'm on my phone and I grow tired of typing on it, but the essence of my argument is, out of all the nations, I feel most pidgeon holed into a certain build type when building USN fleets. this makes them the most difficult to be creative with and thus the hardest for me to play.

No one has to agree with me, but there you have it.


Forgive me. I though someone was trying to be ironic buy voting for the USN but your explanation actually makes a fair bit of since, kudos.
Solomiranthius

Tincancaptain wrote:

Forgive me. I though someone was trying to be ironic buy voting for the USN but your explanation actually makes a fair bit of since, kudos.


No worries. Smile A vote for the USN sans explanation does lend itself towards disbelief! I just hadn't had time to backup my vote.
sublime828

I also believe the RN to be one of the harder to play  nations..... They do have many very good units to play (some of the best cruisers in the game and a good variety of BB's) although there are some glaring holes that prove difficult to overcome after playing many matches with them.

First off, the RN air wing lacks a dedicated dive bomber (the barracuda is a good unit but lacks that overall knock out punch) and a good fighter/escort.  The martlet is a great all-round aircraft but it is consistently outmatched by other nations uber-super-fighters.

The RN BB's are a consistent issue with their never ending string of negative abilities.......don't know how many times a slow roll or jammed mount has come at a decisive part of a match........very annoying.

Only having one sub is another big issue with the RN.  The truculent is a great, well costed sub but variety is the spice of life and the RN is simply lacking any other choices in the sub department.

Overall, IMO I feel that the RN is fairly predictable when playing as them or facing them.  Their strength comes in cruiser/BB builds and their air power is almost always used defensively as trying to build an offensive RN air build will typically use too many points and have minimal impact offensively against other nations.....the RN air is quite simply not powerful enough to go toe to toe with the KM or IJN air forces.  I still enjoy the challenges that playing the RN brings but over time, it can get pretty predictable as to what your builds are going to look like.
SWO_Daddy

I've long taken the rulebook's comment about the Royal Navy freely using US Fighters, Dive Bombers, and Torpedo Bombers on its carriers as "standard", even if I disagree with the "Dive Bombers" part of it.  The RN was a prolific user of the Wildcat, Hellcat, Avenger, and Corsair, and I've always thought they should be fair game on RN carriers.  I personally think its a big reason why we've never seen a Seafire or some of the other RN air from RB and the WOTC gang...that rule meant they didn't "need" to give them a plane like the Seafire...the Hellcat covered the niche of an 8AA carrier fighter for the RN.  And the Corsair should be viewed as a bombshell for the RN - with smaller CAP carriers, I think it lets them get more out of limited carrier space.  Just my take, and part of the reason why I don't think the RN is 'hurts' as much as some do.

As for the hardest navy to play, I'd say RM.  I like them, and have played them quite a bit in Club Med.  Their main positives in my mind: Affordable BBs, Smoke, the SM.79, and decent (but not spectacular) subs.  Horrid AA, weak long range guns, mediocre fighters, and soft BB armor are the major drawbacks.  The are not impossible to win with, but they are only really "good" in small range of match-ups.
Ruckdog05

I chose the Italians for much of the same reasons that SWO did; they are one of those fleets that seem to get disproportionately weaker the higher the point value of the game is.

Their ships sure are pretty, though!
Brigman

I think the Italians are such that they're bordering on not being a "major" Navy, in the game.  The French are already there.
rplume

Funny  .. I voted IJN before reading the thread thinking I'd be in with the majority, only to find I'm flying solo  LOL

Reasoning my pick as follows
IJN units are weak AA units, and are always up against some sort of Air power, even the UK planes ares strong enough to get thru and make coral reefs of most IJN major units
The BBs are slow and vulnerable, even with the Yamato and Musashi being torp magnets, air power just makes wrecks of them as well. very seldom do we ever see BB VS. BB in games with the monster ships in them, everyone avoids them and uses their weakness against them, you can drive all over the map but if you can't stop air attacks you're doomed.
Trying to tango with Allied BBs using the other IJN  BBs is simply a lesson in futility, they have way more dice at range 3 than you and can hit that "8" armor far more times than you can.
IJN strength is their Cruiser force, which can deal lots of death with those LL torps and fair guns, problem is their costs and weak ass armor.  Trying to use cruiser/ DD swarms is a good challenge for anyone, especially if you want to win that game

IJN DDs are weak gunners and their AA is bad as well,  easily sunk by strafing fighters.. easy victims for Fletcher class DDs,  high costs too. LL again make up for it, but the rarity of consistency on making those rolls usually leads to your demise.

IJN air power is cheap and awesome, but at the same time easy to abort, which is just as good as a kill when you can't get thru the AA defenses to make a hit. Again a  dependency on the torp rolls leads to limited opportunities as IJN dive bombers are not something I'd bank a lot of success in.

I've found that to win as IJN, you must be balanced in fleet builds with good use of SAs to maximize your dice and have a good bit of luck rolling 6s...  One must be committed to their strategy with the build and any deviation to accommodate a new tactic from your opponent must be made with care as your forces are fragile enough as it is. Slight mistakes will end your chances of getting that sushi bar seat next to the emperor abruptly.
firesdstny

an impassioned and well-reasoned argument rplume.  I actually considered the IJN as well for much those same reasons. but the LLT can be SO dangerous...

       Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WaS Clubhouse
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum