Assuming og G1 that hte Germans take Egypt and have a couple units left is it worth it to:
Load up the India transport and move it along with the Destroyer and AC to Borneo to take the island.
the Plane on the India ACC would take out the Kwangtung Transport. The sub and tranny from Australia load and take Indonesia(?) or whatever the 1 IPC island is that they can reach.
This then forces JPN to deal with 3 naval battles if it wants to get its 5 IPC back instead of using a massive force at Pearl Island. The USA then has an easier counter on US1.
As I know this is likely a bad move please tell me why.
Generally, there is nothing wrong with the concept of multiple attacks on Japan on UK1.
However, I typically don’t like the idea of moving the AC to borneo because then you have allowed the Japanese BB in Java sea to get into the game and absorb the first hit.
I would usually use the DD to kill the transport, 2 infantry from India to take Borneo, 2 Inf from Australia to take New Guinea and the sub to attack the Japanese sub in sz45.
If you really want to be aggressive, move the UK AC to sz36 to block a BB attack on your DD in sz59 and then land the UK fighter on the US AC in sz52. You can also have the fighter attack the Japanese sub on the way by. Or, the fighter can land in Buryatia to support 6 Russian infantry there.
SS
While I don’t disagree with your general move my thought on moving all the sea units to Borneo is that if you attack the tranny with the DD you condemn in to death as the BB will likely attack it and finish it off. If you attack the tranny with the fighter and then land it on the ACC in Borneo which is there along with the tranny you have consolidated your sea forces there and have a better chance of doing some damage regardless if the BB comes down or not. Basically I think the UK units in the Pacific are doomed to death anyway once the Suez is closed and this way you get maximum damage to the JPN fleet.
However, I have not tried this in an actual game and as always I may be wrong
I don’t like the UK Borneo attack.
Each of the attacks is pretty risky.
If you use the Indian fighter to hit Borneo, the Japs keep their Kwangtung transport, which can be a real problem. If you use the Indian fighter on the Jap transport, your chance of taking Borneo is lessened. Either way, you deplete India, which means Japan can hit there early and set up an industrial complex. A Japanese industrial complex in India is pretty inconvenient for the Allies.
The UK has no threats on UK2, and Japan can deal with UK at its leisure. Even with the UK bomber flying east, Japan can still pull of Pearl and recapture the islands, and as the UK moved east, the Japanese battleships can be moved into play quickly.
Apollo you are correct in your assesment that the UK pacific fleet is dead you just have to choose how it dies. Â Whatever you think is the most effective use of the pieces. Â I generally send the DST to kill the JPN TRN. Â The fighter either secures the assault on Borneo or kills the JPN sub, whatever I think will slow the Japanese juggernaut. Â The attacks are risky but 5 extra IPC for the UK never hurts.
I don’t like the UK Borneo attack.
Each of the attacks is pretty risky.
If you use the Indian fighter to hit Borneo, the Japs keep their Kwangtung transport, which can be a real problem. If you use the Indian fighter on the Jap transport, your chance of taking Borneo is lessened. Either way, you deplete India, which means Japan can hit there early and set up an industrial complex. A Japanese industrial complex in India is pretty inconvenient for the Allies.
The UK has no threats on UK2, and Japan can deal with UK at its leisure. Even with the UK bomber flying east, Japan can still pull of Pearl and recapture the islands, and as the UK moved east, the Japanese battleships can be moved into play quickly.
I just don’t see a downside to taking Borneo except that you have 2 less India INF and ive seen it posted here numerous times that INDIA is dead anyway by about J3. SO taking 4 from Borneo for 2 turns seems worth it to lose 3 for two turns in India.
The downside to taking Borneo is that you need to include the ftr in the assault in order to be relatively sure of capture.Â
If you don’t, you run about a 1-in-3 chance of failing to take the island. Then you’ve put units (inf and transport) in harm’s way and gained nothing.
If you do, then you must put your AC off Borneo to land the ftr, which means the certain destruction of the AC and the ftr, not to mention the accompanying transport. Chances are good that your DD is up off Kwangtung attacking the Jap transport, so your mini-fleet will take out maybe one Japanese unit when attacked in force. While I understand that the UK Pacific fleet is often viewed as doomed anyway, I wouldn’t want to lose that ftr so quickly. Usually my Pacific UK fleet strategy involves some way for that ftr to survive and be useful elsewhere. UK isn’t so rich that they can afford to toss away a plane for the “benefit” of causing an extra hit as it gets destroyed. Keep that plane alive!
~Josh
Actually the biggest downside is that you have just completely hamstrung the UK1 counterattack on Egypt. For the price of setting Japan back for a turn in the Pacific you’ll be letting Germany control the bulk of Africa for at least 2 turns without them having to send any more units and freed up the German BB/TP to immediately start pounding on Russia’s southern flank.
As Japan, I would just say “screw sz52” and crush the UK fleet with 2 BB’s, 1 CV, 1 DD and some aircraft as well as counterattack Borneo with the loaded sz60 TP and a couple fighters. That still leaves japan with plenty of forces to overrun China. Japan will most likely come out of that down a couple IPC’s they normally would earn but largely intact forcewise and with Australia and India very lightly defended and Africa under German control the UK will be lucky to be earning 20 IPC’s by turn 3.
I like to unify the fleet in Sz 30, so I have 1 sub, 2 trns, 1 dd, 1 ac, 1 ftr.
This means Japan either attacks it on J1 or they leave it. I don’t think either one is particularly a great option for Japan.
If they attack with 4 ftrs, ac, bb then they should probably lose 4 ftrs and means they are going Pearl Lite which also adds loses. US can then counter Pearl if Japan brought in ships (the other BB) that survived or just load up and prepare for a US Pac strat. Also the China attack will be slightly weakened.
I figure for the Allies is worst case Japan only loses 3 ftrs (excluding Pearl results) but half the Japan fleet is now way down in Sz 30.
Best case would be you take down 4 ftrs and 1 ac in sz 30, and then US counters the BB (and/or DD) at Pearl and leaves Japan with only 1 AC (probably in sz 60) and 1 BB waaaay down in Sz 30. US could have bought 2 AC, 1 ftr and now they have 1 BB at Pearl and 2 ACs, 1 dd (from sz 20) and hopefully 2 ftrs in Sz 55. They immediately outclass Japan in navy and it is only the end of rd 1.
And if Japan doesn’t attack, you can pick up 3 inf on Aus next turn and then can potentially reinforce several spots in Afr or the ME with 3 inf. Or just move the fleet to wherever it is needed.
I like to unify the fleet in Sz 30, so I have 1 sub, 2 trns, 1 dd, 1 ac, 1 ftr.
Alternativly you send UK fig after kwang trn lands in Buryatia, and “borrows” a fig or 2 from russia untill r2 (where they go back again)
This can be really annoying for Japan esspecially if UK builds a IC on Australia on UK1.
Japan cannot hit SZ52 and SZ30 on Japan 1 (and certainly not Buryatia as well)
If USA goes pacific along with UK Japan is in serious danger.
If you are going for a kill Japan first (and by KJF I mean reduce Japan to her homeland and no fleet) then I prefer to leave the fleets alone, build an IC in India and get all the troops there you can on Round 1.
If you are going for an annoy Japan and make England have some cash for a while strat, 2 Infantry from Australia to New Guinea, 2 Infantry from India to Borneo
1 Fighter, 1 Submarine to SZ 45 (kill the Submarine to make Pearl harder)
1 Destroyer from SZ 34 to SZ 59 (kill the transport)
Retreat the carrier to Africa and start working around the Cape of Good Hope (if I have my geography right, that’s s. of the African continent) to have it for the British fleet against Germany saving you the cost of building one yourself.
The other option is to combine the British fleets in the Bottom of the Board, pull back from India and combine forces in Persia and MAYBE (have to run the numbers) send the fighter to Solomons and land her on the Pearl carrier.
Does anyone use the fgt and transport to hit africa and take it back instead of messing with Japan?
Does anyone use the fgt and transport to hit africa and take it back instead of messing with Japan?
Yeah I usually do, and I often bring the bomber to, because retaking Egypt is way more important than just annoying Japan.
Sending units to Africa as the UK is a great way to stall the Germans taking your IPC. Couple that with US landings in Algeria and Germany will either have to dedicate serious resources to Africa (Hooray for Russia) or they just focus their spending on crushing Russia (More money for UK).
but it speeds up japan tremendeously… Witch in my opinion is lethal.
Does anyone use the fgt and transport to hit africa and take it back instead of messing with Japan?
Depends, what do you wanna kill first? If you are going for a KJF, then no Africa for you.
Nix:
Say that UK leaves 1 inf in India and kills the Kwangtung transport. Now what do you do? Even saying the UK moves their AA gun out (which I probably would as UK), are you going to send two infantry from French Indochina to India and take on a somewhat risky battle? Or will you devote a fighter to the India battle?
On the other hand, UK can completely abandon India on UK1. If Japan takes India, UK can retake with infantry and air. Japan will not be in turn to retake India on J2, because there probably won’t be ground units in French Indochina. If Japan DOES move its Japan transport to French Indochina, that splits the Japanese fleet and makes it vulnerable to UK air in the area, and in any event, Russia retains control of Burytia.
It’s difficult for Japan to REALLY control Africa early.
DarthMaximus:
Remember, this is after a proposed UK consolidation of 1 sub, 2 trns, 1 dd, 1 ac, 1 ftr in sea zone 30 on UK1. I assume no UK industrial complex in India.
Note 1: If you consolidated the UK fleet in the sea zone southwest but NOT adjacent to Australia, you cannot have used that fighter for any offensive purpose. Pearl Harbor’s US carrier is not bolstered, and the Japanese kept their transport at Kwangtung. Furthermore, with the entire UK navy uniting in that sea zone, Japan kept its Solomon Islands sub.
Note 2: The following pretty much assumes that Japan beat up Pearl quite handily with 1 sub 1 destr 5 fig 1 bomber, consolidated most of the rest of the Jap fleet at Solomons, leaving 1 Jap battleship east of Japan to escort the 3 transports built there, along with the 2 surviving Jap transports for 5 transports.
Note 3: Assume the UK bomber did nothing but fly to Ssinkiang. Otherwise, Japan can use the Kwangtung transport to reinforce Kwangtung, which makes a really big difference both in the early Asia game and the battle for control of the Pacific. (Why Ssinkiang? It’s better than Yakut for helping UK at India.) But this will mean that the UK bomber cannot have been used for ANYTHING else but flying; there’s no other way to get to Ssinkiang than through mostly friendly Allied territories unless UK goes for Long Range Aircraft, which has its own set of risks.
Note 4: Given Scenario 2, most of Africa falls to German control on G2. With two tanks at Anglo-Egypt surviving UK1, Germany can blitz and take an additional 3 IPC of territory. If the UK committed the UK bomber to attack Japan’s Pacific fleet, then Germany can blitz both German tanks to Kenya for 4 additional IPC instead of 3, and claim of Union of South Africa on the following turn. If the UK committed the UK bomber towards Africa, then Japan can take advantage of its additional Kwangtung transport to attack the united UK fleet on J2, and at the very least to make Japan’s initial Asian position stronger.
–
Scenario 1: UK builds industrial complex in India. In this case, the Allies are going to be slowed down a pretty good deal in the Atlantic, and you signal clearly to Japan what the game plan is going to be BEFORE Japan even decides on its first turn buy. This doesn’t mean it’s easy for Japan to stop. This really deserves its own scenario descriptions, so I shall not enter into further description of a game with a UK industrial complex in India here.
–
Scenario 2: UK doesn’t build an industrial complex in India. No UK reinforcements. Japan moves to south Pacific. UK immediately loses much of Africa to G2 tank blitzes. (Note that although this isn’t restated again and again, it should be kept in mind for the rest of this article.) UK fleet in Indian/Pacific is quickly forced to retreat around Africa or south around Australia. If south around Australia, the UK fleet bolsters the US defense, but the Allied fleet is out of position for some considerable time during which Japan can capture India.
–
Scenario 2A: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1): If you do NOT pick up infantry from Australia on UK1, you MUST move the UK transports to pick up the 3 infantry from Australia, limiting their next move to East Indies or New Guinea, or one of the isolated sea zones in the middle of the South Pacific. Assuming a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor consisting of 2 carriers to the Solomon Islands allowing 4-5 fighters and the Japanese bomber to attack Pearl Harbor in conjunction with the Japanese sub and destroyer - since the Japanese sub will definitely be alive if it wasn’t attacked - it is fairly likely the Japanese will have 1 battleship and 2 loaded carriers at the sea zone off of the Solomon Islands, with a good chance for a Japanese fighter on Wake, and the Japanese bomber on Japan.
Scenario 2A1A: (No pickup of infantry from Australia, UK2 assault on East Indies, bomber at Ssinkiang): If the UK fleet committed to attacking East Indies on UK2, given the above move, on J2, the Japanese fleet can attack with at least 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 5-6 fighters, and 1 bomber. When that happens, the Japanese fleet can retreat to New Guinea after minimal losses, leaving 1 battleship, 2 loaded carriers, and a bomber in range of a probable UK fleet of 1 dd, 1 ac, and 1 ftr. With Japanese fleet and air so close, the UK fleet cannot even run south of Australia; the only place for the UK fleet to go is directly west at full speed, or the Japs kill them instantly. In the meantime, Africa will have collapsed, and the Japs will reclaim East Indies on J3.
Scenario 2A1B: (No pickup of infantry from Australia, UK2 assault on East Indies, no bomber at Ssinkiang or Yakut, no infantry in Burytia): In this scenario, the Japanese don’t need to keep their Japanese battleship east of Japan to prevent the UK bomber from strafing on UK2 the newly built Japanese transports placed at the end of J1. Since there is no Allied air in range of Japanese transports, the only thing Japan has to fear after the capture of China and Burytia is long range aircraft - and even then, Japan can minimize the risk by splitting its transports between the sea zone east of Kwangtung, east of Japan, and west of Japan. The problem for UK here is that Japan can end with a transport at Kwangtung at the end of J1; that transport can be used as additional fodder for an attack on the UK navy at East Indies should the UK decide to go there; furthermore, the Jap battleship east of Japan is free to move at the end of J1 with no escort duty needed. Those factors combined mean the IMMEDIATE destruction of the entire UK navy on J2 in case of UK2 invasion of East Indies OR New Guinea, at the cost of a single Japanese transport.
Scenario 2A1C: (No pickup of infantry from Australia, UK2 assault on East Indies, no bomber at Ssinkiang or Yakut, six infantry in Burytia): In this scenario, the Japs can use their two existing transports plus the Manchurian infantry plus a fighter to get 4 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fighter 1 battleship support shot vs 6 infantry (favorable), while still carrying out Pearl Harbor with 1 sub 1 destr 4 fig 1 bomber vs 1 sub 1 carrier 1 fighter, and China with 5 inf 1 fighter vs 2 inf 1 fighter. In this scenario, the Japanese can’t handle the UK fleet nearly as easily on J2, considering the chancier attack on Pearl putting Japanese fighters at risk, BUT the transport at Kwangtung means that the Japs can still probably kill the whole UK fleet on J2 at the loss of the Jap transport and two or three fighters. Alternatively, the Japanese fleet can pull a hit and run on the UK fleet at East Indies, and stage at Borneo, forcing the UK fleet to run west or be destroyed as described in 2A1A.
Scenario 2A2A: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1, pickup Australian infantry on UK2 then move to seazone south of the seazone around India, or the seazone immediately southwest of Australia, no UK bomber at Ssinkiang at start of UK3 (say UK bomber at Africa)). The Japanese need no escorts for their transports around Japan, so can consolidate 2 battleships and 2 loaded carriers plus 1 transport at Borneo on J2. If the UK fleet sticks around the vicinity, the Japanese fleet destroys the UK fleet with the loss of the Japanese transport. If the UK fleet runs away, the Japanese fleet takes India. In the meantime, Japanese transports have been unloading units into Asia, and German has control of African IPCs.
Scenario 2A2B1: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1, pickup Australian infantry on UK2 then move to seazone south of the seazone around India, or the seazone immediately southwest of Australia, UK bomber at Ssinkiang or Yakut at start of UK3, Japan sends the Japanese battleship east of Japan towards the UK fleet on J2). Japan has to escort its transports or split them between islands (thus allowing the UK bomber to only hit one). If the Japanese are willing to lose a transport, they can split their transport fleet into four or five different sea zones, and use its Japanese battleship stationed east of Japan on J1 to move southwest, to go for quick Japanese pressure on India as described in 2A2A.
Scenario 2A2B2: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1, pickup Australian infantry on UK2 then move to seazone south of the seazone around India, or the seazone immediately southwest of Australia, probable optimal move at that point would, I think, be moving the UK fleet back to sea zone 30 on UK2, UK bomber at Ssinkiang or Yakut at start of UK3, Japan does NOT send the Japanese battleship east of Japan towards the UK fleet on J2, UK sends fleet towards India on UK3). Now, the Japanese protect their transport from a UK bomber attack, but the force at Borneo is only 1 battleship 2 loaded carriers 2 transports. Japan has to commit far more resources to attacking the UK fleet on J3. But the Japanese do NOT have to chase the UK fleet, they can simply proceed with their attack on Asia; either attacking through Ssinkiang and Yakut, or by attacking India on J3 anyways, and using the Japanese transports, forcing the UK to go with 2 trns 1 sub 1 destr 1 AC 1 fighter 1 bomber against 2 trns 2 carrier 4 fighter 1 battleship; if the UK picked up infantry at Australia, UK can’t move to India until UK3, and Australia is weakened, so Japan can opt to attack Australia on J3 while keeping its Japanese battleship and two carriers at Borneo while the Japanese battleship and transports east of Japan to stop Allied air attacks unload into Asia; if UK starts attacking French Indochina, the entire Japanese fleet can conslidate at French Indochina and retake it. The US can move into the Pacific if the Allies commit their fleet towards French Indochina, but the US will not have enough strength to attack Japan. The US will not be able to secure East Indies, Borneo, or Phillipines; any attack on any of those islands can be followed by a Japanese recapture at the latest two turns later, preventing any US industrial complex placement followed by a build. So the UK will probably do best by retreating towards Africa (probably Kenya) on UK4, denying the Japanese progress in India, but the Japanese can then attack weakened Australia on J4 and start consolidating to attack US in the Pacific, while Japanese transports continue to move units to the Asian mainland and Japan starts fighter production to further slow Allied progress in the Pacific.
Scenario 2A3: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1, UK fleet runs southeast of Australia to sea zone 40 on UK2). If Japan attacks from the Solomons then retreats, Japan’s attack is far weaker without the Japanese bomber and fighter in range. Besides that, though, the US can fly its fighter from Hawaii to reinforce the UK fleet, making the Japanese attack 1 battleship 2 carriers 4 fighters vs 2 transports 1 sub 1 destroyer 1 carrier 2 fighters - and in addition, the US can follow with its 1 AC 2 sub 1 fighter US1 build (possibly 1 sub 1 trns or even 2 trns instead of 2 subs). So the turn is, UK1 southwest of Australia, J1 to Solomons, US1 fleet build at Western US, UK2 southeast of Australia, J2 POSSIBLE attack southeast of Australia, US fleet of 1 transport 1 battleship 2 carriers 3 fighters to Solomon Islands, after which UK3 combination with US fleet at Solomons, which is decent for the Allies in the Pacific. THEREFORE, Japan should NOT pursue that line, but should instead move 6 units to French Indochina on J2, and move its fleet west; with the UK fleet southeast of Australia on UK2, the fall of India on J3 is quite sure. The Allies can counter with a very early and strong combined Allied fleet, but with the Japanese air force and navy intact, control of India, German control of Africa, and the difficulty of the Allies in stretching their supply lines, and the ability of the Japanese to quickly reinforce their lines, the game is far from over.
Scenario 2A4: (No pickup of infantry from Australia on UK1, UK fleet runs southwest of Australia to sea zone 39 on UK2). Japan consolidates at Borneo, either chases the UK fleet if the UK fleet comes in range, or secures India.
Scenario 2B: (Pick up Australia infantry on UK1) If you DO pick up infantry from Australia, you have a much better range on UK2, able to reinforce or retake India or Anglo-Egypt on UK2 as well as the ability to hit New Guinea and East Indies. Again, say that most of the Japanese fleet is consolidated off the Solomon Islands, with battleship and transports east of Japan at the end of J1. In the probable scenario that you moved the UK bomber east to help out the consolidated Indian fleet, and left UK infantry in India, I can retreat my Japanese infantry into China (technically, I suppose this is an attack); now the UK bomber will have no targets to hit and will either have to float around in Asia (which isn’t great after J2 unless it’s protected by a stack of Allied infantry, and even then, constant Japanese reinforcements force the Allied infantry stacks to retreat from the coast, pushing the UK bomber out of range, and the whole time the minimum fleet the bomber can attack should be 1 battleship 3-4 transports at a time - OR, the UK bomber can fly back west where it can do something, then the Japanese can start being REALLY aggressive with their navy.)
But I digress, let us say that I retreated, and you captured French Indochina on UK2 with Indian infantry. What is your UK fleet doing? Did you
Scenario 2B2: If you DO pick up infantry from Australia, you could immediately move to Anglo-Egypt on UK2, but by that time the German infantry and/or artillery and tanks should have blitzed Italian East Africa and taken Belgian Congo and French Equatorial Africa and are safely out of reach. Japan takes India quickly. Now, what has UK gained? If Anglo-Egypt is retaken at this point, Germany can counterattack from French Equatorial Africa and/or Belgian Congo and Libyan units, plus German transported units from Southern Europe plus possible German air. So if the UK attacks Anglo-Egypt in force, Germany simply counterattacks, and UK is left with almost nothing. What if UK consolidates at Kenya along with the Union of South Africa infantry? Then you have up to five infantry in Kenya,which does bolster the southern part of Africa, but in the meantime, Japan will be taking the weakened Australia and New Guinea and India.
Scenario 2C: UK fleet runs southeast of Australia to sea zone 40. Japan gets India early but has to face an early Allied attack in the Pacific. However, an industrial complex at India and a couple of transports from Japan plus fighters allow Japan to stall for quite a long time, while lending decent support to Asia.
–
So, for various reasons, I do not see that the UK consolidation of the fleet southwest by west of Australia is necessarily more difficult for the Axis. Germany retains control of Africa with US IPCs directed towards the Pacific; if US does not put IPCs in the Pacific, Japan can hunt down the UK fleet all at once at fairly little cost.
Yes, w/e you wrote :lol:
I submit! Could only make it through 1/3 of that post….I think I need the Cole’s Notes~ :lol:
Oh yeah . . .
I assume that DarthMaximus PROBABLY combined that UK fleet move with an industrial complex in India. Which works out pretty decently for KJF. The long post above only mentions some of the positions if the Allies DIDN’T put an industrial complex in India, which I felt was important to describe in case a player was considering unification of the UK fleet WITHOUT an industrial complex.
Also note that I don’t say that the UK unification is BAD. I don’t think it is BAD at all. It offers Japan plenty of opportunity to make mistakes.
Even if Japan acts as I believe is optimal, I think the Allies can still achieve quite a decent position. Of course, if Japan messes up, the Allies can go to town early.
Note: GENERALLY, if I write a serious article, I edit it to make it easier to read. But that takes time, so I usually don’t edit my posts throughly.
–
Face the NPB gom jabbar. Text wall!
