Or build 2 infantry and have full transports. :P
I save 6 to have 39 in J2, considering the conquest of China and Buratyia. So I can buy an IC (15) and 8 inf(24).
As I said on J1 Japan have 10 land units available in Japan or within 1 sz of distance:
Japan: 4 inf, 1 art, 1 tank
Philippine: 2 inf
Okinawa: 1 inf
Wake: 1 inf
Considerign lost the TRN in sz59 (A sure event in my games), 2 units are landed in J1.
So in J2 I have 8 units and 4 TRN, perfect match.
The extra 2 inf should be bought if sz59 was alive.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Mmm…
Spending all on J1… means having 33 on J2.
Buying the IC means 18 IPC instead of 24.
Not so a big difference.
Maybe 1 tank in J1 may be interesting… I should try it!
Don’t spend money on units that aren’t going to be moved in the following turn. There is no reason to use the extra $6 to build 2 inf that are going to sit until J3.
And buying 1 extra armor on J1 and landing it instead of 1 inf isn’t going to shift the balance of power in Asia. Unless the Russians completely retreat from Asia immediately, Japan’s 1st turn landings end up stalling until following landings start to push Russia back anyway, so having 1 more armor and 1 less infantry in Asia on J1 isn’t game changing. Early on, it’s Japan’s air force that carries the weight of offensive power. Rarely, if ever, will 1 extra armor and 1 less inf mean gaining more territory any faster.
In my opinion, you should always give Japan 2 IPC’s from the bid to give you the option of building 4 TP’s on J1. You may not build 4 TP’s, but having the option to do it is important. But, if you have only the $30 Japan starts with, then build the 3 TP and save the $6. You still may not be sure that the Allies are going KGF by the time Japan moves so having that extra money gives Japan a lot of flexibility to react to the Allied moves.
Thanks U-505. Karma +1 for you for having given a theoretic background to this startegy and a support at my explanations that seemed not enough to show the goodness of the strategy.
You suggested me this strategy months ago, in one of my first thread I participate in.
I have used it and I feel well with it. Usually I buy 8 inf on J2 with the 24 reamining IPC, but having 24 IPc is also possible to buy other things (even a BB … :-D)
For the bid I would try. Until now we usually give the 8-9 IPC from the Bid to Germany.
I save 6 to have 39 in J2, considering the conquest of China and Buratyia. So I can buy an IC (15) and 8 inf(24).
That makes sense. :-)
The issue is that I am obsessed with the idea of minimize the mismatch between the TRNs available and the land units to transport. It seems to me that “overbuying” is a waste. Saved money, not used to buy a land unit that have no place on a TRN, may be invested in a more useful unit. Basically a land units sticking in Japan is useless.
Moreover 39 IPC on J2 are also useful if Allies are going KJF to strenghten the navy (they are 1 AC and a SUB or TRN).
In my opinion, you should always give Japan 2 IPC’s from the bid to give you the option of building 4 TP’s on J1.
Do you ever get the feeling that inflates the Axis bid, U-505?
If I were to bid so that Japan gets 2 IPCs and also Germany gets enough IPCs to make a difference on their front, the bids would easily be 8-9, while some people are getting away with 6-7. It seems to me to add 2 IPCs to the bid, but what’s your perspective on this?
Also U-505, if you start with a 3 tran build, would you go expanding to Hawaii/Aus anytime soon? When is a good time? Or simply keep them there off of Japan, continually offloading maximum units from Japan each turn?
If you allow me I may also my answer on the argument.
Personally I build even more than 4 TRN. Usually I arrive at 6. For several reasons.
First it allow to retrieve inf from islands, more easy. I usually take away all the inf from the islands near the Japan landing them in Asia, while the more far inf are used to attack, Australia, New Zealand, and Madagascar, using the 5th and 6th TRNs. IMHO Japan have to counter UK predominance on Africa.
This is the way I see it. If Japan may hit hard UK other than advance in Russia, German will be less pressed.
Moreover if and when USA try to build a fleet to advance in Pacific, having a lot of TRNs is useful.
About the first point in our face2face games we are ruthless in stripping IPC away from UK. This is another reason for which our UK players leave the Indian Fleet to counter Japan, otherwise when the fleet is back home Churchill may only scrap it to have the money for buying more inf! :)
1. I don;t save cash as Japan because I have serious build limit issues as Japan early in the game. If I can get 2 units built in Japan on J1 that I will not use on J2, then I have build capacity for something else in Japan on J2, like a FIG or a TRN.
2. The most common J1 builds are:
A. No Bid: 3 TRN, 2 INF
B. 1 IPC Bid: 2 TRN, 1 IC
C: 2 IPC Bid: 4 TRN
2 IC’s on J1 has been pretty much debunked as a viable strat. I think Octo was the only one to have had any success with that as a “novelty” build, but since then it has failed when tried.
Do you ever get the feeling that inflates the Axis bid, U-505?
Not really. I’ve been consistently bidding 5 or 6(1 inf/art Lib $2 Japan) and doing rather well with it. However, the level of competition is rising dramatically here so it may be an obsolete bid for me in the future. For some reason, I haven’t yet been scared of not fortifying Europe somewhere but it can get pretty hairy if Russia has a good first round.
If I were to bid so that Japan gets 2 IPCs and also Germany gets enough IPCs to make a difference on their front, the bids would easily be 8-9, while some people are getting away with 6-7. It seems to me to add 2 IPCs to the bid, but what’s your perspective on this?
The bids have risen recently to 8-9. In the League, anyway. Yet it seems that even with that high of a bid, people are still inclined to not give Japan any of it. Most people appear to be concerned with Germany being hamstrung with a low bid whereas I still see Russia as being the country that needs, at the very least, average dice on round 1 even with no extra German units in Europe. The only thing that really matters to me is that Germany closes the Suez on G1. As far as I’m concerned, it’s far more important to get Japan a good jump out of the gate than it is to slightly reduce Russia’s high kill probablilties in the R1 attacks.
Also U-505, if you start with a 3 tran build, would you go expanding to Hawaii/Aus anytime soon? When is a good time? Or simply keep them there off of Japan, continually offloading maximum units from Japan each turn?
I would hit the Pacific early, yes. With the same amount of force that I do now. Those IPC’s are important to me. Gambling on using minimum force to clean up the Pacific IPC’s is a bad idea since they are so far flung. It would slow me down by 2 units in Asia for a turn, but if Japan isn’t getting any of the bid it means that Germany is getting an extra unit somewhere so it probably offsets the lesser number of Japanese units in Asia. In the end, I’m still most likely building 6 total Japanese TP’s whether or not they are built mostly in J1 or split between J1/J2.
For the record, if I get an 8 bid, I’m placing a TP or SS somewhere and the $2 IPC’s to Japan won’t happen. We placed a Japanese TP on an 8 bid and it bit me in the ass in my last doubles tourney game when, in the first 2 rounds, Russia had really good dice and Germany had horrendous dice, but that was anomalous so I wouldn’t hesitate to do it again. And I would never get or allow a 9 bid, if I could help it. The possibility of allowing your opponent the oportunity to place 3 inf for the Axis is asking for trouble. I’d love to have it but I would hate for my opponent to get it so a 9 bid in one of my games is an impossibility.
I would hit the Pacific early, yes. With the same amount of force that I do now. Those IPC’s are important to me. Gambling on using minimum force to clean up the Pacific IPC’s is a bad idea since they are so far flung. It would slow me down by 2 units in Asia for a turn,
Could you clarify what force you use? I am confused by what I am reading here, on one hand you say don’t use a minimum force, but then it seems like you use 1 tp to clean up the pacific (2 units a turn), which is minimal? I am not seeing it clearly.
@ncscswitch:
1. I don;t save cash as Japan because I have serious build limit issues as Japan early in the game. If I can get 2 units built in Japan on J1 that I will not use on J2, then I have build capacity for something else in Japan on J2, like a FIG or a TRN.
I never have build limit issues with Japan on J2 because even though I have at least 4 TP’s and 8 available units to land, 2 of those TP’s are going to Hawaii and beyond so they aren’t going to stress the build limits for Japan. Plus, I also make it a priority to divert TP’s to clean off the islands early, as well, so my Japan rarely sees 8 units built there until J3 at the earliest. And with $38-$42 in the bank, my build on J2 would probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 IC, 1 TP, 5 or 6 ground units in Japan.
Your policy is to land maximum units in Asia before going after the Pacific, if at all, where my policy is to immediately bleed off a couple TP’s to hit the Pacific and delay max Asian pressure for a turn or 2 while I get my infrastructure up to speed. For you, using that money on J1 works much better than for me.
I would hit the Pacific early, yes. With the same amount of force that I do now. Those IPC’s are important to me. Gambling on using minimum force to clean up the Pacific IPC’s is a bad idea since they are so far flung. It would slow me down by 2 units in Asia for a turn,
Could you clarify what force you use? I am confused by what I am reading here, on one hand you say don’t use a minimum force, but then it seems like you use 1 tp to clean up the pacific (2 units a turn), which is minimal? I am not seeing it clearly.
What I meant is that I’m slower getting 2 units to Asia, not the Pacific, because normally I build 4 TP with the $2 cash to japan on the bid. With only $30 and 3 TP’s built on J1, I’m still sending my customary 2 TP’s toward the Pacific so I’m short 1 TP/2 units unloading in Asia than I normally would be if I had built 4 TP.
$32 and 4 TP’s built J1= 2 TP, 4 units to the Pacific, 3 TP, 6 units to Asia on J2.
$30 and 3 TP’s built J1= 2 TP, 4 units to the Pacific, 2 TP, 4 units to Asia on J2.
Yes, it was a rambling post and easily misconstrued. :-D
I think this is all very interesting. I’m still undecided. It’s a big debate between whether to go into Asia hard, or to get those farflung IPCs quickly. The thing is, that if you go into Asia hard, you will get some Russian IPCs earlier. If you go off the to farflung, you get some US/UK IPCs, but it’s an overall permanent boost. I think you probably end up with the same amount of IPCs overall whether you get the islands earlier or later because it simply shifts when you get the Asian IPCs.
If you allow me I may also my answer on the argument.
Personally I build even more than 4 TRN. Usually I arrive at 6. For several reasons.
First it allow to retrieve inf from islands, more easy. I usually take away all the inf from the islands near the Japan landing them in Asia, while the more far inf are used to attack, Australia, New Zealand, and Madagascar, using the 5th and 6th TRNs. IMHO Japan have to counter UK predominance on Africa.
This is the way I see it. If Japan may hit hard UK other than advance in Russia, German will be less pressed.
Moreover if and when USA try to build a fleet to advance in Pacific, having a lot of TRNs is useful.About the first point in our face2face games we are ruthless in stripping IPC away from UK. This is another reason for which our UK players leave the Indian Fleet to counter Japan, otherwise when the fleet is back home Churchill may only scrap it to have the money for buying more inf! :)
That’s pretty much how I see it, except, even with 6 TP’s for Japan, you don’t necessarily have to go to Africa immediately. Unless Germany doesn’t go after Africa. Normally, it turns out that as Germany is being cleared out of Africa, Japan’s Pacific fleet is finally arriving to replace them in the fight for Africa. If Japan goes to Africa quickly they usually just end up reinforcing German held territories(which, by the way, does have merits of a different flavor) but I prefer that those extra Japanese units be in Asia first and then Africa later.
I think this is all very interesting. I’m still undecided. It’s a big debate between whether to go into Asia hard, or to get those farflung IPCs quickly. The thing is, that if you go into Asia hard, you will get some Russian IPCs earlier. If you go off the to farflung, you get some US/UK IPCs, but it’s an overall permanent boost. I think you probably end up with the same amount of IPCs overall whether you get the islands earlier or later because it simply shifts when you get the Asian IPCs.
Going into the Pacific does indeed slow you down in Asia, but not by much really. It’s only 4 ground units that never need be rebuilt and replaced from Japan. Their losses are replaced by picking up the island infantry along the way. And, yes, those IPC’s are far flung but they are also far flung from the Allies to retake them so once those territories are taken, you can leave them undefended so you aren’t wasting units on defense.
Good point U-505, but 4 ground units could very well be the difference between holding Novosibirsk one turn earlier or avoiding it due to Russian strafing. Also since you’re basically going out there purely for IPCs, you do have to wait a few turns to recover the cost of going out there; it’s unlike pushing hard and fast where every unit you put in stages not only for IPCs, but for a future attack.
And dang, 6 transports! I suppose you would only need to use 2 complexes, correct? Since when you switch to tanks, you would offload 4 from Japan and count that as a complex rather than do something like churn 9 tanks out of 3 complexes? 6 transports + 3 ICs would sound too much infrastructure to me!
I usually build 2 complexes. But if I’m strapped for a few offensive units I’ll pull 1 TP from Japan and add it to the Africa sz34 fleet so I’m only building 12 units but with at least some offensive capability. Once Japan starts earning close to $50, 14 units(2 IC, 4 TP) isn’t too hard to sustain.
