with Russia invested in China (IC in Szechwan and raised territory value to 3) and getting the IPCs, pluss the turn order allowing to consolidate, made a KJF more viable. My friend tried it one game but made a couple mistakes with positioning
Japan First Move and US Reply
-
-
AC’s are to important to lose to USAF I would run them back to Iwo Jima and land what ever was left of the attack on the coast DD and trasport a BB in hawaii as close to home as possible execpt the poor DD that went to Hawaii if its still floating. They will get to see what happens to ships that are left in the range of the USAF.
-
2 fighters + 1 DD –> 1 BB is too dicey IMO. It really sucks when you miss on the first round.
Also, I’m not sure its strategically sound to sac your only DD on J1. If you keep it around, US sub purchases look much less attractive.
I’d go with all 4 fighters vs. the BB. You have ~85% chance to lose 1 or less fighters. Yeah, you leave the TP and DD in sz56 alone, but I don’t think it’s as critical as taking out the BB.
-
IMO, 3 Fighters + DD vs the BB. If he only score one hit on defense, sack a plane and leave the DD. Send 1 plane after the TR/DD. If you lose, you lose, but in any case the DD in Hawaii prevents a US Turn 1 capture of the Carolines which gives the Brits their $5 bonus and just throws one more thing on the pile of things Japan has to do on the first few turns.
-
the DD in Hawaii prevents a US Turn 1 capture of the Carolines which gives the Brits their $5 bonus
The Brits will never get this bonus, because Japan moves before them. So this moves seems rather dubious to me. In any case, the DD could go to Caroline Islands sz, along with the carriers if you feel it necessary to prevent this. This would also put fighters in range of both Australia and sz56 on J2.
-
If the Japanese want to waste time, troops, and transports retaking the Carolines on J2, I say let 'em. And they have to defend those transports which means they will be in range of US counter attack on US2. If the US built anything resembling a fleet, this will be quite hard on Japan assuming they dont pile their who fleet there (which in turns means no attack on India, a delayed or no attack on Australia and less moving inland into China. I’ll happily take that for the cost of 1 US TR + 1-2 Infantry.
No, IMO Japan cant really afford to retake the Carolines on J2 without major disruption of their other goals. Like I’ve said before, Japan can do anything, but Japan cannot do everything. And the more thorns you stick in their side the better.
-
2 Fig + DD vs BB isn’t that dicey.
85% Attacker Wins
8% Defender WinsYou just gotta have guts. Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2 and the defender will miss. :)
.67*.67=45% chance he scores two hits in a row.
-
I prefer to send 1 fighter from the carrier group in 57 against the US transporter + destroyer in 56.
then i send the remaining 3 fighters from 57 against the USbattleship in 53 supplemented with 1 more fighter from 61 and the destroyer from 51.
if my i’m in the mood i put one more fighter on 56 from the 53 attack
In noncombatmove i move the 2 carriers from 57 to 51 and land the remaining fighters on teh 2 carriers there. and if the 5th fighter survives, then one gets to land on one of the japanese islands
-
@Fighter:
then i send the remaining 3 fighters from 57 against the USbattleship in 53 supplemented with 1 more fighter from 61 and the destroyer from 51.
Do you attack the british fleet before India with one fighter only? Not at all?
In noncombatmove i move the 2 carriers from 57 to 51 and land the remaining fighters on teh 2 carriers there. and if the 5th fighter survives, then one gets to land on one of the japanese islands
I don’t like these move because of the possibility of US to strike these fleet with three fighters and the bomber. I feel uncomfortable to offer that CVs without naval fodder. If you got three hits at first round, wave your carrier(s) good bye.
And I have learned that I need my cruiser to attack at sea zone 50 (Philippines). Every time when I hold back my cruiser to bolster up the CVs at sea zone 51 or support amphibious operation elsewhere things get nasty at sea zone 50 … :| -
Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2 and the defender will miss.
.67*.67=45% chance he scores two hits in a row.
I hope this is a joke.
If not, you might want to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler’s_fallacy
-
If the US built anything resembling a fleet, this will be quite hard on Japan assuming they dont pile their who fleet there (which in turns means no attack on India, a delayed or no attack on Australia and less moving inland into China.
Well, I don’t see how sending your fleet to the Carolines prevents an attack on India. With my J1 open I’ll have 6-7 ground units and 4-5 fighters ready to attack regardless of what my fleet is doing. And if I have to delay an attack on Australia, so be it. It’s not a priority as long as Germany/Italy took Egypt (which they should have by now).
The fact is, if the US wants to fight you in the Pacific, then they can. You’re not going to be able to expand as quickly as you would otherwise, and there’s nothing you can do about it. Whether or not you attack sz56 isn’t going to have a major impact if the US decides to take it to Japan.
-
@Unknown:
Well, I don’t see how sending your fleet to the Carolines prevents an attack on India. With my J1 open I’ll have 6-7 ground units and 4-5 fighters ready to attack regardless of what my fleet is doing. And if I have to delay an attack on Australia, so be it. It’s not a priority as long as Germany/Italy took Egypt (which they should have by now).
That’s why moving 4 Russian Infantry to India on R2, is a good idea. Toss in the Russian Tank and it becomes even better.
Even if you can beat that kind of force, Britain can recapture India on B2 with 3 Infantry, an Artillery, and potentially its entire starting Air Force in UK, if need be.
Or they can simply retreat from India on B1, then capture it with 2 Artillery, 6 Infantry, and the same potential air support, except this time the Japanese forces have no air support of their own, meaning that you wipe out the majority of the Japanese Infantry. You can then have the Russian troops move back to the Caucasus, into Trans Jordan, or still go to India on R3.
-
That’s why moving 4 Russian Infantry to India on R2, is a good idea. Toss in the Russian Tank and it becomes even better.
Even if you can beat that kind of force, Britain can recapture India on B2 with 3 Infantry, an Artillery, and potentially its entire starting Air Force in UK, if need be.
Wow, that’s quite a burden on the Soviets, don’t you think? 4 inf lost, plus their only decent starting attack piece, AND you’re gonna land UK air in Soviet territory, denying them another 5 IPCs and letting the German Baltic fleet survive? As Germany, I be salivating at the thought…
And all this does what, exactly? Prevents India from falling for a turn? Maybe 2? Meanwhile, on the Eastern front, Caucasus/Moscow falls a few turns earlier as compensation. Good trade for the Axis I’d say.
Or they can simply retreat from India on B1, then capture it with 2 Artillery, 6 Infantry, and the same potential air support, except this time the Japanese forces have no air support of their own, meaning that you wipe out the majority of the Japanese Infantry.
How does the UK get 6 inf, 2 art to attack India on their second turn? Are you moving Aussies on the tp into sz39? Because that won’t work, they’ll be dead on J2 when the Japs sink the tp with fighters. They have a cv in sz37, remember.
-
@Unknown:
Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2 and the defender will miss.
.67*.67=45% chance he scores two hits in a row.
I hope this is a joke.
If not, you might want to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler’s_fallacy
Actually, your link does not apply.
My statement is statistically correct. The odds of getting two hits with two dice when your target number is 4 or less is .67 * .67 which is approximately 45%
We could extrapolate further if you wish. The odds of a battleship scoring 10 hits in a row is .67*.67*.67*.67*.67*.67*.67*.67*.67*.67 = 1.62% (approximately.)
What your link refers too is a gambler saying that BECAUSE he missed in round 1, he WILL hit in round 2. What I am saying is that the odds of getting two hits in a row is 45% and the odds of getting 10 hits in a row is 1.62%. Doesn’t matter if you roll two dice at the same time or one die and then the same die a second time. Statistics are statistics.
-
My statement is statistically correct.
No, it absolutely is not. Even though you’re probably going to give me -karma again for pointing out your error, I will anyway.
The odds of getting two hits with two dice when your target number is 4 or less is .67 * .67 which is approximately 45%
No argument, this is obv true.
What your link refers too is a gambler saying that BECAUSE he missed in round 1, he WILL hit in round 2.
Right. And this is what you said:
Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2
So how does the link not apply? You’re suggesting that if you get “bad” luck in R1 (no hits), you will have “good” luck in R2 (2 hits) to balance things out. This is the gambler’s fallacy: odds don’t “even out” on future rounds because you got a bad result. Probabilities don’t work that way, because the dice have no memory of what happened. The odds of hitting with both fighters in R2 is exactly the same as they were in R1.
What I am saying is that the odds of getting two hits in a row is 45%
OK, but that doesn’t matter. The first hit already happened. Its in the past, so it’s not a probability event anymore, it either happened or it didn’t. Given that the BB hit in R1, the odds of it hitting again at the start of R2 are 67% (just like they were at the start of R1), not 45%.
Statistics are statistics.
Yes, yes they are. But we’re discussing probability here, not statistics.
-
You didn’t reference that part of my statement in conjunction with your link to wiki. You linked the part of the statement where I said that odds of the battleship getting two hits was 45%
Yes, technically it’s true that you do not have better odds of getting two hits with your two fighters in the second round if they missed in the first.
As for your personal bad karma, don’t look at me bud. I have one person I give bad karma to and that’s it. You gotta be the world’s biggest jack-ere, donkey to get me riled up to the point you get BK from me.
-
You didn’t reference that part of my statement in conjunction with your link to wiki.
Well, if you read the original quote I took from your post you’ll see that I did. I should have taken out the part about the probability of BB hitting twice, though, as it was irrelevant to the point I was making. Sorry about the confusion.
As for your personal bad karma, don’t look at me bud. I have one person I give bad karma to and that’s it. You gotta be the world’s biggest jack-ere, donkey to get me riled up to the point you get BK from me.
My apologies then.
-
I hit SZ56 with 2 FGT and %3 with the DD and 2 FGT. In non combat I put the CVs and the surviving fighters in SZ51. I also withhold the CA from SZ50 using the BB only. I position the CA with the fleet in SZ51. I have had the US get cocky and attack this fleet. Yeah it cost me a CV I could replace and it cost the US a wad of units that were going to take several rounds to replace.
Suggested Topics
