Yeah, well, that’s my ego to you. You’e right though.
Converting to KJF
-
What Squire said is about exactly what I’d do, I’d move my fleet into position either keep the 3 carriers on Japan and the carrier and destroyer on Carolines to make myself look like a blind idiot and then give America they ol’ one two with Pearl Harbor, attack the same Japanese territories and Yunnan to take the Road from em, with my non combat movement being that I move the majority of my airforce on Kwangsi. With the airforce J2, I attack the Flying Tigers and say the 6-7 infantry they had there, granted you’ll likely lose some fighters but nothing short of say like 1-2 maybe 3 fighters if they roll well, completely eliminating China’s ability to reattack the Burma Road.
As for Sibera, I’d leave the 2 fighters and 2 tac bombers there for the defense as well as the AA guns and move the mech and artillery out since they really aren’t doing you any good when they’re there and then more than likely consolidate my units from Korea onto Manchuria since if they move into Korea they’re gonna die. Other than that that’s basically what I’d do as Japan in the face of having Russia try to knock you out with their Siberian Forces and even if they do unbelievably find success in taking Manchuria, it won’t last.
-
Right, because the US is going to get close to the Heartland of Japan just to drop units off and support the Russians. I actually had a friend of mine try this strategy a while back, and if I need to say it, it didn’t go well. Granted Japan was definitely in for one hell of a fight having to fight both of the Allied nations whilst keeping a J1 opening in movement, but that doesn’t really matter much when the Grey Wolves of Europe are running rampant, I’m just saying I’m not trying to knit pick about the other side of the board but these kinds of strategies should be made to compensate for what they’re lacking on the other side of the board instead of just negating Germany.
-
@thedesertfox i will take these as your moves when i do my livestream
-
You’ve got a good YT channel going, I didn’t know you played things like warroom and turn by turn simulations, that’s pretty cool
-
@thedesertfox thanks.
-
@crockett36 korea does not factor into this strategy. Especially given the convoy situation. It’s about destroying the ijn.
-
@crockett36 get the ijn focused on usa and lock horns until death do we part. Everyone else takes care of the rest of the world
-
@squirecam no bm for me! The objective of stacking Amur is as much a pinning move as it is a distraction from Calcutta or China and a dispersal of enemy units that stretches past fighter range.
-
I don’t usually move my Manchurian/Korean forces anyway with the exception of maybe 2 infantry, the artillery and mech infantry since they are kinda useless sitting there being attacking units. As for the 2 fighters and 2 tacs I’ll likely move 1 fighter and 1 tac to fill a carrier up and leave the other 2 for defense.
If you do you’re live stream, suggest that Japan does do their basic builds. What I usually go for is a carrier, transport and infantry for J1 build, no J1 attack. Turn 2 build I’ll gain exactly 40 IPC’s (30 for territories, 10 for NO from America), Which I would buy 2 transports, 2 tanks, a sub and destroyer or replace the 2 transports and tank for a battleship if the Americans are doing your wave strategy to rienforce, as well as stationing on Caroline Islands to recover any damaged capital ships. Turn 3 build I would build a Minor complex, cruiser, destroyer and another carrier and fit a figher and tac bomber on it. At this point I’ll have 5 carriers since I will absolutely be keeping my carriers out of range from the United States Navy. And with that I basically only have to build destroyers from here on.
-
@crockett36 said in Converting to KJF:
@thedesertfox i will take these as your moves when i do my livestream
I would watch this. I’m interested in the outcome.
But DF are you no longer doing a J1? I thought that was your initial plan.
-
No J1 attack, I might’ve said it somewhere along the lines but what I would have instead done was j2, let Crocket simulate his beginning moves of moving everything to Wake Island and then sending the navy in J2 whilst attacking everything else.
Though what the J1 Pearl harbor could also act as a strategic blocking method and prevent him from getting to Wake with his navy since he’d have to go through the leftover cannonfodder of destroyer(s) and then I would station my 2 aircraft carriers on Wake Island
-
@thedesertfox already you let me set the rules and the time tables. The money islands are a million miles away
-
@crockett36 I probably won’t get to it until next week. Have a great Monday
-
@crockett36 i negotiated Friday as me day. I’ll get to a mock up then.
-
@crockett36 ive got pix if your moves desert fox but can’t figure out how to upload photos
-
What I normally do is take my charger to my phone and connect it to my PC/Laptop and I’m able to download any shots to my PC but I’m not sure if that’s the same for you.
-
@thedesertfox said in Converting to KJF:
I don’t usually move my Manchurian/Korean forces anyway with the exception of maybe 2 infantry, the artillery and mech infantry since they are kinda useless sitting there being attacking units. As for the 2 fighters and 2 tacs I’ll likely move 1 fighter and 1 tac to fill a carrier up and leave the other 2 for defense.
If you do you’re live stream, suggest that Japan does do their basic builds. What I usually go for is a carrier, transport and infantry for J1 build, no J1 attack. Turn 2 build I’ll gain exactly 40 IPC’s (30 for territories, 10 for NO from America), Which I would buy 2 transports, 2 tanks, a sub and destroyer or replace the 2 transports and tank for a battleship if the Americans are doing your wave strategy to rienforce, as well as stationing on Caroline Islands to recover any damaged capital ships. Turn 3 build I would build a Minor complex, cruiser, destroyer and another carrier and fit a figher and tac bomber on it. At this point I’ll have 5 carriers since I will absolutely be keeping my carriers out of range from the United States Navy. And with that I basically only have to build destroyers from here on.
So I modified what you said in our test that is going on. I didn’t move the northern forces but didn’t stack in Manchuria but instead Korea as that is where the US wants to land. Built 2 transports and the IC rather than a carrier but I can build one next turn. So it’s sort of your strategy but mixed up a bit.
-
That’s totally fine, as Japan that is generally what I’ll build, either a carrier or an IC and I assume you put the IC on Shanghai…? Unless there another area you had in mind to put it.
But either way, those are the 2 general builds that I will go with on one game or another, with the IC and 2 transports build, that’s usually if I’m doing something with Germany that requires Japan to ease into the war instead of rush right in attacking everything. While with the carrier and transport, I take to this as a more aggressive stance to be ready to pounce at the Allies as early as turn 2 or turn 3. Either method works out just fine.
-
@thedesertfox said in Converting to KJF:
That’s totally fine, as Japan that is generally what I’ll build, either a carrier or an IC and I assume you put the IC on Shanghai…? Unless there another area you had in mind to put it.
But either way, those are the 2 general builds that I will go with on one game or another, with the IC and 2 transports build, that’s usually if I’m doing something with Germany that requires Japan to ease into the war instead of rush right in attacking everything. While with the carrier and transport, I take to this as a more aggressive stance to be ready to pounce at the Allies as early as turn 2 or turn 3. Either method works out just fine.
I put it in Korea. Reason being that if I have sea units I cant be building multiple IC to defend but I can eventually have one major IC in Korea that can produce 10 land units. Slower on mainland but far easier to defend.
-
True that, especially if the UK is providing ample support to China through Yunnan then Korea will be more more efficient.
Suggested Topics
