Sorry I’m late in returning to this party, but there’s a few things I’d like to throw in…
@Tragedy:
- I agree, attacking the Japan fleet in S.Z. 10 with the U.S. fleet + Planes would prolly work.
Which got me thinking; What if the Japan Fleet in S.Z.6 moves to S.Z.2, and blocks S.Z.1 and 9 with Destroyers? It seems like that would cause problems for the U.S. fleet. They can’t really attack, and if they move to Hawaiian Isles they can be blocked from getting back to S.Z.10. Thoughts?
Judging by your move in your games, you seem to have figured out that this does not keep the US from attacking z1 and landing in Alaska. However, if you move 1 BB, 4 fig, 2 CV, 1 CC, 1 DD, and 1 SS to z1, the US can still send 1 bmr, 1 tnk, 1 inf to Alaska, all other naval and air units in range to z1, and all remaining land units to Bco, and they have, by my figuring, about a 65% chance of winning all three. That, however, is not necessarily their best counter, depending on what else happens J1.
@Tragedy:
The pros and cons of not taking Alaska back are debatable imo. The combination of Escorted Bombing Raids and Japan subs in S.Z.10 can be a massive economic disruption and really ties the U.S. up logistically.
@Gwlachmai:
I don’t think it really matters if you take Alaska back as long as you build a solid defense. Unless the US player doesn’t see it coming, a move against the Western US is a bad strat.
The most solid of defenses will not guarantee you security if you do not fight back strategically. Unimpeded after a J1 move which takes both Bco and Alaska, Japan can attack WUS on J3 with 8 inf, 3 art, 1 tnk, 4 bmr, 10 tac, and 14 fig. Wus at best, as far as I can tell, will have 15 inf, 1 mec, 1 art, 2 tnk, 11 fig (4 are ANZ), 3 tac, and 3 bmr. I believe that, accounting for the AA gun, that gives Japan a 65-70% chance of conquering the territory. Also, bombing raids against Wus should not be happening, since there should be 7+ fighters there to defend after US2
@Tragedy:
This is a all or nothing strat. Japan is “all in” on round 3. Either they take Western U.S. and essentially win imo, or they fail and have wasted their resources to a point they can’t recover from. There is no middle ground or stalling tactics.
Maybe it is, and maybe it isn’t. As I said before:@Stoney229:
If the allies respond to a KUSAF in such a way that they lose if Japan decides not to go through with it, then it’s still a working strategy
The allies are forced to go “all out” to defend against it, so a KUSAF strategy that is able to take advantage of this by neglecting Wus and eliminating the vulnerable US fleet and invading the now undefended Philippines, Hawaii, New Zealand, etc is worth considering. With that said, test games should probably not require the Jap player to attack on J3. The ultimate goal of a test game, in my opinion, should not be to see if Japan can invade Wus on exactly J3, but to see if Japan will win a game with a certain opening strategy - in this case one that threatens to conquer Wus by J3. However, my guess is that this “fake out” strategy will still not be as effective as a good India rush strategy.
@Tragedy:
If you would like to play a forum game so you can show me why this is a bad strat that would be great. I’m not saying I don’t believe you, I’m saying show me.
The “That should never happen, It’s easy to counter” comments with not much backing it up are getting old.
Well spoken, sir. I agree.
@Tragedy:
If Western U.S. goes down and Japan collects U.S. points, asking U.K./ ANZAC to win the game by conquering Japan is a tall order imo. Especially with a Major Complex in Kiangsu and a boat load of points to spend.
@gamerman01:
The point someone made earlier about WUS only being worth 10 is silly. It’s worth 50 to the WUS, and if the US is out of the game that early, this game is unwinnable by the Allies (to answer your question, Tragedy)
I’m not saying I think UK/ANZAC will win even if this strategy is successful, but I stick to my opinion that the idea is not too far-fetched or “silly”. As Tragedy said, this is an “all out” strategy. Japan can take all of the DEI if they want, but they essentially give it to the UK by going for Wus instead. In a simple glance, you can see that Japan taking Wus is an income swing of 50 in favor of Japan, but the UK having the DEI instead of Japan is an income swing of 40 in favor of the Allies. The Allies can still double Japan’s income even if Japan has all of North America, Hawaii, and Philippines. The question may be whether or not Japan will still have enough of it’s originally superior military to swing that imbalance back toward Japan’s favor quickly enough.
@The:
What on earth are you guys talking about with these forum games? How do you play them? I would really like to show off my strategic brilliance once in a while. :wink:
The “AModulePack” that is currently linked to in the stickied “ABattlemap Module” thread on the Anniversary board does not yet include the P40 module (as far as I know), since the current P40 module will not be the final one. You can find the latest P40 module, however, in the first post of this thread. A new and near-final version will be released with or soon after the next update of ABattleMap. The updated program will include new features, such as support for P40’s convoy system, and the updated module will utilize the newly supported features. In the meantime, feel free to dive into the wondrous world of forum play and show us your strategic brilliance!
