I find it quite difficult to keep China from being killed. How would you suggest doing it?
It’s pretty much impossible to keep China alive if Japan focuses on them. It’s more about prolonging death and being annoying than not dying.
How did playtesters miss J1 attack?
-
Sorry to not reply sooner, I was working all weekend and my 10 month old is sick so this is my first few hours free to sit and type in a few days. Keep in mind, I don’t actually need to brainstorm strategy with you, since my gaming group isn’t having balance issues. I’m just trying to help out a fellow war gamer because he asked for it. And no, I’m not going to mistake your list of moves as anything resembling an invitation to play online.
That said, have you tried moving all the UK and ANZAC planes to Java, and putting the destroyer there to stop any bombards and the cruiser off Malaya. If I’m not mistaken, while the three starting transports are all in range only the planes already on the carriers can attack as well. This works very well if the Japan lost at least two infantry attacking the US as they will have to pick up two more infantry off the mainland to make a full attack on Java. So it would be 6 inf, 2 art, 3 fighters, and 3 tac bombers vs 1 tac bomber and 8 fighters. That if that attack fails or succeeds but costs Japan dearly in planes and or men then their initial position is severely weakened and that buys the US a turn or two to get their fleet one step closer. On UK1 buy a fighter and a tank, on US1 buy a carrier and move your fleet and bombers to Hawaii, taking an inf and a tank, but put your sub in another sea zone 2 spaces away from Japan, and move no more than one fighter and one tac bomber to Queensland or leave them all on Hawaii or New zealand or whatever your preference is. Build either a transport, 2 men and 1 art or a fighter as ANZAC and move the transport to New Zealand and move the whole Malaya stack to Shan State. It might not seem like the best trade at first, even if Japan attacks Java, but the odds are that it will either cost Japan dearly to take or it will hold. And it seems to really pay off down the line as it makes Japan pull significant air power out of either Japan, the Carolines or China to defend it’s fleet, making any of those important allied objectives easier to strike/threaten. If Japan decides not to attack, depending on the disposition of the rest of their airforce and your initial allied buys, you can either attack elements of the Japanese fleet, it’s transports or it’s men on the mainland. In any event, you can land all nine planes in India if you like on the nest turn.
We’ve found that as long as Japan is left with the initiative then they will win more often than not, regardless of what turn the war starts at. If the allies can disrupt the initial Japanese plan then it opens up the game and forces Japan to make on the spot changes to adapt to the evolving situation and that is what gets the allies their opening.
So to answer the question posed when this all started… How did the playtesters miss the J1 attacks? I don’t think they did. I think that, like most axis and allies games, they saw that Japan was much more straightforward to play and therefore would win more often then not initially. But as you play more and more you find that, while a good change of pace, the J1 attack pigeon holes you into a type of attack that is telegraphed and can be countered more easily than if the allies are sh**ing themselves wondering where the hammer will strike cause Japan is poised to strike in any number of places and China is truely reeling. If you play more than just one opening and play the game through to the bitter end then you learn how to beat Japan as the allies. You won’t be able to do it every time, but you’ll have a fair shake at it as long as the dice don’t punch you in the testicles and laugh at you.
-
But doesn’t the loss of British and ANZAC air forces mean that the US is alone and isn’t able to reinforce captured Truk?
-
It depends on how that battle goes. Obviously the dice are a huge factor, but the game effect depends on how the battle goes. To my eye, Japan should expect get 4, 5 or 6 hits and the uk/anzac 5,6, or 7 in round one. The point is to kill land units and a few planes. Even with bad luck you should kill all the Japanese land units. When the Japanese soldiers die, the three or two transports that were bought on turn one then have to be used to either reinforce the land OR take the islands. That means that you’ve bought the US a whole turn. Also by buying a carrier on turn one for the US you can hit the Sea of Japan with 2 fighters, two tacs and two bombers and possibly a sub. If there are no targets there you can move to the Carolines or Queensland. If you end up killing Japanese planes in their attack, then Japan has to pull planes out of china to defend against the US fleet. Most likely Japan will also have pulled one or two inf off of the mainland for the attack, so now that whole area is weakened all these little things add up. If Japan attacks you in Java then you save the 5 men from the Malaya stack. Also there’s a turn that the UK can buy without losing borneo and if you depending on what you put in Queensland, anything that Japan leaves in Borneo to convoy raid, might be killed. The idea is to get them reacting instead of acting. I’m not giving you a step by step instructions on how to beat Japan, cause I don’t have any. :) Remember, on the first 2 turns, Japanese ground troops are just as valuable as planes are to you. Be aggressive when you can make it pay off. And play China well. If you don’t then that’s the biggest gift to Japan. All I can tell you is our group has found that by mixing it up sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, but as long as the dice don’t hate on you the whole game you have a chance. :D I find it’s best to assume that it’s going to come down to a fight between the US and Japan. So any edge you can give the US at the expense of the other three just might be worth it down the road.
Oh, and about “Truk”, they’ll have to pick between weakening their offence against China or their defence against US. Either way, you win. Also, if you hold up Japan for a turn then you are effectively combining your 2nd and third US purchases. So suddenly your reinforcements are on the same timeline as Japans instead of a turn behind. Really, I don’t know the “perfect” move, I just try to think of what will delay Japan just one turn in those crucial first few turns. That’s what has been the deciding factor in my groups’ games.
Play well and be victorious. ;)
-
By my calculations the Java battle gives the Allies 6 hits 1st round vs 5 hits for Japan.
Japan loses 1’s and 2’s; Allies lose fighters. Unless the allies get lucky round 1, round 2 has Japan with a decided advantage. This assumes Japan doesn’t get lucky. They are rolling more dice after all.Is there something I’m missing here? Whenever UK offers it’s planes up on a silver platter I take the bait. Now you’re offering up ANZAC fighters as well?
If Japan loses 3 fighters, 3 Tac to take out that fighter stack that’s a win for Japan. Japan is always to trade fighters with UK 1:1. Even if allies survive with 1 or 2 fighters it’s a win for Japan.
Once UK fighters are gone they have eliminated themselves as a threat.
This is a recipe for disaster for the allies. And that’s putting it diplomatically.
Assuming Japan is being played by a brain-dead zombie, and he doesn’t attack Java, where will the allies move the planes next turn after 3 more loaded transports are in the vicinity?
-
If Japan attacks, they’ll lose their valuable land units and won’t be able to attack any of the other islands that turn, plus they will most likely need to pull one or two infantry off the mainland for the attack. If the UK buys planes and tanks then they’ll get the chance to rebuild a fair sized force. Also, they save 4 infantry that would otherwise be dead and ANZAC should get both their NO’s that round. That will also buy the US a turn to consolidate and advance. Instead of just poo pooing the idea, try it. My assumption is that India will fall regardless so I try to weaken Japan’s position in relation to the US. It’s a short term hit for a long term benefit. The UK’s fighters aren’t just for show so that you can score 5 or 6 hits on Japan after they have a huge land army attacking India. Try being unconventional and attack with the forces you have when you can do some real damage. If Japan has only 6 land units in the area, then killing them is a huge priority. if you clear southeast Asia of Japanese men then how does that not benefit both the UK and china??? That’s what you’re missing. Suddenly Japan’s first buy is now needed to do the work that should have been done by the time they arrive in the Dutch East Indies and the US fleet reinforcements is now only one turn away from the action, OR if the battle goes well then the US fleet is now on the attack depending on what Japan pull out of where to off-set their losses. On the other hand, if Japan doesn’t attack then you’ve just doubled the fighter content of India as it’s only 4 spaces from Java to India; it’s much easier for the US to help the Aussies that the Indians. If you’re always losing against a Japan turn one attack, maybe things that you think aren’t good moves might change the tactical landscape in a way that would benefit you in the long run. Play ideas out to see what the long term effect is instead of just looking at what happens on that turn, to put it diplomatically. :-D
-
I agree that this gives the allies a lot of flexibility with the final disposition of the their fighters, IF Japan does not take them out.
In the games I have played, whenever the allies squander their fighters the game is over.
The US cannot defeat Japan on its own. If Japan can ignore UK, just whittle down the British IPC territories, it means Japan can concentrate on naval builds.
Once UK loses its fighters, they’re never going to be rebuilt.3 loaded transports empty themselves into FIC J2.
The Manchuria stack continues to move closer to the front lines.
Japan has nothing to fear from China, as long as Japan doesn’t do anything foolish like attacking inf with just fighters.
btw, Japan will not miss those fighters, if they took out all the UK/ANZAC air.Whenever US takes TRUK, wouldn’t it be nice to have 4 ANZAC fighters as reinforcements (with their ability to scramble)?
Without those fighters, US has to take 2 extra turns of naval builds to make sure capturing TRUK isn’t suicide.
Losing your fighters in this fashion assures the Japanese victory. It is true Japan has temporarily moved their fleet out of position. And the crushing of UK/China will be delayed.
But strategically, the fact Japan does not have to worry about those fighters is a huge advantage. So what if UK and China take longer to fall? Fall they will. Meanwhile, Japan’s 90-100% Naval builds are easily holding off the Americans.
In fact, Japan may not have to build a factory on the mainland at all, because there is no urgency to destroy UK/China. You have reduced the allies to a one front war.
-
Once again, try it out as a serious strategy in a game since it’s not a one shot gimic move, but part of an overarching plan. As long as the dice aren’t crazy out of whack, you’ve killed off the whole Japanese invasion force, including the one or two infantry they brought from the mainland. And I miscalculated the numbers, it’s 4 infantry and 2 art or 1 art and 1 tank. If Japan hits 5 and UK/ANZAC hit 6 in the first round there are 4 UK or ANZAC fighters left and Japan has lost either their whole ground forces or has kept one land unit and taken an extra air hit. Next round the fighters could all be dead, but Japan also loses three fighters on fairly average dice, making a total of 4 planes and almost all their land units in the area. ANZAC also could have built a fighter round one and two as well as hitting both their NOs on round two means that if you want by turn three their back to 4 fighters or a mix of fighters and subs with maybe even a transport. The UK is already removed from the naval game with a turn one attack so build tanks and planes or just tanks and men. You can still prosecute a ground war as India if you have at least a few tanks/planes and artillery. The main goal is for Japan to take them out on Java, making them actually fight for the DEI. And I’m not sure why you say that about China, because they can be a huge thorn in the Japanese side the whole game, unless a large amount of manpower is sent at them. If Japan skips attacking them, then because of your blockers, they’re two territories less and you’ve actually slowed Japan down with your mad intimidation skills.
The ONLY benefit of a round one Japanese attack is the easy victories that put them into a good position for turns 3+ The whole point is to make Japan pay for it’s early conquests, changing the whole game. Setting Japan back one turn on turn 6 isn’t all that huge cause at that point it’s only one sixth of the game. Setting them back a turn on turn 2 has a much larger impact. The main problem I hear from people on this site is that the US is always one turn behind Japan. If you can buy the US a turn to get their 17IPC build up to their starting fleet and their 55 IPC builds one turn behind the action you’ve just made your life a lot easier in the opening stages of the war. For example, the US can move from Hawaii to Queensland, have their last 55 build move to Hawaii and drop down another 55 IPC build in San Francisco. If you assign your forces and buys well then that train threatens the Sea of Japan and any new builds there, the Carolines and the strategically places bases there AND the DEI. Talk about spreading Japans fighters and Navy out, especially since Japan still needs fighters to combat both China and the UK. Not only that, but you can combine fleets at the Caroline Islands for a huge whomp if it’s well defended or slip in on the way down if they pull back from there, and you’ll still have reinforcements in place for a counter attack next turn, and if Japan counters, you can the turn after that. The US will be building for Naval superiority anyways so drawing Japan into a war for the sea away from China/India only helps. Especially if you have a good helping of US and ANZAC subs floating around. Japan is only one player and it’s harder for them to be everywhere at once, especially when the shooting starts in ernest. Aside from killing a few stray transports, Japan’s fleet, once combined, usually doesn’t fear the UK fighters as their capital ships can soak too many hits for that small airforce. After turn 2 are there even a lot of Japanese transports just floating around for no reason and undefended anyway? One plane can kill them just as good as five.
Personally I don’t like the J1 attack as it is the least flexible of all the Japanese possible openers (ie. J2 or J3 or J4), and while I 100% agree that the UK transports, or at least one of them, should have started next to India, I don’t think the playtesters “missed” the J1 attack. If you have a different Allied style of play then that’s cool, but if you’re finding that you can’t hardly ever stop Japan then you should probably try making a few drastic changes to your moves and do some serious experimenting. You never know what you’ll learn from yourself. 8-)
P.S.
As a neat follow up, the US can also bomb the snot out of surviving land forces on Java with strategic bombers based out of Queensland. Since it’s two turns back to the Phi, Japan has to use two of it’s newly arriving transports to secure the whole DEI and can’t threaten even an undefended India on turn three, and that also helps out a lot in the following few turns. Then you can bomb those transports out of spite unless the Japs split their fleet to protect them.
-
Personally I don’t like the J1 attack as it is the least flexible of all the Japanese possible openers (ie. J2 or J3 or J4), and while I 100% agree that the UK transports, or at least one of them, should have started next to India, I don’t think the playtesters “missed” the J1 attack. If you have a different Allied style of play then that’s cool, but if you’re finding that you can’t hardly ever stop Japan then you should probably try making a few drastic changes to your moves and do some serious experimenting. You never know what you’ll learn from yourself. 8-)
Thanks, kungfu, I was waiting for someone to respond like this - that a J1 attack is not necessarily the best decision to make. I’m not saying I agree with you, but I’m glad someone finally posted some ideas and made a case for delaying from a J1 attack. I’ll have to try J2, J3, etc sometime…
-
Kauf, I’ve put together a Turn 1 Allied response. I also used kungfujew’s UK/ANZAC turn 1 strat. I’m looking at what Japan can do on Turn 2, and it already feels a bit tougher for Japan.
US TURN 1
US1 BUY = 1 CARRIER, SAVE 1 PU1SS FROM SZ10 TO SZ8
LOAD TT WITH 1ARMOR & 1 INF. MOVE 1DD, 1BB, 1 CC, 1CARRIER, 1FTR & 1DB TO DESTROY THE SUB IN SZ26. LAND 1ARMOR, 1 INF, 1 FTR, 1 DB ON HAWAII
MOVE 1FTR & 1DB FROM WUS TO SZ26, LAND IN HAWAII.
1BRM FROM WUS TO HAWAII
FIELDER’S CHOICE:
1BMR FROM HAWAII TO QUEESLAND
AND MOVE THE WUS 1BMR TO QUEENSLAND INSTEAD OF HAWAII
AND MOVE THE 1FTR & 1DB TO QUEENSLAND
This would put more pressure on the DEIs, but allow Jpn to break off SZ6 defense to head that way as well. I think staying in Hawaii is a bit better, as it forces Jpn to buy FTRs and keep them in Japan in response, otherwise you let them decide what to buy.CHINA TURN 1
CH1 BUY – 3 ARTY
4INF AND 1 FTR FROM SZECHWAN MOVE TO YUNNAN. 1INF FROM KEICHOW MOVES TO YUNNAN. FIGHTER LANDS IN SUIYUAN or KANSU.1INF FROM SHENSI MOVES TO SUIYUAN.
FIELDER’S CHOICE: If you are placing in Yunnan rather than Suiyuan, then 1INF from Shensi and 1INF from Suiyuan move to Kansu.
FIELDER’S CHOICE: PLACE 3 ARTY IN SUIYUAN.
OR PLACE 4 INF IN YUNNAN.UK TURN 1
UK1 BUY – 1FTR, 2INF
4INF FROM MALAYA MOVE TO SHAN STATE. 1INF FROM BURMA MOVES TO SHAN STATE.
4INF & 1ARTY MOVE FROM INDIA TO BURMA.
3FTR & 1DB MOVE FROM INDIA TO JAVA.
1FTR MOVES FROM BURMA TO JAVA.FIELDER’S CHOICE: MOVE 1DD OR 1CC TO SZ42.
PLACE 1FTR & 2INF IN INDIA
ANZAC TURN 1
ANZAC1 BUY – 1 FTR
MOVE 1 INF FROM NEW SOUTH WALES ONTO TT IN SZ62. MOVE 1TT & 1DD TO SZ61, DROPPING 1INF ONTO SOUTH AUSTRALIA
MOVE 3FTR FROM NEW ZEALAND TO JAVA.
MOVE 1FTR FROM QUEENSLAND TO JAVA.
PLACE 1 FTR IN NEW SOUTH WALES
THE ALLIED THREATS:
After those Allied moves, Japan has to:1) Protect SZ6 against a Korean invasion. The US could bring 1SS, 1DD, 1CC, 1BB, 1CARRIER, 1FTR & 1DB (1FTR & 1DB more if SZ7 is unblocked, allowing the Turn 1 Carrier to move to SZ7 for the Hawaiian based planes to land upon), 2BMR
This forces Japan to buy 4FTRs to drop the win% for America below 50, down to a 24%. The Hawaiian fleet is also safe from any assault, as no planes or navy can reach them.
2) Deal with or ignore the fighter stack on Java. If Japan chooses to assault the stack on J2, it would need to bring all three TTs, and the 3 loads of carrier-based planes to have an 86% chance of victory. Even if victorious, they will lose on average 8-9 units, including 4-5 planes, taking the island with only 1ARTY.
If Jpn ignores the stack, they are giving up on Java and the DEI bonus for a couple of turns and open themselves up to a counter-assualt. On the ignore route, Jpn can either keep their navy in one stack, slowing down their DEI income, or if they divide, they run the risk of some losses from a 1-2 punch. I figure about 4-5 hits against any divided navy.
- The Chinese stack in Yunnan is now 9INF.
4) The Brit stack in Shan State is 5Inf.
5) The ANZAC TT in SZ61 can take JAVA and give ANZAC 4 more IPCS, adding some fodder for the FTR stack if not immediately taken.
-
This is all making sense, I didn’t like my odds when I was playing as Japan for a J1 attack. I felt I could use my forces a lot better on a J2 or J3 attack, since all my armaments were in better position and China was all alone and the US wasn’t an economic powerhouse yet.
-
You know while I tend to agree with Van Trump that losing all the UK & ANZAC Ftrs is an unrecoverable setback, the Java stack is worth some playtesting.
Perhaps a UK minor factory on Java on UK1 would spice things up a bit? It would definitely be a magnet for Japan but if Japan failed to capture it, it could prove nasty by turning Java into a fortress. Of course it would mean no Indian defence, and would it be fatal to ANZAC if Japan captured the factory??? It’s certainly less useful than a factory in Kwangsi or Malaya….
<edit>Duh! Can’t build the UK factory cos it’s Dutch owned! Still, Japan could always avoid all this by taking Java on J1 with its Carolines transport.
Lozza007</edit>
-
You may not build factories on islands.
Great job Whackamatt!
This definitely needs study.
At first glance I would block US with DD so Japan doesn’t have to worry about invasion US2.
On J2 Japan builds SS’s and 1 DD, or maybe all SS’s.I would still hit Java fighter stack (pick up 1inf from FIC, 1 survivor from Hong Kong)
Hit Yunnan stack with every plane in range (except for planes on CV’s hitting Java) + whatever ground troops available (maybe 2 available, 1 from FIC, 1 from Hunan).UK Stack worrisome, but without fighters toothless dog. Don’t forget 3 loaded TT’s landing in FIC J2. If UK stacks with China in Hunan turn 2, Japan goes in with everything again J3.
As far as Japan not having enough ground troops in China, by J3 Manchuria stack has now reached Kweichow.
Still have to figure out logistics of non-CV ships (how many to send to Java, how many to send to TRUK/PI/Japan) Also need to figure out if TRUK can in fact be held or if need to set up for counter attack.
btw, last game I played the Allies commented on how much more convenient it would be if UK went before China.
Understand, both Kaufschtick and myself really, really would like this to work for the allies.
I really appreciate any allied strategy input.
Thanks Kungfu and Whackamatt
-
I’m glad to see that unconventional thinking is now in. :-D
If Japan takes Java, then it’s fleet can be hit by all UK air and the UK navy.
If Japan takes Java with just a transport and keeps their navy in the Phi then you can still make the same blocks and move US planes and ANZAC planes to land on and defend Sumatra on turn 2, which can be attacked by two less infantry, because of the lost transport and can have either an extra UK plane…. or you can build one or two transports and move in some men.
If Japan moves to the Celebs in case you build transports so that it can hit them with planes from the only carrier in range then they can still be hit with the UK surface fleet, which ignores the transport, and all the UK air but one plane. PLUS they’re fighting over a hostile island so if the Carrier soaks any hits before the planes are dead…the planes are dead. AND then you can set up the defence of Sumatra by ANZAC, US and the UK fighter.
OR
If Japan doesn’t take Java you can even buy a transport as he UK for a two fold kicker. If they move the only carrier in range to kill the transport then that weakens the Java attack by one plane and the US can hit that carrier floating over hostile territory with 2 bombers, a dive bomber and a fighter. If they don’t attack it, you can set up another line of defence at Sumatra with UK infantry and the US planes.etc…
Like I said before, there is no one SUPERMOVE to kill either the Allies or the Axis. But there ARE tons of options, especially if you consider that this game is different enough from any other A&A game that I’ve played that new strategies are needed to succeed. The whole point of any early moves by the Allies in a J1 attack game is to slow down the advance. Any kind of delay for Japan is a huge problem when their whole strategy is focused on deadly speed (ie. on any J1 attack).
-
Whackamatt, your idea deserves some looking into. The main problem I see is that Japan could land at Queensland, depending on losses on the Philippines, and it’s fleet would actually be safe there provided everything in SZ6 except one destroyer and one sub went to the Philippines.
-
not to rain on anyones parade, but a standard J1 war dec involves Java being taken with the fleet from Truk, which the UK does not have odds on sinking thanks to one fighter being unable to reach the fight.
the problem with the game is not the J1 DOW, its the india crush which can be done with a turn 1, turn 2, and while i’ve not seen it yet i’m sure its out there, turn 3 dow. In the india crush, india falls turn 3 giving japan income advantage on the allies as well as TUV advantage, which means game over man.
-
So, let them land at Queensland. Japan has then traded the DEI for an improvised attack on Australia. The allied main goal of messing up Japan’s entire war strategy was worked. Now the game can begin.
-
not to rain on anyones parade, but a standard J1 war dec involves Java being taken with the fleet from Truk, which the UK does not have odds on sinking thanks to one fighter being unable to reach the fight.
Well, there is that problem. As the Japanese, once you’ve seen this move, you can just take Java J1, and that’s the end of that.
But the first time you see it, I like the idea of the Japanese just attacking it with everything they have. Whatever the Japanese suffer, the Allies will suffer equally, if not more.
The Allies already start the game 100 IPCs behind Japan in air units, and a minor IC build by Japan in Vietnam or Hong Kong will make up for the loss in ground units. Japan can also get 2 x more air units in its build phase on J2 in anticipation of the battle losses.
I don’t see how this move can possibly benefit the Allies?
If you’re going to do the air stack, it seems to me like a better idea to try it in Singapore on turn 2. Then you can get in 4 US planes (2 x bmbrs if you want), and you can have the British land forces moved to Shan State to counter attack Singapore should it fall. It’s a bigger, more spectacular battle, and more of a winner take all deal.
Of course, that is unless the Japanese take Singapore on J2, which is the same problem the air stack on Java has, the Japanese have the option of taking it away in the first place.
the problem with the game is not the J1 DOW, its the india crush which can be done with a turn 1, turn 2, and while i’ve not seen it yet i’m sure its out there, turn 3 dow. In the india crush, india falls turn 3 giving japan income advantage on the allies as well as TUV advantage, which means game over man.
I’m not super sure of all the mechanics of the J3 India Crush myself, but from what Jim says, I’ll take his word for now that it is broke until I get a chance to break it down.
But it sounds like it would have to just be banned. Disallow the Naval & Air Base build in Kwangsi and be done with it.
I just got back in from Dayton and two solid days of AAP:40. I’m too tired to for more now now, I’ll be back tonight.
But I think the J1 attack is equally as broke in this game. The main point being that the Japanese can build a major IC easily right in the heart of where the action is.
In OOB games that we’ve played, the Allies never overtake the Japanese forces in numbers. A skillful Japanese player can do exactly what the Allies try to do, namely hold down friendly losses and maximize enemy losses.
We continue to see large battles take place where both sides dish out equal amounts of losses to one another. When this happens, the Japanese gain an edge as their replacements make it back to the key areas a turn (and sometimes two) before the US units can make it back. That allows the Japanese forces to concentrate while the US units come straggling in piecemeal.
Two good players will maneuver their forces in AAP:40 like two boxers in the ring. If neither makes a mistake and gives the other an opening, then the best one can hope for is to move in and lock horns, hoping for the dice Godz to smile upon you. :|
We’re seeing games in which both sides maneuver, unable to gain a clear cut advantage. Eventually one sides moves to strike, and the battles have been winding up mutually destructive. In the race to build back up, the US is coming from Timbucktoo (San Francisco), and the Japanese have the option to rebuild damn near right where the battle took place.
The first turn only allowing the US to have a meager 17 IPCs gives the Japanese too much of a head start. The first big US buy doesn’t get placed until turn two, moves out to Pearl until turn three, and therefore doesn’t get into the action until turn four.
The designers, IMHO, have allowed the Japanese player to get too big a lead from third, and they’ve stolen home.
-
Honestly i think the J2 war dec India crush (still happens on turn 3) is much scarier of a tactic than the J1 one is. Stony is the creator of this opening, but simply put Japan takes Yunnan loosing a plane instead of ground units, and kills the china inf in Kweichow with planes, making retaking Yunnan unlikely for china on turn 1. Along with moving transports to FIC. Then on turn 2 simply war decs, kills any potential blockers, and stacks a crapton of units on Sham State, still gets to hit India with 6 loaded transports plus planes that don’t even need an airfield if they goto Yunnan. There is obviously alot more to it than that, but that is the general idea. One less round for US to make big money, and all of UK’s big money goes strait to japan on turn 3 anyway.
-
and all of UK’s big money goes strait to japan on turn 3 anyway.
OK, now there’s a good reason for not attacking on J1.
If on UK1, player takes 2 money islands, UK has an extra 8 IPC’s to spend on UK2. But the money collected on UK2 would only serve to be collected for Japan if J can take Ind on J3. That does sound nasty.
So then, although you’re letting the 2 transports live on J1, if the UK player takes islands on UK1 you will just be sinking them on J2 instead. However, refraining from a J1 attack does give the UK options, and they do not have to take islands and lose transports, and they can combine the warships…. And the US, while not getting +40, does get +7 for the Phillipines, and also salvages the fighter and bomber on the Phillipines, and the transport at Hawaii, and can they also save their destroyer and transport at the Phillipines? Plus Japan’s not getting IPC’s for Hong Kong, Phillipines, etc. If J doesn’t take Hong Kong on J1, that’s an extra 8 for the UK, plus J can’t build any facilities at Hong Kong on J2. Boy, I don’t know. J1 attack still seems awfully good…
But at least we’re hearing about benefits and angles for forgoing a J1 attack. Thanks, guys.
-
It doesn’t matter what the UK does against that, the best they can do is take the ANZAC island NO and get 2 men back into India from Mal, but its still pointless. India falls on J3, Japan has income advantage, US only has 17+22+22=61 IPCs total spent, not enough to have enough fleet to win or even compete. The Phi stuff doesn’t get to go anywhere safe, the UK boats can still be smashed on J2 if desired, etc. It just means that by turn 4 the allies are even worse off.
I keep saying it, and will continue to say it, J1, J2, J3 war dec is immaterial, the India crush is the balance problem of this game. Its not the money that UK looses, its the money Japan gets income wise, combined with positioning (major IC in DEI area for free) and with the TUV / navy disparity, and a mobility disparity with the large number of naval bases they control.
Unless someone comes up with a way to screw japan hard for doing a J3 india crush, the game will continue to be messed up. The ironic thing, as i said before, is that to fix it all we need is the SZ on the other side of India. UK1 carrier build would then allow a block and a large threat to japan’s boats in the DEI area in the early game.
The only thing I can see to screw japan over for doing an india crush is in northern china/Korea, but I don’t think that will work too well once japan has delt with it once or twice. Will be better once TripleA lets us play the map with the new rules as far as testing strats out goes though.
Suggested Topics
