Exactly! That’s why I always wait for a declaration of war. Attacking first caused Japan to lose in real life.
The Japan Playbook
-
Hey, welcome back Jercules!
-
I’m attempting my first J1 attack this weekend, I’m alone as the axis, so I won’t be getting the hairy eye ball from my German team mate. Hell…… I may even do my G1 attack on Russia as well.
-
@Young:
I’m attempting my first J1 attack this weekend, I’m alone as the axis, so I won’t be getting the hairy eye ball from my German team mate. Hell…… I may even do my G1 attack on Russia as well.
that would be a surprise! :-D
-
Let us know how it turns out Grasshopper, and may the dice Gods be with you….and may the force be with you, and dont forget the lucky shirt,or rabbits foot.
Good luck -
The lack of a sealion threat from G1 attacks on Russia, may encourage the UK to scramble into sea zones #111 and, #110…. not to worried, but I may lose more planes than I would like. I will de-brief on Monday, BTW… I told my opponent what my plans are, I want to be up against a prepared enemy to gage the viability of the attack.
-
I have a question about an early Japan attack, j1 or j2. Forgive me if this has been asked earlier, I haven’t had time to read this entire thread yet.
Okay, I am assuming that one of Japan’s objectives would be to get all the rich stuff – DEI, Philippines, Hong Kong, Malaya – then go back north to deal with the US Navy at sea and China/India on land. I don’t mean actually TAKING India, just keeping them busy so they don’t advance too much or help China too much.
What is the best way to deal with the islands, particularly the 4 DEI islands since they also include a $5 NO for Japan? Do you leave the troops that you used to take those islands as a garrison and send empty transports back to Japan for more men? Or take those men with you for other duties, leaving the islands empty?
If you do the first, it takes so long to get your transports back for more men and you don’t get the island money soon enough. Yet if you leave them with just a control marker, ANZAC can sneak in and take them away from you while you are battling the US fleet further north.
So, I guess my question is: How does Japan successfully deal with the US fleet and Chinese, keep ANZAC and India at bay AND keep the money islands?
I always have a hard time doing all of that and something always seems to fall through. Either I lose ground in China, or my fleet gets trashed by the Americans and I get convoy raided to death, or I lose money because ANZAC has sneaked up and took the DEI. Even if they just take 1 island, say Java, that’s an overall loss of $9 right there ($4 for Java and $5 for the DEI NO). When they do that, often times I am so busy fending off the US fleet that I can’t seem to get enough to go back down and take it back (usually need a couple of warships plus a couple of transports with men and art/tanks).
Any suggestions?
-
Its mostly in the synergy of Pacific win is the fast route to winning. Delaying past J2 for DOW equates to Japan sacrificing the win in the Pacific allowing the US to focus entirely on Europe while needing minimal ships to deny Japan a VC win.
It really comes down to this: An aggressive Japan helps Germany by keeping the US resources in the Pacific. A slow moving Japan hinders Germany because the US can build up for a significant landing in Europe before Germany has dealt with the UK or Moscow.
Of course, if the US ignores the Pacific, Japan will walk away with the VC win there before the US can stop it, so it really puts the onus on the US player to be effective in looking round(s) ahead in the purchase phase. One battle goes the wrong way for the US in the Pacific and things go badly for the Allies there, negating the planned purchase of the economically strong US.
And lets be honest, a J1 DOW is much more entertaining for what generally ends up a very boring Pacific Theater in most other scenarios.
-
If you’re going with the Japanese blitz before India and the US can really mobilize then you’ll want to set up shop with a minor industrial complex on Kwangtung or more riskily French Indo-China. This allows you to start cranking out infantry to protect China without having to keep heading back to Japan. This moves your theatre of operation much closer to Southeast Asia where you can protect the DEI or prepare for a possible strike against Australia or India.
-
I have a question about an early Japan attack, j1 or j2. Forgive me if this has been asked earlier, I haven’t had time to read this entire thread yet.
Okay, I am assuming that one of Japan’s objectives would be to get all the rich stuff – DEI, Philippines, Hong Kong, Malaya – then go back north to deal with the US Navy at sea and China/India on land. I don’t mean actually TAKING India, just keeping them busy so they don’t advance too much or help China too much.
What is the best way to deal with the islands, particularly the 4 DEI islands since they also include a $5 NO for Japan? Do you leave the troops that you used to take those islands as a garrison and send empty transports back to Japan for more men? Or take those men with you for other duties, leaving the islands empty?
The really important objectives are the 4 money islands, Philliphines, Kwang, and Malaya… A secondary objective is preventing the 2nd Anzac NO. At the same time, a critical objective on J1-J3 is to crowd and destroy China. J1 offers the advantage of getting Kwang, Phi, and Bor in your column right away. On J2, obviously you can’t capture all of these targets, so you pick and choose according to circumstances. But you ought to take them all by J3, and be ready to retake them if the Allies counter.
-
knp7765 as Japan I would try to leave at least 1 inf garrison on the islands closest to the Aussie’s so they have to commit more then just a tpt and 1 inf (no easy pickings IMO). Force them to risk more then they want to. I Would defiantly build a minor in southern Asia to start pumping out ground units for China/India, also gives you a secondary spot for navy builds if needed. I would probably build my minor on former Chinese territory so if the allies do get it, it goes away and they can’t use it. Malaya or FIC is riskier for IC builds IMO (although I do build there too sometimes) because if the allies end up with it they can start pumping out their own units.
-
@WILD:
knp7765 as Japan I would try to leave at least 1 inf garrison on the islands closest to the Aussie’s so they have to commit more then just a tpt and 1 inf (no easy pickings IMO).
Quoted for effect.
If the Aussies have all their territories and only one NO they are banking 15 IPC/round. They have to spend it on 1 Inf, 1 Art, 1 TT in order to take an island with 1 Inf on it. The expense of leaving 3 IPC to force Anzac to spend an entire round of IPC is a good cost/benefit choice.
If not, they can spend 7 IPC on a TT and spend the other 8 on a DD and use one of their starting Inf to retake the island. Anzac see-sawing an island with you while accumulating 2-3 DD before they have to retake it causes mucho problems for Japan. Particularly because losing a DEI for Japan that has that NO costs them 8-9 IPC if Japan does not retake it.
-
Good point continuation Spendo02.
If Japan garrisons the islands, the Aussies have to spend/risk the bulk of their income to get just 4 IPCs for an island plus take away the Japan NO (that Japan will most likely regain on their turn). Japan can take it back on their very next turn (so their income doesn’t miss a beat), and they get to kill off the Anz transport and ground unit(s) rather easily because of carrier planes or bombardment (a luxury the Anz don’t have). The Japanese can generally bully the Anz early on, its when the US gets involved that the Japanese need to make some decisions. With a J1 attack (w/o a Pearl Harbor) the US could have a rather large starting navy sitting off the coast of Queensland (w/naval base) US2 or US3 depending on which way they go.
Another thing to think about is Japan taking Dutch New Guinea early on the Anz NO (think someone mentioned this earlier in the tread). This is a tough call because Japan generally can’t spare a transport, and it has no value. You will make the Anz think about what to do though. Get their own NO back that they may be able to keep for a while, or try to spoil the Japanese NO and collect a little income from the money islands along the way. In the long run this move might keep the Anz off the Japanese DEI NO for a bit because the Anz doesn’t exactly have an over abundance of transports.
-
Thanks for all the good points guys. I’ve often thought it was a better idea to go ahead and leave an inf or two on the DEI islands, but I keep using those guys for other attacks because Japan is so far away. Putting a Minor IC on FIC, Malaya or Kwangtung might be a good solution to that, as my transports wouldn’t have to go so far for new men.
WILD BILL, I almost always put a Minor IC on Kiangsu (Shanghai) for that very reason: I can pump out troops/tanks into China and if the Allies take that territory, it won’t be used against me. Sometimes I also put one on Manchuria if I’m going up into Russia or Northern China.
I have usually waited until J3 to declare war on the Western Allies. First, I can collect the FIC NO for a couple of rounds and Second, I can build up enough to usually take all the DEI in one turn, depending on UK and ANZAC blockers of course. I spend the first couple of rounds beating up on China, and perhaps Russia depending on what they do up there. Plus it keeps the US fleet off my back for a little while.
The problem with this I’ve found is the US has a couple of rounds to consolidate it’s fleet, plus some new builds, into a really big fleet that matches or exceeds Japan’s. ANZAC and Inda also get stronger plus THEY get all the money islands. So, instead of taking them from the Dutch relatively easy, I end up having to fight British or ANZAC garrisons not to mention they have collected extra money for a round or two, helping them build up even more.
So, I was thinking an earlier DOW by Japan might throw the Allies a bit off-guard and make it easier for Japan to achieve most of it’s objectives. Even though the US will be at war and collecting big money, their fleet is kind of scattered and will take time to gather up and give me problems. Plus, I may be able to give problems right back with a few extra ship builds of my own.
I guess if the US goes all Pacific, Japan will pretty much be doomed, but then that will probably mean Germany will win in Europe, so Japan will kind of win after all, right? -
I would agree with you about the trouble the allies can give to a patient Japan. I do believe the earlier that Japan goes to war the better it is for them. It is harder for the allies to regain what Japan has taken with fewer starting units in the theater (units killed by Japan). Allies face an uphill battle in the Pac, it’s what happens in Europe that I think is the key. What the Germans strat is (knowing what the Japanese may do), and how the US responds. As a whole I feel that aggressive Axis powers is the way to go. Try to keep your foot on the jugular.
-
I was wondering if anyone out there playing as Japan has gotten that five island NO for Japan – Midway, Wake, Guam, Gilberts and Solomons? And by getting that NO, I mean when it might actually make a difference to Japan’s income.
I have gotten it a few times, but that is usually not until Japan has all but won on the Pacific side. They will have taken Calcutta, China will be about wiped out, the Russians pushed back, Australia is being threatened and the US Navy hard pressed to stop more Japanese advances. Or if the US decided to go more for Europe, the Pacific fleet may be sunk by this time. So with Japan on top of the world in the Pacific and making 65-75 IPCs per round roughly at this time, what’s another $5 NO really mean to them? I don’t think I have ever accomplished that NO when Japan was still down around 35-45 IPCs per round.
If this is pretty much the experience of other Japan players, I have to ask this question:
What the heck is the meaning of this NO anyway?
It’s nearly impossible to get when Japan could really use an extra $5 per turn and equally as hard to keep for more than a round or two, unless the US and ANZAC are both just playing stupid. Getting it after Japan has crushed everything is meaningless. It’s like “Oh, another $5. Well, just throw it in the pile with the rest.” -
This NO does seem a little unnecessary and probably, as you state, underused. Who in the early turns is going after 5 worthless Islands when the money is in the South? Japan can make better use of its Transports after all.
-
Latest Japan NO (Alpha+3 or 2nd ed)
� 5 IPCs if Axis powers control all of the following territories: Guam, Midway, Wake Island, Gilbert Islands, and Solomon Islands. Theme: Strategic outer defense perimeter.We don’t get it either. The Japanese never go for this NO because it’s not in their best interest income wise (need to protect DEI & Asia). It is also very difficult to keep if they do go out of their way for it.
We liked the old Alpha+2 5/7 islands NO that both Japan & US got (created a lot of island hopping/fighting). I would probably only allow Japan to get it (not the US), because the US NO income was adjusted to France.
Alpha+2 NO
� Collect 5 IPCs per turn if Axis controls 5 of the 7 following islands. Midway, Wake, Marianas, Iwo Jima, Carolines, Solomon Islands and Guam. Theme: Strategic outer defense perimeter.4 of the 7 islands are the same as the new NO, it swaps out Gilbert, and makes Marianas, Iwo Jima and Caroline (islands Japan starts with) options too. It gives the Japanese options that aren’t as predictable which is good IMO.
A blend of the 2 NOs could have kept Gilbert in the mix and removed one of the islands Japan starts with like Iwo Jima (because it is closest to Japan, worth 1 IPC and both sides already have reasons to fight for it). We have done this a couple times and because Japan starts with a couple of them they will go for it. It forces some island hopping on both sides. The US will play ball although they don’t get a bonus to stop the Japanese from getting theirs. It allows Japan to go South Pacific, or Mid Pacific which keeps things somewhat unpredictable.
So basically just adding Marianas and Caroline Is to the 2nd ed Japan NO would result in more opportunity for Japan causing more fighting for Pac islands IMO.
Collect 5 IPCs per turn if Axis controls 5 of the 7 following islands. Guam, Midway, Wake, Gilbert, Solomon Is, Marianas, and Caroline Is. Theme: Strategic outer defense perimeter.
I think there was even a lot of feed back from the community that was scratching their heads when this NO was announced for Alpha+3. They missed the boat on this IMO.
-
I prefer this rule:
Surface Warship Detection
If an enemy moves surface warships through a SZ that contains an island and an opposing enemy has at least one (1) fighter or tactical bomber stationed on an island in that SZ:A die is cast for each enemy surface warship passing through the SZ by the owner of the fleet.
If no “1’s” are rolled, the fleet continues to move through the SZ unhindered.
If a “1” is rolled, combat/non-combat movement stops in that SZ.
Each Fighter/Tactical Bomber present rolls a die as a result of the detection. Die cast that result in 2 or less equates to a hit against the opposing surface warships (3 or less if an AB is present).
Surface ships do not return fire.In this way, it simulates scouting missions of aircraft around the island and hinders movement through the sea zone if detection occurs.
Although it does little to present an economic bonus, it really will hinder the movement of fleets from NB to NB and provide value to the US putting aircraft on Midway or Wake to keep Japan away from Hawaii or vice versa for Japan and SZ6. Alternatively, if Japan claims certain strategic islands, it presents the Allies with a decision to either invade those islands or chance losing ships trying to “skip” them to attack Japanese fleets.
-
I’m not sure of all the ramifications of this house rule, but its kind of neat that it would make Japan want to take Solomon Islands and put planes there to interfere with the shipping from Hawaii to Queensland. USA and ANZAC would want it back and fast, in early rounds before USA is up to full strength. So at that stage you could see a real battle for Guadalcanal, something which is conspicuously missing from the game. In the real war it was crucial that the Marines stopped the Japanese from establishing that airbase.
To make things a bit simpler, how about if you just allow up to 3 fighters/tacs at an airbase on an island or coastal territory to scramble against enemy ships passing through in their Noncombat Phase. If you scramble, the ships have to STOP and fight it out just like they would do in combat phase.
-
Vance,
I thought about using the AB as a singular decider, however as most islands in the Pacific do not start with one, the investment is significantly large in order to just harass opposing navies (1 AB, at least 1 Ftr is the equivalent of 3 DD).
Of course Midway, Wake, Guam all start with an AB so they would be prime targets. However, it still ignores so many places of importance in the Pacific and the remaining islands with AB have a NB so they are logical targets for extending influence already. We don’t want more fighting over the same islands as is.
I do believe that putting a cap on 3 aircraft scrambling would make sense, however you’d think historically if you detected a fleet and you flew in to pop shot a ship or two you’d beat feet quickly afterward and not stick around to let them get aircraft in the air or more guns firing on you. Hence, the singular round of combat. Most likely big fleets will have to tip a BB or sacrifice a DD or CR.
Shoot, I’d be happy with just stopping the fleet if detected and no combat occurs, but that does not make much sense as just locating a fleet won’t stop it from moving to its destination, but attacking it for a round possibly would.
As an addendum I’d pose allowing Kamikaze to be used in SZ’s where ships are detected.
Suggested Topics
