entirely different version.
Problems with playing Japan
-
S_U_D, I have to disagree with you about the necessity of destroying the Hawaiian fleet. A savvy American player will wreak havoc in the Pacific if he is allowed to unite and enhance his two original Pacific fleets (i.e. the West Coast BB/Tr and the Hawaiian AC/sub). This combined US fleet will be unassailable after the first turn, and will become an increasingly large thorn in the side of the Japanese for the remainder of the game. I reckon that the only way to give the Japs the unchecked economic growth they need to win is to eliminate a strong US presence in the Pacific. The only way to eliminate the US presence thoroughly is to kick the bollocks off the Hawaiians.
-
S_U_D, I have to disagree with you about the necessity of destroying the Hawaiian fleet. A savvy American player will wreak havoc in the Pacific if he is allowed to unite and enhance his two original Pacific fleets (i.e. the West Coast BB/Tr and the Hawaiian AC/sub). This combined US fleet will be unassailable after the first turn, and will become an increasingly large thorn in the side of the Japanese for the remainder of the game. I reckon that the only way to give the Japs the unchecked economic growth they need to win is to eliminate a strong US presence in the Pacific. The only way to eliminate the US presence thoroughly is to kick the bollocks off the Hawaiians.
I think soon you die is saying nt sending the whole of your force is necessary to remove the threat…
-
and if you like double hit BB then just send in the 2 BB and the sub and your fine…
-
re: Pearl lite. . .
S_U_D, assuming you don’t use the ‘2 hit’ BB rule, what kind of force do you send into Hawaii when you execute ‘Pearl lite’? Surely whatever units survive the initial assualt get knocked into oblivion by the US counter, no?
-
Yes I was wondering this too. Could you explain this please? Thanks :D :D .
-
I have found that it isnt worthwhile for japan to attack the US fleet in Hawaai on their first turn. instead, I have found that it is better to buy a IC and infantry for your transports & then put your whole fleet on japan with two aircraft on your carrier. Your fleet is larger than the US because you have 2 battleships, let the us come to you. besides, who cares if they take the solomons?
-
with regards to what SUD said, let me reiterate that a pearl lite may be a good idea in that it could well sucker the US into attacking your fleet. This would cost it heavily in losses of ftrs and bmbs, or the trn and BB if it is smart. After Pearl, Japan really does not need that AC, or those BB’s, and can afford to lose them and would not hurt as much as the allies without the US air power and add’l boats in the Atlantic.
I kind of like the idea of not Pearl-ing at all, but old habits die hard, i guess. -
@cystic:
with regards to what SUD said, let me reiterate that a pearl lite may be a good idea in that it could well sucker the US into attacking your fleet. This would cost it heavily in losses of ftrs and bmbs, or the trn and BB if it is smart. After Pearl, Japan really does not need that AC, or those BB’s, and can afford to lose them and would not hurt as much as the allies without the US air power and add’l boats in the Atlantic.
I kind of like the idea of not Pearl-ing at all, but old habits die hard, i guess.well put CC… The 2 BB’s are better used to knock out the US fleet then to sit still and do nothing… There only major use is to really do Land Bombard and what can you hit with that… India You might say but then you could sail in 2 turns down to India so on turn 3 do an attack (which usually happens anyway on turn 3 if the Japanese are lucky, if the Transport hasn’t brought 2 inf. from Aus.)… and if they get pounded by the BB, Tran., 2 Fighters, and a bomber awesome… the US will take on average 3 hits (if my math is right) and lose a tran. and 2 FIGHTERS which would have served in the European theatre better…
-
I’ve always gone Pearl heavy and used Pearl Harbor for an invasion of Western U.S.A. I’ve never tried this in a real game, but once I took Eastern U.S.A. by then using Western U.S.A. as a staging point for the assault. Do you think I’m crazy? Thoughts. Thanks again everyone :D :D .
-
Jeeez SUD… I think you put the rest of us to shame about analyzing the Pearl Hvy vs. Pearl lite debate :D
Pearl Heavy with Hawaii land assault is the biggest risk of all, in this sense. One less tranny available to consolidate against a possible US sub, 2 fewer Inf in Asia, 1 less Ftr in the Naval attack…reducing odds of getting 3 hits on first attack.
I just want to add I agree with this 100%.
-
Truly a first-rate reply, S_U_D! Excellent risk analysis and assault force breakdowns. Pearl lite is quite obviously a very viable gambit for J1.
-
my friend pulled of a, well, unorthodox japanese strategy that didn’t work out well but got me thinking.
he focused on the islands, australia, and NZ, then went for brazil.
he built in IC in F-IC, and bought time in asia, ended up taking india and holding out. he also sent a transport to africa later on to help the germans (there was a bit of a standoff going on).
that was one hell of a messed up game.
-
Pearl Lite…
The US should never ever declare an OOL in-advance at Pearl.
When Japan Pearl’s Heavy with all 3 Capital ships, the US should seriously consider taking 2 hits on the AC & Ftr first, if they have a chance to withdraw the sub. Thus, wait to see how many hits before deciding casualties.
That pesky US sub can attack undefended transports in the Sea of Japan (potential disaster for Japan depending on builds).
That sub can ‘force’ Japan to keep her trannies together, possibly
stopping her from going to Burma on J1.SUD
very good strat SUD….
-
I like to build an IC in Manchuria at least by the third round,after taking on Pearl Harbor,China and India.In the mean time,transport troops and planes to that area.If for some reason you lose transports,you will still be able to get troops,tanks to the mainland.
-
@wonder:
I like to build an IC in Manchuria at least by the third round, after taking on Pearl Harbor, China and India.
Although there is much debate as the value/necessity of any country buying IC’s … I am in favor of an IC with Japan in either the 2nd or 3rd round as well.
-
In a game last night I saw Japan attack Pearl with a fighter, 2 BB’s, and a sub (I think). They took heavy casualties, and ended up having to retreat their two BB’s! Has anyone ever seen this happen before? Thanks again for all of the help :D :D .
-
If I were playing the US and the Japanese didn’t build an IC in Asia, they would definately lose, paritcularly if they don’t take out my fleet in Hawaii. When I see they’re buying tranports instead of an IC, I sink all my money into my pacific navy and after a few turns, take the water around japan. Japan then has no way of getting troops into asia and it’s too expensive to buy fighters and bombers to use against boats. The US can keep them out of the game by outspending them. This takes japan out of the game and leaves Russia and UK to fight Germany which they can do easily without Japan.
-
In a game last night I saw Japan attack Pearl with a fighter, 2 BB’s, and a sub (I think). They took heavy casualties, and ended up having to retreat their two BB’s! Has anyone ever seen this happen before? Thanks again for all of the help.
I am not surprised that they got knocked around in that battle with only taking those few units in. See Mista Biggs e-mail from 8/29 - you have to bring in an overkill force to take them out here just in case you roll really badly. As far as the first turn, I always purchase 1 transport, 1 tank & 1 Industrial complex in Manchuria. Someone mentioned that you can’t build at this IC until the 3rd round, which is not true. I would suggest building 3 tanks in the 2nd round to give you some punch in knocking the Allies out of Asia. If the UK builds an IC in India, you should be able to take it in a round or two. If they don’t, that just makes it easier. If Germany is in trouble against Russia, you can always build another IC in India and enable Japan to build 6 tanks/round in Asia. I wouldn’t build a mass amount of transports until after Russia is eliminated and you want to take down the US. Besides, an IC is only $12 and you can build 3 units/round of any type if you place it in Manchuria. Transports are $8 each and can only transport either 2 infantry or 1 tank at a time and these units will arrive on the Asian mainland 1 round later than units built in an IC in Asia. I’ve never seen the Japanese do well at all without at lease 1 IC in Asia.
-
Besides, an IC is only $12
Is this a house rule of yours? ICs are $15.
-
My mistake - I’ve been playing a lot more A&AE lately where you can’t build new ICs. At $15 for an IC, buy 1 IC and 1 transport in the first round. It’s still worth it because you can get units to the Asian mainland faster.
Suggested Topics
