To Pearl or not to Pearl, that is the question . . .

[Guest]

@Jennifer:

BTW, if I see the Jap fleet leave the Pacific, I’m liable to send a few ships in there to collect islands.  Either you’ll waste valuable resources stopping me, turn your fleet back to stop me, or loose the islands.  In any event, the US usually has the cash on hand to blow.

I usually will not pull my Japan fleet out of the Pacific until J3 or so in most cases.  By this time, the US has made a comitment already to either send their fleet to the UK, or to come out after Japan.

In the early rounds (J1 and J2) those BB’s help out with amphibs taking Russian territories (or taking back Manchuria and/or Kwangtung).  Once the coast is secure, I split the fleet, send part of it south to take Australia and NZ, then either moving to South America, Central America, or the Central Pacific.  The other half heads for the Indian Ocean to raid in the Middle East and Africa.

If, after the US moves out of the Pacific, they build new naval forces, the Australia fleet moves back to Japan, as do the capital ships from the Indian Ocean.  US builds the fleet on a given round, Japan sees it and on next round starts moving their fleet back.  Next round US moves toward Japan, and then Japan finishes moving back (or stikes the US ships enroute, supported by land based bomber(s) and possibly even land based fighters.

If the US does not initially go into the Pacific heavy, they surrender it to Japan until such time as Germany falls and all 3 allies turn on Japan.  This of course assumes the Allies do take out Germany before the Axis gets Russia.  If Russia falls before Germany, then the Pacific is OWNED by Japan, and the US will be in a war of attrition that they cannot win.

[Jennifer]

Yes, but in this case you havn’t pulled your fleet out of the Pacific, NCSCS.  All you’ve done is put one half in Australia/New Zealand and the other half in India/Suez Canal areas.  While these are foward positions (as in not around more traditional ports of call such as Japan, Hawaii, Midway, Alaska, SFE, etc) they are also not the English Channel or West Indies, if you catch my meaning.

Basically, if I see Japan with it’s entire fleet around South Africa or Southern Europe (depending on if the Suez is open or closed to the Axis) then I, as America, might make the judgement call to build a transport or two and put an escort around them to collect a few islands just to annoy the Japanese player into bringing that fleet back.

Then again, I might decide to attack their fleet with the Amero-British fleet and possess complete ownership over a majority of the Earth’s surface.

[Bashir]

Haven’t played for a while, but here are my 2 cents…

The first question to ask yourself. Why wouldn’t you want to attack Pearl? I can’t answer that one, because you can archieve every other goal on J1 without your forces you spend on Pearl, actually you only have 1 goal. Taking Chi with as much force as possible.

But IMO Pearl should always be attacked! Sole on the basic fact that the USA loses more IPC’s in the attack than you do. Please correct me if I am wrong, but USA losses 18 (car) + 12 (fig) + sub (8 )= 38 IPC’s. Most of the time I try to take Pearl with minimum force. Most of the time I rather sacrifice my BB insted of a fig so I would lose 24 + 8 (sub) = 32 IPC’s. Losing the BB woyuld not really hurt Japan and you have a minimal profit of 6 IPC’s. With this move you force the UK to buy a fleet creating some time for the Germans to organize their defense and strenghten their possition in Africa.
So IMO the Pearl attack is mandatory…

Falk does have a point, that UK doesn’t need to necessarily buy its navy on UK1.  But I think (and maybe I’m wrong here) this will slow down the Allied reinforcement into Russia too much, this play being an advantage to the Axis.

If I play the UK (hate playing UK tho) I buy either a fighter (to help Russia defend), a Bomber or an IC on India to slow down the Japs. Say I would buy the fighter I would have 48 IPC to spend on my fleet in Uk2 => 1 Car + 3 trans. USA will land 2 fighters on the Carrier and your fleet is save from the Germans. I can already send an extra fig to Kar or Moskou if needed in UK2 while I could not if I bought my fleet on UK1.
I don’t see why I should buy my fleet on UK1 because it won’t do much. You can buy a Car and a tran and they will be waiting for the USA trannies (which probaply will be build in US1) for a full turn. IMO buying your fleet on UK1 is a waste of rescources.

Just my 2cents.

[Bashir]

@MagicBoot:

If India gets an IC, I’ll forgo pearl and move on India, possible building a mainland IC myself. Once I take India, or get a second IC running, I could care less if the US has a navy, mines already headed to Afrika. If i’m planning on maintaining a trn fleet, I’ll hit Pearl, then send the fleet home to pick of any Ruskies that wander to close to the water. By turn 2 or 3 when Japan has pushed back the asian defenses, I’ll leave the trns to fend for themselves, and send a modest fleet of the Afrika to cause havok.

By the way building an IC on J1 is prolly one of the worst strategic mistake you can make if the UK build an IC on UK1. Even if the UK didn’t build an IC building an IC on J1 is still an tactical mistake.

By the time that the units produced by a first turn factory are ready (only 3 tanks, which is usually the Japanese purchase), they have virtually little capability to do much else but defend themselves from an onslaught of suicidal British tanks from an ever increasingly potent Indian factory which was built first, and whose pieces have the capability to attack first.  With a factory on the board, the Japanese are left in a position to defend it, too early in the game. By turn one, British India may have a factory in place, producing units in front of you, attacking you before you get your turn. Now, you have to deal with scarce availability of resources to defend against it. Then, you are subsequently forced into a defensive situation with scarce resources and little mainland offensive capability, when you should have been on the offensive, sweeping towards Russia and easily crushing any possible British-built Indian factory by the 6th or 7th turn.

A factory on the mainland, no matter where you put it, starts the major part of the Japanese offensive by Turn 3, which is far too late and too weak and too slow for any realistic purposes. Instead of this, Japan should be potentially threatening Evenki and Novosibirsk and West China with a “push” force by now, cashing out higher and higher every turn, forcing the Russians to respond to this front earlier in the game (taking pressure off the Germans).

[Guest]

Bashir,

The reasons to NOT pearl are…

1.  For BB support shot on invasion of SFE.  Or, if Russia invaded Manchuria, to BB and amphib Manchuria.

2.  To invade Australia, and then New Zealand.

3.  To move your Capital Ships to the Indian Ocean to support amphib landings in India, Persia, Syria, Africa…

I ahve asked this before, I’ll ask it again…

So WHAT if the US pools their Pacific fleet and comes after Japan.  They will probably LOSE when they attack the consolidated Japan fleet.  And if they do not, they will lose to the land AF of Japan.  Either way, the US is without a Pacific Fleet, and they took themselves out fighting a Japan fleet that was 33% stronger on defense than on offense.

LET the US attack me.  After those ships are dead, I can builds trannies unhindered to blast Russia’s backside…

[221B Baker Street]

Switch,

The danger lies in the threat to the Japanese transports.  IF Japan sends the AC to Australia (and whatever with the BB’s) and the US consolidates its fleet off Alaska on US1 then:

1. Japan cannot attack this combined fleet with their own combined fleet since the AC is too far away.  Therefore it is likely that at least some of this fleet, and probably most will survive until US 2.

2. on US 2, this fleet can then move to the Jap sea zone and kill any transports that are there.  Or if the transports are moved, this can simply park there in an attempt to prevent Japan from moving any troops to the mainland.  Of course the Japanese AC and landbased fighters will then arrive (too late, J3 at the earliest for the AC), but Japan is likely to lose its capital ships, a few landbased fighters, and perhaps a turn of sending troops to Asia.

3. on R3, UK3, … the Allies can send many fighters and bombers to parts of Asia to further harass the Japanese transports which might well (if the US is lucky) still be threatened by the US fleet (i.e. the US sub which can retreat) on US3.

This can be a real pain for Japan (especially coupled with an aggressive KJF strategy to take away Japanese possessions in Asia) and does have the potential to slow Japan down considerably.

[Guest]

But a KJF straegy would be evident from R1 and especially UK1 moves, so Japan would know it was coming.

In which case, you ice the allied ships, Take out China HARD, and do max damage to India (in that order of priorities), then consolidate your remaining ships back to Japan ASAP, and start the ferry service to Manchuria…

My theory assumes no evident KJF based on R1/UK 1 moves.

And even with the AC gone, the BB provides good defense rolls against the 2 figs, 1 AC, 1 sub that can reach Japan on US1  (assuming China is taken out and Manchuria re-taken if sezied by Russia)

[limitedwhole]

Always go to pearl.  Are you really going to let them keep an aircraft carrier which is so vulnerable (the best unit in the game)?  Moving to pearl not only rapes their navy, it forces them to build heavily in the Pacific now or risk losing the remainder of their navy and having the western U.S. permanently blackaded by the Japanese navy so that they can no longer build units on the west coast.  Always go to pearl.  The U.S. HAS to by an A.C. plus two subs or lose the game.  You completely determine their first move and prevent them form purchasing transports or a navy in the east to assist in Africa giving Germany the time it needs to get more trrops into Africa.  Take the Submarine from Solomon, the A.C. from Caralina along with the plane on it, send a plane from Phillipines, and the Battleship from the Caroline Islands.  The U.S. has to build a fleet or be up a creek.  When they do retreat out of range.  It’s like taking two turns, your and the U.S. turn.

[Bashir]

@ncscswitch:

Bashir,

The reasons to NOT pearl are…

1. For BB support shot on invasion of SFE. Or, if Russia invaded Manchuria, to BB and amphib Manchuria.

2. To invade Australia, and then New Zealand.

3. To move your Capital Ships to the Indian Ocean to support amphib landings in India, Persia, Syria, Africa…

I ahve asked this before, I’ll ask it again…

So WHAT if the US pools their Pacific fleet and comes after Japan. They will probably LOSE when they attack the consolidated Japan fleet. And if they do not, they will lose to the land AF of Japan. Either way, the US is without a Pacific Fleet, and they took themselves out fighting a Japan fleet that was 33% stronger on defense than on offense.

LET the US attack me. After those ships are dead, I can builds trannies unhindered to blast Russia’s backside…

Ok NCS, first of all I would like to point out that I was referring to a RR-game.

1. SFE should be defended by only 1 inf. That is if the Russians played well and are stacking their inf at Yakult. So taking SFE would not be a problem. It would be a waste of your BB to use it for that 1 inf that is left there.

2)Invading Australia and New Zealand is out of the question. It is a waste of rescources(BB, AC transport and 2 inf and possibly a fig), because you will only win 3 ipc’s with it. While a single Russian hearland is also worth 3 IPC’s. You can go after Australia or NZ after turn 3-4 because you are moving into the Russian heartlands and you don’t need your fleet for that anymore. Another point is that if you go after Aus and NZ your fleet will be hopelessly out of position. It takes 2 turns before your fleet is back at the borders of Asia.

3. You will get those territorias anyway… Africa should be hold by the Germans for at least 2-3 turns so they don’t need you there yet.  Syria and Persia are only worth 1 IPC and again it would be a waste of rescources to go after that. India is a different point, but if the UK builds a IC there you can’t take it on the first rounds anyway.

So all your options look inferior to the attack on Pearl IMO. The JFK strat is also inferior to the atlantic strat. So the Pearl Harbor attack is mandatory!

@limitedwhole:

Always go to pearl. Are you really going to let them keep an aircraft carrier which is so vulnerable (the best unit in the game)? Moving to pearl not only rapes their navy, it forces them to build heavily in the Pacific now or risk losing the remainder of their navy and having the western U.S. permanently blackaded by the Japanese navy so that they can no longer build units on the west coast. Always go to pearl. The U.S. HAS to by an A.C. plus two subs or lose the game. You completely determine their first move and prevent them form purchasing transports or a navy in the east to assist in Africa giving Germany the time it needs to get more trrops into Africa. Take the Submarine from Solomon, the A.C. from Caralina along with the plane on it, send a plane from Phillipines, and the Battleship from the Caroline Islands. The U.S. has to build a fleet or be up a creek. When they do retreat out of range. It’s like taking two turns, your and the U.S. turn.

I would not say that you the US has to buy an AC and 2 subs… Why? The Jap fleet is not directly threatning the US. So just build some trannies at the atlantic coast and you are good. If the Japanese want to go after the US they will just throw the game away, because everything they throw at the US means they cannot throw at the Russians… Rusland is the main target for the Axis not the UK or the US period. So anything wasted on those two will weaken the Russian front.

[limitedwhole]

“I would not say that you the US has to buy an AC and 2 subs… Why? The Jap fleet is not directly threatning the US. So just build some trannies at the atlantic coast and you are good. If the Japanese want to go after the US they will just throw the game away, because everything they throw at the US means they cannot throw at the Russians… Rusland is the main target for the Axis not the UK or the US period. So anything wasted on those two will weaken the Russian front.”

If the U.S. don’t engage the Japanese in teh Pacific they will doiminate Russia.  If the U.S. doesn’t restore it’s fleet the Japanese will move an A.C. plus to the west coast and the U.S. can no longer place ships.  Auto loss.  Seriously, if you don’t engage the Japanese in teh Pacific they don’t have to build but like 2-3 trannies over 2-3 turns and just ferry their way to a 20 point IP swing.  This result in an auto loss for the Allies.  How is this coming out of left field here.  If the Japanese put 6-10 infantry per turn into the mainland they will have like a ridiculous income.  If you don’t force the Japanese to buy ships, the Allies autolose.  What is a carrier, a sub, and a battleship going to do against the Russian mainland?  My point is this.  If the U.S. doesn’t force the Japanese to build more ships than they start with (barring a few transports) theyu will throw everything they have at the mainland and the Russia and will win.

[Bashir]

@limitedwhole:

My point is this. If the U.S. doesn’t force the Japanese to build more ships than they start with (barring a few transports) theyu will throw everything they have at the mainland and the Russia and will win.

The Japanese player can pretty much throw everything at Russia anyway… If you buy ships with the US against the Japanese you are wasting money and time. While the main objective is Germany for the US. You can directly drop inf in WE or Norway(to support Rus)  or when optimal played in Karelia (moving from east-Can to Karelia) While the Japanese island is at least 2 turns away… Even if the Japanese player is dumb enough to go after the US you will gain time for Russia… And because Japan is 2 turns away from the US you will see them comming and you can buy significant inf to defend WUS. But most of the time the Japanese player can’t even come in US waters because the US has 2 figs, 1 bomb, 1 bb and 1 tran. They can take out most of the Japanese fleet with that… The US has also a larger income base than the Japanese to replace losses… So buying ships in the pacific is just a waste of money and time for the US.

[limitedwhole]

“The Japanese player can pretty much throw everything at Russia anyway… If you buy ships with the US against the Japanese you are wasting money and time. While the main objective is Germany for the US. You can directly drop inf in WE or Norway(to support Rus)  or when optimal played in Karelia (moving from east-Can to Karelia) While the Japanese island is at least 2 turns away… Even if the Japanese player is dumb enough to go after the US you will gain time for Russia… And because Japan is 2 turns away from the US you will see them comming and you can buy significant inf to defend WUS. But most of the time the Japanese player can’t even come in US waters because the US has 2 figs, 1 bomb, 1 bb and 1 tran. They can take out most of the Japanese fleet with that… The US has also a larger income base than the Japanese to replace losses… So buying ships in the pacific is just a waste of money and time for the US.”

I’m sorry, I don’t see how the Axis don’t win every game you play.  Russia stands no chance against Japan unless Japan is forced to buy ships.  That simple.  Japan can send 4 infantry on the first turn, 6 infantry on the second turn, 6 infantry and one tank on the third turn.  Dropping INF into Norway.  Is this a joke?  Did I say that the Japanese should invade the U.S. No.  The U.S. has a larger income base for  the first three turns.  After tha no.  Also the U.S. is not very well placed to help in the Asian war against Russia is it?  IF the U.S. doesn’t restore it’s fleet after pearl, Japan sinks its remaining ships.  If the U.S. trades it’s airforce for Japans fleet off it’s coats great.  Now they have to replace their air force.  The game isn’t just about I.P.'s its about tempo.

[Bashir]

The US player helps the Russian player from the other side… Yes dropping in Norway is not a joke, because the inf will be in Karelia next turn and after that they will be pretty soon in Russia itself and in Novobrisk… In turn 3 I will be dropping 8 inf a turn to help the Russian player to defend either Karelia or move them to Russia.

The US has more money to replace their airforce than the Japs have to replace their Ships. (You need your ships even after J3-4 to conquer Australia and NZ or to go to Africa… Sure you need tempo as an Axis player, but not oo much, because you will overstretch your supply lines (infantry wise) and you will wear your forces down…

[limitedwhole]

“The US player helps the Russian player from the other side… Yes dropping in Norway is not a joke, because the inf will be in Karelia next turn and after that they will be pretty soon in Russia itself and in Novobrisk… In turn 3 I will be dropping 8 inf a turn to help the Russian player to defend either Karelia or move them to Russia.”

This is hilarious.  Africa?  I’m guessing you have an A.C. to guard those transports and fighters that you restored after throwing them on a suicide mission against the Japanese fleet too?

“The US has more money to replace their airforce than the Japs have to replace their Ships. (You need your ships even after J3-4 to conquer Australia and NZ or to go to Africa… Sure you need tempo as an Axis player, but not oo much, because you will overstretch your supply lines (infantry wise) and you will wear your forces down…”

Umm… the Japaness in Africa…?  Why would they do that?  You obvisouly aren’t shipping troops to Africa which means the Germans can dominate it all by themselves.  Who gives a rat’s arse about Russia when you can just pick up 10-11 I.P. unhindered in Africa.  It takes how many turns for the Japaness to get to Africa?

Australia is out of the way and worth 2 I.P.  Asia is worth a whole bunch and right on your doorstep.

[Bashir]

I will stop arguing with you now, because you just don’t want to see the point that is so clear…

My last explanation to you…
First of all the UK buys the AC to protect the trannies. I won’t sack my US airforce to the Japanese Navy unless they start sending trannies to try to take WUS.

After turn 3 you have most of Asia already so you just let your fleet sit at Japan and don’t do anything with it?
After turn 3 Germany start to lose Africa back to the Allies and you might want to help them…

Germany cares about Russia, because Russia is pretty much the bottleneck in the game… The game evolves around Russia… Can the Axis conquer Moskow before the Allies enter Berlin… So yes they do care about Russia, because the Russian pressure the Germans as well at EEU…

[limitedwhole]

I will stop arguing with you because you have obviously never played an Axis player who has any sense.  You spend 16 extra I.P. to ship 2 extra inf on turn 3 and then pigeonhole your strategy by requiring a full investment of 30 IP on inf ot make use of those transports.  Germany obviously isn’t losing Africa to the allies if your shipping 8 INF to Norway.  How could they be?

[Bashir]

I spend 8 ipc’s extra… (2 trannies and 3 inf to your 1 tran and 5 inf…) Uk can send troops to Africa as wel, or you just send 6 inf to Norway and 2 to Africa, whatever you want, but you can’t see that, because you are rather shrotsighted…

[limitedwhole]

@Bashir:

I spend 8 ipc’s extra… (2 trannies and 3 inf to your 1 tran and 5 inf…) Uk can send troops to Africa as wel, or you just send 6 inf to Norway and 2 to Africa, whatever you want, but you can’t see that, because you are rather shrotsighted…

UK has no navy by turn 2.  If it wants to build a new one, it has to save up and the U.S. has to send fighter support.  We’re now talking turn 3-4 and they don’t get to build any bombers.  Germany bridges troops every turn from southern Europe into Africa.  Good luck keeping up with that while shiping 6 INF to Norway.  The U.S. can only ship troops every other turn to Africa or offset half forces.  Germany “bridges” every turn.  If I was dumb and just threw everything I had at Russia despite you dropping stupid amounts of INF in Norway, yeah you would would beat me.  But I’m guessing I would just take all of Africa while Japan took all of Asia and rush towards an easy I.P. victory.  The way you look at it, Germany throws everything at Russia.  The way I look at it, Germany makes reasonable incursions into Africa and Russia forcing the Allies to divide their forces while Germany has relative flexibility do to maximal placement.

1. You don’t reinforce Africa with everything you have because, you are reinfocing Norway=>Germany will take Africa.
2. You don’t force the Japanese to buy ships by ignoring the Pacific war=>Japan will take Asia.
   =>I.P. victory

Germany doesn’t need Russia.  The game doesn’t hinge on Russia.  The game hinges on I.P. swing whether that be in Africa, Asia, Russia, whatever.

Japan gets +10 of Russia prod and Germany can hold border with Russia, possibly exchanging Ukraine back and forth.
That leaves Russia with 14 I.P.

Germany gets +9 of Britains prod with French West going back and forth with U.S.
That leaves Britian with 21 I.P. without any bombing runs in them.

Japan gets +4 of U.S. prod with no flip flop
That leaves U.S. with 32

They need 4 more to win.  Not that tough.  Great you turned Russia into a fortress.  Woopde doo. If you turn Russia into a fortress you just wasted a bunch of units, because I just will ignore yor fortress and soak up I.P. you failed to protect.
Allies 67 I.P
Axis 80 I.P., better position, better flexibility.

[aaFiendish]

Limitedwhole:

Please, please, please go read the rest of the forums on this site. Do not insult our intelligence by assuming you hold the answers that no one else here does. While we’d all love to debate you on points that we have gone over three thousand times, I think it makes more sense for you to immerse yourself in previous threads where people have the same opinion that you do.

[aaFiendish]

@Bashir:

So all your options look inferior to the attack on Pearl IMO. The JFK strat is also inferior to the atlantic strat. So the Pearl Harbor attack is mandatory!

I would not say that you the US has to buy an AC and 2 subs… Why? The Jap fleet is not directly threatning the US. So just build some trannies at the atlantic coast and you are good. If the Japanese want to go after the US they will just throw the game away, because everything they throw at the US means they cannot throw at the Russians… Rusland is the main target for the Axis not the UK or the US period. So anything wasted on those two will weaken the Russian front.

You are contradicting yourself Bashir. The pearl harbor attack is an attack against the US, which you say is mandatory. In the next paragraph you state that wasting resources on the US will weaken the russian front. So which is it?  :evil: