I usually find that even if I dont kill the navy in the pacific and it does go to the atlantic it cant do anything big until round 4 and if the german navy isn’t killed by then, russia is in deep doo doo.
The Allies are GOING to have a transport fleet in the Atlantic, PERIOD. It WILL happen.
The Allies WILL kill the German navy, and they will have a tranny fleet that is defended well enough that Germany will not risk her AF to try to kill it.
And this is PROBABLY going to happen by Turn 4. And if it not set up by then Russia is in DEEP DOO.
So, the Pacific Fleet showing up in the Atlantic simply seals what was already a “done deal” of Allied tranny fleets.
But… but NOT doing Pearl (and the US pulling out of the Pacific), Japan gets to raid like mad. By the time the PACFLT gets to UK, Japan holds all of Eastern Africa, and the Middle East. BB support shots, trannies (most of which have to be built starting in J1), AC loaded with FIGs… and you have a coastal offesnive forces that it takes a half dozen units to block. And the Alllies simply will NOT have that kind of force in Africa (and probably not in the Middle East).
So just on those areas of Africa and the Middle East on the Indian Ocean, Japan picks up 12 IPC’s.
And of course, 1 or 2 units can be slipped around the Cape of Good Hope to grab Brazil if you are of a mind to… or to raid the west coast of Africa…
Well, that’s really hard to say…
First of all: I suppose most people are thinking of a KRF for the axis, so:
as J you can do 2 things:
attack Pearl… In this case your fleet and especially your fighters will be needed to destroy the fleet overthere. This means your AF will not be helping your land troops in eastern Asia. But… the USA will need some turns to recover from this battle.
the USA can handle in 2 ways:
a) they reinforce their Pacific, so J will meet a USA fleet in a few turns. If J focuses on KRF, you can say Pearl was a good thing to do, 'cause you gave J a few turns extra to defeat important territories in Asia without interference of USA in those turns. But the question is: Didn’t you need your fighters to get those essential IPC’s in Asia in J1 and J2?
b) they retreat the remaining fleet and go to the Altantic to have a KGF. Again you can say Pearl was a good thing to do, 'cause you gave USA less defending force against G. But here, too, you can say that those fighters attacking Pearl were essential for an Asian invasion in J1 and J2…
leave Pearl and focus on Asia… you can probably take and hold those captured territories in Asia more easily, but USA has a big fleet in the Pacific.
the USA can handle in 3 ways:
a) they reinforce their Pacific, so J will meet a USA fleet in one or 2 turns. That gives J not much time to anticipate and so they would have to leave their Asian conquest in order to focus their IPC’s on naval builds. But if they build navy units, then the Asian front of J will crumble to ashes…
B) they join all Pacific ships and start island hopping… so, J’s fleet isn’t strong enough to attack the combined USA fleet and J loses essential IPC’s. J will probably have to postpone KRF if J wants to deal with USA and would have to make naval purchases…
c) they move their entire fleet to the Atlantic to have a KGF. You can focus on KRF entirely and you have to be faster then a KGF. Good luck :-)
Conclusion?
If you think you can capture AND hold important (IPC)-territories in Asia WITHOUT any help of your fighters in J1 and J2 (J3 is the fastest round they can be back to help J for a KRF…): then I suggest you go for Pearl massively!
If you think Asia will be blocked and counterattacked sincerely if you don’t use your fighters to help diminish those enemy forces, then leave Pearl be and hope they will do nothing with that fleet in the Pacific…
Anyhow, USA can build a Pacific fleet in a matter of rounds. If he does that, then your Asian front will perish eventually (whether you did a Pearl attack or not). If USA moves to the Atlantic J has no troubles at all, but G has even more…
I think a Pearl attack is better to get rid of possible USA dominance in the Pacific and to focus more on KRF in the following rounds. But I repeat: No matter if J attacks Pearl or not: success or failure of an Asian campaign (and a KRF for J) depends on what USA does with his Pacific fleet…
Axel… Pearl can be done without a single FIG if you want to (1 SUB, 1 DST, 1 AC, 1 BOM) with a reasonable chance of success. Add in the Caroline FIG (that can;t reach any land area for attack in J1) and it is pretty much a given against just 3 US units.
Also, the US does not need to “recover” squat after losing Pearl UNLESS they are going KJF. They just lose the navy, build their TRN’s in the Atlantic, sail the Panama DST to the Atlantic, along with ther SZ10 DST, and then link up with UK ships in or near SZ7 and away they go…
Not doing Pearl, Japan settles to SZ61 in J1 and builds their trannies there. If the US comes after Japan with just the Pearl fleet in US1, there is nothign for them to hit in SZ60, and there is no tranny for them to even try to land in Japan. In J2, you smash the fleet in SZ60. If they wait and combine fleets at Pearl in US1, then you build a couple of subs, plus more trannies in J2, place them in SZ60, move your BB and TRN’s from 61 to 60, and very likely move an AC and/or BB from FIC to SZ60. Go ahead US, attack THAT fleet.
I have played a game where the US had MASSIVELY built up in the Pacific. Multiple AC’s, all loaded, multiple BB’s plus a lot of subs and trannies, DST’s, the works. He even had an entire EXTRA wing of FIGs for each AC so that he could “fighter exchange” and double the number of FIGs in a naval battle.
I WON that game, with a Japan fleet still in the water.
So what do you do in J2, if you in J1 didn’t attack Pearl and the US player combines his Pac fleet in the Solomon seazone. The allies would have 1 trn (with 2 inf from hawaii) 1-2 subs, depends on if uk sub survied or not, 1 AC with 2 figters and a BB.
Next turn he could attack any jap high ipc-island.
I personally believe Pearl is must J1, see my game with Octo what havoc the USA can cause for Japan without spending a dime in the Pacific (take East Indies Turn 2, later link in Med with USA Atlantic fleet). But if you opt not to attack J1, than at least position your forces so both BB’s and most air units can wipe the Americans if they move to a high-IPC island (the extra BB absorbing a hit, a bomber, and extra planes can make the USA lose a lot of expensive boats just to take one 4 IPC territory).
I sorta agree with Bebo. If you don’t nail the American navy in Pearl Harbor at the start, it will cause a bit of havoc at relatively low cost. Bebo said it doesn’t cost a dime, but it does cost you a fighter and transport you would otherwise be using against Germany. If you let the Americans island hop, it reduces your ability to push against Russia, but if you don’t let it island hop, aka attack it, then you need to be a little careful.
You can destroy the mini-fleet easily, but if you use any transports as fodder, you are making an error since you absolutely need those transports to push against Russia every turn. If you don’t use any transports, you’re going to have to bring an adequate airforce out to make sure you don’t lose too many expensive boats. You do have 2 bbs, 2 cars, 1 dest, and 1 sub, but you need to bring out at least a couple fighters to seal the deal and preserve your navy for the future. Bringing the airforce out in that direction is awkard for land assaults on the following turn.
The only advantage I see of leaving that fleet alone is maybe you’ll split the Allies up. You might get the US going after Japan with the UK and Russia dealing with Germany. I might if given that fleet on US1 just pull it back to the West Coast and leave it there with the BB and TRN as garrison. I certainly wouldn’t start pumping a lot of IPCs into a Pacific fleet. And I’m certainly going to move it somewhere Japan can’t shoot it before I can reinforce it.
To me you are asking for trouble any time you don’t take out a “weak” fleet when given the oppurtunity.
The one thing I didn’t see mentioned here was the possibility of destroying 6 Russian Infantry and getting a head start in the north by crushing Buryatia. If Russia stacks in there, which is a common move, it’s worth consideration.
Considering the Axis’ need to kill Russia, it’s a blow to the Motherland. Typically it forces the Russian player to divert a few forces it otherwise wouldn’t have to to slow down Japan across the top. Usually those 6 Inf back off and team with others in Novo to form a defensive barrier, or they get wacky and attack Manchuria and slow down Japan. The Buryatia attack, when coupled with a 3 Transport build, gives Japan quick access to Asia as well as a large defensive fleet.
Again, this is contingent on what you’ve seen from Britain- an obvious KJF should be countered with a Pearl strike. A super-aggressive Britain (Borneo & New Guinea strike, Ftr landed on Pearl Carrier) might dictate the use of most Jap Fighters, which would make Buryatia an afterthought.
If Japan has lost the Kwang TRN (and they almost always do) then a Bury attack on J1 against 6 INF is a BAD move. It will cost you a large chunk of airforce, weaken your China attack, and preclude an India attack.
If Japan has lost the Kwang TRN (and they almost always do) then a Bury attack on J1 against 6 INF is a BAD move. It will cost you a large chunk of airforce, weaken your China attack, and preclude an India attack.
Hmm. I found a counter I can live with. Bury is attacked with 2 inf manchuria, 1 inf 1 tank via trans + bb shot, and 4 fighters + 1 bomber (all fighters except indies). China is attacked by 3 inf kwang, 2 inf french indochina, and 2 fighters from east indies.
The bury battle is 80% to capture with all airforce intact and at least 1 tank remaining, while the China battle is above 90% to capture with all airforce and at least 1 inf.
Of course, there are some other factors to attend to. Hopefully the kwang flee that the UK owns is weak so your bb + car from indies can take it out, and you will be skipping Pearl Harbor so the rest of the fleet has to defend in SZ60. And hopefully the Allies haven’t sent other units eastwards into sinkiang/yakut to counter you again. But if all they’re doing is stack buryatia and retreating from India, then this is a counter I can live with. The Russian defense is all but broken with their 6 stack gone, so you’re free next turn to blitz SFE and Yakut. You could quite possibly have enough infantry left in China to attack Sinkiang if it hasn’t been stacked more than 2-3 inf as well.
If the Americans decide to go island hopping with their initial forces and don’t build any additional navy in the Pacific, then you shouldn’t be that worried. You can strike it with 2 bb 2 car 1 dest 1 sub + 2-4 fighters after they take East Indies.
It’s also true that you won’t be in India until J3 even if the UK abandoned it on UK1, since all your infantry is going to china and buryatia and you have to reposition in indochina on J2, but the counter is workable and smokes the Russian defense before it’s backed up with other units.
Tri…
You may be able to TAKE China with 1 INF in that strat… but having 1 INF in China, FIC empty, and 1 ARM in Bury is NOT a good way to start as Japan. You’ll lose FIC, China and Bury all in T2 unless the Allies are just ignoring Japan (and you are the only perosn I know who totally ignores Japan… at least you USEd to until I taught you that it was not a good idea… AFTER you taught me how to play :-)
Switch, I understand that Japan will be lean infantrywise on the mainland pre J2, but c’mon, when are you going to get another chance to bash open the door to Siberia. The remaining units that the allies can muster there are just picket forces and they will all be retreating once you start landing and producing 9-11 units a turn. Plus, they aren’t likely to be reinforced until Japan is threatening Russia’s 2 dollar territories even if Russia is making a few spare IPC’s because Germany is farting around in Africa and not in Europe, like me :-D.
I’m not even going to go into the merits of the U.S. building a fleet in an attempt to delay you further because, as far as I’m concerned the U.S. can build all the fleet it wants with my blessing.
That ONE landing is all you get for a few rounds though…
Your ships in SZ60 are in deep kimchee, with the TRNs the first casualties of course, in an American attack on SZ60.
That means NO troops to Asia on J2.
That means that UK can no move from their new FIC territory into Kwang (Japan now -3 net).
USA can counter in China with 2 INF and a BOM (if they staged for it in USA1)
Russia can even counter in Bury with 4 INF, a FIG, and maybe even some ARM.
Regardless, it makes it J3 before Japan is landing in Asia again, and at that point they need 1-2 rounds JUST to re-capture their starting territories. Another for China.
Japan with original Asia territories plus only China and Bury on J4 or J5? Sounds like a VERY happy day for the Allies!
Your ships in SZ60 are in deep kimchee, with the TRNs the first casualties of course, in an American attack on SZ60.
Really? The Americans can attack with 2 fighters, 1 sub, and 1 carrier, versus 4 trans, 1 bb, 1 car, 2 fighters, 1 sub, and 1 dest. Are you sure the trans are going down as first casualties? The Americans on average die instantly on the first round while inflicting 1-2 hits, you think I will lose transports to that?
Russia can even counter in Bury with 4 INF, a FIG, and maybe even some ARM.
Really? Who sends 4 infantry to yakut with arm on R1? If you do that then Sinkiang isn’t going to be countered.
You’ll lose FIC, China and Bury all in T2 unless the Allies are just ignoring Japan
Really? I don’t know many people who defend India. If you leave 3 inf there then the strategy changes, but if you leave 1 inf there then I’ll take it, or if 0 inf, then there is no threat to Indochina. If Bury is countered, that is the end of the Russian defense, period. J2 is a hard crash into Bury with a free stretch of land to Moscow, and Russia has little to spare after already making that big of a stand.
You may be able to TAKE China with 1 INF in that strat… but having 1 INF in China, FIC empty, and 1 ARM in Bury is NOT a good way to start as Japan. You’ll lose FIC, China and Bury all in T2 unless the Allies are just ignoring Japan (and you are the only perosn I know who totally ignores Japan… at least you USEd to until I taught you that it was not a good idea… AFTER you taught me how to play
Burning out your defense stack with Russia so fast isn’t a a great idea either. That 6 inf compromises just about all the buffer that you can afford before you have to actually spend units in that direction.
I’m still pretty stuck on ignoring Japan until novosibirsk. I have to admit I’m more tempted to stack Bury than I was previously because I think it intimidates some people more than it should.
You may be able to TAKE China with 1 INF in that strat
Really? It’s more likely to take China with more than 1 inf than it is to take it with just 1 inf.
Sorry switch, I was making some assumptions about the Allied forces there but I’m still gonna have to side with Tri on this one.
I assumed no American interference because I would do exactly what Tri described. If I’m not attacking Hawaii SZ (I have a thing about calling it Pearl Harbor) the only naval units I don’t have in SZ 60 will be the 2nd carrier group (East Indies CV/BB) and a U.S. attack there would be just like attacking Hawaii except Hawaii comes to me. I would never lose transports either, thats what the sub and DD are for.
I also assumed that the British were moving to Africa and that at least 4 Russian infantry were going toward Germany. With the kind of Russian hardware you’re talking about ( air support, armor), as Japan, I’m thinking KJF. A British mobilization in India and an IC build there would be the final indicator for that. No IC and I’m not worried about massive Russian movements in east Asia because that front structure is going to collapse quickly even if I have to split my builds to counter a U.S. fleet build. With two BB’s hugging the coast any incursions into Japanese held territory is risky at best.
Which brings me to the exact reason why, if I get at least a 2 bid, 2 bucks, not 1, go to Japan. If I see heavy Russian and/or British resistance, I won’t build the 1st turn IC. I’ll build either 4 trannys if I don’t see an Indian IC(any empty trannys immidiately go to the islands, if possible) or 3 trannys and a sub if an Indian IC is built and I can expect a fleet competition with the U.S.
Just rmember, if Japan tries too much too fast, they WILL get spanked.
And with only 1 TRN on J1, attempting to kill 9 enemy INF (revised count to now include India based on Tri’s last post) and a FIG is going to result in Japan being VERY thin in Asia, and with a depleted AF.
As for losign those Russian forces early…
If Russia counters Bury on R2, and if Japan has no TRNs on J2, then Japan can;t get to Yakut until J4. And with only 2 more INF, it will be at least J5 before they can be in Evenk or Novo. And taht will not be in force.
It cost Russia just their eastern forces plus 1 FIG for 1 round, and 2 more INF to accomplish that. And Japan had to fight the whole way to Russia. And now that they are there, they are thin on the front line… VERY thin if trying to advance on other fronts also, and a single counter-strike can shatter their advance.
Really? Who sends 4 infantry to yakut with arm on R1? If you do that then Sinkiang isn’t going to be countered.
i would. I usually send 6 Inf to Buryatia on R1, puts 2 Arm In Yakut, moves 2 inf from Novo to Sinkiang.
Uk, usually attacks FIC with 3 Inf, 1 Fig, the goal is to Kill the 2 Inf, and that usually succedes.
if succesfull UK builds an IC on UK 1 in India(southafrica if failed)
And US follows Up with an IC in Sinkiang.
Still plenty of cash to put against Germany……
Wow, glad my Buryatia comment sparked some debate. I’ve only done the move once.
Russia and Britain dictate whether Japan can even think about Buryatia or not. As I said, it requires a conservative first turn from the Allies in the Pacific.
If Russia is in position to counter Buryatia I say bring it on. The 3 transport build means more dead Russians if Buryatia is countered- according to some of these posts a tank or two. Thanks for voluntarily depleting your offensive forces, Mutha Russia. As Japan I’d exchange troops with Russia all day long. As said above Russian troops defending the north means less troops in the Sinkiang/ Novo region.
And there’s no way around this fact- 6 dead Russians may not equal the Sub/ Carrier/ Fighter Pearl strike in IPC value, but they’re 6 dead Russians. The Axis goal is to get to Russia, isn’t it?
And in only two battles the force breakdown can look like this-
Vs. Buryatia- 3 Inf/ Arm/ 4 Ftrs/ Bmr/ BB shot vs 6 Inf. That looks like winning with an armor to me.
Vs. China- 4 Inf/ 2 Ftrs vs 2 Inf/ Ftr. Looks like a win with 1-2 Inf left to me.
SZ 60= BB, Carrier/ 2 Ftrs, Destroyer, 4 Transports. British Kwangtung destroyer has been taken out by BB + Carrier. Set up to hit F Indo in a reprisal, Buryatia in a reprisal, or reinforce either/or. Second turn IC and you’re rolling into Asia nearly unchecked. And if Russia is seriously (not just token defense) impeding your progress, then they’re certainly not stacking in enough force in W Russia to prevent German gains.
All that having been said, I don’t do this move. Being strong up the gut in China, and killing the Pearl fleet at little or no loss, is extremely solid play. But Switch, I don’t think a Buryatia strike should be summarily dismissed as a bad move. It can have merit in the right situation.
You are forgeting that your 2 Inf from FIC is usually dead (in 60% of the cases so is the Fig in FIC, and UK lands an additional Fig in China)
And if you don´t do pearl you will have hell to pay, and if you don´t kill Buryatia, Russia will attack Manchuria with 6 inf, 2 Arm on R2 (then moving into China and to Sinkiang to Defend)
