@Cow:
sent lone fighter to battle it lived… do i have to land it or can i crash it?
I assume you’re asking because you committed a carrier to pick it up. If the carrier can still make it there, you must move it to get the fighter.
Can the US have naval superiority?
-
the key to the success of the american fleet is what the uk does with the raf on r1… if you move the fig’s and bom to w. can than on jap 1 decisions become much more difficult… of course the uk boats have to follow suit as wel… the uk can put alot of pressure can put on sz 60 and 59 on r1 this gives the us time to commission its fleet while jap is some what on its heels… russias contribution is to reinforce buriatia on r1
-
1. Â Japan’s starting 2 BB and 6 fighters/Bomber are also 30, not counting its DD, CV, sub potential. Plus the potential for more naval units purchased J1 or J2.
2. Japan could buy an IC, which will allow for some expendable transports
3. Therefore, a UK CV + DD + transports + sub makes all the difference defense wise
Yes, your fleet has a #'s advantage after #3. Buy why risk evan a 60/40 battle when you can take islands/mainland and force Japan to protect too many territories.
Squirecam
-
The point, Squire, is to take Jap islands and force them to give up control of the Pacific, or come and attack the US Fleet. And yes, I advocate using the british fleet with the Americans. They add extra power and can always move to join your fleet before Japan can move.
Also, if Japan takes ALL those forces to attack the American fleet, it has nothing to use in Asia. I’ll give up an American fleet to not loose Asia. :)
-
I do agree with you somewhat. The way I used to play the strategy was to let the UK/USA get attacked. I was more than willing then to rely in my defensive strength. Two things changed that…
1 - The advantage you have is not overwhelming. I’d say 60/40. But that means there are games where Japan will survive that fleet battle, causing you a loss. Whereas if you screen, Japan cannot prevent you from landing on the islands USA3. You reduce your risk, but accomplish the same goal.
2 - In tournament games, which is what I play often, you are limited in time/rounds. You cannot afford to lose your fleet. Even though it might be a wash and a long term good thing, with a time limit there is not enouigh time left.
Squirecam
-
I agree, in the first few rounds you might want to hold off on loosing the fleet. The first few rounds are when you want to grab East Indies, New Guinee and if you can, the Phillipeans. By then, Japan should be good and mad at you and willing to throw anything they have at you to stop you from also grabbing Okinawa and starting to put “feet on the street” in Asia minor. (another tactic to force them to attack is to build an IC in New Guinee…it does Japan almost no good and it really makes them mad at you.)
By the time you have collected those islands, you should be concentrated enough with some DDs, some Trannies, a couple ACs and a BB (or two if you are feeling lucky) to stop a full scale Japanese assault. Sure, you can pretty much kiss your fleet good bye, but then so can Japan. Meanwhile, you now have an IC in New Guinee (if you built it) to pump out a couple subs and a couple trannies to annoy the ever living yoohoo outta Japan.
BTW, the whole goal of this game for me is to tick the other player off to the point they stop using rational thought.
-
I still want to know what you are taking all those Islands with…
UK does not HAVE a fleet, they may have a few scattered ships, but no FLEET in the Pacific on UK2, not if Japan is being played by a competant player.
-
I’m taking islands with 1 BB, 1 TRN, 1 ARM, 1 INF. If my Hawaiian fleet exists, add that. Also, the Brits have a fleet, unless Japan squandered her resources sinking it instead of the US fleet, in which case Japan’s probably down a few more ships.
Sure, it isn’t easy. but what jap player (who isn’t playing me) is expecting it?
-
Japan has Naval superiority to begin with, and more FIGs to boot.
UK fleet AND Pearl fleet are dead J1 (most of the UK anyway). And I still have an AC and a BB in the south Pacific, and a fleet US needs to attack at Pearl…
-
You’d be surprised how often I see the Pearl fleet sitting intact on US 1, Switch. By the time Japan’s dedicated enough firepower to take out the British fleet, without suffering any real losses, they don’t have enough to take out Hawaii, in their opinion. In mine, I go all out, if I loose, well Japan’s toast. If I win, then Japan’s on easy street.
-
@ncscswitch:
I still want to know what you are taking all those Islands with…
UK does not HAVE a fleet, they may have a few scattered ships, but no FLEET in the Pacific on UK2, not if Japan is being played by a competant player.
UK does have a fleet. 1 CV, 1 DD 1 sub 2 transports. Together, thats 10 def. Not enough on its own, but when added to the USA, it makes it difficult for Japan.
Probably YOU never have a UK fleet because you waste it attacking that japan transport rather than save it.
Squirecam
-
UK does have a fleet. 1 CV, 1 DD 1 sub 2 transports. Together, thats 10 def. Not enough on its own, but when added to the USA, it makes it difficult for Japan.
Probably YOU never have a UK fleet because you waste it attacking that japan transport rather than save it.
Squirecam
Hey Squirecam,
if you are never going to use your UK fleet to kill the transport or contest africa. (then i want to play as the axis everytime vs you)
it isn’t wise to let the Japaneese Transport live at any costs. (I send the 1 DD, 1 AC after it) and 3 inf, 1 Fgt to Egypt to contest it with the germans.
your UK fleet is doing you no good sitting around in the pacific doing nothing. even if you manage to grab a island lets say New Borneo. you wasted everything the UK had in the pacific to take a island for 1 turn that is not worth 4 ipc.
you’d be surprised how fast land-based and Air-craft based figs can go from the main-land to the pacific and back and forth.
-
UK does have a fleet. 1 CV, 1 DD 1 sub 2 transports. Together, thats 10 def. Not enough on its own, but when added to the USA, it makes it difficult for Japan.
Probably YOU never have a UK fleet because you waste it attacking that japan transport rather than save it.
Squirecam
Hey Squirecam,
if you are never going to use your UK fleet to kill the transport or contest africa. (then i want to play as the axis everytime vs you)
it isn’t wise to let the Japaneese Transport live at any costs. (I send the 1 DD, 1 AC after it) and 3 inf, 1 Fgt to Egypt to contest it with the germans.
your UK fleet is doing you no good sitting around in the pacific doing nothing. even if you manage to grab a island lets say New Borneo. you wasted everything the UK had in the pacific to take a island for 1 turn that is not worth 4 ipc.
you’d be surprised how fast land-based and Air-craft based figs can go from the main-land to the pacific and back and forth.
But I do kill the transport, with the UK fighter. I just dont waste my fleet by sending the carrier/DD to do so. Here’s why:
1 - The carrier/DD will die, without inflicting a hit, due to the DEI BB. Therefore, you have wasted 28 IPC.
2 - The fighter cannot be countered. It lands safely, providing Bury defense.
Squirecam
-
if you were to land the fighter in the mainland. I would have to think China would be the best spot as I find Japan can have a bad round of dice and barely win or lose that battle.
your saying a CV + DD will die without taken a hit? ( I love the idea of forcing the Japaneese to send in stuff to kill that. you got to think it takes 1 BB + some fighters or a fighter/bomb combo to kill it.
reason is, a CV and DD both defend on a 3… (that BB is only taking 1 hit…) that means a plane is dying. So on the contrary to what you said. I think the CV + DD has a good chance of taking a fighter out.
-
You can consolidate the British Fleet and then force Japan to send it’s precious BB and CV after it. You should get one of those capitals at least before they sink you, even if you don’t keep the fighter with it.
Meanwhile, the US fleet at Pearl might be sunk, but Japan will be sending a lot less navy then what it could and that’s easy to counter attack. Just use the BB, DD and USAF (land in Hawaii) and you should retake that. Now Japan hardly has a “vast” superiourity, but rather a few scattered boats.
-
if you were to land the fighter in the mainland. I would have to think China would be the best spot as I find Japan can have a bad round of dice and barely win or lose that battle.
your saying a CV + DD will die without taken a hit? ( I love the idea of forcing the Japaneese to send in stuff to kill that. you got to think it takes 1 BB + some fighters or a fighter/bomb combo to kill it.
reason is, a CV and DD both defend on a 3… (that BB is only taking 1 hit…) that means a plane is dying. So on the contrary to what you said. I think the CV + DD has a good chance of taking a fighter out.
CV + DD = 6 = ONE hit on average. Therefore, on average, a BB+CV (DEI) + Fighter + Bomber will on average, kill it, in 1 round, without any japan losses.
Bury (6inf +fighter) is better than China, IMHO.
Squirecam
-
I always give up Bury and SFE. Shouldn’t I be?
Always felt the fighter served better on the German front. You can always put 2 tanks in Russia and fire them off to Yak to defend, and 6 def from 2 units is better then 4 def from 1 unit. IMHO. Same cost. Only tanks can also attack if needed.
-
I always give up Bury and SFE. Shouldn’t I be?
Always felt the fighter served better on the German front. You can always put 2 tanks in Russia and fire them off to Yak to defend, and 6 def from 2 units is better then 4 def from 1 unit. IMHO. Same cost. Only tanks can also attack if needed.
If you keep Bury, thats +1 USSR 1, plus +1 from USSR 2 and +3 from Manchuria which you will walk into USSR 2, +1 from Bury round 3, when Japan has to take back Manchuria and potentially keep swapping FIC, or be in danger of losing Kwang.
It means more $$ for USSR to fight off the Germans, USSR can have 32+ on round 2-3 depending on circumstances (24 + 3 ukr +2 WR + 3 manch)
Squirecam
-
Bury is a lost cause. Japan takes it on J2, with or without 6 INF and a FIG there. And they take minimal to no losses eitehr way (BB shots, FIGs, BOMs, 3 TRN’s of units, plus troops from Manch).
A better plan is for Russia to engage in strategic retreat from the 1 IPC territories and stage for counter-attacks from Novo. Drom that position they can stall the Japan offesnive along both the northern and central ciorridors for several rounds at a cost of 1-2 ARM from Moscow and their starting Eastern INF. That leaves Russia still net positive income (due to West Russia and trading Ukraine) and able to focuse more than 90% of their IPC’s on Germany for 5 turns or so.
Add a US IC in Sinkiang, and Japan can be held at bay for 10 turns or more with almost no cost in purchased units by Russia.
-
The 6 Russians and Brit fighter have moved by J2.
It’s a good move- saves a destroyer and keeps Japan from going banzai on those 6 infantry (some people do, after all).
However, if 2 German units are holding Egypt, I feel the best move with the fighter is to take Egypt back along with 3 infantry and slow Germany’s advances in Africa to a crawl.
To me the final use is coupling with the sub to take out the Japanese sub, then landing on the US carrier at Pearl. No jap sub + extra fighter means some risk for the Japanese fleet- too much attrition and it makes a US counter more feasible.
I really dislike the idea of parking the British fighter in China. Talk about no chance of survival.
-
I don’t like the idea of having valuable russian infantry on the beach. They’re lazy. Half the time they don’t load their weapons and the other half the time they arn’t given bullets to load them with.
I’d rather give up 2 IPCs in land then 18 IPCs for infantry AND 1 IPC in land. Sure, you’ll hold Bury 1 more round if you stockpile it, but you’ll loose it on J2.
Suggested Topics
