Well, let’s go ahead and assume the bids at $31 for the IC and 2 TRN and $32 for 4 TRN (pretty popular on these boards); and with the Kwang TRN being sunk on UK1.
W/ IC:
J1: 2 units to Asia
J2: 9 units to Asia, build 4th TRN
J3: 11 units to Japan $33 needed to keep IC and TRNs full (Bury and China)
W/ 4 TRN J1:
J1: 2 units to Asia
J2: 8 units to Asia
J3: 8 units to Asia
OK, only 4 exta units :-D
Furthermore, with the IC purchase, you have your build limit issue dealt with immediately. Otherwise as Japan ALL you can do is fill TRN’s and nothign else.
Lastly, the J1 IC allows you to get units into Asia at the rate of 9 units a turn even if Japan has to start building Navy on J2 to offset a US Pacific build-up, using the 3 TRN they have at the end of J1 and the IC. If Japan has to start a naval build up in J2 but has not yet built an IC, their supplies to Asia are dramatically reduced since they can only produce a total of 8 units.
Japan does not need tanks on the mainland early. Japan needs tanks on the mainland late. Where will Japan go with its tanks? Russia can trade infantry for tanks, which isn’t GREAT for Russia, but it certainly isn’t great for Japan.
Therefore, I believe that rushing to build ICs for J2 is not practicable. Building ONE, perhaps, particularly if UK builds an Indian IC; but I think even then it is not strictly necessary.
Japan should wait for the US build. If the US goes to the Pacific, Japan can put those 15 IPCs towards fighters to stall the US; Japan won’t be building more than eight units anyways if it builds transports-infantry-fighters. If the US goes to Germany, Japan can pop an IC in French Indochina, and stick to transports, then infantry and tanks.
Japan is, like most other nations, and INF monster.
Add in some ART for punch, then start mixing in a few ARM as your income climbs backed up by your preserved initial FIGs and lastly a couple of BOM’s to maximize punch for the final strike, and you have a serious powerhouse.
With Japan with 1 IC built on J1, then doing the 4th TRN on J2, and then a 5th TRN (for island raiding first, then shuttle duty from FIC to Egypt) and doing 2 INF, 1 ART built in Asia, and INF plus a couple of ART for the TRN’s, Japan can face down the allied Forces with 2’s on 2’s, backed up by Japan’s Flying Tanks (the SIX FIGs they start with) to make nice steady progress through Asia with minimal loses, and nice punch.
And once the income REALLY starts to climb, and you have 6 INF, 5 ART a turn being built, and still have left over cash (income over $38), you can upgrade ART to ARM on a 1 for $1 basis, or save up for AF, or a bit of both.
Lol am I wrong to build only tanks on the main land?
I dont build additional navy usually and just use my combined fleet for defense.
I start building 30IPCs worth of tanks a turn and throw them full force at the undefended Russian East.
Any extra money I get I save and add onto my navy since my Mainland ICs are maxed out. It works pretty well for getting to russian fast and catching them off guard.
Sure, you get there fast, but with no fodder, and limitted punch.
Building 6 ARM a turn to go after Moscow is being a gnat as Japan when you need to be a dragon…
@ncscswitch:
W/ 4 TRN J1:
J1:Â 2 units to Asia
J2:Â 8 units to Asia
J3:Â 8 units to Asia
OK, only 4 exta units :-D
Actually, it is only 2 units. Â :-)
If you go 4 trns on J1 you can get 10 units to Asia. Â :-)
1 inf wake
1 inf oki
2 inf, 1 rt, 1 arm jap
2 inf phil
2 inf ei
Or 9 units if you use the bor inf first.
And if you go 3 trns and inf on J1, then a trn on J2 as well, you pick up that 10th inf for J3 instead on J2.
@ncscswitch:
Lastly, the J1 IC allows you to get units into Asia at the rate of 9 units a turn even if Japan has to start building Navy on J2 to offset a US Pacific build-up, using the 3 TRN they have at the end of J1 and the IC. If Japan has to start a naval build up in J2 but has not yet built an IC, their supplies to Asia are dramatically reduced since they can only produce a total of 8 units.
That is misleading.
How is that any better than if I buy an IC on J2 and 6-7 inf?
I still get 9-10 units and now I have an IC as well.
The gain is at best 1 inf per rd for the J1 IC, but with picking up the inf from the islands it is really a wash by J2-3.
Just b/c you may only place 7 units on Japan doesn’t mean you can’t get 9-10 to Asia without an IC. Â :wink:
Japan does not need tanks on the mainland early. Japan needs tanks on the mainland late. Where will Japan go with its tanks? Russia can trade infantry for tanks, which isn’t GREAT for Russia, but it certainly isn’t great for Japan.
Therefore, I believe that rushing to build ICs for J2 is not practicable. Building ONE, perhaps, particularly if UK builds an Indian IC; but I think even then it is not strictly necessary.
Japan should wait for the US build. If the US goes to the Pacific, Japan can put those 15 IPCs towards fighters to stall the US; Japan won’t be building more than eight units anyways if it builds transports-infantry-fighters. If the US goes to Germany, Japan can pop an IC in French Indochina, and stick to transports, then infantry and tanks.
Yeah, this is the way I think of it. Â I like to see how Japan does at Pearl and then what the US intends to do before I invest 15 IPC in and object that can’t move.
Yeah, this is the way I think of it. I like to see how Japan does at Pearl and then what the US intends to do before I invest 15 IPC in and object that can’t move.
And that is a reactive strat.
I prefer pro-active as Japan. Germany’s moves are pretty much dictated by the Allies from the start with little leeway within just a turn or two if the allies are going KGF. So it is up to Japan to crack things open and make things happen for the Axis. So I tend to make the Allies react to me instead of the other way around… amke them fight my war instead of theirs :-)
I don’t know, this sounds pretty reactive to me. :wink:
_Lastly, the J1 IC allows you to get units into Asia at the rate of 9 units a turn even if Japan has to start building Navy on J2 to offset a US Pacific build-up, using the 3 TRN they have at the end of J1 and the IC. _
There is being proactive, reactive, and foolish :-)
In the above scenario though I am still landing/building my units in Asia as I had planned, but also making sure that I don;t get my backside bitten off by the US (meanwhile, the trade off is Germany gets to be more pro-active in that scenario :-) )
@ncscswitch:
Yeah, this is the way I think of it. I like to see how Japan does at Pearl and then what the US intends to do before I invest 15 IPC in and object that can’t move.
And that is a reactive strat.
I prefer pro-active as Japan. Germany’s moves are pretty much dictated by the Allies from the start with little leeway within just a turn or two if the allies are going KGF. So it is up to Japan to crack things open and make things happen for the Axis. So I tend to make the Allies react to me instead of the other way around… amke them fight my war instead of theirs :-)
If you are playing rock-paper-scissors, and you have the option of waiting for your opponent to show his or her hand, are you going to be PROACTIVE and show your hand first, or REACTIVE and wait for your opponent to show his or her hand first?
The Allies are not locked into either KGF or KJF until after the US turn.
The way I see it, Japan needs 3-4 transports ASAP anyways. Japan simply waits on an IC until it sees the US turn. If the US goes KGF, then Japan can put down an IC and not lose much by it (it will have a stronger Pacific position and have an extra transport to hit Australia/Pearl/New Zealand/Africa with). If the US goes KJF, then it’s good that Japan has IPCs for fighters.
It would ideally be better if you KNEW, as Japan, what the US would be GOING to do. But you cannot. So you wait a bit.
I play without a bid, and my standard first turn buy is 3 transports and 2 infantry, and if the kwangtung transport managed to not be destroyed, then I make it 2 Trans/1 sub/1 inf. I wait until turn 2 to buy and IC, along with a transport. It helps to really move the troops off of the home island quickly and break into russia early with amphibious assaults. the IC usually goes in indochina since the 4 transports are shutling troops off to the soviet far east.
why the sub why not 2 transports and ic if you have a 1ipc bid if not then 2tanks and 1 artillery you have 8inf in the immediate vicinity of japan that can transport in 1 turn. only 2 other unites other tan inf. that balances it out more i try to complament my tanks with inf not the other way around when it comes to transports…
in a KJF you want ICs.
I have seen Japan hold all their Round 1 income for Round 2 before. That was interesting. (they had a 9 IPC bid for infantry in Asia.)
why the sub why not 2 transports and ic if you have a 1ipc bid if not then 2tanks and 1 artillery you have 8inf in the immediate vicinity of japan that can transport in 1 turn. only 2 other unites other tan inf. that balances it out more i try to complament my tanks with inf not the other way around when it comes to transports…
We dont play with a bid though, so that lucky 1 IPC bid isnt available.
No bid you probably want to go transports. You’ll need the flexibility to get Japanese feet on the streets of Africa fast.
why the sub why not 2 transports and ic if you have a 1ipc bid if not then 2tanks and 1 artillery you have 8inf in the immediate vicinity of japan that can transport in 1 turn. only 2 other unites other tan inf. that balances it out more i try to complament my tanks with inf not the other way around when it comes to transports…
We dont play with a bid though, so that lucky 1 IPC bid isnt available.
other option waas without the bid because you said no bid before the longer 2trn,2tanks and 1 art bid was for without a bid. 2x8+2x5+4+30. the 2trn, 1ic was for with the bid. 16+15=31
other option waas without the bid because you said no bid before the longer 2trn,2tanks and 1 art bid was for without a bid. 2x8+2x5+4+30. the 2trn, 1ic was for with the bid. 16+15=31
I see I see.
I still like to build 3 transports or 2 and a sub (depends on kwangtung transport), since I like having 4 in the water by turn 2.
For me J1 is 3 TRNs and 2 Inf. I like the flexibility the trns offer. I usually buy an IC on J 2 or 3 depending on the situation. Japan has troops to start but they can’t swim to the mainland so you need transports to get them there.
In the game DarthMaximus and I just started, I thought long and hard about this. The situation was that the UK (Darth) pretty much moved all his asian units west, leaving 1 Inf to welcome me into India. The SZ59 TRN survived.
So I had 2 TRN and lots of land to start. I thought about 2 ICs but just bought 1 - 2 seemed like an over-commitment. I was really tempted to put the IC in Fic, with no allied units nearby, but chose Man as the safer option. Of course I don’t want to speculate about strategy too much, but this thread is very interesting to me… My only other build was 1 TRN, which on J2 will be enough to shuttle all remaining original Jap units to the mainland.
I also captured China and Bury, so Jap income is at 36, plus 7 saved from the first round. On J2, it’ll be nice to spend 43 IPCs with 1 IC on the mainland and 3 TRN in the water.
My goal with Japan is USUALLY:
1. If the Allies are going KJF, force the US to spend 20 IPC per 10 IPC I spend on navy and air force.
2. Put maximum NUMBERS into Asia.
3. Put maximum TANKS into Asia.
So even WITH a bid, it’ll be 3 transports and a tank for me.
2 transports 2 tanks 1 art is usually not my preference; even 2 transports 3 tanks (with bid of 1) is not my preference, because of my Axis play style - G1 infantry build, G2 infantry build, G3 tank build and earlier builds move to E Eur, G4 tank build and earlier builds move to Balkans, G5 earlier tank builds move to Balkans and infantry/tanks move to Caucasus, G6 attack Moscow. This goes together with J1 transport and infantry build, J2 landings at Manchuria, French Indochina, Kwangtung, Burytia, J3 further reinforcement of coast while J2 landings move to Ssinkiang and Yakut, J4 march towards China and Novosibirsk (probably repulsed), J5 take China and Novosibirsk, J6 attack Moscow. (Japan’s schedule isn’t as set, because the Allies can defend and attack with more flexibility in Asia, but that’s the rough timeline). Typically, the Axis don’t actually ATTACK on the sixth turn, but build up forces to hit on round seven or eight.
BUT if the Allies try to go aggro with Russia, I use transports and tanks for Germany, and mass tanks with Japan, plus strategic bombing to try to kill Moscow on R4 or R5.
–
More particulars -
It’s true that you could put 3 inf 3 tank into Asia on J2 with the latter build, but I prefer to run 6 inf 1 art 1 tank instead, going for aggressive tanks in later rounds. That’s EIGHT units opposed to SIX units.
So on J2, my fighters fly back from Pearl Harbor or the Indian and Pacific Oceans, or maybe they just continue to hang around Asia - and the J1 build lands. So on J3, I have infantry and fighters threatening Asia. Whatever I take is probably going to stay taken, because Russia won’t be eager to trade infantry for infantry (infantry on the attack vs infantry on the defense)
The other possibility is to have a few infantry and tanks and fighters threatening Asia. But then, Russia MIGHT decide to use Russian tanks to counter any early hits on China, and the decreased numbers make the possibility of a counterattack more likely - and the decreased number makes it more difficult to cover each of the China/Yakut/India routes.
(edit) to be more clear, yeah, I think that 2 trans 2 tanks plus tank or art depending on bid is solid IF the Allies tried an aggressive path. But if the Allies are turtling, I need more numbers to punch through the turtle. By the way, I do not advocate violence against turtles. Unless it gets me chicks. (/edit)
