Has anyone tried a J1 invasion of Alaska?

I wouldn’t imagine building an mIC there ever worth it, but that’s just me.

Crockett36, just an FYI this is a Pacific 1940 thread, NOT a Global 1940 thread. So keep in mind your parts about defeating Germany are invalid in this particular situation  :-)

To sort of piggy back off of crockett36’s post though, for those that apply to a Pacific 1940 game, you’ll definitely need to look at how the whole game plays out. By that I mean, you’ll probably need to be prepared to be semi-aggressive with ANZAC and UK both with an Alaska strategy. As Crockett36 points out, you’ll be throwing most of your force that way presumably, so that leaves Japan to (also presumably) focus efforts north as well. If that happens, you’d want to be ready to pounce as ANZAC and UK, wouldn’t you? Attack the Caroline Islands, fortify the Philippines and DEI, etc.?

That all said, the other tricky thing about this strategy is knowing you start out on the second foot to Japan. they get to go first, so will dictate play a lot. Also depends on when Japan attacks. They start out with an obviously significantly larger naval force than the US, and could potentially leave enough force to deal with Alaska, and also continue to strike south. If a J1 happens, I think an Alaska build up is rather difficult.

But, if it’s delayed to J3, with a US entrance to war on US4, then you may reasonably be able to have built up a decent size force to do this. Again, assuming you coordinated with ANZAC and UK as well. This might all be pointless to do if ANZAC has only built defensive ground forces, or UK gone all ground force to help China, etc. You’d essentially have an empty theater in the south where Japan isn’t getting hit in that case. Or, by staying defensive, might allow Japan to still do what needs to be done in the south pacific without jeopardizing it’s Alaska force much.

@dinosaur:

Yes, they made an exception for Japan although you never “Build” an IC there.  Also they made the funny rule about only scrambling planes from an island, and Japan is able to defend herself while New Guniea (I think?) is split into two TT.  There are a few contrivances on the map like that.

If you are not playing by the OOB rules, then you can scramble from any TT, with an airbase, bordering a SZ.

My thinking is as a separate game this setup is flawed, but I’m betting anything that the Global game (the one we are all going to play from here on out for the most part) is pretty balanced with the addition of all those Russian infantry to the North of Manchuria. Something tells me that India crush strategy will take a beating.

So my group has completed a game where Japan went for America.  We figure that whether or not Japan wins is dependent on a few things.

I don’t remember whether the final assualt on WUS happened on J3 or J4.  I think it was J4, and they waited until J3 to attack Alaska?  Either way, the statistics were about a 45% chance for Japan to take WUS.  They needed some AA misses to throw it in their favor.

There really is little that the UK and ANZAC player can contribute to the defense of WUS.  The best thing for them to do is go crazy in the absence of the Japanese forces.  By the time America fell, the UK had liberated most of China, and had several rounds to build up a navy with the help of the DEI income.  Australia also had a bonus going on, adding 2 loaded carriers to supplement defense of the UK fleet.

Japan thought about going straight for Australia, but the UK fleet with transports(deploying from  Kwangtung and Kiangsu factories) was already threatening Japan.

While America had fallen, they only gained +10 income from America, +Mexico +Alaska, while giving up on their territories in the Chinese mainland.  They were being out produced by the Allies, and out of position to restablish a hold on the mainland.

@MaherC:

come on TripleA!

It will take a while (if ever) before there’s a playable version of Pacific because of all the rule changes. But let us hope a little longer…

Buying a major IC by J3 is risky (like everything else) because you need to spend at least 30 IPCs for turn to fully use it otherwise J is wasting production capacity. And Japan needs destroyers, destroyers and destroyers to take hits and deal with subs.

makes me wonder how much the game was actually “playtested” honestly.  The errata is going to be bigger than the rulebook.

Maher C.

I think that they should re-issue a second edition and provide it to those who bought this shabbily tested game (don’t get me wrong, I like it and it has potential).  The should as least give those that purchased the disaster version with some sort of coupon or rebate.  Yeah right, like that’s ever gonna happen.

Sure, my opponents did in our first game: I was the Japan.

I attacked the US navy at Hawaii with my huge Imperial Navy: obviously I destroyed all while they don’t scrambled any fighter nor tactical bomber. At his turn, the US player counter-attacked my ships, destroying all them… We closed the game and immediately started a second one: there’s no fun in playing Pacific without ships! :D

Why are you guy so focused on those NO’s? I mean it’s only a bloody 5 IPC, you don’t even get a tank for that price.  :wink:

I’ll take a look on what you posted about the US troops from the Phillippines whether they can be put safe or not. The UK BB and transports are really going to hunt you. They can join the India ships and Anzac fleet south of Java to make a nice 1-2-3 punch with the US later on in the game…… That’s why that BB must die no matter what.