How to slow Japan enough in KGF?

@Bunnies:

@MrMerguez:

(I could post my own topic, but i fits in quite nicely in this discussion).

Say UK1 retakes Anglo-Egypt with 3 infantry (1 from trans-jordan, 1 from persia, 1 from india) + fighter+ bomber + cruiser. Only 2 infantry remain in India. He takes lone transport with CV (and builds atlantic fleet, say). (Under what further conditions, if any) would you consider taking india on J1 with 2 infantry from fr.-indochina + air?

Should UK always leave 3 infantry on india then?

Do you ever take out cruiser+transport in sz. 34 on J1 (e.g. with Battleship from sz. 37?).

Next time post your own topic.  It’s better for you and better for the thread, rather than going off topic.

The answer to your question hardly has anything to do with Japan anyways.  It is really a question about the Allies, and I don’t mean that just because you’re asking a question about UK.

The underlying question is, should Japan attack India at J1 if there’s only 2 inf and 1 AA Gun.

Leaving infantry on India at end of UK1 is almost always wrong. The more you leave on there, the worse it usually is.

The mistake that the Allies need to avoid is to allow Japan to destroy those inf on J1 and capture the AA Gun, without any kind of retribution.
Usually the best idea is to place 2 Russian armor in Caucasus - if the Japanese risk going after India (and the AA Gun can ruin any attack) then the Russians can retake it and meanwhile the Japanese have been delayed on the Indian corridor.
Another possibility is to evacuate India to Persia and then retake it. It is perfectly valid but at the same time, if the UK keeps India then Japan will have more targets to hit - the more attacks it makes, the bigger the possibility that one of them will fail. Also, if the UK is placing itself to sink the German Med fleet on SZ15 on UK2 then most likely you won’t have a plane available to help those inf on Persia retake India.

@Gragor:

A great way to learn is to review games others have played.  You can review the play by forum games here but you will have to load the map utility to get the most of reviewing the play by forum discussion thread.  You can also install tripleA and join games in progress, save the game and then dissect how others play the game.

Okay sounds good. . . . Question what is tripleA?

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=18278.0

The UK Indian Ocean fleet.

@Bunnies:

@BigPapaSmurf:

Send 5 inf from Kar/Arch, 1 Artillery and two fighters to West russia and stack everything else in Cauc. Leave one Inf in Lenningrad and do your standard moves on the east end.

Don’t you run into Germany taking Karelia and West Russia, and establishing a strong center position from which Russia cannot reclaim Karelia income?

Bunnies is correct. G takes West Russia with units from BR/Ukr. Russia can retake West Russia but will only earn 27 IPC, not being able to contest Belorussia and Karelia. Germany meanwhile can build 5 inf, 5 arm on G1 and put some serious pressure to prevent Russia from stacking West Russia on turn 2.

The main goal of the Ukr attack is IMHO to get the fighter,

Cutting most of Germany’s ability to attack Caucasus is another big big plus.  If Russia lucks out on the Ukraine attack, Germany may either risk fighters on G1 on other targets to send a fighter to Ukraine, or may send valuable tanks to reclaim Ukraine.  Or if Russia lucks out at Ukraine, Russia may retreat to Caucasus to preserve its tanks/artillery.

As equally as important as the fighter is to protect the Russian units on West Russia from being destroyed on G1. If you lose them, you lose any chance of contesting Karelia/Belorussia. Germany may also stack Ukraine like you mentioned, cutting off 3 IPC to Russia (plus the 2 from Belorussia) and both sides get into a war of positions that doesn’t favor Russia (i.e. the Allies better get quickly to help).

Hard to say - all depends on the magnitude of the threat from Germany.

Going full KGF with a pretty standard German opening round means that the sea zone next to Algeria is threatened by 2 subs 3-5 figs and a bomber.

I almost always buy an AC + Destroyer.
Maybe also a Fighter (UK maybe require 1-2 figs on their AC).
this leaves room for 1 transport + 1 tank

I often land in Algeria with 4 units round 1 - meaning I sacrifice the two transports.

Giving me the possibility to move in next with AC + 2 figs + cruiser +2 dd and maybe join up with the UK navy.

Germany can beat this, but not likely without substantial losses, if they do my next buy will be similar, and reach Europe together with the pacific battleship.

I have experimented with going after Japan in several recent games. Although I still consider my startegy far from perfect – Pacific is really messy! – I think Japan can be really squeezed into corner quite easily, but there has to be one condition met. And this is at least one of the battles does not go for the Japan well.

If Japan fails Pearl or does it heavy and loses some ships, or has very light presence in China or – most often – exposes some of its ships to counters, there are two stretegies you can really follow with success: 1. US IC build on Sink R1 and UK IC build on India R2 plus naval buys US or 2. just naval buys US which is the way to go if Japan lost or is about to lose 2 of its capital ships.

If Japan does not make mistakes R1 and does not hit bad luck though, I think it is very difficult to break it. But then still you can slow it most of the times sufficiently to get to Berlin the same round japs get to mosc which should be sufficient.

Japan definitely does not need to be house ruled to weaken them.

ok so i’m hearing that you might as well do whatever damage you can with your india fleet, because it’ll either die regardless, or arrive to another theater too late to be of great effect.  sounds reasonable.  in one game i put the india fleet in the med because G didn’t take egypt, and from there i could threaten a (albeit small) landing in southern europe, balkans, or ukraine.  this forced him to keep 3-4 units at least in each of those territories and i found it to be a nice little advantage.  i’m guessing the protip there is that you can be MORE effective/annoying elsewhere with those ships though, huh?

thanks to bunnies for always answering my questions and hobbes for always providing strategical perspective  :-)

Normaly 2 arm is not a problem, ofc depends i mean if he go all out tanks r1 Im still ok, round 2 if he went all out tanks again i just move tanks back from Yak, and then the allies will win.