Safe strategies for Japan

I prefer to ensure that UK would have a rough go about investing in an Indian IC.  to that end, I like to set-up a Bash India move with Japan J1.  I team this with an IC purchase and a 2 transport buy J1.

Place the IC in either East Indies or Borneo, I perfer East Indies myself as it is closer to India.  Recall too that you will have the Southern Naval force off India (loaded IC, BB) end of J1, and an IC purchase would enable navel buy if needed if the US moves agressively into the Solomons on USA1.

The J1 India bash doesn’t allow Japan to be too agressive against China or Russia turn 1.  That is ok with the 2 transport buy to move 4 units into asia J2.  Japan’s lack of initial transports needs to be rectified to increase their income to be able to fight a potential US naval onslaught.

The India bash move would enable Japan to attack India with 5 inf, tank, up to 6 ftrs (depends what survives SZ35 battle), CA and 2 BB offshores if wanted (bomber if it survives SZ53 attack).  Strong deterant to any Indian IC.  Max UK india units is 4 inf, 2 ftrs, aaa.  Russia may set-up to retake, but Japan could also reolad for a J3 attack with the East Indies IC and 2 tpt buy J1.

Needless to say, this move removes any allied thinking of building a strong hold in India.  Once that is stretgeic option is removed, the Japanese can move into a more standard game plan of attacking china and opening another front on Russia while keeping vigilant against the US navy.  With Japan’s air force, one or two more carriers is usually sufficient early (with a DD and/or sub or two) to hold out.

I prefer the IC in FIC, because I believe that against a strong US player, East Indies or Borneo may be difficult to defend (you need to split your defense sometimes). So I believe it’s better to wait at least round 2 before investing in it.

Otherwise, I try to go for “safe” attacks, avoiding Yunnan to be able to attack the other places with more fighters (better to be sure of sz35 and 53 ).

Just a few points that might help your decision:

• ICs are only useful where you have a long way to go via transport. This excludes Manchuria, you have enough production capacity in Japan.
• ICs there are far away have to have a good transport route. This excludes East Indies and Borneo in the 42 scenario early on.
• ICs that are hard to defend against a US Pacific strategy should not be build before you can see the US strategy. This excludes East Indies and Borneo.
• ICs should be in range of valuable targets. This makes East Indies better than Borneo because you can reach India or Egypt more easily, but it shows that the mainland ICs are even more valuable in the early game because you lack transports to use island ICs turn 2.

Summary:

I personally get an IC and 2 transports turn 1 with Japan. If I have 3+ fighters left after my attacks and can land them in Burma, I do that and place my IC there. That makes sure that I keep Burma turn 1 and can attack India turn 2.
Overall the buy gives me flexibility: The money of the IC is not lost even if UK gets an India IC and US goes Pacific, I can add another IC in French Indo and outproduce them. Also I don’t risk to lose an early IC build in East Indies or Borneo to a US Pacific strategy. If I see US goes Atlantic, I can still build there.

About the way to attack Russia: You will have to attack on all 3 fronts. The India/Persia route should have priority because you have a NO in India and because threatening Caucasus is important if Allies go KGF. But you also need some forces to run over China, and you don’t want to give Russia the income of their east territories for free all the time, so you will have to attack there with minor forces.

Just my 2 cents

Darkman

Recall that an IC in Borneo (east indies) might actually HELP japan hold that island instead of lose the IC.  Dropping 4 inf (or 3 inf and AAA) and landing some ftrs is a good deterant to a US invasion.  I guess it depends on the style of play for Japan.  I would say I am a bit more accomplished with Japan, so I don’t let USA’s navy deter the optimal build for Japan (IMHO).

A Burma IC is definitely a safer move, albeit one that doesn’t push expansion quite as quickly (2 less units dropped far away from Japan per turn)

I’m a fan of mainland ICs since everything that isn’t Eurasia is a bit tangential.

However, a U.S. assault on Borneo or the East Indies can be seen coming a mile away. It takes multiple turns to get down there, and the U.S. at the point has probably decimated the Japanese navy.

@afterword I like to put a IC in Burma and move troops down to FIC. I like to force a response from the Allies either with a IC in India by the UK or Russia moving to support. Anything that takes money or troops away from Europe helps.