Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?

Question about winning the game for the Axis. Is it both. That is, does it mean that you need 6 of 8 in the Pacific AND 8 of 11 in Europe. Or, is it one or the other.

It is just one.  If the Axis achieves one of the two, it wins.

@Alsch91:

No aircraft can support that, as it takes 4 movement points to get from SZ 33 to New South Wales.  They cannot land from there.

I have a house rule that aircraft on carriers can launch after the carrier makes its movement, cause in real life, if there were carriers in Japan with planes, the planes didn’t take off and attack midway from there, they took off once the carriers got to midway. Thats just one of my house rules.

@otahere34:

@Alsch91:

No aircraft can support that, as it takes 4 movement points to get from SZ 33 to New South Wales.  They cannot land from there.

I have a house rule that aircraft on carriers can launch after the carrier makes its movement, cause in real life, if there were carriers in Japan with planes, the planes didn’t take off and attack midway from there, they took off once the carriers got to midway. Thats just one of my house rules.

How exactly can you discuss balance and strategy when you change the rules?

I have a house rule, when I play the US, I get the Nimitz in 1941. Now let me argue that the OOB setup is not imbalanced in favor of Japan.  :?

I have a house rule too. German infantry can cross the English channel without a transport because in real life people can swim across too.

@Peck:

I have a house rule too. German infantry can cross the English channel without a transport because in real life people can swim across too.

Then shouldnt French, American and British units be able to do the same?

And all those people who swim the channel do not have to carry 100 pounds of war making gear nor wear combat boots and battle uniforms (which get darn heavy when wet!)

Please all gamers. I have questions that I believe is significant to Japan’s strategy and survival. It pertains to rules about aircraft movement and American movement while neutral.

At page 27 of the Rules (Europe)and 26 (Pacific) it states … to determine range…when moving over water from a coastal territory or island group count the first sea zone entered as one space. When flying to an Island group, count the surrounding sea zone and Island group itself as one space.

Query: Japan moves its SBM from Japan to attack Philippines. Move 1 japan to sz 6. move 2 sz 6-sz 19, move 3 sz 19 to sz 20, IS move 4 sz 20-sz35 OR is move 4 sz 20 to Philippines Islands itself because the Island group and surrounding sea zone is counted as one space?

Query: Alpha 2 rules. American neutrality movement of ships in the Pacific allows them to end movement in sea zones NOT adjacent to japanese controlled territories or Islands. Does this mean US ships in the Philippines can end their move in sz 23 between Marianas and Wake or are they prohibited from this move because it is adjacent to a jap controlled island? Or, is the jap controlled island Marianas sz 22?

Please advise…

Sargon the Hijacker!

Perhaps you should start a new thread?  You could title it and everything, and that way people who can answer your question can see your question in the thread title and help you out.  Seriously I think some people pick the most recent thread and post whatever they feel like in it.  They either don’t understand how a Forum works or are just too lazy or retarded to be creative enough to make a new thread.

And to answer your question, SBM’s, or as normal people call them, subs….can only move 2.  Like all ships they move 2 spaces unless using a naval base.

For US naval movement, you cannot end your movement in a sz containing Japanese ships or islands.  Is that not clear?

Please forgive my lack of computer savvy. I thought asking a relevant question was within the rules of the forum? Maybe not? Anyway, an SBM is not a sub, it is a strategic bomber? I asked the question because it was relevant to your discussion of Jap strategy. If you already know the answer that is great. However, I don’t and asked for help.

you cant fly a SBM to the phil from japan, it takes 5 movment to get there, and you need to land in 7.

@sargon:

Please forgive my lack of computer savvy. I thought asking a relevant question was within the rules of the forum? Maybe not? Anyway, an SBM is not a sub, it is a strategic bomber? I asked the question because it was relevant to your discussion of Jap strategy. If you already know the answer that is great. However, I don’t and asked for help.

Friendly Message intended for Sargon and other new players, feel free to skip if you are neither:
Your question did regard Japan and how it would affect your strategy. Others may have been a little harsh. Welcome to the axis community at large. We welcome new players, its always fun to play against different people. The Frequently Asked Questions page is quite large and very hard to search. For basic rules questions like counting sea zone spaces, you are more likely to find an answer from someone in a helpful mood. Otherwise, currently there are 120 pages of comments about questions in the FAQ which is stuck at the top of the topics list for Global 1940. FAQ can be found here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=19919.0

Be mindful of scrambling and how it can cause a sea battle to occur. This comes into play more so in the Pacific side of the board as Hawaii, Philippines, Japan and a few other key sites have air bases. Also, a lot of these current forum topics regard a new set of rules that are different from what came in the box. The game designer wrote them in an effort to address game balance and they are called Alpha 2. (Alpha 1 did not work, and Alpha 3 is another effort underway).

Here is Alpha 2 on his site: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4167

Thank you for your kind words. I will look at the other sites. The reason I asked the question is just because we use Alpha 2 does not mean it alleviates the other rules set forth in the rule book such as those at pages 27 (Europe) and 26 (Pacific). Since it stated that the sea zone and island group are counted as one movement I understood this to mean that a strategic bomber could hit the Philippines on movement #4 and retreat to Kwangsi by move #7. If this is a correct interpretation it would significantly affect Japan’s strategies and movements. Same if it is not the correct interpretation.

What would be the correct interpretation?

Again regarding Japan’s strategy and again an interpretation of the rules as to U.S. ships not being able to end their movement in sea zones adjacent to a Jap controlled island group. One could state that sz #23 is adjacent to Jap controlled Marianas or Marshall. Other interpretation is adjacent to island group such as sz 22 or sz 32.

Which is it?

@sargon:

Thank you for your kind words. I will look at the other sites. The reason I asked the question is just because we use Alpha 2 does not mean it alleviates the other rules set forth in the rule book such as those at pages 27 (Europe) and 26 (Pacific). Since it stated that the sea zone and island group are counted as one movement I understood this to mean that a strategic bomber could hit the Philippines on movement #4 and retreat to Kwangsi by move #7. If this is a correct interpretation it would significantly affect Japan’s strategies and movements. Same if it is not the correct interpretation.

What would be the correct interpretation?

Again regarding Japan’s strategy and again an interpretation of the rules as to U.S. ships not being able to end their movement in sea zones adjacent to a Jap controlled island group. One could state that sz #23 is adjacent to Jap controlled Marianas or Marshall. Other interpretation is adjacent to island group such as sz 22 or sz 32.

Which is it?

Per page 27, second paragraph, Europe 1940, 3rd sentence: “When flying to an island group, count the surrounding sea zone(1st move) and the island group itself (2nd Move) as one space each.” This means 2 spaces are consumed to reach the island. While I can see how it might be misread, the modifier “one space” before “each”, means each consumes one space. Hence 2 moves.

From Japan a bomber flies: sz6, 19,20,35,THEN the island called Philippines, THEN 35, and crash in your choice of 20,21,34,36,43,44,45 hence making it an illegal move as you must be able to land in order to make the combat move.

Sea zone 23 is empty of and territories to be controlled. As an empty sea zone, Yes USA can move there as there are no Japanese controlled “territories” within it to prevent the move.

Hope that helps, also I am not the “official” answer guy, just looking to help.

I’ll post this funny idea i’ve been musing about, it pretty much throws the entire game out the window, and not having memorized the rule changes for Alapha 2, im not entirely sure if this still works but here goes  :-)

I call it the Berlin-Moscow axis, in it, rather then declaring war on the Soviet Union, the European Axis keep the peace and the Germans contiune to collect the 5IPC’s for being neutral with the soviets. The Soviet Union, for its part, declares War on Japan on R1 or R2, and focuses on only fighting Japan. The Allies (UK, ANZAC, USA) refrain from declaring war on Japan, keeping in place the 10IPC bonus for not occupying FIC while they dont have to worry about using up resources to fight Japan.
The Idea being that, since the Soviets arent doing anything to help the allies fight Germany, the Allies dont have to do anything to help the Soviets fight the Japanese. Its a funny idea, but a rather plausable alternative history match up. It puts Japan in an intresting position, no longer having much use for its massive fleet, and fighting a much more desprate war on the asian mainland. I as the western Allies never come into ditrect conflict with the soviets and the european axis never come into direct conflict with Japan, its dosent break the rules, just neatly skirts around them  :-D

I had the idea when I looked at the initial layout and realized that the European axis have very little direct contact with Japan, and that initially, Japan is only fighting the Chinese. It really dosnt seem to benifit Japan to fight the allies, as attacking south gains them 3 new enemies while still deeply involved in China and leaves a powerful Red Army to their rear. The other key component is that the rules say that the allies, “May declare war on any or all the Axis powers”. This means to me that the allies, and espically the US, can be at war with some axis powers while not at war with others.

just a fun thought, enjoy  :-D

@otahere34 said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule that aircraft on carriers can launch after the carrier makes its movement, cause in real life, if there were carriers in Japan with planes, the planes didn’t take off and attack midway from there, they took off once the carriers got to midway.

@JayDavis said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule, when I play the US, I get the Nimitz in 1941.

@Peck said in Thoughts on a Japanese strategy?:

I have a house rule too. German infantry can cross the English channel without a transport because in real life people can swim across too.

This house ruling is fun!

I have a house rule too.

Obviously it’s only the French, aka Frogs, who can swim over the English Channel. It’s called frog suit. Obviously.

But that is not my house rule.

My house rule partly reflects the installment of the Vichy government, partly builds on French swimming technology being adapted by the Germans, partly includes primitive rocket science and partly simply because Germans are sauerkraut.

With my house rule the Germans can bounce over the English Channel. In fact, they can bounce over most of the annoying obstacles, like Gibraltar, Sahara, Himalayas and the Atlantic. They can even bounce behind enemy lines, if need be.

More or less becoming similar to flying Tribbles.

That is my house rule.

I think the game would be more balanced that way and more fun.