Japan strategy

I’ve been thinking about this lately.  Actually Young G got me thinking about it.  Cmdr Jenn mentioned it also a while back.  Its gonna open up another arm of possible strategy for Japan.  China will always be strapped to the mainland, HKong and Burma.  So are there ways to just bypass the headache and focus on gaining income and more importantly VCs elsewhere???

I mean in total Japan is only gaining 12IPC per turn for China.  Why not focus on securing the DEI and gun for India/Australia.  Maybe even attack Russia, break the pact and gain more income that way.

However, Japan maybe giving up Shanghai in that case and Manchuria and Korea are pretty important, or are they???  Hmmm…good topic.

Subsaharan Africa would make a nice cash cow for Japan after taking out India.

Allies get to stage their planes there.  Also the loss of income is more than 12 when you throw in everywhere the Chinese can advance.

Yes and No.

1st off, china cuts into your income. 2nd off china makes bread and butter units (inf and art).

So if you ignore china you basically racing. You go for the national objectives. After calcutta  all you need is hawaii so all your eggs go in that basket before china cuts you off of money / NO.

lastly, china is not hard to deal with -.-. on average 1 japan inf kills 3 chinese.

If you’re planning on helping Germany kill Russia, it could work. What I see people do is either pull out of china, and send the units north through Siberia, or build a couple of factories and completely push through china in a line aimed at Stalingrad. Either way, you completely abandon any hope of a Pacific victory.

Quick answer: no.
1. You’ll lose mainland ($11 plus opportunity cost of $12 from Chinese tt’s=$23 lost by Japan).
2. Chinese can advance onto Hong Kong and take it back.
3. Chinese can take Burma, putting you in trouble if you want land-based invasion of India.
4. Allies use China/Korea as base.
5. Screws up your lines–isolated in India, Siberia.

@Little_Boot:

If you’re planning on helping Germany kill Russia, it could work. What I see people do is either pull out of china, and send the units north through Siberia, or build a couple of factories and completely push through china in a line aimed at Stalingrad. Either way, you completely abandon any hope of a Pacific victory.

A third way is to turtle in z6 and fly the Japanese air force to the European theater.  An airbase in Suiyuyan puts 20ish air units in German occupied Novgorod as early as turn 4 (seriously look at the map!).  From there they may can opener up and down the Eastern Front and SBR Moscow every turn.  If the Americans and British try to come in through Denmark strait they can sink anything in z112/113, and if things look scarey they can always NCM to Berlin or maybe a new airbase in Northern Italy.  Finally, after Germany has strafed Moscow from Smolensk or Bryansk and their infantry is depleted, the jap airforce can suicide itself against what remains and then the Germans mop up the Bolshevik on the following turn.

I can testify to the value of this strat. Course you’re giving up the pacific to make this happen. But it’s a very interesting way to throw the allies a curveball.

Japan should pursue a victory on the pacific side of the board… it is not hard. after india you just need hawaii.

It is easier to get a pacific victory than a europe victory, because after russia you got to take UK over or get egypt.

Hard to take egypt with UK pacific and UK around, if you got Calcutta you are probably 1 VC away from a pacific victory, all you got to do is go for it.

Why go out of your way to deal with ruskies and get an egypt victory? Those units take rounds to get there… I can see if you are done with asia and have extra guys layin around… sure just send it over.

Hawaii 3 spaces away from japan… So anything you drop has to directly be countered by USA/ANZAC income. Germany’s victory will come in time if not for yours.

In fact you are a much bigger threat being 1 VC away from victory. Lots of games are won in the pacific especially before round 10.

This strat is certainly plausible, but watch for when US sees what you’re doing and starts sending upwards of 80% of its income into the Atlantic.  It’ll make the Europe victory - which is realistically the only one you’ll be getting - only difficult.

Yes that’s true, but 80% of $52 for the first 3 turns isn’t really all that much, and the earliest their puny force can be at Gibraltar is round 4 because they are stuck next to US territories on the Europe map until then.   By that time Germany may be close to Moscow if they launched Barbarossa G2 or maybe even G1.

I’ve been tryng to think of what I would do as the allies against this and I am stumped.  It completely unbalances the Pacific so that Japan cannot win over there, but it also unbalances the situation so badly on the Europe map that the axis probably do get the VC win on that side.  They only need to win on one map.  I don’t like it though because it feels phoney baloney.  There weren’t thousands of japanese airplanes in Leningrad.

Well, you still need to fight your way through the middle east to grab that last VC or build a navy to threaten UK itself. It’s still up in the air, although I think the map as it is is slanted your way. I’m not ready to throw in the towel just yet though. I guess I’ll see if you’ve got any more surprises up your sleeve.

I’m not too sure what all I could’ve done differently either. I put a lot into Africa early with UK, maybe I could’ve started landing in europe sooner. But then I’d be facing an Italy with a good presence in the med, threatening that last VC if they didn’t have it already.

aint over til its over.

I’m not talking about Atlantic spending during those first few turns.
In the first few it’ll be pretty evenly split, and on US1 I’ll still probably spend everything in the Pacific so that I can start advancing quickly once I’m at war.

The heavy Atlantic spending will most likely happen a couple turns later, but Italy will be neutralized very quickly, and Rome’s safety will be at risk.

@Vance:

By that time Germany may be close to Moscow if they launched Barbarossa G2 or maybe even G1.

I don’t quite understand this part.  If Russia plays well, there’s no way you’ll be threatening Moscow until G6/G7 at the absolute earliest, and if you do, it’ll be the balls-out 100% Mechs + Tanks strat, which is stopped cold by allied fighter reinforcement.
If you go for a more efficient Barbarossa, US will be in force more than in time to make an impact.
Unless you’re thinking of something I don’t see, you’re relying on poor Russian play.
Russia can hold out by itself quite well in time for the Western Allies to divert German resources and lock down Moscow with fighters, given that Japan decides to abandon any chance of a Pacific victory.

man what are you guys complaining about?

japan has to do pacific, you try to do some tricky ruskie play you end up making uk pacific a real country.

don’t worry, when the stable comes out, I’ll post a save of standard axis and allies rounds 1-3 for low luck games.

Sometimes I forget to move a few pieces here or there, I got to make a save someday so I know what I am doing lol.

@Alsch91:

it’ll be the balls-out 100% Mechs + Tanks strat, which is stopped cold by allied fighter reinforcement.

Yes, that’s what I am thinking.  A few fighters can be a big help to Russia, but will that be enough if they haven’t had time to build infantry and they have been suffering SBR?

Another piece of this may be an IC in Hungary so that mechs built there can reach Moscow in 2 turns, and then Moscow falls turn 5 or 6 with a G1 Barbarossa.  It’s an all out offensive strategy, with Italy playing defense in Northern Italy.  By the time the Allies can arrive with enough force to establish a foothold on the continent, Russia is gone and Germany has a windfall to spend.  It’s just too fast for the allies to respond.

@Vance:

Yes that’s true, but 80% of $52 for the first 3 turns isn’t really all that much, and the earliest their puny force can be at Gibraltar is round 4 because they are stuck next to US territories on the Europe map until then.   By that time Germany may be close to Moscow if they launched Barbarossa G2 or maybe even G1.

I’ve been tryng to think of what I would do as the allies against this and I am stumped.  It completely unbalances the Pacific so that Japan cannot win over there, but it also unbalances the situation so badly on the Europe map that the axis probably do get the VC win on that side.  They only need to win on one map.  I don’t like it though because it feels phoney baloney.  There weren’t thousands of japanese airplanes in Leningrad.

This is why it is key for the US to make Atlantic purchases early and the UK to preserve its Fleet in the Med by sailing it around the Horn of Africa to meet with the US TT arriving at SZ91 on US4, and being reinforced by the UK ships on UK4.

US1: 2 TT, 1 CR
US2: 2 TT, 1 CR
US3: 1 TT, Inf to fill up the TT
US4: 5 Inf, 5 Art (35 IPC), 4/5 TT (28/35) Land 5 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Art, 3 Mech on Morocco.
UK4: Reinforce SZ91 with at least 1 CV, 1 DD, 1 CR + Whatever ships survived the G1 attack.  UK should be utilizing its surviving TT to get units out of Canada and onto Gib and then ferrying Inf from Brazil to Gib.

US then has a choice of either sending those Inf from Morocco on TT to any of the landing zones in Europe (Holland, Normandy, S.France - and if UK got a NB on Gib by chance Denmark, Norway, and W.Germany open up too).  If you want to ignore Europe, you can advance in N.Africa or even threaten Rome and N.Italy.  Those TT can even go back to E.USA on US5 to be in position to pick up more US units to start a rotation of TT landings in Morocco of 10 units every turn.

Italy is going to have a hard time of it taking Egypt by the end of I4, and even if it does, it isn’t going to have a lot of ground units to defend both Rome, Egypt and N.Italy because it has to send literally everything it has to take a toughly defended Egypt.

A split Allied Landing on both Rome and N.Italy prevents Germany from blitzing from W.Germany to Rome to Liberate Rome.  With a second US landing hitting Morocco the same time you possibly take Rome, you have 10 units of reinforcement hitting Rome.

Of course, Jap planes are the question mark here, but if the Axis cannot take and hold Egypt, or loses Rome - those Jap planes become less relevant as Japan has precious few resource centers to add more units to the Europe Map.

Japan won’t commit their planes past the point of no return till turn 3-4 if not later. If US builds nothing in the pacific, what’s to stop Japan from recalling those planes and going crazy in the pacific? Even with their planes gone, the Japanese navy is still powerful enough to bully the Anzacs and UK Pac without a strong American presence to help contain Japanese expansion. In that scenario, Japan will start to become a power big enough to still get a pacific victory with a lot of their air gone. If nothing else, the US needs at least some Pacific purchases to keep Japan honest. You don’t have to commit to a full kill japan strat.

If the Brits pull out of the med, it’ll be too late for the allies to win. Italy will get Egy for the axis last VC and Germany will get every USSR VC. Italy will be cash rich enough that they’ll be able to deter allied expansion into the med for awhile, especially with 20 japanese air units poised to wreck/strafe any allied fleet sailing past sz91 for Italy to finish off. Italy will have more than enough to cover Germany’s western beaches while the majority of the German army is pushing towards Moscow and victory. Eventually the allies will be able to land in large force in Europe or force their way into the med. By that time Germany can send mech/tanks through the middle east to reinforce Egy and they’ll have 100+ cash to spend because Moscow just fell.