Japan gets killed

I don’t know if “Crush” is the right word.
More like exchange their every naval unit they have east of Egypt to kill two big Japanese ships and maybe a fighter.

1@1, 1@2 (SS) 3@3
So 2 hits

vs
1@2, 3@4
2.33 hits. And the BB can soak a hit.

@oztea:

I don’t know if “Crush” is the right word.
More like exchange their every naval unit they have east of Egypt to kill two big Japanese ships and maybe a fighter.

1@1, 1@2 (SS) 3@3
So 2 hits

vs
1@2, 3@4
2.33 hits. And the BB can soak a hit.

If Germany doesn’t clear the egyptian fighter, it’s a 60% win for the UK if they send the 2nd spit in.  If the UK only uses the sub, carrier, cruisers and fighter, it’s a 60% loss for the UK.  My gut says it’s a risky move for the UK regardless because it’s definitely an all eggs in one basket ploy.

HOWEVER…  With the starting factory, the UK can reinforce India first turn, which means that fighter isn’t quite as important in India.

Japan no longer has the option to send the BB from SZ 60 to Hawaii anymore, so there is no longer a Pearl Heavy option.  best pearl 2 is now 1 CV, 2 fighters, 1 bomber (ending in Wake or Solomans), 1 sub and 1 cruiser, and more likely than not the Carrier will hold back for a pearl light.   It’s certainly an interesting opening setup…

I like that a lot more now that Pearl can’t get Auto-crushed on J1.

Revised had a way of making Pearl Harbor: Episode II……a must do for Japan, simply because of how favorable it was to them.

Japan can afford to rebuild its navy if it plays honest on the coast.

And by that I mean NOT going for Moscow, containing China, and going for India.

You will have financial problems as Japan if you try to fuel a Siberian excursion to knock out the commies.

If the UK has anything left after UK1 w/full on assualt, Japan is S-C-R-E-W-E-D.  That CV FTR would be the last unit taken, and you are already going to drop 3 units there anyways.  And with a CA from SZ19, BB/DD from WUS, and another FTR for the CV with Bomber/FTR on standby in Hawaii (including any purchases made for US1 (like CV/FTR/FTR/Transport), would immediately put the Japanese on the defensive……

Japan was a beast in the first edition. It’s good to see the odds evened up a bit in the pacific.

Frankly, I’m ok with Japan having to play like every other power.
i.e. defensively at times

In classic and revised, they were the orange monster.

Agree Oztea,
They almost never had to wory about being attacked before.

The only thig to be worried about is if they tipped it too far in the other direction.

Well, this is where the Russians balance it out…yep the Japanese will be kept in check, but with a surrounded UK (naval speaking), and an exposed/weakend Russia, Germany can take adavantage of this, although it will be affected with the tank plus 1 cost…I thought 1st ed leaned to the Axis IMHO, but went huge Axis if you immediately took out the EUS fleet G1.

Well, Japan would have been much better contained in classic and revised, and even in this edition, if more than 5 soviet units started in the far east.

A good stack of 6 INF, 1 AAA, and maybe 1 ART spread around over there would have kept the Russians in check.
Also, another territory between Moscow and Manchuria with no value would always help.

Hmm. I like what I’m hearing about Japan.

Maybe I won’t have to hate this version for not-quite-being anniversary after all.

We just had our first game last night and the english fleet got crushed by Japan in the very first U.K round ;)

But you don’t really have any choice but to attack the japanese fleet because they will crush you even harder in their round if you don’t.

BTW. the game ended with the axis powers winning big time.

Russia got crumbled almost from round one. The germans are a lot stronger in this version than the original MB 1942 that i also own.

@maxx001:

The germans are a lot stronger in this version than the original MB 1942 that i also own.

Welcome to the forums maxx. I guess you’ve been out of the loop for a while but this is the 4th edition or so since that old MB version. So lots of things have changed.

But I have to ask. Are you sure you’re not playing the existing 1942 (first) edition. (The germans are also much stronger in that version.) Because this edition has not been released yet. It will be about another week until it comes out.

@Canuck12:

@maxx001:

The germans are a lot stronger in this version than the original MB 1942 that i also own.

Welcome to the forums maxx. I guess you’ve been out of the loop for a while but this is the 4th edition or so since that old MB version. So lots of things have changed.

But I have to ask. Are you sure you’re not playing the existing 1942 (first) edition. (The germans are also much stronger in that version.) Because this edition has not been released yet. It will be about another week until it comes out.

Yes i got it thursday this week for 52 USD.

And you’re right, I haven’t played any other version than the original 2nd edition from mb. and this new 2nd edition :)

A) As a die hard Kill Japan First fan, I have to say, any game that makes it easier has my attention - hands down.
B) In Classic Russia had 7 infantry in the east, not 5, and that wasnt anywhere close too enough.  What we did was just plain out ban Japan from flying over or walking/driving into Russian territories - period.  Made them a lot more manageable (and killed that frackin POS gimp move of Magic 84 for the axis as well.  Lamest copout rule I’ve ever seen, so glad it was never reincarnated in Larry’s games!)
C) For those that dont know, I’m also a die hard fan of Kill America First, it’s just so darn pesky to set up it’s usually not worth it.

@kcdzim:

Japan no longer has the option to send the BB from SZ 60 to Hawaii anymore, so there is no longer a Pearl Heavy option.  best pearl 2 is now 1 CV, 2 fighters, 1 bomber (ending in Wake or Solomans), 1 sub and 1 cruiser, and more likely than not the Carrier will hold back for a pearl light.   It’s certainly an interesting opening setup… Â

Also, unless I am miscounting somewhere, if Japan does hold back the carrier at Pearl, they can only get one fighter to the battle.  There is no fighter, other than the one in SZ50, less than 4 spaces from SZ53.

So if they hold back the CV, it is
1 fighter, 1 bomber, 1 sub and 1 cruiser
vs.
1 Fighter, 1 CV, 1 sub and 1 destroyer

Japan should win that but they probably take two casualties, maybe 3 if some luck is on the US side.

On the bright side, the UK has no way to reinforce the Pearl fleet on UK1.  Though they could try and weaken Pearl2 by killing the Japan sub with 1 cruiser, 1 sub from Australia if they forego the East Indies attack.

@JamesG:

@kcdzim:

Japan no longer has the option to send the BB from SZ 60 to Hawaii anymore, so there is no longer a Pearl Heavy option. � best pearl 2 is now 1 CV, 2 fighters, 1 bomber (ending in Wake or Solomans), 1 sub and 1 cruiser, and more likely than not the Carrier will hold back for a pearl light. �  It’s certainly an interesting opening setup… �

Also, unless I am miscounting somewhere, if Japan does hold back the carrier at Pearl, they can only get one fighter to the battle.  There is no fighter, other than the one in SZ50, less than 4 spaces from SZ53.

So if they hold back the CV, it is
1 fighter, 1 bomber, 1 sub and 1 cruiser
vs.
1 Fighter, 1 CV, 1 sub and 1 destroyer

Japan should win that but they probably take two casualties, maybe 3 if some luck is on the US side.

On the bright side, the UK has no way to reinforce the Pearl fleet on UK1.  Though they could try and weaken Pearl2 by killing the Japan sub with 1 cruiser, 1 sub from Australia if they forego the East Indies attack.

Right you are, Pearl light would be down a fighter as well.  Edit:  Actually, no, it wouldn’t necessarily.  You could send the fighter under the assumption that it will live and you will win, and reinforce with the carrier if the fighter survived.  But if you took the fighter as a casualty, you could move the carrier anywhere you wanted.  Might be a high price to pay, but still possible.

But UK cannot actually kill the Japanese sub unless the Japanese player is a fool - Subs can always choose to submerge before combat.  Unless you have a destroyer, you can never guarantee combat with a sub.

As for East Indies, I think Germany will now be forced to throw ALOT at Egypt on G1- including at least 2 fighter or the fighter and bomber to guarantee that the UK fighter dies.  Once the fighter is gone, it looks like a foolish UK player who would throw down against the Indies fleet.

@kcdzim:

~~Right you are, Pearl light would be down a fighter as well.~~  Edit:  Actually, no, it wouldn’t necessarily.  You could send the fighter under the assumption that it will live and you will win, and reinforce with the carrier if the fighter survived.  But if you took the fighter as a casualty, you could move the carrier anywhere you wanted.  Might be a high price to pay, but still possible.

You are completely right.  I probably blocked that possibility out of my mind because I hate that rule.  If I was made King of A&A the rule would be that all fighters must have a legal landing place at the end of the combat move.  A much simplier and easier to police rule.  No more saying what your CVs will do during noncombat to make your fighter’s move legal.  Either the CVs make the move during the combat move phase, or the fighters can not make the move themselves.

But UK cannot actually kill the Japanese sub unless the Japanese player is a fool - Subs can always choose to submerge before combat.  Unless you have a destroyer, you can never guarantee combat with a sub.

Right again, and I thought of this after I posted.  I think in an earlier version of A&A there would always be one round of combat before subs could submerge and that probably confused me.

As for East Indies, I think Germany will now be forced to throw ALOT at Egypt on G1- including at least 2 fighter or the fighter and bomber to guarantee that the UK fighter dies.  Once the fighter is gone, it looks like a foolish UK player who would throw down against the Indies fleet.

I don’t think Germany can get any fighters to Egypt on the new map.  The only air they can get there is the bomber.  Fighters on Italy or Southern Europe could get there, but the German setup has no aircraft in either location.  I do agree that a UK attack on the East Indies without the Egypt fighter is not a good one.  They would probably lose everything and only kill 2 fighters.  Probably not a good trade off even if the US is committed to KJF.

ugh, right you are.  I didn’t study the euro borders - seazones (and setup) completely changed in southern europe.  At best, Germany kills the fighter 70% of the time.  Which means it looks like Japan can be hammered 30% of the time.