Five of the Japanese Openings

NINJA TURTLE DEFENSE

What is it?

Sometimes Japan just needs to dig in and defend itself, without worrying about grand strategic objectives on other parts of the map. This opening will show you how.

What should you build?

2-3 transports, 6-8 fighters, 2-3 destroyers, and lots of infantry. Hold off on building carriers until you really need them – they’re not useful for attacking mainland Asia, and they’re vulnerable to large wolf packs of submarines if the US sees you building them far enough in advance to build the wolf pack. You can plop down an (extra) pair of carriers in sea zone 62 immediately before the US attacks and land fighters from Tokyo directly on the newly-built carriers, blocking off most of the decent US attack routes. Avoid building any factories, because factories create a second choke point that you have to defend (other than Tokyo) from an American invasion.

How should you attack?

As with the Polar Express opening, you want to make smart, opportunistic trades in East Asia. Gaining income from extra territories is nice, but only if it’s going to pay off quickly enough to help you hold Tokyo – there’s no sense in losing 10 IPCs’ worth of units to gain a 1 IPC-territory when the big battle for Tokyo will be on turn 6 or 7. Also, you’re not trying to conquer any territory in particular, but you do want to wipe out Allied forces in the region at minimal cost to yourself. If you can keep the British cooped up in India and force the Americans to rely exclusively on what they can bring in by transport, then you’ll have an easier time defending.

When should you use this opening?

Don’t be too easily intimidated – if America plonks down one extra carrier in the Pacific, that by itself doesn’t mean that they’re going to be able to shut you down or even that they’re necessarily going to try to kill you – it could be a bluff, or a mistake, or some odd tactic that’s not immediately apparent. If America attacks Japan on its own, without any support from Britain or Russia, you should be able to sink the American fleet at a profit, even without any special defensive tactics. On the other hand, if you see that Britain is shifting Egyptian troops over to India, and Russia is shifting troops from Moscow / Caucasus into China, and America is moving ships out of the Atlantic and into the Pacific, then you have a problem, and you need to stop thinking about how to conquer Asia and start thinking about how to stay alive as long as possible. If the Allies have a bid, consider using this opening when you see a British sub in the Indian Ocean, a bid of more than one infantry in China, infantry in Hawaii, and/or an extra ship or extra fighter off the coast of Hawaii.

Why does it work?

If all three Allies (or Britain and America with token help from Russia) are focused on attacking Japan, then all you have to do is survive and avoid gifting the Allies a mainland factory, and Germany should be able to beat up Russia and run away with the game.

What kind of middlegame can you expect?

Japan is going to be small and under siege, with probably only a couple of territories under control beyond Tokyo itself, and a large stack of infantry and fighters defending Tokyo. Germany should be enormous, occupying both Africa and Siberia and starting to put pressure on India. Your goal as Japan is to continue to stay alive as long as possible, re-taking some of your territories or sinking some Allied transports when you see a good opportunity to do so without losing your capital.

CONCLUSION

So, that’s five Japanese openings! Did I forget your favorite opening? Can you think of a way to execute one of these five openings more effectively, or a reason why one of these openings is doomed to failure? Let me know in the comments!

Thanks everyone! Glad you like the post. :-)

Herr Rommel, I’m having trouble understanding why 3 tanks per turn in India would be a special problem for Japan, even if you want to hold on to Indochina. On turn 1, the most Britain can put into Burma is 4 infantry and 1 AA gun. You can attack Burma using your starting transport to carry (1 inf, 1 tnk) from Tokyo, plus a pair of battleships for bombardment, plus the (2 inf, 1 art) that start in Indochina, plus at least 2 fighters and a bomber. That battle is a 99% win for Japan, even when Britain reinforces Burma to the max.

Taking Burma on Japan’s first turn means that Indochina is safe from attack on Britain’s second turn.

On your first turn as Japan, you can build 3 transports without breaking a sweat, and you start off with the extra infantry sitting around ready to load onto the transports – so starting on turn 2, and every turn thereafter, you can match India’s 3 tanks with a naval delivery of at least 6 infantry. You can also land a couple of fighters in Indochina for added protection if you really want to. Six British tanks vs. two Japanese fighters and six Japanese infantry is an 87% win for Japan, and the odds only get better from there – if even one of your infantry from the Burma campaign survived, then odds go up to 96%.

Meanwhile, Britain is very weak in Europe/Africa, because they are spending money that they don’t have to go nowhere in Asia. Germany will soon vacuum up Africa, leaving Britain without the 18 IPCs/turn it needs to keep max placing tanks.

Innohub, how do you use the East Indies factory to speed up the India crush? What turn do you usually wind up assaulting India? I’ve never understood how that is supposed to work. Since you need 2 transports just to service the East Indies factory, you’re spending 29 IPCs on logistics. If you crush India on turn 4, that means you get two turns worth of transport deliveries out of your factory – so you’re spending something like 29 + 16 + 16 = 61 IPCs to deliver 4 inf, 2 art, 2 tnk to India, for total offensive power of (2 * 1) + (4 * 2) + (2 * 3) = 16. With that same 61 IPCs, I’d rather buy 6 fighters, for total offensive power of 18. You still need some land units as fodder for your fighters and to hold the territory, but you start out with 13 land units in Asia, and if you build even 1 more transport (for a total of 2), you can ferry over about 6 more land units over the first three turns.

Thanks, Innohub! That makes a lot of sense. I’m imagining something like this:

J1: Build East Indies Factory and 1 transport, save $8, move starting transports to Yunnan with troops from Tokyo. Start marching troops from Kwantung, Indochina, and Malaya toward India via Yunnan and Burma. Attack Anhwei mostly with troops from Manchuria, leaving 2 inf in Kiangsu.
J2: Build 2 inf + 2 art in East Indies and 2 bombers in Tokyo, move Burma transports to Kiangsu & Philippines to pick up troops and drop them off in Burma, move new Tokyo transport to Burma with remaining Tokyo troops. March units from Indochina and Yunnan into Burma.
J3: Use all 3 transports to ferry 4 inf, 2 art from East Indies to India together with support from BBs while also attacking India from Burma and with help from new bombers in Tokyo.

Total army is approx. 14 inf, 6 art, 1 tnk, 4 ftr, 2 bmbr, 2 BBs.

If the British build 2 inf, 1 ftr in India on rounds 1, 2, and 3, and they move in every available troop from Egypt through Burma to defend India (minus a loss of 1 infantry to a G1 attack on Trans-Jordan), that still only leaves them with 12 inf, 1 art, 1 tnk, 4 ftr, 1 AA gun to defend India on round 3.

Odds on that battle are 98.9% in favor of the Japanese! Even adding in two Russian tanks and one American fighter as emergency reinforcements, odds are still 84% for the Japanese. I like those odds. I look forward to giving it a try the next time a British player gives me the opportunity! Taking India on round 3 would be a great way to accelerate the Japanese expansion – and since it leaves you with 3 transports, some planes, and a decent position in China, you really don’t have to sacrifice that much to get there. Thanks for showing me a new way to look at the East Indies factory. :-)

I dunno, I don’t think the threat to make me “waste” my East Indian factory is very convincing. As Black_Elk points out, it’s five spaces away, which means that ships built on A1 can’t reach East Indies sea zone until after the J4 build. If you’re worried about getting diced in Pearl Harbor, you can send the cruiser, sub, carrier, two fighters, and a bomber – it’s overkill, but you’re going to win. That leaves the US with only the BB and DD off the coast of San Francisco that can reach East Indies before J4, and it’s very easy to ward them off with your starting 2 BB + 1 CV + 1 DD.

If you build the factory on J1, you can use it to crank out infantry on J2 and J3, and then switch to naval defense on J4 if America really is coming for you, which you’ll see a mile away. That doesn’t sound wasted at all to me!

That said, if Britain successfully sank my Caroline Islands BB + CV on turn 1, I would think twice about an East Indian factory, but that’s as much on general principles as it is because I’m specifically worried about defending the factory – an all-out attack on SZ 37 suggests that it’s a KJF kind of game, and while I’ve got some cojones, I usually don’t have quite enough cojones to go for a turn-3 blitz on India while both Britain and America are coming to kill me.

You’re also making good points, but I still think you can get good use out of an East Indies factory even when the USA is attacking you as long as your Caroline Island fleet in SZ 37 survives UK 1.

Innohub and I lay out a plan above that shows you how, with the East Indies factory, Japan can take India on J3. Keep in mind that, according to this plan, there are zero factories in China and zero transports in sea zone 60 – all three of Japan’s transports go west to India and then even further west to Africa. As a result, if the US makes a fast move to the northwest Pacific (Alaska / Wake / Midway / Iwo Jima / Manchuria) with only one or two transports, you don’t have to block that naval move at all.

Instead, you can just retreat your infantry one step into the Chinese interior. Let the US drop four infantry into Manchuria if they want to. You can just retake Manchuria next turn with two or three Asian infantry and two or three fighters, without any Japanese boats at all in the northwest Pacific. Now the Americans are sitting around on their thumbs, unchallenged masters of Tokyo Bay, with no land units and no good options, while Germany starts camping in West Russia and Japan builds tanks in India to trade for Kazakh and Novosibirsk.

On the other hand, if America makes a heavy move into the northwest Pacific, with 4+ loaded transports and enough boats to defend them against the starting Japanese navy and airforce, then there’s no way in heck they’re getting to the coast of Asia before US 5 – and when you see that buildup, you have time to bring your fleet back from India to defend Tokyo and to build some extra infantry on the Japanese mainland.

Will you make use of all 12 builds every turn if America sends everything into the northwest Pacific? No, but that’s totally fine, because the point of the factory isn’t to max out my builds on a regular basis; the point is to take India one turn sooner (turn 3 instead of turn 4) and then to take Italian East Africa and Madagascar one turn sooner (turn 4 instead of turn 5). That’s worth at least 10 IPCs right there just from the income swing, let alone the hit to the British from losing their factory and the boost to the Japanese from gaining a well-placed factory, which has got to be worth another 10 IPCs because now instead of stalling out in Burma and making negative value trades, you can sweep through central Asia and pick off isolated Allied forces at favorable odds. Another 5-10 IPCs of value comes from the fact that America doesn’t want to be in the northwest Pacific; they want to be in the southwest Pacific hoovering up the money islands, and your East Indies factory is keeping them out of there and forcing them to fight over islands that are literally worth 0 IPCs just so they stay out of range of your East Indies factory. Finally, the East Indies factory gives you the option of placing max defense into Japan (e.g., 7 infantry, 1 fighter) while still building a couple of subs or destroyers in a safe location (East Indies). That’s worth another few IPCs. The cost of 15 IPCs for the factory winds up being worth around 35 IPCs in value – it’s a good profit, and under the right circumstances, it’s a better profit than you can make on a fourth transport or on a factory placed in China.

The way I see it, there are only three good responses to the East Indies factory option: (a) blow up the second Japanese transport on England’s first turn so that the Japanese can’t guarantee a sack of India on J3, (b) blow up the Caroline Islands fleet on England’s first turn so that if Japan does sack India on J3, America can build up naval superiority quickly enough to make Japan pay a heavy price for its Indian adventure, or © abandon India, building 0-2 infantry there over three turns, and focus on building up a great Atlantic fleet that can quickly seize Paris or Rome. The fourth option (send a medium-sized American fleet to Wake Island and hope Japan panics) just isn’t an effective counter-attack.

Aha! Well, if the UK hits the J trn/dd in SZ 61 on UK 1, then I completely agree with you! With only one starting transport, the largest army I can figure out how to get to India on J3 is only 13 inf, 5 art, 1 tnk, 4 ftr, 1 bmbr, 2 BBs, which I don’t think is enough to give you good odds if Britain strongly reinforces India.

And yeah, it is nice to see what the US is doing before you commit. Picking an ambiguous strategy like ferrying troops into China builds your economy while also getting you a little bit closer to India, whereas the US has to make a bold choice on turn 1 – go Pacific, or go Atlantic. If the US just sits in San Francisco, they’re wasting their time, and if the US moves toward Panama, then that becomes much more costly for them to “undo” than for Japan to re-route from China to India.

Hi, MarineIguana. Please keep in mind that I’m well aware of the orthodox strategies for 1942.2, so when I write about other strategies, I usually either (a) have a niche scenario in mind where given the particular circumstances of that scenario, another strategy can be just as good, or (b) am purposely exploring other strategies that are fun but not optimal. You’re more than welcome to point out where my suggested strategies would go wrong – but please be careful not to just point out that my strategies are different from the orthodox strategies and then promptly conclude that my strategies must be wrong because they’re different from the orthodox strategies.

1. I agree, Japan cannot defeat America in Alaska and will in fact be pushed out of Alaska within at most five rounds after landing there. The point of going to Alaska is not to seize San Francisco – it’s to distract the USA during a critical window so that Germany can capture Moscow.

2, 3, and 4) In general, I totally agree with you that transports beat factories for Japan round 1. I also agree that Britain should usually sink Japan’s transport in SZ 61 on round 1. However, if Britain chooses not to, or if Britain gets diced and fails to sink the transport, then I think the round 1 East Indies factory is an optimal strategy that guarantees a round 3 capture of India unless the Allies divert way more troops to defending India then they can possibly afford. Note that even if Britain builds 3 land in India and 2 fighters / turn in London to fly to India, only one round of fighters (so, 2 fighters, total) will reach India in time to defend against a J3 attack. That’s not enough; if Japan keeps both starting transports, then India still falls on round 3 unless you also send massive Russian support. It’s useful to keep Szechuan safe on R1, but by itself that doesn’t interfere much with the Japanese blitz on India – at most you’re saving the American fighter to go to India and defend there.