And it’s bad enough that you’ll be sacrificing 1/3 of what Japan starts with on mainland Asia but it’s also heartbreaking to watch the armor die because you can’t retreat it from the battle if it goes badly.
to the orginial question how long does it take to drive to moscow the answer is 4660 miles or anywhere from 50 to 78 horurs depending on how fast you drive. http://www.indo.com/cgi-bin/dist/place2=moscow%2C+russia?place1=tokyo%2C+japan
but i say you should slways attack buryatia if russia moves there unless you can better use those battleships. most of the time you should attack.
I would say Japan is better off focusing their forces on the US and UK territories. My reasoning is that If the Russians stack in BURY that is all they have. Russia can’t create a focused attack on Japan from the North. So as Japan it is really a non threat. When you have more transports and can get some more forces to take the little soviets out.
That is exactly WHY you blast it… remove ALL threat from Russia and open a clear path to Moscow.
What Japan MOST wants to avoid is those 6 INF being used in a delaying tactic that slows the Japan advance and chews up Japan INF. Kill them all in one shot, then drop the massed INF (Japan, Oki, Wake, Phil) on J2 in Bury and start WALKING.
As for how fast…
Current game I have 10 INF on the Russian Front Lines as Japan after J5. 1 in Evenk, Kazakh, Persia, 7 in Novo. I could have had up to 9 more INF in that front wall, but I held most of my INF back this turn, pressing hard only in Novo…
And just FYI: I have 14 INF in the second tier territories of Yakut/Sinkiang/India, and have a Japan foothold in Africa while the Germans still have not been cleared from Africa…
Newbie here, i am still trying to figure out how to get japan involved as earliest as possible on the mainland. i see everyone is big on taking bury, but my question is, shouldn’t japan be taking out china in J1? getting rid of that fighter is crucial. also i have tried Pearl Harbour and attacking india in the same round and was successful. i am now leaning towards leaving the BS in SZ60, to try and help with the transportation of troops into Bury.
Newbie here, i am still trying to figure out how to get japan involved as earliest as possible on the mainland. i see everyone is big on taking bury, but my question is, shouldn’t japan be taking out china in J1? getting rid of that fighter is crucial. also i have tried Pearl Harbour and attacking india in the same round and was successful. i am now leaning towards leaving the BS in SZ60, to try and help with the transportation of troops into Bury.
Build 3 transports and 1 tank.
You’re right about China and that fighter; good assessment. What people aren’t writing is that they hit Burytia AND China. China’s almost a given.
Doing Pearl AND India is . . . tricky.
tricky but not unheard of…id say in over half my games i can pull it off…
Build 3 transports and 1 tank.
Interesting. Care to elaborate on the tank? I never build a tank that early because I never think I need a second one that early when I have all that fighter support against very little opposition. J2 or J3 I’ll build and IC or two and start pumping tanks (as well as building half inf/half tanks at Japan). Do you need another tank that early, or are 2 inf better?
Alright switch I see your point. Taking out that stack does free up that northern route. I was thinking if you send your invasion force of inf from Japan you can BB bombard as long you leave 1 BB in sz60. Also if you have most of your AF in the Area you can take that stack of 6 inf with very little loss.
Don’t put TOO much faith in me…
I am getting kicked out of the E/N/K/P perimeter as we speak…
But yes, you can advance much faster if htose units die right away. If they retreat and slow you, they just bleed away your forces as you advance…
I would say Japan is better off focusing their forces on the US and UK territories. My reasoning is that If the Russians stack in BURY that is all they have. Russia can’t create a focused attack on Japan from the North. So as Japan it is really a non threat. When you have more transports and can get some more forces to take the little soviets out.
Thats exactly WHY you tear through. It takes SO much preassure off of Germany when Japan invades. It just makes the whole game easier for the axis if Russia can be cut down to next to nothing.
Build 3 transports and 1 tank.
Interesting. Care to elaborate on the tank? I never build a tank that early because I never think I need a second one that early when I have all that fighter support against very little opposition. J2 or J3 I’ll build and IC or two and start pumping tanks (as well as building half inf/half tanks at Japan). Do you need another tank that early, or are 2 inf better?
1. Assuming the Kwangtung transport was destroyed by UK, I will have 4 transports at the end of J1. Even so, I will have enough infantry to fill those transports on J2. I think I grab 2 from Phillipines, 1 from Wake, 1 from Midway, 2 from Japan, 1 artillery from Japan, plus the tank produced on J1. In short - you don’t NEED 2 inf, your transports are already being filled, so why bother making infantry?
2. Tanks help you hold ground, infantry don’t. Tanks can also blitz. The earlier you have a tank on the front, the more it can do.
3. I prefer to produce tanks, so I can divert from an attack from India to Ssinkiang to Yakut quickly. Infantry and a couple artillery are always valuable, but the Allies CAN shift position to respond to concentrations of slow-moving Japanese infantry. The Allies have a far more difficult time stopping Japanese tanks from doing mass reinforcement, blitzing, and territory claiming.
Some observations on the Japanese front:
Russia can mass 10 inf in Yakut. Combined with 2 ftr threatening from Moscow, it makes impractical to even land in Buryat until J3 (when uniting with forces landed in Manchuria on J2).
A Russian inf+ARTY mass in Novosibirsk is very effective at gaining more time, or punishing not-too-strong approaches (either from east or south).
Is the southern approach (Indochina, India, Persia, Caucasus) viable ? I found it very hard to do together with a northern approach towards Novosibirsk. The same Russian tanks and fighters can threaten both, effectively ‘doubling’ their presence. Maybe press only the southern route ?
A steady moderate flow is possible to both routes: 4 transports, 2 are off FIC and 2 of Japan. Each turn, the FIC ones move to Japan, load and unload 4 units to Buryat; the Japan transports load 4 units and unload 4 units to FIC.
Later, after much struggle… Japan succeeded to bring the mass in Novosibirsk and have it survive. The flow of reinforcements from Japan >tra >Buryat >Yakut is very ‘inertial’ and ‘slow’ (and other routes are slower). UK and/or US sent some help to Moscow, and can send more. Now what to do to crack Moscow before Allies crack Berlin ?
Build 3 transports and 1 tank.
Interesting. Care to elaborate on the tank? I never build a tank that early because I never think I need a second one that early when I have all that fighter support against very little opposition. J2 or J3 I’ll build and IC or two and start pumping tanks (as well as building half inf/half tanks at Japan). Do you need another tank that early, or are 2 inf better?
There are three fronts for Japan; China, Yakut, and India. Having a tank at any or all of these locations helps you blitz, the earlier you have a tank at those fronts, the earlier you can blitz. You won’t have fighter support early game as Japan in all likelihood, because you probably want to deal with UK and/or US navy.
3 transports 1 tank is for tank dash; you’re trying to kick down the door to India, build an IC there, and then start pushing through Caucasus/India. Technically, you don’t NEED to build a tank, but if you already know you’re going dedicated tank dash, then you start the tank production ASAP.
As far as infantry on J1 build go - well, you only have 4 transports AFTER the build assuming a UK attack on Kwangtung transport. Even if you had 5 transports, though, which you sometimes will, you still want to use some of those transports pulling Jap infantry off the islands. Really, you don’t have the transport capacity to dump those two extra J1 built infantry on the mainland on J2 anyways, so you might as well build a tank. Artillery isn’t bad either. Either way, I just don’t think it’s necessary to build infantry on J1.
Some observations on the Japanese front:
- Russia can mass 10 inf in Yakut. Combined with 2 ftr threatening from Moscow, it makes impractical to even land in Buryat until J3 (when uniting with forces landed in Manchuria on J2).
Yeah, but think about it, where are those 10 infantry gonna go? If they move forwards to the coast, Japan kills them with mass fighters and transported infantry. And if the 10 infantry stay there, Japan builds up forces and kicks them out anyways. And that is a lot less infantry going against Germany. Frankly, I’d land in Burytia on J1, and let you try to grab the territory back. 10 infantry go down REAL quick to 4 Japanese transports plus fighters/bomber on J2. Besides, if you use Russian fighters against Japan, you can’t trade territory nearly as effectively with Germany. Plus the Russian fighters have to be committed to the east, they can’t fly back into range to threaten Germany.
- A Russian inf+ARTY mass in Novosibirsk is very effective at gaining more time, or punishing not-too-strong approaches (either from east or south).
True, but again, you’re bleeding off reserves from the German front. Novosibirsk is important, yes. But sometimes you cannot count on being able to bulk up at Novosibirsk due to German pressure.
- Is the southern approach (Indochina, India, Persia, Caucasus) viable ? I found it very hard to do together with a northern approach towards Novosibirsk. The same Russian tanks and fighters can threaten both, effectively ‘doubling’ their presence. Maybe press only the southern route ?
And just where do those Russian tanks have to be to threaten both Novosibirsk and India? Caucasus. In other words, Not West Russia. In other words, if the Russians are building tanks, they have less infantry. In other words, less infantry, more tanks, weaker West Russia, stronger German offense. Anyways, I wouldn’t just press the southern route. Either you transport mass infantry in, and do both Ssinkiang and Novosibirsk, or you build mass tanks, and switch up on your offense.
A steady moderate flow is possible to both routes: 4 transports, 2 are off FIC and 2 of Japan. Each turn, the FIC ones move to Japan, load and unload 4 units to Buryat; the Japan transports load 4 units and unload 4 units to FIC.
Ideally, Japan wants to grab India early, build an IC there, and pump out 11 units a turn. If you stay with only 8 units a turn, Japan runs out of steam, and can’t afford to make serious threats on multiple fronts. If India is well defended, an IC at French Indochina or Kwangtung will do.
Later, after much struggle… Japan succeeded to bring the mass in Novosibirsk and have it survive. The flow of reinforcements from Japan >tra >Buryat >Yakut is very ‘inertial’ and ‘slow’ (and other routes are slower). UK and/or US sent some help to Moscow, and can send more. Now what to do to crack Moscow before Allies crack Berlin ?
Germany should have kept its airforce. Infantry plus fighters make Berlin very difficult to crack, even if the Allies threaten Western and Southern Europe.
- Build a factory in Novosibirsk to add 2 ARTY /turn ? The foregone income means less inf… in 4 turns !
Never. Only build industrial complexes in territories with value 3 or more that are on the same continent you want to attack. MAYBE an island IC if you really know what you’re doing.
- Swing the Japanese mass west to Kazakh then Caucasus for more local building ? Then the ‘traditional’ flow of reinforcements may get too weak to survive in Novo’ against the ever-increasing Russian mass. Essentially Japan needs then 2 defensive armies, and if they are that strong they would win anyway ;-). Or the new Novo army to be used as ‘bait’ - if Russians attack it, they weaken themselves against the Caucasus army ?
Just make the Russians bleed themselves out against you, and swing for the fences. If the UK and US are concentrating heavily on Berlin, it’s Japan at 40+ IPC against Russia at 30+ IPC. Not great, but certainly not bad either.
to the orginial question how long does it take to drive to moscow the answer is 4660 miles or anywhere from 50 to 78 horurs depending on how fast you drive. http://www.indo.com/cgi-bin/dist/place2=moscow%2C+russia?place1=tokyo%2C+japan
but i say you should slways attack buryatia if russia moves there unless you can better use those battleships. most of the time you should attack.
That made me laugh!
But this discussion will surely help in my next game. Last night I played FTF with a friend and I wasn’t very optimal with my Japs. He built up a rediculous US Navy all game and attacked me in Japan SZ60 with 4BBs, 9Subs, 2Des, 1HBom, and 1Tran. So I was kinda forced to keep my Transports in SZ60 for both cannon fodder and using them to bridge. I left 1CV w/2Fig, 2BBs, 1Des, and 6Subs to defend my 4Trans.
I’m still a new player and am scared to take my Inf from the islands as UK or US can just take the islands freely. But my Germany was doing fine and his UK and US weren’t helping out USSR hardly so I ended up taking Moscow with Germany fairly easily, but he did shock me by winning D-Day.
to the orginial question how long does it take to drive to moscow the answer is 4660 miles or anywhere from 50 to 78 horurs depending on how fast you drive. http://www.indo.com/cgi-bin/dist/place2=moscow%2C+russia?place1=tokyo%2C+japan
but i say you should slways attack buryatia if russia moves there unless you can better use those battleships. most of the time you should attack.
That made me laugh!
Did it rly?
But this discussion will surely help in my next game. Last night I played FTF with a friend and I wasn’t very optimal with my Japs. He built up a rediculous US Navy all game and attacked me in Japan SZ60 with 4BBs, 9Subs, 2Des, 1HBom, and 1Tran. So I was kinda forced to keep my Transports in SZ60 for both cannon fodder and using them to bridge. I left 1CV w/2Fig, 2BBs, 1Des, and 6Subs to defend my 4Trans.
Look, man, if he wasted that much IPCs on battleships and tech research, you shoulda blasted him with fighters and economic advantage gained from holdings in Asia and Africa.
I’m still a new player and am scared to take my Inf from the islands as UK or US can just take the islands freely. But my Germany was doing fine and his UK and US weren’t helping out USSR hardly so I ended up taking Moscow with Germany fairly easily, but he did shock me by winning D-Day.
Japanese infantry on mainland. Russia has to deal with them.
Japanese infantry on isolated islands. US attacks with 4 infantry 4 fighters and loses maybe 1 infantry for every 3 they kill.
When you see KJF coming, build fighters with Japan.
But what if the Allies use KBJAGF strategery?
KBJAGF?
Kill Both Japan And Germany First?
Is this like the “Pie or Ice Cream - Yes” question?
There’s kill Germany first, kill Japan first, kill Japan first while stalling Germany, and kill Germany first while stalling Japan. It’s not possible for the Allies to FOCUS on both Japan and Germany; if the Allies go up against both Axis at the same time, that’s called NOT focusing.
Yeah I was just being funny. :-D
But what plan has a potential to backfire more say if the Axis player knows whats coming and plans for it? KJF or KGF?
Or does this go back to the equal skilled players versus equally matched players debate.
