Japan Strategy Concepts

OK, a few new folks posting on the board and LOTS of questions about Japan, KJF, etc promoted this…

Japan starts out with MASSIVE naval power.  They are so powerful on the seas that they initially can wipe out both the US and UK fleets in the Pacific, and still have ships in the water.  Japan’s problem is that the Allied navies are too spread out to deal with all of it on J1.  They also are tasked with taking some of the heat off Germany or else the Axis loses the game.  Add into the mix that the bulk of Japan’s land forces are stuck on islands at the start, that Japan will likely only have 1 tranny on J1, and that they have a major build limit issue with the 8 unit limit in Tokyo, and it is obvious that Japan has some issues that they have to deal with QUICKLY in order to get in the game in a big way.

Japan has several potential avenues of attack:  northern Asia (bury, SFE, Yakut); central Asia (China, Sinkiang); south Asia (India, Persia); African east coast, South Pacific (Australia, New Zealand), Central Pacific (Hawaii, Midway); and North Pacific/North America (Alaska, Western Canada).

North Asia:  This is he easiest avenue of attack for Japan.  It involves building trannies to get units from Japan to Bury in a birdge move via SZ60.  The trannies are easilly protected due to distance from Allied air force landing zones and by keeping 1 or more Capital ships in home waters.  While supporting the North Asia strike, Japan remains well defended against US incursion due to massed ships in SZ60, and land forces being built in Japan.  The disadvantage is that the North Asia strike yields little IPC gain, and does little to slow Russia’s growth (once you reach Yakut you have only shifted the equivalent of 1 INF per round from Allies to Axis).  Also, with Japan’s build limit, you quickly reach a maximum of 4 ARM and 4 INF per round being available for that attack, and that would be ALL of Japan’s build capability.  Even with the drawbacks, the ease and cost effectiveness (in terms of naval expenditure vs. number of units trannied to Asia) is VERY positive.  Thus Japan should, in most cases, maintain at least some pressure on the North Asia front.

Central Asia:  This is one of the hardest avenues of attack for Japan, but one of the best.  It is a direct pipeline into Novo (a very key Russia territory, that if taken and held by Japan is a grave threat to Russia that MUST be countered, even at the cost of pulling forces away from the German front.  The problem is, there is no quick way to get forces to the Central Asia avenue without at least 1 new IC.  Manchuria or Kwangtung both serve equally as choices to support a Central Asia strike, with Manchuria offering the ability to send forces to either the north prong or central with equal ease.  Also, trannies can be shifted from SZ60 to SZ61 to flow Japan built troops to Manchuria to support the central strike (at the cost of forces on the northern strike).  The risk here is that, until Sinkiang is taken, the trannies in SZ61 are at risk, requiring more capital ships in home waters for defense of the fleet, and the new IC is at risk for free SBR’s as long as Novo is held by Russia.  A factory in FIC can also support a central asia strike, but is discussed in South Asia below.  ONE WORD OF WARNING:  China is a critical J1 strike for Japan.  Taking it, you often have enough force to follow up with a Sinkiang attack on J2 using your AF and ground forces.  Doing so however will leave you critically thin on your front with Russia, with Japan forces to back up those initial strikes several rounds behind.  You could easilly find yourself facing Russia forces rampaging through your Asian holdings if you do not get enough forces to the front before pushing to Sinkiang (and beyond).

South Asia:  To my mind, this is perhaps one of THE best avenues of attack for Japan.  UK is likely to use their India forces to hold Africa (giving up 3 IPC’s to keep the 9 in Africa from Egypt south.  Again this allows Japan to advance quickly, with the risk of advancing too quickly and being decimated by a small strike of USSR forces coming south from Caucuses.  The south Asia avenue of attack can be supported with an IC in FIC, as well as by 1-2 transports that scavenge INF from the islands (Phillipines and East Indies in particular), and later with “tranny exchange” where a loaded tranny brings forces to FIC from Japan 1 round, then travels back the next round to “bridge” forces to Bury or Manch, being replaced by another loaded tranny heading to FIC from Japan.  Thus all trannies are able to ferry forces each round.  The south Asia strike has two additional advantages that make it such a strong threat to the Allies.  The first is that it adds a second threat to the Russian IC in Caucuses.  With Germany pushing via Ukraine, and Japan pushing through India and Persia, Caucuses becomes an issue for Russia.  And control of that IC by either side, with supporting defensive forces flowed in by the other plus subsequent builds, means that Russia is in serious trouble.  If Caucuses is too well defended, you can possibly slip some forces past and move on into Africa.  But again, be careful, if Caucuses is well held and you move past Persia, Russia can strike at your supply line and even back toward your FIC base while your advance forces are cut off in Trans Jordan or Egypt.  An IC in FIC should probably be the first built by Japan since it allows for use on 2 otherwise slow to supply avenues of attack.

East Africa:  This is not an avenue that opens immediately for Japan.  It usually takes 2-3 rounds for the circumstance to allow a push here.  Once 1-2 Asian IC’s are operating, the UK Indian and Australian fleets are destroyed, and the islands near FIC have been trannied to FIC or India, then you can use 1 (maybe 2, but that is risky) tranny to shuttle forces from FIC to Africa.  The risk here of course is that you can put 2 units from FIC on that Africa bound tranny leaving only 1 unit to support your south and central asia attacks.  It is also a slow attack, and with a very strong Allied naval presence in the Atlantic, EASILLY countered.  Grab some free IPC’s from Madagascar, and drop 2 INF in South Africa, then either retreat the tranny back, or make a suicide run to Brazil.  But against just 2-3 trannies of Allied units to Africa, Japan is not going to hold territory there for long.  The logistics of re-supply (4 trannies needed to keep 1 loaded tranny emptying in Africa from Japan each round) simply is too extensive to merit the return (32 IPC’s of trannies for a MAXIMUM of 9 IPC’s, more likely 2-4 IPC’s).  East Africa though CAN be effective once your south Asia avenue is fully developed and the trannie ssimply accelerate unit arrival in Africa from your IC’s.

Remainder in next post…

South Pacific:  Once the UK fleet is gone, IPC’s gains in the South Pacifc open up.  The key to advancement here is being able to free up Japan capital ships from SZ60/61 to support the attack.  Without the capital ship support form either a BB and/or an AC with 1-2 FIGS, don’t bother.  If Australia still has 3 INF, you will need BOTH a BB and an AC with FIG(s) in addition to 1  loaded tranny.  To do it without the AC, you just land 1 INF at a time and let your BB do the offensive work… a slow proposition.  Once Australia is taken, New Zealand is easy (only 1 INF there).  Risks of course are if US is sending ANYTHING to the Pacific, you are not going to free up those capital ships.  After taking New Zealand, you can then consider sending these forces to other avenues:  back to south Asia, to Africa, toward Mexico or Panama, or even around cape horn to Brazil and then West Africa.  But beware… once those capital ships leave the Pacific, US builds will get to Japan before your capital ships can get back…

Central Pacific:  Low IPC return, high risk of US taking out your forces.  No other way to say it.  Hawaii can quickly become a death trap for Japan.  your naval forces can be hit with North American air force and Western US navy, your ground forces can be hit directly via tranny from Los Angeles… all in exchange for 1 IPC.  Midway… even worse, then you don;t even get a single IPC.  If your goal is to try to get US to focus on Japan, you MIGHT risk it, but even then, there are better ways to do it.

North Pacific/North America:  This is another avenue of attack that takes a couple of rounds to open up.  You need to get most of the Allied ships in the Pacific killed first, and reduce the US to just their Western US navy (an unreinforced one at that).  Then, using the trannies you built initially to support your north Asia strike, you instead slip over to SZ63 and unload forces in BOTH Alaska and Western Canada.  If you are going to do this, you need to do it HARD.  And you need to have additional trannies and ground forces being built to send the second wave, and retreat the initial trannies for refill to keep the operation going.  Head to head vs the US, Japan does not stand a chance.  BUT… this type of massive disruption of US forces heading for Europe can be effective if timed with German advances on Russia.  If Japan goes full-tilt on this avenue of attack, the US will lose 1-2 rounds of total support in Europe, and if timed correctly can let Germany reach Moscow.  Otherwise, your are pouring your forces into a meat grinder.

Anyway, I hope you found this to be worthwhile.  I of course invite others to add their comments, suggestions, and just plain tell me I am full of it :-)

If it is later in the game, then yes, the land assaults on Russia and continued support of them is the better choice…

BUT, the Alaska/West Canada strike CAN be done in J2 or J3 (preferably J3) and disrupt the US schuck before established… about the same time that Germany’s first INF buy hits the Russia front…

Tri, you are missing something… the same move YOU use on FIC…

Japan lands in Alaska and West Canada while on the same round building a tranny or 2 plus land forces (Japan is around 35 IPC’s at this point).  Then, on J4 (the round after the A/WC attack), Japan sends 4 trannies back to SZ60 for re-load, and serves as a bridge to Bury at the same time, while the 2 new trannies send reinforcements to Alaska.

J5 would be 4 trannies to Alaska and 2 to Bury…

Japan sets up their own shuck-shuck, sending forces in TWO directions. using all trannies at all times, just like with the FIC shuck, and pressures US while sending significant ground forces (4 INF 1 round, then 4 INF and 4 ARM the next) at Russia, all the while supported by figs and bombers and letting the ground forces do the work in North America…

Now throw in the FIC tank factory built in J2 to support south and central Asia… you have a nice 4 prong attack going:  1 at US, 1 at UK money, 2 at Russia.

Details on that attack sequence…

J1:  1 ARM and 1 ARM to Bury, take China (with 3-4 INF remaining), take India for free (UK evac to India).  Build 3 TRN
J2:  Build FIC IC, land 5 INF and 1 ART in Bury, land 2 INF in FIC
J3:  3 ART and 3 INF to Alaska and W. Canada.  3 ARM build FIC.  1 TRN to East Indies and TRN 2 INF to India.  Build 2 TRN and ground
J4:  3 trannies back to SZ60, 2 TRN with ART and INF to Alaska/W Canada, ground forces to Bury with returning 3 TRN.

So you have a 2-3 double shuck established and continuing in J5, with landings in North America supported by BB’s (adding 1.4 kills to the forces in Western Canada per round).  Russia still faces 7-10 ground units per round, supported by AF, coming at them via north and central avenues, Japan INF controls southern Asia avenue to Persia, and 1 TRN free in Indian Ocean for Africa raiding.

Damn, I think I just found the update for my Classic strats to Revised!

Tri, you are forgetting one of the key concepts of strategy… APPEARANCE of force.  True, it may not work against the top 20-30 players here, but against 99% of folks…

You have a mass of INF, perhaps 7-10, plus a couple of tanks and some artillery in Yakut.  You have 3-6 INF in Alaska/WCan along with 2-3 ART and 1-2 ARM, plus BB’s, and maybe an AC with a fig or 2 for good measure.  Add in you have Japan in Sinkiang, Japan in Persia…  Then add a few advances by Germany, perhaps taking out the UK fleet, or a good measure of it, about G3…  You are forcing US to deal with the Japan incursion, or at least weakening the number of forces left in the shuck, you are making Russia send a few INF to Evenk/Novo/Kazakh perimeter instead of sending them to take Ukraine or re-take Karelia…

You now have the PERCEPTION of the Axis dominating the game… Japan heading for Moscow in force, UK’s IPC’s being lost, Germany counter-attacking Russia’s advances and UK sans a fleet, or most of it…

You tell me how most folks would respond to seeing THAT situation on the board. :-)

Oh and Tri…

The infrastructure costs are not THAT great.  Actually, the extra tranny builds in J3 and J4 take the pressure off Japan on their second impending build limit of 11 units with 1 IC in Tokyo and a second probably in FIC.

You are still sending 7 units a round at Russia in your “weak” round, 11 in your “strong” round, with 4 and 6 at US, along with the BB’s

Plus you still get the 3 IPC’s for Alaska and W Canada, the same as grabbing Australia and New Zealand, BUT with the advantage of destabilizing the US shuck :-)

You ARE forced to advance a bit slower as Japan.  But that does not matter that much really… Japan advancing too fast is its own risk… unsupported forces.  With doing the “bridge and back”, you are sending more INF against Russia, plus some ART and the occasional ARM, always supported by your FIGS, which is actually a STRONGER advance than the 1-2 INF and an ARM breaking the K/N/E frontier :-)

Sounds like the two of us have a theory to test in our next game :-)

Then look at the options for Japan going full-bore against US in Alaska and W Can… 3 Trannies in J1 and 3 more in J2, then another in J3.  That gives you a 4x4 tranny load into Alaska/WestCan and the same 4x4 load against Russia… EVERY round.  Raid the islands in J2 to get the needed forces, take China, India and Bury to get Japan’s IPC’s to 36 against the US’s 42…  Then you take 3 more IPC’s in Alaska and WCan, and grab Sinkiang, and now it is 38 Japan to 36 US…

I don;t care what the US does, unless it is a naval/AF build, they are going to get rocked by 4 INF and 4 ARM a round + 2 BB’s in Western Canada.  And once the US builds Pacific fleet, you just won your fight to keep the US out of Europe for a round or 3.

I like ncscswitch ideas on how to win as Japan.  I applaud you.  :-D  Very well thought out.  Im going to try some of those strategys out soon and see if they work out for me.

Glad you like them.

Let me know how they work out… so far, I have been unable to fully test them (I keep getting side tracked…)

@trihero:

I just don’t think going against the US full tilt is going to work. I tried it against myself and I always have enough land troops to deal with it, plus doing it so early really lets Russia kick butt in Asia. It’s a good move to keep in mind when a situation arises, but I don’t think it stands alone as something you can count on winning the game for you, as you really need to pressure Russia hard.

Oh gods no! Certainly not a stand-alone strategy.  Of the “avenues of attack” I posted, Japan MUST do at least 2 of them (or risk build limits, and strong counter’s elsewhere) and 3 is probably a good idea.  Trying to stretch to 4 of them would make all of them too weak.

BUT, you do get to choose among the 6 major avenues, and mix and match as desired…