I recently had an idea for the Axis: a Kill Hawaii First on the part of Japan.
This strategy would be part of the usual J1, but would involve the Japanese fleet in sz6 attacking the American fleet in sz26. On turn 1, Japan could build 3 transports to attack Hawaii, and fill them up with units from Tokyo. Then on turn 2, they could take Honolulu. The US fleet in sz10 wouldn’t be strong enough to destroy the Japanese fleet, and Honolulu would be secured for Japan. On J3, the Japanese units still in 26 would be able to use the NB in Hawaii to repair, and it would be secure. While this is going on, Japan could do all of its other moves (Asia factory, taking the Money Islands, etc). With 5 VCs, Japan could just go for Sydney to get 6. Sydney is close enough that America could probably reinforce it, and therefore save the game. Alternatively, they could aim for liberating Hawaii. This will probably succeed. Now, what have the Axis gained? They have lost Hawaii, and seem to have lost the initiative. The Imperial Japanese Navy is resting on the bottom of Sea Zone 26, and Hawaii is free. But… this is going to be expensive for the US. Either shipping reinforcements to Sydney or destroying the Japanese fleet in Sz 26 is going to cost a lot and take time. All the while, Germany and Italy are enjoying the American preoccupation with the Pacific, and are deep into Russia. Cairo may or may not have fallen. All this to say, by the time America can turn itself to Europe, it is very probably too late.
So in summary, if Japan conquers Hawaii on J2 and then threatens Sydney, the Americans will have to spend large amounts of money and resources preventing the Japanese from winning. While this is going on, the European Axis can win the game.
I have not yet played a game with this idea, and would very much appreciate your feedback so as to see whether or not I’m close. I will also be able to playtest this strategy myself soon.
I’ve messed around with J1 and J2 Hawaii attacks (J1 its just the fleet, you can’t take the island on J1) and have decided its not worth it.
Here’s my case:
The ships needed to take and keep Hawaii for even a full turn mean you don’t keep the Money Islands for more than 1 turn and you’ll lose all 3 of your original transports AND you won’t have reinforcements for the mainland. So Japan misses out on a LOT of income that ANZAC and UKPac will get instead, and the U.S. loses out on only 10 ipcs or so.
Instead, consider that securing Japan’s income right away, turtling UKPac, destroying a stack of China’s inf, and keeping ANZAC in check are still threats to the U.S. If he doesn’t concentrate on the Pacific, you’re going to win with Japan.
My opinions:
J1 you need that mainland factory to efficiently have troops for China/Russia. The 2 transports bring reinforcements down for the Burma road fight
J2 you need to take the money islands and need enough fleet to keep at least 2 of your transports there alive. Another factory in FiC is very useful. Mechs are great on the mainland since they move quick and you have planes for hits.
J3 you can take Malaya or other opportune targets
I don’t try to take Calcutta until later, when my money is secure. Instead I bomb on J2 and start convoying J2 (Malaya), J3 (Calcutta itself) so he can’t replace lost troops if he tries to help China. If things go well, you can easily take Calcutta and not lose planes after J6 or so when you’ve had 3 rounds of builds on your FiC factory.
I’ve also found carriers the most efficient defensive naval buy for Japan rounds 2-4+ because you have so many planes. This means the U.S. fleet can’t take SZ6 and hopefully gets bored and goes for the Carolines, but you have so many carriers that Japan can hit the Carolines with everything from Japan, Philippines, and planes from Kwangsi. Its a great way to win.
You raise good points. However, the 3 transports could be sent back to Japan and used in the Money Islands. If Japan built a factory in FIC and perhaps even another in Shanghai or HK, it could theoretically have enough naval cover for transports to hit the Money Islands and enough tanks to check India and China. All of this, though, would make that Australia Capture much trickier… Perhaps Japan should use that FIC factory to go for Calcutta instead?
You raise good points. However, the 3 transports could be sent back to Japan and used in the Money Islands. If Japan built a factory in FIC and perhaps even another in Shanghai or HK, it could theoretically have enough naval cover for transports to hit the Money Islands and enough tanks to check India and China. All of this, though, would make that Australia Capture much trickier… Perhaps Japan should use that FIC factory to go for Calcutta instead?
So let’s game it out a few rounds:
J1 buy 3 transports
J2 take Hawaii and Money Islands
UKPac/ANZAC 2 they retake 2 islands
J3 3 transports return to Japan
J4 3 transports reach Philippines
J5 3 transports reach Money Islands
So, if ANZAC/UKPac sink your original 3 transports after J2 you won’t have the Money Islands for 2 full turns. That’s a 32 ipc swing - you may not lose all of the islands, but income also goes to ANZAC/UKPac (so, -13 for you, +8 for them each turn for sure). You also won’t get Malaya on J3, which is another 22 ipc swing against you. You lose 6 ipcs that UKPac keeps and ANZAC gets 10 ipc NO bonus.
Also, no mIC and no spare transports means no extra troops on the mainland until at least J3. If UKPac is good, you won’t be able to build in FiC because he’ll be threatening to take it and you won’t have transports to reinforce it unless you buy 2-3 more on J2 so you can land on J3.
Now, maybe ANZAC and UKPac use their transports on turn 1 and instead of losing the Money Islands between J2 and J3, its after J3. That’s good, and they’ll have to replace them but still a lot of lost income.
Best case scenario I can see, if your opponent is good but not a wizard or anything is:
US loses 14-21 ipcs, 2 inf, and 2 fighters (maybe)
UKPac goes +14 ipcs (or more)
ANZAC is +18 ipcs
China +12-18 ipcs (you won’t be able to keep Burma Road closed)
Japan will: lose 3 transports, no mainland factories building until J4, about -40 ipcs (approx)
It also occurs to me that if you want your Hawaii fleet to stay afloat you might not be able to take the Philippines and Money Islands on J1/J2 because you’ll need all your ships at Hawaii. If you send just the ships from SZ19 south, ANZAC/UKPac have the planes/ships to easily sink them once you go for Java, etc.
I really want to spend more time reviewing this theory! It might not be best but it does sound exciting at least.
What if you didn’t J1? but instead did a modified J2 or J3 Indo/Hawaiian crush? Much of it depending on US buys and placement.
What would the best supplementing move by Germany be? What would a J3 India J4 hawaii look like? How tight can the schedule be run?
Could a J2 US Navy crush if they leave it at Hawaii be a thing? Maybe forcing them to retreat to the safety of San fran? Carolines is a powerful depot point - maybe it can be used as an Hawaiia/India/Sydney option?
If only so much didn’t depend on precisely what the allies buy and do…
Japan has 2 problems (among other probable ones) that it will have to deal with.
[unless Japan stacks Midway with sizeable Navy - BiG enough not to be sunk on US-1 retaliatory attack….] But this means possibly half of Japanese Navy is out of position to guard the TRs taking DEIs.
The other Half is vulnerable to a 1-2 India-Anzac punch if they come too close… especially if UKBB survived J-1
I’ve once been able to repair my ships art Hawaii, but the way I remember it I eventually had too run away.
Japan has way better things to be doing.
Hmmm.
So I like ShadowHawk’s idea of heading for ANZAC on J3, and Japan can probably keep 1 original transport afloat after j2 at the money islands, but…
If the U.S. retreats their fleet to the west coast instead of hanging out at Hawaii on US1, can they destroy the Japanese fleet at Hawaii?
I guess this is sort of an attack of opertunity, rather than a standalone plan.
Lets imagine a US response to japanese sinking of hawaii fleet, building 3 TTs, and a possible sealion. In this scenario, I would guess UK goes 8inf and US has two main objectives:
1., prevent sealion by flying bombers and fighters.
2. keep hawaii.
To keep hawaii, you have enough fighters to make the J2 attack not work, especially with anzak help. You still have the resources to prevent sealion at the same time (those eastern fighters wont reach hawaii anyways). So, since you have the resources to prevent hawaii falling on J2, you have to think about J3, To prevent J3, you would probably build something like 1 fighter and 7 subs on the west coast. At this point, japan is in a race for hawaii he wont win, while he proably isn’t doing what he should elsewhere.
tirano and i discussed this at gencon. im still not in favor
you only kill 4 wimpy ships. assuming japan blocks, his carriers and support ships may be safe for a J2 follow on and stack up, but you cant land supporting fighters on hawaii or build much more than the tts needed.
usa is imm brought into war, and gets $$ but even better, gets 10 facs. So he may not be able to push you off right away but hes building in parity with you and thats his clear and onky early game goal. if japan leaves, hawaii is recaptured. And all of this to get $6 when there is $35 or so money down south that has to be denied to the small allies. Like irl, PH awakens a sleeping giant and emboldens his little buddies. japan can sprinkle planes everywhere but it cant defeat/cover every front at once
