Converting to KJF

@crockett36

I don’t usually move my Manchurian/Korean forces anyway with the exception of maybe 2 infantry, the artillery and mech infantry since they are kinda useless sitting there being attacking units. As for the 2 fighters and 2 tacs I’ll likely move 1 fighter and 1 tac to fill a carrier up and leave the other 2 for defense.

If you do you’re live stream, suggest that Japan does do their basic builds. What I usually go for is a carrier, transport and infantry for J1 build, no J1 attack. Turn 2 build I’ll gain exactly 40 IPC’s (30 for territories, 10 for NO from America), Which I would buy 2 transports, 2 tanks, a sub and destroyer or replace the 2 transports and tank for a battleship if the Americans are doing your wave strategy to rienforce, as well as stationing on Caroline Islands to recover any damaged capital ships. Turn 3 build I would build a Minor complex, cruiser, destroyer and another carrier and fit a figher and tac bomber on it. At this point I’ll have 5 carriers since I will absolutely be keeping my carriers out of range from the United States Navy. And with that I basically only have to build destroyers from here on.

@crockett36 said in Converting to KJF:

@thedesertfox i will take these as your moves when i do my livestream

I would watch this. I’m interested in the outcome.

But DF are you no longer doing a J1? I thought that was your initial plan.

@squirecam

No J1 attack, I might’ve said it somewhere along the lines but what I would have instead done was j2, let Crocket simulate his beginning moves of moving everything to Wake Island and then sending the navy in J2 whilst attacking everything else.

Though what the J1 Pearl harbor could also act as a strategic blocking method and prevent him from getting to Wake with his navy since he’d have to go through the leftover cannonfodder of destroyer(s) and then I would station my 2 aircraft carriers on Wake Island

@crockett36

What I normally do is take my charger to my phone and connect it to my PC/Laptop and I’m able to download any shots to my PC but I’m not sure if that’s the same for you.

@thedesertfox said in Converting to KJF:

@crockett36

I don’t usually move my Manchurian/Korean forces anyway with the exception of maybe 2 infantry, the artillery and mech infantry since they are kinda useless sitting there being attacking units. As for the 2 fighters and 2 tacs I’ll likely move 1 fighter and 1 tac to fill a carrier up and leave the other 2 for defense.

If you do you’re live stream, suggest that Japan does do their basic builds. What I usually go for is a carrier, transport and infantry for J1 build, no J1 attack. Turn 2 build I’ll gain exactly 40 IPC’s (30 for territories, 10 for NO from America), Which I would buy 2 transports, 2 tanks, a sub and destroyer or replace the 2 transports and tank for a battleship if the Americans are doing your wave strategy to rienforce, as well as stationing on Caroline Islands to recover any damaged capital ships. Turn 3 build I would build a Minor complex, cruiser, destroyer and another carrier and fit a figher and tac bomber on it. At this point I’ll have 5 carriers since I will absolutely be keeping my carriers out of range from the United States Navy. And with that I basically only have to build destroyers from here on.

So I modified what you said in our test that is going on. I didn’t move the northern forces but didn’t stack in Manchuria but instead Korea as that is where the US wants to land. Built 2 transports and the IC rather than a carrier but I can build one next turn. So it’s sort of your strategy but mixed up a bit.

@squirecam

That’s totally fine, as Japan that is generally what I’ll build, either a carrier or an IC and I assume you put the IC on Shanghai…? Unless there another area you had in mind to put it.

But either way, those are the 2 general builds that I will go with on one game or another, with the IC and 2 transports build, that’s usually if I’m doing something with Germany that requires Japan to ease into the war instead of rush right in attacking everything. While with the carrier and transport, I take to this as a more aggressive stance to be ready to pounce at the Allies as early as turn 2 or turn 3. Either method works out just fine.

@thedesertfox said in Converting to KJF:

@squirecam

That’s totally fine, as Japan that is generally what I’ll build, either a carrier or an IC and I assume you put the IC on Shanghai…? Unless there another area you had in mind to put it.

But either way, those are the 2 general builds that I will go with on one game or another, with the IC and 2 transports build, that’s usually if I’m doing something with Germany that requires Japan to ease into the war instead of rush right in attacking everything. While with the carrier and transport, I take to this as a more aggressive stance to be ready to pounce at the Allies as early as turn 2 or turn 3. Either method works out just fine.

I put it in Korea. Reason being that if I have sea units I cant be building multiple IC to defend but I can eventually have one major IC in Korea that can produce 10 land units. Slower on mainland but far easier to defend.

@squirecam

True that, especially if the UK is providing ample support to China through Yunnan then Korea will be more more efficient.

@squirecam

I assume you’d ge pumping out fast movers like tanks and mechanized infantry to cross China quickly and efficiently.

Another thing I would also potentially put on Korea is an airbase in case the US try anything on Sz 6 that way you’ll have a 6 plane scramble

@crockett36 Sure, PM me and we’ll set up a game.

@crockett36

What exactly are you referring to by Asia being ‘bare’? Bare of Japanese units? Bare of Chinese or British units?