Japan landing in western US –--- how can i do this?

Sure, if you could time it right you could land in E. Canada with Germany and W. USA and Alaska simultaniously before America even sees an invasion happening.  Just bear in mind that America will be drawing 37-38 IPCs a round, that’s plenty to kick you back out again, given what units they’ll probably have staged in E. USA for their assaults.

And kiss those german trannies goodbye.  You KNOW the American fleet and the allied airforces arn’t going to pass up a sweet target like those!

I, for one, LOVE the “Canadian Shield”

By the end of turn J3, you have…

W-Can
5 Jap Inf
5 Jap Tnk

E-Can
5 Ger Inf
5 Ger Tnk
1 Jap Bom
As many AC Jap fighters as you feel like moving over there

And also a German bomber in W. Europe to aid against E. US

And it’s cleverly disguised throughout the first two turns by looking like the usual German fleet consolidation and Jap transportation through Bury…

Then round three comes around, and BAM, while busy trying to ferry gear to it’s Allies, US suddenly has a huge threat to both it’s VCs…even if he can kill all the invading force, it’s a small price to pay for keeping the U.S. COMPLETELY occupied for at least two turns, for a fairly small investment.

An experienced player usually makes allowance for the possibility when Germany consolidates it’s fleet on G2, but even then, it’s hard for the U.S. to devote what it needs to prevent this double strike from at least partial success while still supplying aid to it’s Allies.

And God help those Allies if D.C. falls on G4 or J4…  :-D

I’d like more details on the Canadian Shield.  It might be interesting to try one day.

Back to the original point though, the question was asked on how to do it successfully.  It was never asked if this was a wise course of action or not.  So we came up with methods to do this, and then started to refine them in a way that it wasn’t a complete waste of units.

I tried a double landing in my first game against TC.  He had 6inf, 2fgt in E. US & 4inf, 1art in W. US.  Germany landed 2inf, 1art, 1tnk in E. Canada & Japan landed 3inf, 3tnk in W. Canada landing 3 planes in E. Canada to cover the German forces.  All was going well, I figured I had a good chance to capture 1 of his IC’s.  Then came the attack his 6inf & 2fgt from E. US against the 2inf, 1art, 1tnk & 3fgt in E. Canada, he wiped out my entire force losing only 4inf.  Game over.  The diversion of all those forces to North America left me nothing in Asia & the allies had Germany surrounded.

@jsp4563:

I tried a double landing in my first game against TC.  He had 6inf, 2fgt in E. US & 4inf, 1art in W. US.  Germany landed 2inf, 1art, 1tnk in E. Canada & Japan landed 3inf, 3tnk in W. Canada landing 3 planes in E. Canada to cover the German forces.  All was going well, I figured I had a good chance to capture 1 of his IC’s.  Then came the attack his 6inf & 2fgt from E. US against the 2inf, 1art, 1tnk & 3fgt in E. Canada, he wiped out my entire force losing only 4inf.  Game over.  The diversion of all those forces to North America left me nothing in Asia & the allies had Germany surrounded.

You shoulda had at least one fighter survive and retain the land, wiping out his forces, and that’s low luck…low luck always takes away more forces then you normally would loose in ADS.

You just had bad dice man!

@Jennifer:

I’d like more details on the Canadian Shield.  It might be interesting to try one day.

Jennifer, don’t bother with the Canadian Shield strategy. It’s basically a one-trick pony that won’t work on anyone twice and an astute US player will be able to prepare for it. It just costs a lot of axis money for a 1 shot deal that, should it fail, puts the axis into a big hole.
I’ve never seen it in action, however. But, it looks to me that the UK/US basically have to let it happen for it to work. It also requires a large group of armor to be stationed in Western Europe for the landings so that is a pretty good indicator. And the Russians should be making good progress in Europe because of all that hardware in Western europe and a ton of German money being spent on TP’s.

The easiest way to defeat it is for the UK to build a sub in sz7 on UK2. The german fleet won’t be able to load their transports in a hostile sea zone and a 1 turn delay means the UK/US should have enough naval units to crush the German fleet after that.

If the US sets up a traditional Shuck pattern, especially if you have a former Classic player using the Classic shuck in Revised, then there is no way in heck you are going to get a free, or even an easy, landing in Canada.  Both ECan and WCan will have somethign like 6-8 divisions there at all times from US2 forward.

i understand all the people i play with have never used this strategy so I haven’t encountered it before.

@U-505:

@Jennifer:

I’d like more details on the Canadian Shield.  It might be interesting to try one day.

Jennifer, don’t bother with the Canadian Shield strategy. It’s basically a one-trick pony that won’t work on anyone twice and an astute US player will be able to prepare for it. It just costs a lot of axis money for a 1 shot deal that, should it fail, puts the axis into a big hole.
I’ve never seen it in action, however. But, it looks to me that the UK/US basically have to let it happen for it to work. It also requires a large group of armor to be stationed in Western Europe for the landings so that is a pretty good indicator. And the Russians should be making good progress in Europe because of all that hardware in Western europe and a ton of German money being spent on TP’s.

The easiest way to defeat it is for the UK to build a sub in sz7 on UK2. The german fleet won’t be able to load their transports in a hostile sea zone and a 1 turn delay means the UK/US should have enough naval units to crush the German fleet after that.

But I wanna use it against the computer!!!  (pout)

The most probable way to get to Western United States is to land in Alaska.

@U-505:

Jennifer, don’t bother with the Canadian Shield strategy. It’s basically a one-trick pony that won’t work on anyone twice and an astute US player will be able to prepare for it.

Yipes! That was a masterful demonstration that you do not understand the move.

As the paper mentions repeatedly, A) you don’t have to land the killer blow to get value out of the setup, B) you don’t do it in all situations, and C) if you are playing a good transport game, the setup won’t be a deviation from your normal pattern.

But other than that, you have fully understood the gambit.  :roll:

@CrazyStraw:

@U-505:

Jennifer, don’t bother with the Canadian Shield strategy. It’s basically a one-trick pony that won’t work on anyone twice and an astute US player will be able to prepare for it.

Yipes! That was a masterful demonstration that you do not understand the move.

As the paper mentions repeatedly, A) you don’t have to land the killer blow to get value out of the setup, B) you don’t do it in all situations, and C) if you are playing a good transport game, the setup won’t be a deviation from your normal pattern.

But other than that, you have fully understood the gambit.  :roll:

And the setup proceedure is……(insert drum roll here)

@CrazyStraw:

@U-505:

Jennifer, don’t bother with the Canadian Shield strategy. It’s basically a one-trick pony that won’t work on anyone twice and an astute US player will be able to prepare for it.

Yipes! That was a masterful demonstration that you do not understand the move.

As the paper mentions repeatedly, A) you don’t have to land the killer blow to get value out of the setup, B) you don’t do it in all situations, and C) if you are playing a good transport game, the setup won’t be a deviation from your normal pattern.

But other than that, you have fully understood the gambit.  :roll:

A) And if you don’t land the killing blow, what value will you get out of the setup with 5 armor in Western Europe and 3 purchased transports on G1? Perhaps an angry bird flip across the channel at the UK. I’m sure the Russians are getting plenty of value from that setup. If you assume value from that setup means the UK/US won’t be able to land in Europe for 3 or 4 turns, that they will have to purchase more navy than usual, or bulk up their ground forces before they have enough transports to move them from their staging points, then yes, that is value. But it is offset by the fact that Germany has made little or no gain in Africa beyond Egypt, Germany bought a bunch of transports that are costly and largely useless when a Baltic CV buy is cheaper and works better on defense, and 5 armor are sitting in Western Europe for at least 2 turns when they could be on the Russian front.

B) Exactly what situations you avoid using it in must be so insignificant as to not be worth mentioning in the paper or in your post, apparently.

C) What good transport game? With Germany? Japan always has a transport game. For Germany, it seems to be a very large deviation from any normal pattern I’ve ever seen. And where are the Germans going to transport anything if the gambit fails, anyway? Back toward Russia likely. Where they should have been from the beginning. Or maybe Africa. Germany should have made some gains there by G6.

There, have I even begun to slightly understand or am I missing a great deal of the subtle parts of the gambit?  :|

I notice you only quoted the first two sentences and didn’t bother to dissect the rest of the post. Perhaps I understood more of the Canadian Shield one-trick pony than you were willing to give me credit for.  :-o

Tell you what. When I am done with the 2 on 2 Tourney here, maybe Caspian sub can send one of their weaker players to this board to challenge my Allies, display all of the merits of the Canadian Shield gambit, and crush me. I’ll even play low luck so I can’t whine about getting worked over by the dice-roller.

Frankly, when it is so clear you haven’t really read the paper, why would I spend time debating you?  If you were serious, you would at least look at the original document rather than dismissing it like you know what you’re talking about.

I enjoy a good debate.  But you’re just beligerent.

As for playing a game, sure.  GenCon is in a couple weeks and at least two CSub teams will be there.  Show up and let’s see what you can do.

I don’t plan on replying to this unless something substantial comes up.  So the last word is yours.  I’m sure you’ll use it well.

Adios.

I don’t think you understand, U-505, that it is recommended to buy only 2 transports against experienced players. That is exactly the same amount you spend on 1 carrier. Even if you buy 3 transports, that is the same amount of money that you like to spend on your carrier/transport in the Med. You are hardly spending yourself into a hole compared to other naval buys.

@ncscswitch:

If the US sets up a traditional Shuck pattern, especially if you have a former Classic player using the Classic shuck in Revised, then there is no way in heck you are going to get a free, or even an easy, landing in Canada.  Both ECan and WCan will have somethign like 6-8 divisions there at all times from US2 forward.

Bingo.

This strat should NEVER work against a competent Allied player.

The US should ALWAYS set up Shuck-shuck through WUS, not only to prevent a Canada landing but to discourage Japan from expanding to Ala and Hi mid game.

This is straight from Classic and hold true for Revised.

US 1 - buy 2 trns, rest inf
US 2 - buy 1 trn rest inf
US 3 - buy 1 trn rest inf.
US 4 on…etc.

You now have 7 trns on the board (start with 3), 2 dd’s and 1 BB.  With UK ships you should be unsinkable and this is with minimal thought and just buying inf.

You can even get away with 1 trn on US 1 as well as doing a “reverse shuck”, ie building in Eus then to E can, then drop off excess inf to W Can with a placement of the same amount in Wus.

But I find it much more efficient to just start in Wus on US 1.

This also allows the US to eventually play around in the Pac come mid game since you should always have a steady supply of about 8 inf in Wus and 8 inf in W Can.

If you don’t set it up in Wus from the start you are asking for trouble (not from an early Canada landing) from Japan, but with a mid game Japanese expansion when they are earning 40+, have IC’s already set up and can now afford a few trn/inf to harass Ala/Hi/Mid and then mess up a US shuck-shuck when it really counts.

Hey Darth,

I kind of did an exception to your below standard Shuch-shuck. ( so for our game for the futur you start to plan on hitting the states from the pacific :P)

I kind of went crazy with the transports, I have like 12 after 4 turns.  :-D

Yep.  Actually Pac or Afr pending how the game is playing out.

And you could be in trouble should Japan go to Ala as Germany hits HI.
Not trouble trouble but it could be a nuiscance.

Had I not been stupid and left those 3 trns undefended Japan can certainly afford to be a pest in the Pac.  I lost 5-6 inf to Asia (on that turn) and then 16 more IPC to replace 2 of the trns.

Once Japan owns Asia, assuming they have a steady supply of troops to continue the march on Mos, it is much more feasible to spare 2-4 inf and 2 trns to pick off Hi or Ala or at least get the US to think about throwing some inf down in Wus, esp if they don’t have troops there already.

Now I have slightly different plans and you noted that by noticing the position of my BB’s in our game thread.

And while it is unlikely that Japan does anything in the Pacific on this turn (or next), certainly in the future it is an option.

In general terms if Japan has 2-3 IC’s that is ~9 inf to Asia which is only 27 IPC.  Well, they are likely to be earning 42+ which makes your 1-2 (of your 3-4) trns expendable, to go either to Afr or the Pac.

Likewise, as the US I anticipate that at some point Japan will take Aus, NZ and set its sites on HI/ALA, which is why I try to deter that thinking immediately.  I think 4-8 inf on Wus on US 1 and another 4-8 on US 2 goes a long way to nip Japanese Pacific expansion in the bud.

Even if you only start with 4 inf on Wus on US 1, with 4 more on US 2 that still leaves you with a ~30 IPC’s to spend on other things on US 1 and 2.

Note:

I’m not talking about the actual taking of Wus (unless it is left open or given) by Japan, just that for a minimal investment later you can be a real nuiscance to the US without disrupting your march on Mos.  However, if you go early (rds 1-3) you are in real danger of going to the Pac at the expense of getting to Mos.

Yeah those 3 you left undefended definetly hurt you.

It pushed all of your IC’s back 1 turn to build I think. But I was never worried about them. I always had tanks on Eus
im at the point that I believe I will now be making a lot of purchases at Wus so i’m not worried about the pesting of Japan, especially not the taking of Hawaii with Germany, only worth 1 Ipc.

the way our game is going. I rather it be in german hands then Japan hands.
I got some plans for germany in a bit.  The way I see it, if I take Germany and Russia falls anyway. I still think Japan looses.

They will then have to deal with the Europe front, africa front, and Pacific front as with the states I will definetly be building a fleet. and with 12 Transports I can spare some fodder.

I’ll put it this way, if Germany doesn’t fall in the next 3-4 turns then the axis wins. (you should have enough japan troops by then to take russia out.)

I like how we hijacked the thread.  :-)

I’ll continue my response in our game thread.  :-D