Was KJF really that bad?

@superbattleshipyamato

An interesting strategy, indeed. One thing is for certain, and that’s that the British need to establish land and air power before they establish their dominance of the sea. Now granted, the UK Pacific economy does not really have the luxury of being able to build big gigantic boats and lots of planes which is why I utilize the Europe economy to buy some of that stuff to send over to the other side.

In one of my test runs, China came SUPER close to falling completely to Japan, the only provinces they were holding at that point were Yunnan and 3 other undefended provinces. The British and Chinese had stacked up infantry and fighters on Yunnan along with AA guns, making an attempt to take Yunnan very unlikely for the Japanese. Either way, the Chinese were kept in the game solely because of the Burma Road.

In regards to the sea, believe it or not, Japan never actually got to a point where they were controlling all 4 money islands at once. The reason for this is that almost immediatly as the UK, I sent a transport along with 2 infantry to occupy Java. On top of that, an aircraft carrier, a couple of destroyers and cruisers and a strat bomber sent over from Egypt made for a sizeable hit squad if Japan wanted to try to send one of their naval taskforces over. They never did, and the reason they never did is because the Americans were actively threatening the Caroline Islands, what could probably be considered the main base of operations in the Pacific.

@superbattleshipyamato

With the strategy that I implement, doing Taranto and Tobruk are priorities. The only way I would be able to send anything from the Med to the Pacific is if it survived or didn’t participate in Taranto. And on top of that, I can understand why people would priotize taking Persia and Iraq, however you will get WAY more bank for your buck if you actually go in and occupy Java. That’ll be a whopping 4 IPCs that will make up for the loss of Borneo if it was taken on J1 and even more money if Borneo was left alive.

On that note, before I can build any carriers or transports I require planes for said carriers, and I really do think you’d be surprised at how successful a British Pacific fleet can be. The key obviously is to ensure that the Japanese navy is not in range of your own while you’re continuing to build up the fleet exponentially. The same can be said with ANZAC. Sure, the Japanese have the ability to go in and take out those fleets but doing so at the risk of leaving the Central Pacific open to the Americans.

@andrewaagamer said in Was KJF really that bad?:

Agreed. Or India instead of all of China. I am not understanding why you seem to think this is unreasonable. Japan can impose her will on China or India, that is not hard to do. Japan simply says I am going to take India and they do. Or she says I am going to take China and she does. That is a foregone conclusion and nothing the Allies do will stop her from taking one or the other. What is difficult for Japan is to do both… take China and India. It is even more difficult with ANZAC and the US both blasting away at the Money Islands and Russia threatening her northern flank.

Haven’t disagreed once here. Japan has the undying ability to impose her will on anybody she wants. However, she does not have the ability to impose her will on EVERYONE. That’s been my whole focal point this entire time that you for some reason have been dodging… What’s difficult for Japan is to go after not only China and India but to also branch out to either ANZAC or Honolulu and the United States. Point is, Japan can’t go after everything, and that’s exactly the thing I’ve been saying to take advantage of.

But without the US blasting away at her Japan will gobble up both India and China, then scarf down some Russia territories, and then go “Hmmm, I am still hungry, what is for dessert? How about Hawaii or Sydney they both are very tasty?”

You might wanna find new players to play the Allies if you’re just casually “gobbling up” both India and China. I’m not sure if you’re used to people turtling on India and Yunnan but it just isn’t as simple as that, lol. This goes down to one of the most basic principles of warfare being: “It’s better to fight your enemy all together than one at a time.” So, why not do that? Why not fight Japan altogether then just let China die then India then scratch your head as the U.S wondering, “Man, why did they fall? Surely they should have been able to fight Japan all on their own, right?” This game was designed so that Japan in the initial stages of the game, is far more powerful then her counterparts. Which is exactly why each of the Pacific Allies needs to work in unison or else it just doesn’t work.

Excellent; we agree. When you first proposed the idea of the Floating Bridge it sounded like a poor strategy which is why I responded to your post. Now we agree it is not a viable strategy my work here is done. :)

No, we don’t agree. Unlike you, I learned how to turn lemons into lemonade instead of throwing them in the garbage can. It is a viable strategy so long as you can do the one and only job you have as the United States, that job being to fight the good fight in the Pacific in case you didn’t realize.

@superbattleshipyamato

Sorry, i meant Sumatra, not Java. I always get those islands mixed up lol. You’re absolutely right though about Sumatra, gives them a much needed economic boost and actually applies pressure to Japan to be more aggressive, but I guess to some people that just isn’t possible.

@andrewaagamer said in Was KJF really that bad?:

If you want to say that Japan cannot do everything IF the USA provides sufficient resources into the Pacific then I agree with that 100%. That has not been my argument. My point is that trying this Floating Bridge strategy would impose such a material loss for the US that they CANNOT provide enough resources into the Pacific to stop Japan.

How do you know that it will? You clearly haven’t tried it before, you’re just speculating that it could never work so where’s the credibility in your statements? I’ve tried Floating Bridge before, and it works like a charmer against Germany alongside the UK and Russia. I think you’re seriously misunderstanding how much money the U.S in reality is having to spend VS what you see on paper. How do you know that Floating Bridge prevents the Americans from being able to adequately build up in the Pacific? Once again, you haven’t tried it so you wouldn’t know. I on the other hand, have tried it. I can guarantee you I never had any problems with my Pacific military either, all the while maintaining Floating Bridge in a timely manner.

If you remove $63 from the US over the first 1-4 Turns (9 additional transports) and then $32 more, at a minimum, every Turn thereafter by Turn 8 we are talking almost 200 IPC worth of resources. There is no way the US is going to have a remotely even fleet to the Japanese down 200 IPC.

You assume that the U.S is going to straight up just pump out transports in the beginning… this is not true. In fact, you don’t start building transports until turn 3 while you bolster the Pacific Fleet and add a few ships to the Atlantic fleet as well.

Thus, by Turn 8/9/10 when Japan has taken China, India and some of Russia they will Turn towards Sydney/Hawaii and there will not be a big enough fleet there to stop them.

Again, you’re not making any headway by just speculating what might happen… play it out. Try it out. I think you’d be genuinely surprised how effective it can be. I never had any problems with Japan, in fact, some of the things I did as the U.S were instrumental in taking Japan down in my playthroughs and testruns. By turn 2, The U.S can have 3 Carriers and 2 battleships in the Pacific Ocean along with all their other smaller vessels. That’s a large enough navy to get the attention of the player playing Japan and hell, if they don’t pay it any notice then great for me, it means I’ll be able to start moving towards the Caroline Islands and then the Philliphines or move North toward Japan.

@andrewaagamer

Good talk regardless, Andrew. Never said I didn’t like your opinion, only correcting and realigning your misunderstanding about what I’m talking about.

And yes, I do agree with you. What you’ve said has been your God-given opinion, and it will remain exactly that until you take a step toward playing out what I’m talking about instead of just speculating and theorizing about how Japan is gonna’ unleash their hundreds of infantry units and their 1000 warships upon the Allied powers in the Pacific without any opposition and win the game with their 100+ IPCs every turn. Cheers man.

@admirlscuttlebut

I’ll probably check that video out, I’m curious how he does his J1 attack.