Item 1
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
You agreed with me on one point, that point being that you wouldn’t attack Yunnan on J2 if they had 13 infantry and 3 planes defending it because you realized the very apparent fact that Japan would lose a serious amount of planes as a result of it.
Actually I agreed with you on two points. The one you stated and the following…
@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%.
Item 2
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
I know your passionate about your J1 take over the world strategy but at least try to make an effort to build on these ideas to better help the Allies lol.
It is not my J1 DOW strategy. COW was, as far as I know, the first one to officially put forth the J1 opener; so I give credit where credit is due. While I do not use his version exactly; 90% of my J1 DOW opener is his baby.
Also, I am trying to help the Allies against Japan. That is why I am trying to counter your less than stellar advice where I think it goes awry. Funny how you just thanked me for helping you improve your China opening and then state this.
Item 3
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
I didn’t dismiss my floating bridge strategy, nor is buying a battleship a “no no” as the USA either. Granted buying lots of battleships is a big no no, I prefer buying strat bombers instead for the Pacific. Way more cost effective then battleships but it’s nice to have something that can take a hit.
Sorry, bad advice again. Buying battleships is a mistake. They have poor value for their cost. You should read my Warfare Principles of Axis and Allies article. In addition, buying bombers for the US in the Pacific is also a mistake. Yes, they have great mobility and project firepower but what the US needs in the Pacific is to control the Ocean and to do that they needs ships in the sea. (Kind of like boots on the ground)
Item 4
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Third and finally, you again missassume that I haven’t seen a 70+ IPC Japan when I have made 0 light to that. I have pal, its almost like I’ve done it myself AS JAPAN. You ought to keep yourself in check before mindlessly insulting me for made up crap.>
Well, I can only go by what you said previously. Both of these statements below sure made it seem you disagreed that Japan could get to $72.
@thedesertfox said in Was KJF really that bad?:
Regarding the merits of how much money is being made/spent, in my test runs, Japan never got to the point where they were making 72$, and that’s all thanks to my combined British and Anzac strategy.
@thedesertfox said in Was KJF really that bad?:
So I’ve counted out all the provinces and in order for Japan to control that much money, they need to have taken ALL of China, ALL of the money islands and ALL of Southeast Asia. That’s without Australia, Honolulu, and Russia. I’m not sure what you’re Allied player is doing to allow Japan to take over that much money but whatever they’re doing is wrong… just straight up wrong.
Item 5
@thedesertfox said in A Nameless but Effective China Strategy:
Because for the past 2-3 days you’ve essentially done nothing but tell me “Japan OP, Japan destroy all, Japan make 70 IPCs and win, Japan crushes everything with unlimited resources”. I’ve at least offered some variation in what I’m saying.
Actually, I spent the past two days trying to rectify your bad advice. You are the one who continues to exaggerate what Japan can do in your sarcastic retorts about unlimited ships and resources. I have clearly stated that, IF the US spends enough money in the Pacific, Japan can be reigned in.
While I am not enjoying this conversation, if you continue to misrepresent my statements I will continue to reply so please stop fabricating what I say so I can spend my time on more fruitful pursuits. I take care to be very exact in my statements and I do not appreciate your trying to tarnish my reputation by misquoting me and misrepresenting what I am saying.