Critique this US strategy

I would have to say later in the game yes.

early on isn’t a good idea at all.

That just leaves the russians pretty much alone vs the germans with some small british drops which will be just annoying more then anything.

Its sometihng that just can’t be done till very late in a game the way i’m looking at it. your going to need a huge navy build-up… because the japs have a huge navy + land based fgts and a bmb or two.

I agree with NoMercy, I think it is very hard to do from the start and really depends on how Japan does at Pearl (is a counter possible?) or where they position their fleet in then next couple of rds.

Also it is just as quick to go from Eus to Mos as it is to go from Wus to Mos.
both take 4-5 turns, depending on route.
Eus->UK->Kar->Arch->Mos
Wus->Ala->SFE/Bury->Yak->Novo->Mos
Or if you go through Afr:
Eus->Ecan->Alg->Lib->Egy->Trj->Per

And if you do more armor you can get there even faster.

I think it is generally more efficient to just go to Europe or Afr, you don’t need as many trans or capital ships to cover yourself.

Africa is the easiest b/c you need the least amount of trans since you don’t need to set up a 3x3 (4x4) trn system, but you can’t directly threaten Ger or Kar/EE.  4-5 US trns total.

To station in sz 8 and 5 you need a few more trns but you can threaten more key teritories.  6-8 US trns.

And to go through the Pac you’ll need not only 4-6 trns (at least), but many more capital ships/ftrs and subs to protect your trns.

If you do it too early, Japan’s navy will come spank you.

If you do it at all, it has to be as an after-thought, not your primary move.  And, if you are going to do that, I’d recommend taking islands instead.  Harder to reclaim…ties up much more Japanese assets then a few infantry in SFE will.

However if you do it when japan is right next to moscow it will be a big pain to reclaim … my friend does this to me but like you guys said not right away.

Yea, but you better make sure that Moscow can hold on long enough for Americans to cause a real disruption. :P

It can turn into a mean arms race and the one who starts lagging will probably lose the entire game due to it. Build ships, send them to Alaska, ferry troops over while constantly adding new elements to the fleet. Japan will have to consolidate outside Japan to prevent an invasion and stop the loss of the fleet. Only staging point possible then is Buryatia. If the bury stack is always kept in check by the US it’s a working strategy as Japan will not be doing much else. But the only point in doing it would be if UK still has a working pacific fleet and can slowly take Japan’s islands and help Russia keep Germany in check.

The strategy seems sub-optimal and somewhat situational to me, but it could well deserve some more playtesting. I dislike the idea of a straight “KGF” or “KJF” anyway.

@Sankt:

It can turn into a mean arms race and the one who starts lagging will probably lose the entire game due to it. Build ships, send them to Alaska, ferry troops over while constantly adding new elements to the fleet. Japan will have to consolidate outside Japan to prevent an invasion and stop the loss of the fleet. Only staging point possible then is Buryatia. If the bury stack is always kept in check by the US it’s a working strategy as Japan will not be doing much else. But the only point in doing it would be if UK still has a working pacific fleet and can slowly take Japan’s islands and help Russia keep Germany in check.

The strategy seems sub-optimal and somewhat situational to me, but it could well deserve some more playtesting. I dislike the idea of a straight “KGF” or “KJF” anyway.

Yea, so if I’m playing Germany and get my typical German dice, then you can do it.  Why?  Because Brition will have 100% of it’s navy, Egypt andTrans-Jordan and will be more then capable of securing Africa and assisting Russia against Germany.

The thing is that Japan can go south with it´s ground forces, and still maintain the Fleet in SZ60, drop a sub or two each round and wait for the right time to strike.

My suggestion for the japanesse player is to attack with everything (2 bb, trn´, subs etc etc)

And retreat when the trn´s and subs are dead, that will mostlikley kill all and every USA trn, making the s´huttle navy go back to square 1.

Every time a Siberian Insertion has been tried against me, i have thrown it back.  Revised, Classic, does not seem to matter (it is SLIGHTLY more effective in Classic, but still always fails… if the Japan player is conscious :-)

The problem with the Siberian Insertion is that the US has to project their power in all 3 areas;  land, sea and air, and they have to do it 2 moves away from their home base, and adjacent to Japan’s main IC.  So Japan can equal the US advance with half the expenditure.  And once Japan counters, it takes 2 rounds for the US to re-establish the insertion, by which time Japan has cleaned up from the prior insertion.

The Siberian Territories are also worth less income in Revised, so even successfully inserting yields only minimal gain to Russia, and minimal harm to Japan.

To be successful, you would have to be able to maintain your navy without fear of Japan cutting your supply lines, and land forces in mass every turn sufficient to prevent Japan land based counter-attacks, and maintain that level of naval and land control for 4 consecutive turns (from the initial insertion) to reach Moscow.  Japan simply is not going to sit idly by while the US attempts that.

@ncscswitch:

To be successful, you would have to be able to maintain your navy without fear of Japan cutting your supply lines, and land forces in mass every turn sufficient to prevent Japan land based counter-attacks, and maintain that level of naval and land control for 4 consecutive turns (from the initial insertion) to reach Moscow.  Japan simply is not going to sit idly by while the US attempts that.

You assume that the US troops are headed for Moscow, that’s not necessary. If US can keep Japan fully occupied by having to constantly repel US landings in SFE/Bury and pump up their fleet the main goal is reached. This by itself accomplishes nothing, it mainly just stops Japan from taking India and Sinkiang, they might even be unable to hold onto India/FIC and China. I think it all comes down to a delicate balance, and the one that starts lagging will ultimately lose the battle and with that most likely the entire war.

I think the key thing is that it opens up for a british fleet to sail freely in the pacific. They can even without new elements to the region take several Jap islands by using troops from India/Egypt area and Australia. The initial US atlantic fleet should be enough to repel or keep Germany busy in Africa, while UK can concentrate on Norway/Karelia.

Without the UK fleet Japan will ultimately establish a foothold in Bury that US can no longer threaten, but in the right circumstances Japans income will decrease due to the lost islands, and US will instead outbuild Japan - or put the extra funds into the Atlantic. What this does is buy the allies time, so it’s only a choice when the allies are making notably more IPCs than the axis. You will have a Germany in good condition, but a limp Japan. You will have US troops in Bury/SFE that can withdraw to Moscow when time comes, a pacific fleet that can be redirected to protect islands, an atlantic fleet than can start putting serious pressure on Germany. A british build-up of troops in Norway/Karelia and a Russia in pretty good shape who has only had to worry about Germany for several turns, and probably several more while Japan starts from “scratch”.

Call it an aggressive “SJF” (slow japan first, as Switch introduced), but still having your mind set at actually killing Germany first.

But ultimately it’s an advanced and fragile tactic the way I see it.

@Sankt:

But ultimately it’s an advanced and fragile tactic the way I see it.

Very true.  It assumes that Japan either will not or cannot destroy a major portion (or all) of the american flotila.  And that is a very poor assumption, especially against a Japan player who is both conscious, and has not done a few shots before gaming :-D

my pacific build worked vs Darth Maximus.

you’d be surprised how fgts are useful… long as you have the AC’s…
fgts from W-USA can hit SZ 60.

just the point I was arguing if any is it matters on the game itself. I generally don’t like the pacific build-up but it was needed in my game vs Darth to ensure victory and force peace.

Japan can see it coming a mile away, because the US builds naval units in the Pacific.  Assume Pearl went off, and Japan lost a sub, destroyer, and fighter.  You still have 2 battleships, 2 carriers, 5 fighters, and a bomber.  You have 1 battleship, 1 transport, 3 fighters, and 1 bomber.  Hardly auspicious.

Now, if you build two carriers and a fighter, those must be placed at Western U.S.  Japan will almost certainly have purchased 2-3 transports and/or an IC.  What happens next is either you advance, in which case Japan hits and retreats (those free hits on those battleships add up a lot, and it has superior attacking power because of the sheer numbers of air).  Or you stay back and build up, in which case Japan keeps its navy around Japan, shuttles infantry off the isolated islands, and reinforces Asia like mad.  Just before you get into serious attacking range, Japan builds all subs for a round, and you have to retreat again.

I’d say get bombers and put em in Alaska with the American fleet there.  If Japan wants to make subs, great, just send in the bombers, clear the zone, and protect your 4 transports.  (Like you need more then 4?  That’s 8 infantry a round into Asia, plenty to protect against Japan.)

What does Japan do?  They either keep their flagships at home to protect the subs, or they build destroyers to protect their subs.  Either way, you are now tieing up massive amounts of cash from Japan which spares Russia a little.

Option 2 is to move into their Islands.  Now he has to come attack you and give you the defensive advantage. (And remember, 100% of fighters not on ACs are out of range of your fleet probably.  He’s going to have to stage them then you move your fleet and he has to restage them.)  All you need is Philippines and Borneo, that’s 7 IPCs and, with an IC on Borneo, you can successfully build defensive forces right there.  1 DD, 3 SS = 36 IPC.  And gives you a decent offensive and defensive punch.  Or you could go 1 AC, 1 SS, 2 FIG for 44 IPC, an easily attainable number for America.

Japan’s options?  Attack, or do without.  Meanwhile, America’s building a fleet/invasion force to hit the mainland in striking distance and in close enough proximity to not need doubled down transports (transports at start and end points.)

Hmm, come to think of it, I’d like to play a game like that.  See what happens, you know?  Of course, I couldn’t tell my opponent that I’m planning it. :)  Gotta have J1 stay “normal”

I’ve always believed that the best uses of the US were:

1. Help take Africa back from Germany and be a threat to force Germany to defend western Europe

2. Build a pacific fleet to force Japan to spend money on navy

3. Strategic bombing whenever possible

Remember the final result of whatever your move is; if you put a few troops in asia, you’re harrassing Japan, but it takes a long time to set up that gravy train of transports.  If you build a big fleet on turn one, then one of two things will happen: Japan will build a fleet, which means less money going into Asia, or they will not, which means you will have naval superiority and Alfred Thayer Mahan will be proud.

If US builds a navy on turn 1 in the pacfic.

As Japan I laugh and continue into Asia. Your navy alone is strong enough to defend any US attempts at your seazones

Yes, your navy is strong enough to DEFEND, Mercy.  But can it counter US Aggression?  Now your carriers are whimps and your fighters are weaker.

Also, how would Japan counter an Allied Airforce strat?  Hit their shipping in Japan, then bring in the warships to keep Japan on it’s heels?

Very easy to defend as Japan vs the US.

I don’t plan on attacking anything the US throws at me. Unless they come to come and I just smash it with every jap fgt in existence + bmb. You can easily hole up on the outside seazone of Japan with BB’s and AC fgts…

the thing is if the states go vs Japan… (the states wont make any headaway vs Japan compared to the Russians getting crushed by the americans and enjoying the Africa Income)

the cons way outnumber any pros

As i said before, Japan Navy doesn´t need to kill the whole US one.

It´s enought to attack and kill all US trn´s.  (if US takes expensive capital ships and figs as casualties they die quickly) if they take trn´s as casualties you can take a minimum casualties yourself and retreat the rest of the fleet if the numbers are against you.

And then repeat the procces.