Japanese first attacks

That’s why under Caspian Sub and tripleA ladder rules you can’t attack an enemy capital with ground troops in your first turn.

Like you mentioned, it turns a wonderful game into a coin flip and spoils the fun.

I’ve also seen someone use an 8 bid to get another transport for this move.  He took UK but America took it back and since there was no pressure on Russia for a few turns the guy ended up loosing.

@Renove:

Lately - when playing Japan - I’ve been experiencing huge problems when confronted with the UK1 fighter assault on the solomon sub and the following landing on the SZ 52 AC.

Well u better get used to these “huge problems” because that sorta stuff you mentioned is pretty standard.  Not THE standard, but standard enough that you should know how to respond right off the bat.  Sayin this is causing you HUGE PROBLEMS means you’re probably pretty inexperienced.

When it actually hits the sub - even when it doesn’t - the chances of an economic J1 sz 52 attack become very slim. My normal sz 52 assault consists of 1 AC 2 FIGS 1 Bom 1 Sub (if it survived UK1) 1 BS and 1 DST vs 1 AC 1 SUB 2 FIGS. With the SZ 37 AC - BS - FIG I attack the SZ 59 UK-DST (if alive), the other SZ 37 FIG supports the attack in China. The SZ 60 transport usually drops something off in Buryatia.

**FYI, the UK sub at Solomons usually attacks with the UK India fighter to try to kill the Jap sub at Solomons for a 2/3 overall shot of killing the Jap sub.

Another “standard” that I haven’t seen a lot (so is it really standard?  well it used to be) is UK transport block from Australia to New Guinea (or was that it, I forget).  The idea is that either you use a battleship to clear the transport, in which case any carriers you left at Solomons are more vulnerable to US attack, or you use a fighter at a time where you can hardly spare any fighters.

Blah blah, rest of ur stuff difficult to read.  I hate reading “SZ 52” blah blah reference.  Please write “Hawaii Island sea zone”.  I haven’t memorized the d*** map you know . . .

Anyways, you’re sending a battleship, bomber, destroyer, 2 fighter, destroyer.  That’s not “economical”.  That’s like saying “Hey US!  If you were planning on doing a KGF, here’s half my fleet giftwrapped!  Won’t you please smack my capital ships down by either strafing hard or if you’re lucky just smacking me dead on the spot?!”

Obviously you have some clue that this is the case due to comments in your post.  But I want to emphasize this is not the “economical” attack you may think it is.

You gotta figure first that you stand a good chance of losing a unit or two on the attack, then the Hawaii fighter, the W. US fighter, and the E. US bomber are in range, plus the US battleship and US transport. can hit.  If the US gets lucky they can clear Jap’s capital ships at Hawaii, if the US is moderately lucky, they can kill the destroyer and a couple of fighters then retreat back to W. US (where Japan can’t hit them after a US1 build plus US destroyer moving west from I think it’s around Panama).  Remember as Japan you didn’t take Hawaii, so you have to land fighters close by if your carrier gets blown up, and if you didn’t send your other AC to Solomons or close by, then when US attacks, you have to assign hits to your fighters before your carriers (if you don’t, US runs away and your fighters die for free).

THEN

For the rest, you totally ignored the UK air and Anglo-Egypt situation, which is what you have to consider on Japan’s first move.  Either there’s a UK bomber in range to hit your transports east of Japan or there isn’t.  If there is, leaving your transports unescorted is real risky, making your battleship-carrier attack on the UK destroyer at Kwangtung a bad idea.  Probably in most cases you should just ignore the UK dispersed fleet, leave the Jap battleship east of Japan to battleship bombard Burytia and escort transports there.  If the UK sticks around on UK2, you hunt, if UK flees, ignore - they make it to Germany, but in a KGF they get there too late to make a huge difference, and in a KJF, Germany should have enough air to mess with the Allied fleet anyways.**

Now I am aware that most players here will probably use the UK FIG to counter the G1 Anglo-Egypt but when the German bid is placed in Libya and the G1 ANglo-Egypt isn’t desastrous that counterattack becomes very hard, thus the FIG is often used for other strategies.

Yeah, like grabbing Borneo - I think it is.  Anyways, it’s a 4 IPC island.  Japan makes an early play for it, Japan pulls itself out of position in Asia.  Japan doesn’t make a play for it, UK’s up 4 IPCs for a while compensating for loss of Africa.

The SZ 52 stack (1AC 1SUB 2FIGS) has an above reasonable chance to really hurt the attacking Japanse fleet and there is always a chance for an American counterattack USA1 on the Japanese fleet - if things go horribly wrong for Japan. The dice don’t even have to be desastrous, a slight dice advantage for the Allies in SZ 52 can result in rather painful Japanese losses.

Yeah, that’s why you see Japan hitting Pearl with 1 sub (optional), 4 fighters 1 bomber in Pearl Light (nothing for Allies to counter), or if Allies reinforced Pearl like you describe, Pearl heavy with ALL units able to reach with rest of Jap fleet dispersing so UK can’t hunt it down.

I don’t like moves where you really need a good twist of fate - definitly so early in the game, so my question is, how do you handle the SZ 52 stack - especially when the Solomon SUB was killed UK1? Do you send the transport in SZ 60 as fodder or do you divert FIGS from the SZ 37 fleet? I could use some help in this matter.

What I would do as Japan totally depends on the board situation.  I’m not gonna be a dumbass and say BLA BLA BLA U SHOULD ALWAYS DO THE KUNNING BLA BLA PLAN, because obviously that’s fulla crap.

If the UK flew its bomber east, if the UK split its fleet, if the UK hit Borneo, if the UK retook Anglo-Egypt, if the UK flew its India fighter to Hawaii’s carrier, if the UK bought 3 fighters, if the UK bought an industrial complex in India, if Russia put 6 infantry in Burytia, if Russia put 1 infantry in Burytia, if Russia put 4 infantry in Sinkiang, if the UK Australia fleet split or stayed together east or west - all these are things you need to think about when you’re doing your move!  Saying you lost the Solomon sub is NOT sufficient information to offer an informed opinion on what you ought to do!

Usually I see the UK dispersing its Indian fleet.  Either UK retakes Anglo-Egypt and sends its Indian destroyer and carrier to hunt the Japanese transport at Kwangtung and attacks the Solomon sub with the UK sub and picks up 1 inf Aus and 1 inf New Zealand and sails east with the UK transport, in which case I leave Jap battleship east of Japan to protect transport plus 3 newly built transports (although I might switch this if UK bomber is in range of east of Japan - otherwise I don’t care if an usupported UK carrier and destroyer attack my Japanese fleet), and I hit Pearl with 1 sub (if it survived), 1 destroyer, 4-5 fighter, 1 bomber (saving 1 fighter for China), noncom battleship and two carriers to Solomons (leaving battleship, 2 carriers, 3+ fighters at Solomons, a hard target).

Or UK takes Borneo; I still build 3 transports 1 tank (retake Borneo next round), follow with standard as above.  Sometimes UK just sends 2 infantry to take Borneo and attacks the Solomon sub with UK sub and fighter, which can be inconvenient for the Japs given the extra fighter on Japan, in which case I might go Pearl heavy as described below.

If UK put a fighter on the US carrier, depending on the Asia situation, I might send EVERYTHING in range to Pearl.  (You NEED more than 2 fighters; if I remember right only 1 carrier can reach Pearl, and the US has a pretty good counterattack, so you need a loaded carrier on defense).  If you drop units, you can drop fighters, so your fleet is battleship, carrier, destroyer, 2 fighters (not bad), although you lose the fodder transport.  Drawback is, obviously, progress in Asia is slowed, which is why I really don’t like this option particularly if you see an infantry in Russian Burytia and an infantry in British India ready to take an underdefended Manchuria and French Indochina respectively.  You can typically respond by leaving 1 inf at Burytia and landing a fighter there (landing Jap fighter at French Indochina is better positionally, but usually due to UK transport in area threatening offload of troops plus UK bomber in range you lose the Jap fighter if you do this)

THERE!  If you wanted a simple answer, too bad!  Hahahahha.  Better give some more details if u want help.

@OLver:

Thanks for the input guys. My oponent should really have landed in Africa with UK on the first turn.

I also thought that sending a Russian fighter in Anglo Egypt was a big mistake made by my oponent, so was it to not leave Leningrad completly empty.

My bad I said 1 inf and one art from Africa but of course it was 1 tank and 1 inf. I also forgot to say that my two subs in the baltic were moved in  seazone 7. I knew my navy was going to be destroyed, but it forced my oponent to split his airforce, and I saved a sub and killed one fighter with my transport/dest fleet.

There are two approaches to a non-Baltic fleet buy that I’ve seen and use.

1.  Stay put.  If the UK attacks with its air, the Germans kill UK air.  The Germans lose a lot of navy which they weren’t using a lot (they would have used the Baltic transport), and the UK loses its valuable and hard-to-replace air.

2.  Split into four groups.  If the UK splits its air up, German subs can surrender and German destroyer and/or transport have a better chance of bringing down some UK air.  If the UK doesn’t split its air up, then at least three German units survive.  Note that the US bomber will probably knock out another German naval unit.

I guess my oponent did not play really well  with Russia because even thought I had few land units on the Russian front, my fighters always allowed me to trade territories and to keep UK and US navy at bay for a while.

Yes, trading territories is - after a fashion - a strength of the German fighter buy, but REALLY, you should have been bled dry, especially with having to transport units to Africa.

Now I have to explain what were, in my opinion the advantages of such a move. UK and USA had to buy much more navy to protect their transports, so even thought my russian front was some kind of weak, Germany was almost never threatened, and the Allies coult not build any fleet in the Pacific. On UK1, my oponent send his Indian SZ Fighter to destroy my tank in Anglo-Egypt along with the Transjordan inf. He succeded, but my lonely Japan transport stayed alive, so I only had to buy one on J1 and could already build a factory in Mandchuria. On J1 I took China and Buryatia. Two turn later a factory was build in French Indochina, and another one in India a turn later.

German fighters have nothing to do with a fleet in the Pacific.  Nothing you have yet described prevents the Allies from building a fleet in Atlantic OR Pacific.  (Of course, if they build in the Atlantic, they’ll have to overcome that German air force, but I digress)

The UK can still send their carrier and destroyer against the Japanese transport at Kwangtung - and they should, too, in view of the fact they used the Indian fighter against Anglo-Egypt.  More weak play.  :wink:

I think you spent way too many IPCs on industrial complexes.  If you purchase 16 IPC of transports, you can move up to four units from Japan to the mainland, and vary between anywhere from Soviet Far East to French Indochina; furthermore, those transports can be used as naval fodder and to pick up Japanese infantry from isolated islands where they are doing no good.  Compare with a 15 IPC industrial complex that produces three units, cannot switch where units are placed, cannot be used as naval fodder, and do not solve the problem of wasted Japanese infantry resources sitting on isolated islands.  I know Caspian Sub states 2 transports 1 industrial complex is good, but I think I would prefer 3 transports 1 tank on J1 regardless of bid - if I can claim India and put an IC there with Japan, the positional advantage is huge.

–

In practice, those German fighters have limited range, exactly as I previously mentioned; you will probably end up having to split the German fighters between eastern territories and Western Europe.  This isn’t too bad in practice.  What you will probably see is the Allies building up a fleet off Eastern Canada; when the Allies feel like it, they will unite newly built naval units from Eastern US with the existing fleet off Eastern Canada and land at Algeria, where with no surviving Baltic fleet elements and your German Mediterranean fleet probably not in a position to counter, and insufficient German fighters at Western Europe (considering that you have to split between Western Europe and eastern territories), you can do nothing THAT TURN.

On the next turn, though, you can land 10 fighter 1 bomber (possibly 9 fighter 1 bomber) at Western Europe.  If the Allied navy stay off Algeria, you beat them up, if the Allied navy retreats from Algeria, you may have a problem.  Why a problem?  Because even a pretty tame Allied fleet will land 6 US and 4 UK ground units (2 starting UK transports and 2 starting US transports plus 1 US transport bought on US1); you may easily have to deal with a lot more.  And although you have air at Western Europe that can hit Algeria, you need cheap German ground units to act as fodder; you can get 2 German infantry in with the Mediterranean transport, but otherwise - well, you can see that you might have a problem to deal with.

So let us say that is what happens.  On the German turn, you fly all your fighters to Western Europe, and the Allies respond by pulling their navy back to Eastern Canada and buying another US carrier at Eastern US (I assume they bought one already on US1 after seeing the German fighter build).  Germany does nothing about the Allied forces in Algeria.

Germany’s next turn, you can only trade off Karelia and one other territory easily (that other territory being the one your German bomber can hit).  BUT now what?  If you fly away from Western Europe, the Allies will land MORE units at Algeria.  And if you do NOT fly away from Western Europe, the Allies STILL land at Algeria, with probable 6 transports (up to 7 or 8 easily), 2 destroyers, 2 carriers, 4 fighters, 1 battleship.  EVEN with that mighty air force, there is nothing you can do.  So let us say you GIVE UP Algeria and start harassing Russia with your mighty air force.  The Allies have sunk 32 IPC in carriers, and are just making their landing at Africa; they are out of position to help Russia.

So as you can see, what have you gained at best?  Nothing but TIME.  Time for Japan to push on Russia.  Time for the Germans to keep the IPCs they gained in Africa.  And that is EXACTLY why I recommend using African bid units instead of Ukraine.  You need to control Africa early while you still can; you WILL lose Africa eventually.

–

And remember these things too:

1.  The Allies can still go KJF (if they do, Germany has to try to control and keep control of Africa.)

2.  By buying so many fighters early, you lock yourself into a certain line of German play.  You may do better to stagger your fighter buys out (say 1 German fighter a turn or even 2 German fighters on G1) so you can have some early infantry to trade with Russia sooner.

In short - yes, if the Allies go KGF, German fighters are useful - however, I do not think that 4 fighters RIGHT AWAY is necessary or proper; I think 2 fighters is the most that the Germans can afford on G1.

@Aretaku:

I am playing a game of Enhanced, and I am Germany.

After a disastrous battle in SZ 30, UK is limited to North Atlantic operations. His Atlantic fleet is in SZ 3 with 1 AC, 1 BB, 2 TRN and 2 Jet Fighters.

I am expecting a Russian sub block in SZ 5, but I can still hit the British fleet with 5 FIGS, 1 BOM and 2 SUBS….

I am set for at least two rounds against Russia, have taken Egypt, and America is two turns away from reorienting to aid Britain should the UK Navy suddenly cease to exist before UK2.

So hit the Brits with planes and subs…or not? And what is your reasoning?  :-)

Does Germany need her fighters else where for offense or defense?
If not, I’d take a shot at it.

You could add wolfpack as an NA (if it’s G2) and go in with 7 threes and 1 four.
You’d be going against 2 ones, 1 two, 1 four and 2 fives.

Germany should get 4 hits, Allies get 4 (give them the good roll)
What do the allies lose?  BB damage, 2 tpts… a/c?  Ftr?

you’d still have 3 ftrs and a bomber on BB (damage) and 2 jet ftr, this is worse case.
Allies could get only 3 hits… letting you trade 2 subs and 1 ftr for 2 tpts and a/c.

I’d take that trade as Germany.

I think you have to go through one round of the battle and see how many hits each side gets, then decide if you want to continue or not.

And us old AD&D players who have more d6 than you can shake a stick at…

It has been 6 years since I last played D&D, and right now, within 30 seconds, I could lay my hands on enough D6 to designate a specific die for every single unit in battle… including each INF having its own die!  100th level fireballs :-P

Hmmm, well I guess it is not more effective, you’re right. I just went and looked at the numbers and by the end of round 6 the transport method would only yield you 12 units, while the factory method would yield you (assuming you use original 2 transports) 4 on round 2, 3 on round 3, 4, 5, 6. The method I would be advocating would require two extra transports to shuffle down to brazil, which obviously costs substantially more than the factory and only allows you to get 1 more unit there a turn.

I think I just have an aversion to having a factory around not doing anything later in the game, but in your case it would definitely be worth it. In every other case I would definitely suggest against a brazilian IC, but for the smallest amount of IPCs I guess the factory in brazil would have to be the way to go, assuming you just want to use the original EUS transports.

yes but their is just one little problem

what with island bases than

i think its ok this way beacuse ,when the island bases would worth for all ,with long range aircraft you could get 8 movement with fighters which is very powerful

and the game wouldnt be that much interesting

but thats just my opininon