I’ve seen a few topics on more-or-less audacious UK plans to put Japan in difficulty, don’t remember how many and where exactly on this inform forum. And I have two new twists so I’d better start a new topic ;-)
I had experimented with a Jap bid of arty in French Indochina to replace the support of a fighter, and so giving them more flexibility in such exploding-UK situations. However, there’s one where even that wasn’t enough…
Low Luck game.
Bid 9 IPC: G Libya tnk, J FIC arty
1R: Buryat 6inf Kazakh 2ftr …among others
1G: Egypt landing, 3tnk 1inf survive … among others
1UK:
Egypt counterattack with 3inf 1bmb 1ftr. Wipes Germans while losing 3inf 1bmb. Fighter retreats to India.
New Guinea counterattack with 2inf. Wipes J 1inf without loss.
Solomons 1sub attacks, wipes J sub without loss.
Situation at end of 1UK:
-des sz59 off Kwantung
-car sz36 off Indochina (The new twist - now J btl from sz37 East Indies cannot reach sz59)
-tra sz34 off Egypt/Persia
-tra sz47 off New Guinea
-sub sz45 off Solomons
-Persia 2inf 1ftr AA India empty
(US in sz52 off Hawaii: sub car ftr)
1J Now what ?
Already 7ftr 1bmb strictly necessary, more are welcome. CANCELED - back to the planning table…
I concluded sz60 (E of Japan) is a dead zone for transports-only now. If I clear enough threats around, not enough fighters left to make it useful (supporting 1J Buryat counter).
If not cleaning Buryat, there is the threat of US bmb attacking sz60 landing to Buryat too. Even Manchuria is a dead zone since RU 6inf 2ftr may attack. 2inf 1tnk 2ftr not defensive enough; adding more inf weakens China attack.
So I decided for lesser ambitious actions:
To crush Pearl Harbor in one round with some safety: btl des tra car 1bmb 2ftr. Succeeded without loss.
To sink sz45 sub certainly: 2ftr
To sink sz37 car reasonably: btl car. Succeeded without loss.
To sink sz47 tra reasonably: 1ftr. Succeeded without loss.
To conquer China: 5inf 1art 1ftr. Survived 3inf 1art. ftr retreated to sz37 car.
To get free India: 1inf
To protect Manchuria minimally: 1inf.
Build: 2inf 3tra (sz61 - W of Japan). A bit off-position for further offensive actions. Still can crush the 6inf in Manchuria.
The empty tra in Pearl is also off-position but may be still brought back to transport Jap>Bur, or take the Solomon inf (BB+ftr supported) to Australia and NZ.
Enemy left: des sz59 to be dealt with later. tra sz34 to be sunk by German planes from Libya. Not dangerous such dispersed, still some risk to leave 3tra attackable by expendable destroyer.
…
2RUS: 3inf conquered Manchuria 1inf without loss, [easy to counter with China force+air]. Other RU 3inf retreated to Yakut.
1tnk (1ftr) liberated India. No Jap force in range except fighters :=( so better just defend Indochina and attack later.
I’m sure there is much to discuss in various trade-offs here. Any obviously better options ?
I’ve seen a few topics on more-or-less audacious UK plans to put Japan in difficulty, don’t remember how many and where exactly on this inform forum. And I have two new twists so I’d better start a new topic ;-)
I had experimented with a Jap bid of arty in French Indochina to replace the support of a fighter, and so giving them more flexibility in such exploding-UK situations. However, there’s one where even that wasn’t enough…
Low Luck game.
Bid 9 IPC: G Libya tnk, J FIC arty
1R: Buryat 6inf Kazakh 2ftr …among others
1G: Egypt landing, 3tnk 1inf survive … among othersAt end of R1, then, Russia’s waving its arms and yelling “HEY ALLIES KJF!”
1UK:
Egypt counterattack with 3inf 1bmb 1ftr. Wipes Germans while losing 3inf 1bmb. Fighter retreats to India.
New Guinea counterattack with 2inf. Wipes J 1inf without loss.
Solomons 1sub attacks, wipes J sub without loss.Situation at end of 1UK:
-des sz59 off Kwantung
-car sz36 off Indochina (The new twist - now J btl from sz37 East Indies cannot reach sz59)
-tra sz34 off Egypt/Persia
-tra sz47 off New Guinea
-sub sz45 off Solomons
-Persia 2inf 1ftr AA India empty
(US in sz52 off Hawaii: sub car ftr)1J Now what ?
- To crush Pearl Harbor in one round for little loss: btl des car 1bmb 2ftr = 18 punch, exactly 3 hits
But if you send Btl Des Car to Pearl, you risk losing the committed Jap navy units in US counterattack. Far more economical to send Des plus mass air, and land fighters on 2 carriers at the Solomons.
Transport may add extra safety (else if US sub hits, J needs to lose the bomber)
It’s safer, but losing that J1 transport to Asia really hurts.
- To crush Buryat 6inf reliably one needs at least 3inf 1tnk 3ftr. So the transport must end in sz60, so it (or whole 4tra fleet with production) must be protected against UK sub+des.
You can either kill Burytia now or later. If you prefer to attack immediately, you might want to lay off Pearl Harbor. Yeah, I said it. But you could also just build transports at Japan and Pearl as normal. If Russia expands to Manchuria, transported units from Japan kill them all. If Russia stays at Burytia, they still die. Probably Russia will send 1 inf to Manchuria and retreat rest to Yakut. That’s perfectly acceptable; Russia makes some temporary gains, and the Japanese advance in Asia is stalled, but it’s nothing terribly serious.
- To sink sz45 sub certainly: 2ftr. OR
I assume you’re talking about the UK sub at Solomon. That lone sub shouldn’t be a problem, particularly if you send the Jap battleship in the South Pacific to join 2 x Jap carriers at Solomons. Sometimes that lone UK sub CAN be a problem if a UK bomber landed in China, but that didn’t happen.
- To sink sz59 des certainly: 2ftr with 50% chance of 1ftr loss.
Again, there’s no reason to do it. At the end of J1, you can have one fleet at Solomons and another east of Japan, both with a Jap battleship; the one east of Japan with fodder transports, and the fleet at Solomons with two carriers plus assorted fighters.
- To sink sz47 tra reasonably: 1ftr. Useful to limit further havoc e.g. Borneo
Again, you don’t need to. J1, you need all the air you can get either to smash China/Burytia, or to do Pearl. If you start diverting air to other targets, all your other battles become less favorable, and you pay the price. Just reclaim everything on J2 with the Japanese navy and air force.
. . .
Well, in a like situation, I’d either ignore Pearl Harbor, and use the freed up units to kill most of the UK fleet in the Pacific and smash Burytia heavily. The Japanese fleet is scattered, but nothing can reach the Jap fleet, so that isn’t a problem.
Or, I’d do Pearl Harbor with destroyer plus mass air (everything that can reach), and end up with two Japanese fleets; one east of Japan with 1 Japanese battleship plus 4 transports; another at Solomons with two carriers and a battleship. The Japanese fleet can be attacked, but the odds are so horrible, the Allies probably won’t bother.
:roll:
IMHO, Japan must try to eliminate as much Allied ships as possible on J1. If successful, it really doesn’t matter how decimated japans fleets are, if there are no Allied ships left in the Pacific. Transports can run around without fear and invade weakly defended territories that Japan can hold for half a dozen turns easily.
:roll:
That really doesn’t work out well, Ivan.
The only way Japan can be dominant in the Pacific is if the allies do a poor job in building/moving or if the allies leave.
My favorite ploy, in KJF, is to get Japan to chase the British fleet. It pulls them hopelessly out of range of threatening the Americans allowing me to move into position at will.
:roll:
What you say is true enough, but far too many players go all out against Germany and tend to totally ignore the pacific altogether untill it is altogether too late.
In my last game, I was able to put all of my Japanese capital ships in the central med! The game was practically over before my opponent built any US ships in the pacific as a desperate measure to threaten Japan. I was strong enough to build ships to counter his buys, and still crush Russia.
:-o
Exactly.
I, personally, do not think Japan should be ignored until they start to invade Egypt and Novosibirsk. By then, in my opinion, it is far too late for the allies to do anything against Japan.
IMHO, Round 4 or 5 should be about the time Russia turns around and moves to spank Japan. Japan earns more at this point then Russia, but Russia gets to build right on top of the forward Japanese units, Japan has to transport or build ICs to counter.
I say Round 4 or 5 in a classic, formulaic KGF game because that’s about when England and America should have the German fleets sunk and their transport systems put in place. That means Germany’s fighting against 16 British/American units a round landing in North Europe and building 10-12 of their own.
1R: Buryat 6inf Kazakh 2ftr …among others
At end of R1, then, Russia’s waving its arms and yelling “HEY ALLIES KJF!”
Not exactly - Russia participated to a quite successful KGF. But it could have become a full KJF if US fleet core were not crushed at Pearl.
But if you send Btl Des Car to Pearl, you risk losing the committed Jap navy units in US counterattack. Far more economical to send Des plus mass air, and land fighters on 2 carriers at the Solomons.
I had Btl Des Car Tra 2Fig surviving at Pearl - more than safe ! Reasons to add the Tra:
OK with counterattacking Buryat later. My Japs left behind 1inf in Manchuria for Ivan not to take it free, but have to mass so have something to kill later [anything suboptimal about that ?]. Or if supporting with fighters, having them exposed in Buryat too.
I assume you’re talking about the UK sub at Solomon. That lone sub shouldn’t be a problem, particularly if you send the Jap battleship in the South Pacific to join 2 x Jap carriers at Solomons. Sometimes that lone UK sub CAN be a problem if a UK bomber landed in China, but that didn’t happen.
That’s the catch with this “explosion” plan - scattered UK are blocking the passing spots, and the East Indian group (btl car) cannot reach Solomons sz45 over the New Guinean tra, neither Kwantung sz59 over the Indochina sz36 carrier. Maybe you haven’t pictured all the map and threats ? This SW group could either sit, move 1N to Indochina, 1E to N. Guinea, 1NE or 2NE to Carolinas - too far away to assist Pearl. And definitely didn’t want to leave a lone carrier in range of UK sub !
Another reason why I used battleships to attack instead of just sitting to escort: didn’t want to waste their free absorbed hit which is GREAT, beside their firepower. And I think I picked the best targets for that. At Pearl, the destroyer would have died just for nothing instead. And against the Indochina carrier - I wanted it down before the Persian fighter could land on it and form an effective stack, either running SW or threatening around.
I’m now thinking the Right Things were the Plan B:
The US counterattack at Wake can be (if US lost sub, fig and survived Car): btl tra car 2ftr (including Californian ftr). Impracticable for US - I miscounted the US bomber that could hit Hawaii sea and land, but NOT Wake sea (Japanese island), go back and land.
Trouble with this version is - the 4tra in sz60 can be attacked by [EDIT] US Car 2Ftr and later by UK Des, optionally if situation is favorable. This is [EDIT: more than] plenty of risk, and this is what deterred me from this Plan B. Would the US dare to open the way?
…
Wonder what Japan could have done if R1 landed the 2fig in Buryat too ?
RUS 6inf 2ftr may be defeated by J 3inf 1tnk (Btl) 5ftr 1bmb, but with good chance to lose 1-3 fighters. So it leaves only 1ftr for China (plus the arty). I think Russia would not want such a trade-off, losing their little swap ability in Eurasia.
…
Wonder what if UK retained their bomber somewhere near the coast ? Then the offensive threat of little scattered UK ships increase dramatically, forcing their sinking or 1-2 big defensive J taskforces (btl car 2tra). BUT that was not possible after Egypt - using 5 moves to reach there, then anywhere landing in range of German bmb+ftr. So with this Egypt plan, it was right to sacrifice the bomber to keep the fighter back to Persia (and so keep the UK carrier as a potential value).
I’ve done plenty of true mistakes later in this game (not like these debatable options), and lost it. Mainly, after the German fleet was trapped and killed in the Med, Germany was heavily cornered by Russian-led Allies (and threatened from south by US), and Japan with not enough deep force to press Russia.
Wonder if this influence sphere separation doesn’t work better than classic KGF UK+US in Baltic ?
UK only troops to Baltic/ Archangel > help Russia,
US to Africa > help Russia, only later, and keep a huge threat on SEU, WEU, Balkans etc. (up to 6-8 transports)
Wonder what Japan could have done if R1 landed the 2fig in Buryat too ?
How does Russia land 2 figs in Buryatia? I count one that can make it if it participates in no attacks on R1, but the other looks too far away…the one that starts in Karelia. The other one could be in India and help threaten Manchuria, but it couldn’t help defend Buryatia on R1.
Other than that, I for one was intrigued by the UK carrier moving to block the East Indies fleet from taking out the Kwang destroyer, never thought of that before. That does make things trickier, because that UK destroyer will survive, making it pretty risky to build just transports in etiher SZ60 or 61.
I need to think about this more…
I think the options are like a) like newpaintbrush says and ignore Pearl, because it vastly fortifies your ability to immediately make transports and drop men on the mainland. or b) don’t make any transports on J1, do some creative spending like an IC in kwang and save 15 for the next round when you binge. IC in kwang is a lot safer than building tps if you decide to go Pearl heavy and do your other attacks, Magister. I like your attacks overall which kill the scattered UK navy quickly, but I don’t like the way you expose newly build transports, you can’t afford to let the enemy take additional early hits to your ability to make war. The best defense is a BB early on so they don’t have a good chance of getting anything, but both of your bbs are way out of position if you go to Pearl, so either ignore Pearl to have peace of mind in SZ61, or don’t build transports. If you build transport + carrier or destroyer, it’s still worth the UK’s time to send the destroyer in because it will still have a chance of knocking out a transport or a more expensive piece of equipment.
Now this 1UK history was a best case, it has its own risks:
So only a combined 3.5% for the UK best case presented and not negligible for at least one of bad battles.
Now, if the Jap sub survives, it surely is a good defensive addition to the Pearl (or Wake) fleet or sz60 transports (though, 1sub 4tra not enough to hold vs US car 2ftr). With Low Luck a sub is unreliable as attacker, cannot be planned on, surely does not replace a fighter’s firepower to reach an “exact” result.
On the other hand, if UK were a bit luckier in Egypt or Germans had a little less troops, then UK bmb+ftr survived. Would Italian East Africa be a good landing spot ? Would German attack with bmb+ftr from Libya ?
… And still this doesn’t exhaust this interconnected regional analysis - that must include capabilities (of action), probabilities (of outcomes) and intentions (of opponent action)…
At tripleaorg.dev they are debating how to write a good AI for A&A. When it could handle a situation like this reasonably with all ramifications, then it will be a GOOD AI.
im magister counterpart in this game.
i call it go for broke opning.
and i must say that it all my atacks whent good. but usal some will all of them not go well. It is a risky move that realy can slow japan down special if u combine it whith and atack on boreno.
another option for uk is, if there is only 2 tanks in anglo egypt then i atack egypt whith 1inf 1fighter and 1bomber, and atack boreno whith 2 inf
1 thing u shout have done was that u shout have put the tranny to sea zone 36 whith the bb and ac. If i got lucky in pearl take a figter as casulti, u hat figters in range ther cout land on the ac. Then u cout have retaken india. And just ignore that UK sub.
But the biggest problem is the sub in solo, if u have that u can go light on pearl whith 1 sub 1 dest 1 fighter and 1 bomber. If i lose that sub i sometimes purcase 2 ic for japan in round 1, Because u cant protect the trannys. It is to risky to let them die, if u lose them u lose the game.
i also have to say that this is my standart opning in a KGF, i have never gone KJF. But if i can counter pearl i will surly do so the navy dosent come and bite me in the ass. I have never seen a KJF that works. and dont come up whith starts, it only works if u can beat me whith it. :-D
sorry for my bad english
@Crazy:
:roll:
:mrgreen:
@Crazy:
:roll:
IMHO, Japan must try to eliminate as much Allied ships as possible on J1. If successful, it really doesn’t matter how decimated japans fleets are, if there are no Allied ships left in the Pacific. Transports can run around without fear and invade weakly defended territories that Japan can hold for half a dozen turns easily.
:roll:
If Japan loses its ships killing the Allied ships in the Pacific, the US can just buy some more ships. Then it will be the US transports that run around without fear.
Yeah, Magister, I wasn’t looking at a board. Quite right, the UK can make some very inconvenient naval blocks for Japan. HOWEVER, I stand by what I wrote earlier.
- To crush Pearl Harbor in one round with some safety: btl des tra car 1bmb 2ftr. Succeeded without loss.
1. Jap transport to Hawaii means 2 less early units in Asia.
2. Japs did not kill 6 Russian infantry in Burytia.
3. Russians have option of 1 inf to Manchuria and retreat rest to Yakut.
Net, Russians maintain strong economy in early game and keep their Asian infantry intact.
–-
What if you were unlucky and sustained 2-4 hits? It’s btl 2 ftr car (optional destr, trns, assume destr) vs US attack force of btl bmb 2 ftr 1 dstr 1 trns. However, the Japs have to lose fighters before they drop the carrier, and the US can retreat its battleship to Western US to be supplemented by a Pacific build.
With a bit of bad/good luck, the Japs will be wiped out and the US battleship will survive, leaving the Allies with the possibility of contesting the Pacific early.
So - that Jap attack on Pearl is a good attack IF the Japs don’t have any sort of bad luck. However, if the Japs DO have some bad luck at Pearl, that bad luck will be exacerbated when the US moves to exploit that by attacking an underdefended Jap fleet. That is why I prefer to do Pearl with fodder plus lots of air when I can. Japan can lose some fighters at Pearl, but the US cannot possibly break Japan’s navy.
[newpaintbrush] Yeah, Magister, I wasn’t looking at a board.
[Magister] 3. Russians have option of 1 inf to Manchuria and retreat rest to Yakut.
Looking at a board and the stated initial plan, 1 Japanese inf was diverted to defend Manchuria. So Russians have only the option to attack with a strongish force. They used 3 inf and won without loss - BUT they could have lost all 3.
What you say - bomber defending at sea ? ;-)
I’d be glad to be able to forego Pearl if I know the US will leave peacefully the Pacific anyway ;-)
Yes, there is risk from fluctuations, and submarines are one of the most important sources. With normal luck I’ll be more circumspect.
But we were playing the Low Luck variant, and here a battleship is best because it takes the certain 1 hit with good chances for others intact.
There remained the risk from UK destroyer, still enough in Low Luck. With normal luck it’s worse because probability to hit at least once with 3 of 1/6 is substantially less than 3/6 (average is same, but compensates with chances of 2 and 3 hits, now useless).
Plan C variant:
J Pearl: btl car bmb ftr = exact 2 hits, retreat to Wake, land another ftr
sz60: des tra (attacks Bury) then build 3tra.
Bury: 3inf 1tnk 3ftr
sz45 Solomons: 2ftr to sink sub
China: 5inf 1art is enough ? Maybe. Without the arty it would have been impossible.
Then sz60 des 4tra has to defend against US car 2fig then optionally UK des. Not that bad ?!
J Pearl: btl car bmb ftr = exact 2 hits, retreat to Wake, land another ftr
If you’re playing low luck you can count on this, but if you’re playing normally you might find the variance is high enough to make it a battle not worth pursuing, because both good and bad luck are against you. Hit too high and suddenly you’ve occupied that zone with a weak btl car, too low and the Pearl units will rip you.
Also Bury might be too hard to hit on J1 if the Russians put a fighter there.
I have never seen a KJF that works. and dont come up whith starts, it only works if u can beat me whith it. :-D
That’s what I’ve been saying since I first came here, cpl of months ago.
I’ve seen (very few games) US shipping units to SFE, but this is as far as the “KJF” can work.
But remember this Enskive, in this forum ppl play with NA’s, and sometimes even tech.
We dont do that in the triplea lobby, so perhaps that type of games is radically different from what we’re used to.
The typical KJF that folks use here is not a “Siberian Insertion” (landing US forces in SFE).
Island hoping, or a quick rush to SZ60 seem to be more common (with Island Hoping being the most common)
@ncscswitch:
The typical KJF that folks use here is not a “Siberian Insertion” (landing US forces in SFE).
Island hoping, or a quick rush to SZ60 seem to be more common (with Island Hoping being the most common)
Why is it that I almost never see this strat played in the triplea lobby??
I have never played by forum so I can’t tell where the best players are, as someone said, the best forum players
often uses KJF (island hopping), the best lobby players never uses this strat.
And I would think it’s strange if the level between the two “playgroups” are any different.
Anyone who has a good answer?
[[/quote]
But remember this Enskive, in this forum ppl play with NA’s, and sometimes even tech.
We dont do that in the triplea lobby, so perhaps that type of games is radically different from what we’re used to.
Point taken.
but i assume if plp dont say other, that it is the normal rules.
@ncscswitch:
The typical KJF that folks use here is not a “Siberian Insertion” (landing US forces in SFE).
Island hoping, or a quick rush to SZ60 seem to be more common (with Island Hoping being the most common)
Why is it that I almost never see this strat played in the triplea lobby??
I have never played by forum so I can’t tell where the best players are, as someone said, the best forum players
often uses KJF (island hopping), the best lobby players never uses this strat.
And I would think it’s strange if the level between the two “playgroups” are any different.
Anyone who has a good answer?
There’s always a regional difference as to preferred strategies.
However, the level between the two playgroups are different. Shuttling US ground units to Soviet Far East has many problems; it is vulnerable to sea/air attack from Japan, must trek to Russia, and does nothing to counter a Japan-held India march into Africa/Caucasus.
