AA50/41 Japanese strategy

I decided to write up my strategies for 1941 scenario.

Germany:
Buy 1 tank, 2 art, 6 inf

take Gibraltar with either two inf or 1 inf and 1tank, this allows Italy to get a National objective bonus by taking either Egypt or Syria on its turn. Don’t worry about losing the transport you won’t be using it to defend the Mediterranean that’s Italy’s job.
Attack UK destroyer with cruiser and sub in baltic. attack cruiser and destroyer with sub and fighters on nw europe and germany. attack BS w/ sub, bomber and fighter from norway.
take E Poland w 2tanks czech and 2 inf poland, Take Baltic w inf nwe, art ger, and everything left on poland, take Ukraine with everything in bugaria.

@mobius1:

You know, maybe you’re right. My countering Japan strategy is mostly a throwback to the old version. But now it may be a better choice to have Russia go all out against Germany, since I think I have a good chance of pulling it off.

There have been many times that I could have secured Poland if I had enough tanks…

Put some allied (UK/USA) fighters with that stack of forward Russian troops and you should be able to safely get to/hold Eastern Poland.  That territory is a key piece in the theatre of war.  Whoever controls that (Germany/allies) can effectively dead zone 6 territories that it borders.  Also, those allied fighters are not out of play based in EPL.  In conjunction with the a/c strategy that Argothair posted for an allied navy, the ftrs can even hit france.

Ya your global guide was great made napa a monster I would like to see one

Some good points Battlingmaxo, and I suspect from a non-tech standpoint that is the best option for Germany, stockpiling the extra cash to use as needed. I am normally a tech player so I spend the excess on research.

As far as Carriers for the Allied fleet I think that is a good response up to a point but I think after a certain mass of carriers is reached the US is better served with Destroyers for fodder and the UK is better off with Cruisers to facilitate strafes using bombardments. That is from my German view of things at least. I do not play KGF with the Allies so I could be wrong.

Reason I like buying subs for my japan is cheep fodder.  Usually if US goes pacific i’m stalling to hold on to my money islands just long enough to crush russia, not to actually fight the US.  Because of that, cost is everything to me.

If I wanted an actual show down i’ll focus on fighters (as my 3 carriers can typically allow 12 to attack if based properly) and bombers with a sprinkling of DDs.

I like Darth Maximus’ idea of liberating one of the 2 4-IPC Islands, and then build a british IC there.
Sure, it would take 3 or 4 rounds before the US can safely hold it, but if they can, and UK can start building there, Japan is gonna be in trouble.

In those first 3 or 4 rounds UK should do everything it can to preserve IPC’s and it’s income, just threatening Germany to keep it honest (Russia should be able to withstand Germany for a while, especially if Japan is busy with the Yanks).

Not saying this can work, but it’s a complete different approach, which is worth thinking about.

@atarihuana:

ive seen many people hit sz56 yet often i refuse to do this and rather send 4 fighter to the BB for a clean kill. i dislike sending my only naval fodder unit to get killed round 1. also the british DD / TN off india gets kiled and the planes are in range.  the CA would  be at phillipines or at sz51 with the carriers.  so even if it is a tradeoff and i loose my BB, CA, DD  i still have 3 carriers + my naval builds while US has its remaining subs. not good.

since US has invested most to all of its money in the pacific its no big deal if it takes one more turn to take australia or india.

I had considered this as well.

I have even attempted it a couple of times.

I even thought of keeping the destroyer out and using only the fighters.

My conclusions:

The kill in SZ 53 is virtually assured.  It’s a matter of if you lose only the destroyer or also a fighter, if you send Destroyer, 2 Fighters in to attack the Battleship.

If you keep the destroyer, you risk a fighter, however, you have 9 fighters at the start of the game and 3 carriers, so you have some to spare.  Also, if you keep the destroyer, you can use it, in conjunction with at least 6 of your fighters, to attack SZ 56 if America puts submarines in the water.  This is a plus in my opinion because it means America either does not put only submarines in the water, puts them in SZ 10 instead, or builds surface ships which are more costly giving you an edge to get into position.

However, the added transport and Destroyer gives the American’s too much of an edge, IMHO.  Besides, when are you going to have a 33% chance to trade a fighter for a destroyer AND a transport (10 IPC for 15) and a 67% chance to lose nothing and get a destroyer and a transport in this game?

Played this out this weekend

Result: Turn 7 ended the game as Axis had more production +50% and more units on board…

Allied Strategy was a KGF + a token resistance in the Pacific…

What shall I say - Italy Killed a S and UK fleet twice in the Atlantic (turn 3+4 after securing the Med including Gebel al Tarik…

Germany was constantly harrassed by the Soviet and lost Scandinavia early to the Brits…
(Turn 7 all western russian territories were in Russian hands, (Stalingrad was held by
Germany)

Territories east of Moscow were almost all in Japanese hands.

japan ignored SU and China for 3 turns (mostly only put enough Inf to discourage an attack)

Japan spread into the Pacific (I must admit a little gamble- it put 9 ships 3CVs+5ftrs vs 7 ships 2Cvs+4Ftrs and won because of some real great rolls (IIRC it lost the fighters, but nothing else - maybe a DD).

BTW crusiers seem to be better than we first thought - if DDs absorb damage they are excellent units)

Italy once captured Canada! (shortly after thrown out by the US, but this and constant invasions to Alska prevented the US to build up a naval fore after the Pac and AT fleets were sunk)

Uk quickly lost all Pac+Asian posessions and Africa was slowly eaten by Italy (which really shone this game - a few early fleet builds (CA+Tr + a few dds) while ignoring the SU.

Both sides made some serious blunders (Japan only seized an empty borneo at turn 5, Russia maybe waited to long to attack German tank forces - maybe an attack a turn earlier and hoping for a few 1s would have turned the tide)

US should have built up MORE pacificx sea units and waited a few turns (1-2) before it attacked IT/GE…

UK - NO more ICs in the Pacific/India - Japan can muster enough force to capture them even if it holds it with ONLY 1 unit - UK can’t get it back…

UK did bomb GE, but repairs were quick to follow…

In the End JP had 3 Fleets - a large off Alaska

A small DD fleet in JP proper to defend against possible bomber threats. and a medium south pacific fleet (AU was conquered on turn 6 - with an IC UK could hold it and even pose an potential threat with a small DD+TRP fleet)

Germany focused on Stalingrand and never came to attack to Leningrad as UK went to Scandinavia (I will do it again) and so Russia could build up before Germany could strike - UK even amph landed at the baltic states…

An observation - If any nation went after lone Transports (it sunk them) - the Ftrs would have probably decided another battle in this nations favor - so my advice - use a few subs for thios duty…

So my solution - KGF is dead - Japan grows too fast - Japan soon had no markers left for occupied territories…

NO favor the winning side ;)