Japan > u.s.

I think this is a perfectly reasonable strategy – but keep in mind that you are forfeiting two victory cities as the Axis. The Chinese can attack and occupy Kwangtung, so you’re losing out on both Shanghai and Hong Kong. This makes it very hard for the Axis to get a majority of the victory cities. Even if you completely crush Russia, that only gets you to 9 VC:

Tokyo, Manila, Moscow, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Warsaw, Berlin, Rome, Paris.

So then you also have to pick up India (challenging without any factories in China), or Australia (hard to hold if you’re mostly going after Russia), or Honolulu (ditto).

The Japanese share of Russian income is just not that large – dripping wet, you’ve got Buryatia, SFE, Stanovoj, Yakut, Evenki, Urals, Novosibirsk, Kazakh, and Stalingrad (15 IPCs total).

Meanwhile, the Japanese income for all of China is Manchuria, Kiangsu, Suiyuan, Ningxia, Chinghai, Sikang, Hupeh, Fukien, Yunnan, Kwangtung, and the NO (18 IPCs total).

So, yeah, given that Russia is a more important target than China, you can see where it would be worth a few bucks to go after Russia instead of China, but there are no VCs in Siberia, so that’s the trade-off. If you actually crush Moscow early, then, great, the gambit worked. If not, then you might gain some very minor economic benefits, but you’re likely to stall out and lose on points in the endgame.

Pacific warfare is primarily about controlling space.  So imho acs and figs are the best choice…since they are versatile and give you spatial dominance.  For offense, bombers aren’t bad either.

Naturally you will need transports and destroyers too.

You do definitely want to take islands–especially those for the USA and UK NO.  And of course it’s worth it to take Philippines whenever possible.

Japan because it’s as if a modern day army/navy was brought back through time and is virtually unstopable. I’m surprised Japan didn’t come with Cruise missiles and M1 Abrams tanks.

OK, voting is over, China inf bids won but by a very small margin. I’ll move the discussion over to the League discussion forum and we’ll see what people think there! Join in and we can influence how the game will be played!  :-)

@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?

Okay, tin.  I can buy turn four given the plan goes without hitch and the dice land in Germany’s favor in most of the battles.

Just glad you agree that turn 3 was a little exaggerated. :)

Anyway, turn 4 is pushing the envelope, it could theoretically happen, but realistically speaking, even with building as many tanks as possible with Germany (I say as possible since it’s safe to assume Germany is losing 10-20 IPC a round to SBRs thus reducing Germany’s available income to 30ish IPC) you might be able to break Russia’s back.

I am not saying Germany will lose.  I am saying it would be more realistic for Germany and Japan to plan a tank dash to Moscow with the goal of taking Moscow on Round 6.  This would account for some bad dice and the loss of income to Germany.

…and the east indies are two squares away from from the transports off of the caroline islands.

You could also set up a trap for allied navies, by sinking the dd and leaving your subs posted there.
If, by any chance, the german player was to be attacked by an english navy that would not dispose of a destroyer, they could trap them by submerging prior to the battle and coming back to attack the fleet on their turn, using planes togheter with the subs.

I don’t exactly remember the initial setup of the game and if uk disposes of a lot of destroyers, but in my opinion, this tactic could work at least once against inexperienced players.