Japan Naval Defense (WARNING: LONG)

@uffishbongo:

There are two kinds of KJF’s in the world: those that start that way, and those that switch to it.  I was referring to the first.  If you decide at the beginning of the game “hey, I want to go KJF this game,” then it’s very, very difficult to make it work unless you go all in.  This means things like stacking Buryatia with 6 inf on R1, moving 2 inf into Sinkiang, and basing fighters in Kazakh to up the threat to Manchuria; building an India complex UK1; consolidating UK fleet in SZ 30, or taking Borneo, on UK 1; and either building a Sinkiang IC and spending the rest of America’s paycheck in the Pacific, or skipping Sin and going full bore on the boats.  If you only do one or two of these, Japan can easily squash them, but with all together it can be too much for them to handle.

I should add the disclaimer that I’ve never successfully won a game this way, nor has anyone beaten me with this tactic.  I know some players have been able to make it work, but it’s awfully difficult.  You can contain Japan’s Asia expansion, but sinking their navy tends to take a while (unless they defend poorly), and Russia just can’t hold out long enough against a good German player without American assistance (and with only half-hearted UK assistance if they build the India factory).

Being that I won with KJF alot, I’ll comment.

My version does indeed start with USSR invading manchuria. adding troops in India, and massing the UK/USA fleet at Solomons.

It is difficult for the USA, by itself, to handle the Japanese fleet quickly enough. Which is why you move the UK fleet south, then towards NZ. The USA fleet moves to solomons USA2, followed by the UK fleet on UK3.

The additional sub, transports DD, and carrier (which can be filled with 1 or 2 USA fighters) allows for the defensive power to defend against a J3 attack. (even if it didnt, a screen works).

The dual fleets allow for faster taking of islands (and India protection).

The UK must still send troops towards Norway (along with USA) so what you are giving up (for the forseeable future) is Africa. After Borneo/DEI is taken, and India preserved, the UK can go to africa while the USA continues to punish Japan.

Is it exactly easy? No.

But it does work.

Squire,

Do you take Norway immediately with UK, or would you try for a USA factory there?

Agree with your contention UK’s priority (besides India) should be propping up Moscow as long as possible rather than taking Africa.  USA/UK can always go after Africa in force starting Turn 3.

@Zhukov44:

Squire,

Do you take Norway immediately with UK, or would you try for a USA factory there?

Agree with your contention UK’s priority (besides India) should be propping up Moscow as long as possible rather than taking Africa.  USA/UK can always go after Africa in force starting Turn 3.

That depends on how much pressure Germany is getting. Immediate pressure means that you land with UK. Preferrably I’d like Russia to take Norway.

Since they are 1v1 vs Germany (mostly) I want them to have every dollar they can get. UK takes Karelia, and USSR drives a tank through and gets the 3 IPC.

However, when you cant afford to wait, take it with whatever country can.

We are drifting way off topic here, but I have another KJF related problem.  So lets say I built India and decided to combine the UK fleet at SZ 30….  I tried this the other day…and was surprised when my opponent brought 4 fighters there by moving the 2nd carrier to SZ 38.  In all liklihood the Japs will then destroy the UK fleet (unless u land the India fighter there, but that would mean omitting the Jap tranny at 59 and thus forsaking India or Bury!)

So what do you do to prevent this?  Is this an acceptable sacrifice since it brings the Jap fleet so far off course?

I’m a little fuzzy on the rules on a related question…if you attacked New Guinea with the Aussie tranny…would this block the carrier (and hence the 2 extra figs) or can the Japs snipe the fighter and then friendly move the carrier to 38?

@Zhukov44:

We are drifting way off topic here, but I have another KJF related problem.  So lets say I built India and decided to combine the UK fleet at SZ 30….  I tried this the other day…and was surprised when my opponent brought 4 fighters there by moving the 2nd carrier to SZ 38.  In all liklihood the Japs will then destroy the UK fleet (unless u land the India fighter there, but that would mean omitting the Jap tranny at 59 and thus forsaking India or Bury!)

So what do you do to prevent this?  Is this an acceptable sacrifice since it brings the Jap fleet so far off course?

I’m a little fuzzy on the rules on a related question…if you attacked New Guinea with the Aussie tranny…would this block the carrier (and hence the 2 extra figs) or can the Japs snipe the fighter and then friendly move the carrier to 38?

Attacking the fleet in SZ 30 will bring the Japanese way off course.
Did they still attack China? Pearl?

They should be pretty weak then. If they allow the USA fleet to live, you get a better head start.

My particular oppo didn’t do China or Pearl, so yeah he was in a world of hurt in no time flat.

But if Japan attacks the Brit fleet with the 4 figs + bb+ carrier, hits China with 2 figs 1 bomb 4 inf, and buy 3 transports, then Japan is in relatively good shape.  On average Japan will lose 2 figs at 30…if they do then thats ok–the UK fleet is destroyed and the carrier doesn’t have to go to 30, instead it can go to the Fico sz and protect a landing there.  The drawbacks are the loss of the 2 figs and letting the Pearl fleet live, but USA is still behind in the naval race which means Japan will have enough time to reunite the fleet.

I think going to SZ 30 is a good deployment to go with the India fact + KJF but I wonder if there anything better.

All that said I imagine most opponents just ignore SZ 30 allowing the Allies to unite the fleets.

@Zhukov44:

I think going to SZ 30 is a good deployment to go with the India fact + KJF but I wonder if there anything better.

Transport nzel inf to aus, keep the aussie sub also in z40

Send AC plus dd, tra (if not used) to z33

Bomber to Russia

You can join fleets round 2 (z30) and send bomb to ind to make a try against eind with aussie infs + bomb UK3 and still send remaining fleet to z40 safety, then join USA’s fleet round 4 or 5

@Funcioneta:

@Zhukov44:

I think going to SZ 30 is a good deployment to go with the India fact + KJF but I wonder if there anything better.

Transport nzel inf to aus, keep the aussie sub also in z40

Send AC plus dd, tra (if not used) to z33

Bomber to Russia

You can join fleets round 2 (z30) and send bomb to ind to make a try against eind with aussie infs + bomb UK3 and still send remaining fleet to z40 safety, then join USA’s fleet round 4 or 5

Except the fighters can kill the sub/trans in SZ 40 (probably w/o a loss too).

If Japan is determined to kill the UK fleet at the cost of fighters and Pearl, let him.

@squirecam:

Except the fighters can kill the sub/trans in SZ 40 (probably w/o a loss too).

If Japan is determined to kill the UK fleet at the cost of fighters and Pearl, let him.

I never saw Japan attacking aussie fleet at z40. They always make Pearl 2 and China because they have not enough to kill all. Anyway, you can submerge the sub if they dare to attack (another reason for Japs to not attack)

But I agree with your 2nd sentence

@uffishbongo:

Yeah, that may not have come out very clearly in the article; I wasn’t trying to recommend type 1 KJF; I was trying not to comment on it one way or the other (because I feel I have insufficient data).  A more complete breakdown of the different types of KJF I’ve seen would be as follows:
(1) Go whole hog against Japan, from the start, with everybody.
(2) Go against Japan from the start, but only with the US Navy.
(3) Go against Japan (either US Navy only, or with other assistance) in response to dice and/or opponent mistakes.

The purpose of the article was to make the case that (2) is a bad idea.  In my mind the jury is still out on (1); at best it’s very difficult, but it’s possible I just haven’t honed it enough.  I think (3) can be usable.  Although, as you say, I’ve been suckered into (3) when I shouldn’t have.  I wouldn’t do (3) just because Japan skipped Pearl; in that case they still have all 4 capital ships and all or most of their air, i.e. they’re still an absolute beast.  I might go for it if they went to Pearl and left the BB and CV open to counterattack, although even then I’d be reluctant if there weren’t other things going my way too.

Returning again to the topic and this earlier post…. basically you suggest only go with a USA Pacific offensive in response to either mistakes or ill dice on J1.

What I’m trying to determine (and I imagine every expert Revised player has their own ideas on this) is when it is favorable to go Pacific in a competitive expert game where you want to win?  In such a game, there is no UK1 India factory and at best there are only the 6 Russians in Bury and 4 in Sink.  How much does Japan have to have lost…or not destroyed (ie. what Allied ships are still alive?) in order for him to be weak enough for USA to attack?

I have a Facebook game going now where my oppo lost his Jap sub on UK1.  On J1, he skipped Pearl, and hit Bury (the UK destroyer had been destroyed by the 59 tranny, enabling the Bury assault) and hit the UK fleet off Egypt…losing 2 fighters.  So all in all he was down 2 fighters and a sub…and he didn’t hit the Pearl fleet…  In addition, he went with a 2 factory approach (clearly whether Japan goes with factories or trannys should also play a role) and his attack on China was weak, enabling the USA to retake China on USA1…  So even though Japan had lost no capital ships, I felt that the USA ought to invest in the Pacific theater (giving all the factors working against Japan) even though my opponent is very skilled.  Was I right?

It is a hard question to determine.  What I am relatively certain of is that if Japan leaves either the USA or UK carrier alive that should be significant in deciding what to do.  Similarly, every spare unit left alive (such as the UK sub and transport originally from Aussie) should count to some extent.

I think you right to have United States go to Pacific in game.  United States with full Pacific fleet, Japan buy no more ship, Japan lock in spend at least 18 IPC on land unit for Industrial Complex, and Japan lose 2 of 6 Fighter means good time to go Pacific.

United States start to take Islands quickly in that game even with 2 Battleship and 2 Aircraft Carrier for Japan.  He only have 1 big fight with fleet before he no longer have ship force in Pacific.

United Kingdom will have much work to do.  Will have to send land unit to Norway and to Algeria going back and forth each turn to hold Africa and keep Germany from focus on Russia.

I think game you describe would be fun game to play.

@uffishbongo:

I would probably go for it in those circumstances…I don’t really have a lot of good guidelines though, just gut feelings.

Yeah same here… If one formulated some guidelines, they would have to be tested by concrete experience…  But theoretically, it should be possible to eventually create a formula of sorts that could serve as a guideline.  This formula would have to incorporate a number of variables…

1. Did Japan build factories or transports or both?
2. Did Japan lose any capital ships, or leave capital ships exposed to be destroyed before J2?
3. Did Japan lose fighters or other essential naval units?
4. What Allied naval units are still alive?
5. What is the situation on the mainland (ie will Japan be getting a lot of mainland IPCs in the coming turns?)
6. Is the Japanese fleet out of position or in a good strategic spot?

I’m currently in a game as the Axis where it is US against Japan with UK in Africa and Russia temporarily on their own against Germany. So far I’m waiting for UK3. I like the fallback option of FIC but don’t have a factory and probably shouldn’t build one at this point so I thought I might have another idea.

Suppose that the Americans were able to advance their navy to the Solomons but Japan can’t reasonably attack them. Japan’s main fleet is already based on the Carolines and their transports, a loaded carrier, and whatever they built last turn is in zone 60. Japan still is stronger than the USA on the defense and can withstand an American attack if they consolidate everything on the Carolines. Then Japan can base all naval units on the Carolines except one sub to block a combat move to East Indies and Borneo through New Guinea. As long as Tokyo has enough to deter an attack, this might be a good delaying method although I haven’t yet tried it.

Thoughts?