Kill USA First

The more I look at this, and think about it, I think the key to stopping this from working is to delay Japan from taking and securing a landing site for there planes.  Along this route I think against a japan purchase of transports, and/or transports hanging out in the north, I would do as follows.

1. Block SZ 7 with a destroyer.
   -This prevents the purchase transports from J1 from reach on J2.
2. Purchase Inf/Art turn 1.
   -Your gonna need 'em.
3. Ship 4 Inf to Alaska turn 1, along with landing 6+ planes.
   -This keeps Alaska safe from a J2 landing as the most they can bring is 2 bombards, 4 planes, and 4 land units.

This will also allow you to safely counterattack British Colombia on US2.  At that point Japan really has no method of establishing a safe landing zone for there planes on the mainland turn 2.  If they take the Aleutian islands that is fine, as the US should be able to get enough units to counter-attack British Colombia on US3.  No landing zone means no plane threat beyond the carriers until J5, at which point you should be able to hold anyway.

Any thoughts?

O.k. Vareel, I like your strat, and I think you’re right that the key is to deny a landing zone for the massive Japanese airforce.  That being said, while it seems that it would pretty much trump the “Alaskan Pipeline” KAF if Japan waits to launch until J2, the heavy transport buy J1 is still a solid investment.  With so much attention diverted north in anticipation of Alaskan invasion, Honolulu is ripe for the picking and, once secured on J2, provides a real thorn in the American’s side for long enough to give the Japanese a decent chance to pick off ANZAC (especially if the Japanese player stacks Hawaii with fighter interceptors on J3, which makes it a major headache to capture if even a portion of the Japanese navy is left behind).

Also: Thanks for the heads up on WUS being worth 10 to Axis.  Must have missed that note completely somewhere along the line.

@Vareel:

The more I look at this, and think about it, I think the key to stopping this from working is to delay Japan from taking and securing a landing site for there planes.  Along this route I think against a japan purchase of transports, and/or transports hanging out in the north, I would do as follows.

1. Block SZ 7 with a destroyer.
   -This prevents the purchase transports from J1 from reach on J2.
2. Purchase Inf/Art turn 1.
   -Your gonna need 'em.
3. Ship 4 Inf to Alaska turn 1, along with landing 6+ planes.
   -This keeps Alaska safe from a J2 landing as the most they can bring is 2 bombards, 4 planes, and 4 land units.

This will also allow you to safely counterattack British Colombia on US2.  At that point Japan really has no method of establishing a safe landing zone for there planes on the mainland turn 2.  If they take the Aleutian islands that is fine, as the US should be able to get enough units to counter-attack British Colombia on US3.  No landing zone means no plane threat beyond the carriers until J5, at which point you should be able to hold anyway.

Any thoughts?

If Jap noncombated all units (w/ loaded inf) J1 z6>z1, would that ensure a safe landing zone for planes on J3?

@KH:

Nice discussion going on! Thanks for the interesting input.

Vareel;
If you move your destroyer to seazone 7 (or 4) I would go for Aleutian J2 and kill the destroyer too. Further more in J2 Japan has not 4 but 12 landing units (6 transports; 3 at the start of the game, 3 bought in J1). I know USA is worth 10 IPC’s and not 50. I also do believe that if Japan fails to take US, it’s a lost game. Controlling seazone 1 and BC in turn 3 are crucial to gain succes. It’s true Japan much watch it’s back door, that’s why I dont’s buy 5 transports in J2, but 4 and 3 inf to stay in the homeland. Still the UK is no threat I believe. To confuse the US player, in J turn 1-non combat fase I place all (except AC placed planes) my fighters and tactical bombers in China (the land north of kwantung, max. 4 flyzones from Japan! important that is!). In J2 all these planes are heading for Japan.

But no, I didn’t play out my strategy to the end. Meaning, I strongly believe that when US is taken Japan will win.

Other thoughts?

With you holding the Aleutian islands you still need to hold British Colombia for the planes to have a landing zone.  That is why on US3 in my plan, I kill your ground units that landed in British Colombia.

As far as your proposed counter, Japan can just send there starting SZ 6 boats to SZ 2 on turn 1 and still take Alaska, then just NCM the other troops in, it will not work.  Re-read my plan, it works.

Really dont see how this could be considered a reasonable strategy.

It can certainly work if you are playing newbies and you want to crush them.

Otherwise, it is easily countered and when it fails Japan will lose the game.  Japan gets themselves completely out of position by trying this and if Wus doesnt fall, which it wont if the US player knows what they are doing.  It takes too many turns unlike the surprise assaults that could be launched in AA50 41’.  And at the end US still has a 50 dollar territory and will be making just as much as Japan except the enemy is on the doorstep and it doesnt have to go across the pacific to get to them.

@Vareel:

With you holding the Aleutian islands you still need to hold British Colombia for the planes to have a landing zone.  That is why on US3 in my plan, I kill your ground units that landed in British Colombia.

As far as your proposed counter, Japan can just send there starting SZ 6 boats to SZ 2 on turn 1 and still take Alaska, then just NCM the other troops in, it will not work.  Re-read my plan, it works.

I meant z1, to land in Bco J2.  J2 would also kill the blocking surface ships in z8/z7 w/ a million planes (max of 10 planes, 7 bmr can reach z8, all can reach z7 if planes are left on Jap J1), and possibly take Hawaii.  then ncm all z6 ships and land units to z1/Bco.  I guess US would be able to take Bco back before J3?  but it would be expensive for US, so would they have enough to defend against the 4-5 new Jap transports coming in?  I think so, but there are several options for Jap depending on what US does, that it is worth playing to try out.  Perhaps the people who are saying only an idiot US player would fall to this strat should be the test defenders!

A J2 hit on BCO would leave a max of 12 ground units.

With my plan, US has 4 inf in Alaska, 4 more ground units in WUS from starting, plus the 3 Inf, 2 Art purchase turn 1, and, lastly, 8 planes.

Your 12 dudes that landed would get smashed, easily.  Now yes, you have say 4 more transports with 8 more units comming in with 6 carrier planes on J3.  They would go up against the 6 inf/1 art purchased, along with the aagun and all those planes, not counting anything held back from the US attack on BCO.

This would be much easier to show in a game Stoney  :-D

@Stoney229:

Perhaps the people who are saying only an idiot US player would fall to this strat should be the test defenders!

I am game.

@Vareel:

This would be much easier to show in a game Stoney  :-D

yeah… about that…  sorry I haven’t started another one.  I’m trying to be responsible and finish up a few things before starting another game, but as it is I can’t peel myself away from the forums to do the work I need to do!! :-o

Welp someone send me a message i’ll take allies against that strat.

Eh, if your transports are north its pretty obvious your going to try and kill the US.

If your transports are not right next to the coast a simple SZ 7 block stalls your plan.  I only think this will work once, after that your enemy should see it coming, I’m sorry mate.  Its like sea lion.

@KH:

Well Vareel, you mentioned some good points. I’m not saying the game is broken, because a blockade is possible (not likely though). So if we would play a game announcing this is the Jap strat, for sure you’ll win as allies. Now I’m practicing the same strategy with more camouflage in it. Meaning; it’s not clear Japan turn 1 goes straight for KUF. That includes, Japan could decide to act different in turn 2 and also has the opportunities to do so (position of units, planes and ships). I earlier stated in turn 1, I land all my tac bombers, bombers and fighters (except those on the AC’s) in the coastal landzone north of Kwantung. This does not look as a KUF strategy, correct? All planes are in reach of Japan turn 2, Alaska turn 3, US turn 4. My main problem to hide my KUF-plans for turn 2 are the J-1 movements of ships and units at Caroline Islands. If I’d move them to Japanese waters directly, the US gets really suspicious, if I don’t I could head for great difficulties in turn 2 and 3.

That said, it’s absolutely not completely idiot and it’s not a trap only newbies would fall in to. It’s just a nice puzzle.

Greets!

Personally, I think that the Allies can stop Japan from taking WUSA even if they don’t use their fleet to block Japan from taking Alaska on turn 2.  The Allies start off with 20 planes (19 if you don’t count China’s since it can’t leave China).  Of those 19 planes, the Allies can get up to 16 of them on WUSA by turn 3 (10 USA, 4 ANZAC, and 2 UK fighters (UK lands them in Northern Territories turn 1, then the USA carrier off of Johnson Island on turn 2, then WUSA on turn 3).  The USA transport moves to the ANZAC naval base turn 1, and can reach WUSA with two infantry on turn 3 since they gain access to ANZAC’S naval base on turn 2 after Japan attacks Alaska.  UK could even build a bomber on turn 1 and get it to WUSA turn 3 to use as cannon fodder.  Turn 3, USA builds 9 tanks and 1 fighter.  I just don’t see how WUSA is going to fall.  Even if they somehow do manage to take it, Japan’s economy probably won’t even be 40 due to their loses elsewhere.  UK’s economy alone will probably actually be greater than Japan’s (Dutch East Indies, Siam, French-Indo China, both National Objectives, plus any 1 IPC islands they manage to take).  It would certainly make for a different and interesting game, but still a Japanese loss.

@mikecool70:

@KH:

Well Vareel, you mentioned some good points. I’m not saying the game is broken, because a blockade is possible (not likely though). So if we would play a game announcing this is the Jap strat, for sure you’ll win as allies. Now I’m practicing the same strategy with more camouflage in it. Meaning; it’s not clear Japan turn 1 goes straight for KUF. That includes, Japan could decide to act different in turn 2 and also has the opportunities to do so (position of units, planes and ships). I earlier stated in turn 1, I land all my tac bombers, bombers and fighters (except those on the AC’s) in the coastal landzone north of Kwantung. This does not look as a KUF strategy, correct? All planes are in reach of Japan turn 2, Alaska turn 3, US turn 4. My main problem to hide my KUF-plans for turn 2 are the J-1 movements of ships and units at Caroline Islands. If I’d move them to Japanese waters directly, the US gets really suspicious, if I don’t I could head for great difficulties in turn 2 and 3.

That said, it’s absolutely not completely idiot and it’s not a trap only newbies would fall in to. It’s just a nice puzzle.

Greets!

Personally, I think that the Allies can stop Japan from taking WUSA even if they don’t use their fleet to block Japan from taking Alaska on turn 2.  The Allies start off with 20 planes (19 if you don’t count China’s since it can’t leave China).  Of those 19 planes, the Allies can get up to 16 of them on WUSA by turn 3 (10 USA, 4 ANZAC, and 2 UK fighters (UK lands them in Northern Territories turn 1, then the USA carrier off of Johnson Island on turn 2, then WUSA on turn 3).  The USA transport moves to the ANZAC naval base turn 1, and can reach WUSA with two infantry on turn 3 since they gain access to ANZAC’S naval base on turn 2 after Japan attacks Alaska.  UK could even build a bomber on turn 1 and get it to WUSA turn 3 to use as cannon fodder.  Turn 3, USA builds 9 tanks and 1 fighter.  I just don’t see how WUSA is going to fall.  Even if they somehow do manage to take it, Japan’s economy probably won’t even be 40 due to their loses elsewhere.  UK’s economy alone will probably actually be greater than Japan’s (Dutch East Indies, Siam, French-Indo China, both National Objectives, plus any 1 IPC islands they manage to take).  It would certainly make for a different and interesting game, but still a Japanese loss.

Now Jap says “fake out!”, and takes hawaii, Philipines, Ind, and Nsw, and NZealand which are now all ripe for the picking!  If the allies respond to a KUF in such a way that they lose if Japan decides not to go through with it, then it’s still a working strategy  :wink:

Now Jap says “fake out!”, and takes hawaii, Philipines, Ind, and Nsw, and NZealand which are now all ripe for the picking!  If the allies respond to a KUF in such a way that they lose if Japan decides not to go through with it, then it’s still a working strategy  :wink:

I agree that the Japanese player should try to set up situations where they leave the Allies guessing.  But moving the entire fleet to Japanese waters on turn 1 means that the entire Allied fleet will survive.  The Allied starting surface fleet isn’t that much smaller than Japan’s (and the 3 extra transports they start off with largely offsets any Japanese advantage in my opinion).