I have looked on the forum and didn’t see any articles on this topic.

In a KJF game is it viable to build an IC in Australia? There are a couple of reasons why someone might place one there instead of India:

1. Japan will have to make the choice to either attack Australia with more than it usually does (thereby reducing the number of troops sent to the mainland) or let you threaten its money making islands.

2. If you end up losing it to Japan, you don’t give them an IC on the mainland that can quickly be used to threaten Russia.

There may be other advantages than those listed, but I’m tired and going to bed now.
Let me know what you think.

@KindWinds:

Has anyone tried to by an Aircraft Carrier and trans on Russia turn 1?

I tried this once- it was a nice change of pace, but I ultimately lost the game.
Wouldn’t recommend it unless you want to give the Axis player a better chance to win, but that is what bidding is usually for.

@ezto:

NO.

No what? You talk about useless suggestions in the Confronting Monster Japan thread, but fail to provide a useful one here.
I know that I am new to this forum, but even I know that a single word post is not very useful.
If you have a better suggestion, by all means share it- you most likely have much more experience than I do.

I am of the mindset that building an IC before maxing out Japan’s production capacity is a waste of IPCs. Yes you can produce directly on the mainland, but the transports are more versatile. Generally I wait to build an IC on India or Sinking.

Also, I do agree that keeping some Tns in sz 5 can be very useful. However I don’t think you need an IC in WE to take advantage of your Tns. Just put them in Ger and shuttle them from there.

I see now there is more to consider. I do have a few questions for clarification:

@Blitz:

For example, the allies are almost forced into uniting there fleet in sz 8 to preserve it on each of their 1st turns. This means africa is yours for that much longer.

How do you threaten the US or UK fleet on G2? I assume by moving the baltic fleet G1 to sz 7. The best way to counter this is with a UK attack with air only, or with BB and tns, and retreat ships after 1 round. This will usually kill all but a sub or 2.

Also, to unify fleet on G2, the BB and tns from sz 14 must attack the BB in sz 13 G1, right? I assume then you play with bids- otherwise you sacrifice taking Egypt G1.
Therefore you can threaten UK fleet with 1BB, 1Tns, and whatever is left in sz 7. UK can handle that.

I do relish the thought of getting UK to panic!

I can see some benefit to an IC in WE, but I think that it is a sub-optimal purchase. Lets look at the main reasons for the purchase:

1. Build naval units directly in sz 6, 7, and 13.
2. Build infantry and possibly fighters directly on WE.

First and foremost, in most games Germany’s primary target should be Russia- which means spending most of your money on troops for the eastern front. Spending 43 IPCs (IC + AC + Des) on units that do not help with this makes putting any kind of early sustainable pressure on Russia near impossible.

Second, fighters are more flexible. A destroyer and a fighter have the same attack, but the fighter is cheaper by 2 IPCs. Fighters can significantly bolster a territory’s defenses, provided you have infantry as a shield. They can not be attacked by naval units (excluding bombards, which should kill infantry anyway), and defending subs cannot hit them at all. Neither can an enemy’s air force directly attack yours- they have to attack the territory they are stationed in. If needed your fighters can be sent east to help with attacks against Russia, then pulled back to help defend in later rounds. No naval units have the same flexibility. In addition, the allies can afford to spend more on their navy than you can on yours, especially the US.

Third, why not just build infantry in Ger and SE? They only take 1 turn to get to WE, and this saves you 15 IPCs. In my opinion, the only reason for Germany to build an IC anywhere is if their production is maxed (16 inf alone is 48 IPCs- most likely you will make some art/tanks instead of all inf).

I confess that I sometimes purchase an AC on Ger 1 in sz 5 and land a fighter on it. This is to keep the fleet alive long enough to regroup with the BB+Tns in the Med. But that is the extent of my naval purchases in almost every case.

There’s my 2 cents. Spend it well   :-)

Welcome Veqryn!

That is a lot to digest. Instead of giving counters for each scenario, here is my general strategies for playing the allies.

Russia:
   -Make sure that the territories you trade in Europe are German, not yours to begin with. You cannot afford these trades for long, so make them count.
   -Consolidate troops in the east: Fortify Yakut, Sinking, and India/Persia. I keep most of the troops in Kazakh and Novosibirsk until I know which route Japan is 
       taking to Moscow.
   -Retreat when necessary: retreating is better than losing your stacks of infantry. Setup counter-attacks whenever possible.

UK:
   -Usually an IC in India is a bad idea, because Japan can take it if they want on J 3-4.
   -Contesting Africa: There are two ways I approach this: either with an IC in SA or without. If without an IC, then make sure you organize both US and UK fleets to 
       meet at sz 12 on the same turn. It will be much harder for German air/sea to take out a combined fleet.
   -Setup shuck from sz 4: Russia will most likely need help on the German front. Try to send troops to either Karelia or Archangel each turn to ease pressure on Russia.
       Your ships will be protected from German air in WE as long as the allies control Karelia and Archangel.

US:
   -Commit to either Japan or Germany: splitting up resources to go after both can be disastrous. Either kick Germany out of Africa or take islands from Japan. It takes too   
       many resources to do both effectively.
   -Get in the action as soon as possible: Even if this means taking losses that you would not normally approve of, it is important to put the axis on the defensive early.   
       Remember that you can afford losses that Germany and Japan cannot.

There is my 2 cents. I hope it helps.

@a44bigdog:

As far as loosing the Carrier off Borneo, a good Japanese player should attack the UK fleet that is in seazone 34 following a liberation of Egypt.

Forgive me a44, but I need clarification on this. Is this UK counter of Egypt on UK 1? If so how do you pull it off? This is something I have never tried before.
Usually Germany has at least 2 units on Egypt after G1, with another inf and art in Libya with any planes that helped attack. Even if you do take back Egypt on UK 1, Germany just takes it back, right? Or is there something I am missing? Thanks.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

I move the two subs down to sea zone 7, the rest of the med navy and other sub attack the battle ship (with figs). My opponent attacked the remaing baltic with his air force. He leaves the subs alone because he can only attack it with  his navy, which would put it in range of mine + all my planes in round 2. He has to choose what his air force attacks because it’s to risky to split them up. Sure this tactic delays me in Africa but it helps secure the Med and with a round 1 purchase of all men + 1 art, I can afford the delay. The us bomber has a crack at the subs but at the least I’ll keep one. Two or three subs, BB + tran is a good thing to have in the Med in round 2.

If I were your opponent in this situation I would have attacked the two lone subs with air on UK1 and the rest of the baltic fleet on UK2. You would most likely lose the Baltic fleet and both subs- if one sub survives the US Bmb gets a shot at as well.

@Zhukov44:

One game, the United Kingdom got 4 hits there and couldn’t retreat.  Since they didn’t buy a carrier, I was able to take down the UK fleet with air.

Generally, this is the exception (I wish it would happen more often to me  :-) ). In most cases I expect either one surviving sub or a total loss, with very little to show for it.