Pearl Harbor - yes or no?

[Lil' Tokyo]

I have seen lots of posts on whether Japan should destroy all of US's navy on J1.  Some say yes, some say no.  

I personally never do it as Japan, because I find that all those ships are critical for my invasion of Asia in the first few rounds.  Hey, I would love to turn the US Pacific Fleet into an expensive coral reef, but I just don't want to spare the ships and slow down my Asia mainland push!

What are people's opinions on Pearl Harbor - should you do it, or not?  Please let me know why or why not. Thanks!      

[Yanny]

Always. There is NO reason not to attack it.

[cystic crypt]

I don't know Yanny.  I've thought along those lines before.  After all, a smart allies team would have the resources for an assault soon enough regardless of whether or not one allowed those ships to survive.  Maybe this is one of those "play a hundred games of each way, and find that you're 55/45" or something like that".

[Lil' Tokyo]

Yanni - could you please elaborate on this. If you attack the US navy, don't you find that it makes it difficult for Japan to get rolling on mainland Asia?  Because you would have to commit your transports to the sea battle as fodder, which makes them unavailable for a mainland inbvasion for J1 and J2.

[Wild2000]

[EmuGod]

Yanni - could you please elaborate on this. If you attack the US navy, don't you find that it makes it difficult for Japan to get rolling on mainland Asia?  Because you would have to commit your transports to the sea battle as fodder, which makes them unavailable for a mainland inbvasion for J1 and J2.

You have to attack Pearl Harbor in order to knock out the American carrier there. Remember, with the carrier America can harass your transports by launching fighters to destroy the, which will make island hopping and transporting valuable resources vey difficult.

[TG Moses VI]

I have to agree with Wild there.  Usually since I play RR with a slight bid (usually inf in Libya or in Burma, Manchuria), so an attack by Russia and UK is unlikely.  Therefore, it is in my best interest (and in Germany's) to attack Pearl Harbor J1.  As Wild mentioned, having two fleets in the Atlantic can spell big trouble for both Europe and Africa at the same time.  

I also recieve a lot of messages that beside, the Naval Defense value, the fleet at Pearl Harbor doesn't pose much of a threat.  Again, I find this false.  First of all, USA having 3 ftrs can spell a lot of trouble, esp. when it comes to an invasion of France or North Africa (depending where the Germans are strongest).  The AC can serve as a mobile base of operations.  

The good thing about Pearl Harbor is that you can also trap the US Pacific Fleet at the same time.  This is important because an extra transport for USA can be very important, not to mention the BB that can be used in amphibious assaults.  

With Pearl Harbor, you can also force the US to counterattack.  This can cause them to lose their ftrs and bmb, which can be very helpful to the Germans in their defense of Europe.

[Rommel34]

If you DON'T attack pearl on J1, The US can go on an island hoping with the forces from the west coast and Pearl.  With some luck, i got all the way to the phillipines with 4 inf and my pearl fleet.  No THAT, wil mess up your mainland push my friend =)

[TG Moses VI]

Island hopping is such a waste of time, esp. since Japan's Navy (intact) can just block you.  Your safest bet is just to seen them through the Canal and help in the Africa landings (with luck you can even cut off Germany's Med. fleet)

[Xi]

E_G_ & T_6 are correct.

As for W_0's
"Now whether to pearl light or heavy...that's another discussion..."

I only HEAVY in new scenarios...see 'Nazi Diplomacy' under the A&A category.

As for W_0's
"Also, regarding taking transports as fodder: I do not think this is a good idea and I rarely see this done. Most people choose to loose the sub and fighter (maybe bomber)."

He hit the nail on the head.(unless your pullin' a Donny boy   ).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Evaluating the enemy, causing the enemy's ch'i to be lost and his forces to scatter so that even if his disposition is complete he will not be able to employ it, this is victory through the Tao." - Wei Liao-Tzu, Chinese military theoretician/advisor, Fourth century B.C.

[Ansbach]

Yanni - could you please elaborate on this. If you attack the US navy, don't you find that it makes it difficult for Japan to get rolling on mainland Asia?  Because you would have to commit your transports to the sea battle as fodder, which makes them unavailable for a mainland inbvasion for J1 and J2.

Lil' Tokyo, I always hit Hawaii but I never bring in a transport for fodder - I would rather lose a plane.  I would rather have 4 extra infantry on the mainland in the first two turns than the additional firepower the plane brings - it is much easier to buy a replacement plane later and move it to the front lines in one turn than to try and push 2 waves of 2 infantry to the front line.

[TG Moses VI]

Yeah, it's much better to protect the transport than sacrifice it.

[Yanny]

Look, heres what happens if you don't do Pearl Harbor.

America has a fleet of 1 Carrier, 1 Sub, 1 Battleship, and 1 Transport ready to use. This can he augmented by 2 fighters and a bomber. If he wants, without too much attention taken away from Germany, he can make life hard for you. Expect your transports to be sunk.

Or, the American player can take all that and bring it to the Atlantic. Now Germany has another pain in the ass to deal with.

And you gain what? A couple useless ships? Australia?

[TG Moses VI]

I thought you were originally against Pearl Harbor?

[Yanny]

Never )

i think it is Field Marshall who is a big advocate toward Pearl Harbor.