September 18, 2018, 08:29:27 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Help support TripleA software development. Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register AACalc  
Pages: 1 2 3 »
  Print  
Author Topic: 1st turn Japanese attack on Hawaii  (Read 4482 times)
Field Marshal
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 383



View Profile
« on: January 05, 2002, 10:50:00 am »
0

After the Japanese early IC vs. transports only debate, it seems the 2nd Japanese controversy is whether or not Japan should attack Hawaii in turn 1.  Let's break it down pro and con:

JAPAN - PRO
1.  Sends a powerful fleet in range of the US west coast.
2.  Destroys the US carrier needed in Europe and threatens the remaining US Pacific fleet.
3.  May force the US to take energy away from attacking Germany (temporarily).
4.  May scare the US with a hidden strategy (could be used as a bluff or to try an advanced strategy).

JAPAN - CON
1.  Takes badly needed aircraft away from the Asian battles.
2.  Leaves your transports unprotected in Japan (if their not with the fleet).
3.  US counter-attacks may destroy or reduce your fleet to 1 or 2 battleships.  Japan can't afford to replace their fleet which could be better used intact elsewhere.
4.  The US may control the Pacific and seriously harm your efforts without your fleet protection.

US - With Counter-Attack
1.  The US will lose all or most of it's remaining fleet and aircraft which are badly needed in Europe.
2.  Forces the UK to provide the US with more fleet protection in the Atlantic.
3.  May give more strength to a "Japan First" option.

US - Without Counter-Attack
1.  The US may lose the remaining 2 ships anyway depending on Japan's intentions.
2.  The US could lose time regaining lost territory from Japanese West Coast attacks.

Overall, Japan is taking a gamble on what the US may do.  It could cost the Allies an un-needed delay or totally backfire on Japan.

OPINIONS...









Logged
bossk
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 556



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2002, 12:51:00 pm »
0

Again, my ideas on this point seem to conflict with most other players.  I like to attack the Americans at Hawaii with my air force (fighters from Japan, Manchuria, AC, bomber, land fighters on AC, bomber on Wake, move fleet around Wake).  Although this removes my fleet from danger it limits my offensive capabilities on the mainland.  I consider this to be a fair trade because land forces are much cheaper than a new navy.  This puts me in a stong position in the Pacific and I can easily get more forces to the mainland.
Logged
generalcampbell
Guest
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2002, 02:59:00 pm »
0

one thing I like about the pacific is it's so fun and unpredictable.if you think it will work go for it.
Logged
Major_Damage
Guest
« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2002, 10:31:00 am »
0

Japan must ATTACK!  Send 2 Battleships, AC, sub, 1 fighter, and the bomber.  This is more than sufficient to destroy the US Hawaii fleet.  Chances are Japan will lose their sub, if any loses at all.
If Japan doesnt attack, then the US will draw Japan's attention from the mainland...which is no good.  If the US counter-attacks with 1 Battleship, trans. as fodder, fighter, and bomber, chances are they will do damage, but also wipe themselves out as well...and even slow their attempt at Europe...which is another no-no.
Logged
greensleeves
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 143


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2002, 10:58:00 am »
0

hawaii is an interesting island, its in the middle of the pacific, it can strike mexico, panama, west coast, alaska, canada, japan, australia, etc. It might actually be a good idea to invade it first turn then use one of the bs's to capture australia (to strike india after) and send the other bs and ac and sub if survived to destroy the american bs and transport.
Logged
generalcampbell
Guest
« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2002, 04:58:00 pm »
0

it's pretty cool playing japan.the possibilities.
Logged
Field Marshal
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 383



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2002, 09:50:00 am »
0

Major_Damage,
Your quote, "If Japan doesn't attack, then the US will draw Japan's attention from the mainland...which is no good".
Why would this happen?
Logged
Major_Damage
Guest
« Reply #7 on: January 08, 2002, 10:19:00 am »
0

If Japan lets the US fleet live, the US will have the option of sending over its surviving fleet as well as any new aditions (such as transports), over to pester Japan.  Japan may deal with it by defending its waters with its current navy, which may mean giving up useful transports as fodder.  If the US are succesful,  they might take Japan, or land in Far East Russia (which would devestate Japan's Asia conquest).
  By the US doing this,  the Japanese will have to react to the American approach....which means diverting its very modest amount of $$ from the mainland to defending against a landing or naval attack.
So all-in-all, for the Japs NOT to attack Hawaii, is basically seting up for their own dismantle....maybe!
I say maybe because the US may carry it's navy to the Atlantic for use on Germany...which is still no good for the Japs...it just means it will take the allies a little longer to deal with Japan.
Logged
Field Marshal
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 383



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 08, 2002, 11:00:00 am »
0

Japan can hold off the US for many turns.  It won't be until turn 3 when the US can attack the Japanese fleet with sufficient forces.  Germany has at least 4 more turns on top of that US free.  Germany can hold Africa longer and drive sooner into Russia.  If Japan purchased an early IC and captured 1 more, the lose of their fleet is less significant to a US player determined to take Asia or Japan proper.  Germany, in this scenario, is totally unmolested by the US.  This can be very bad for Russia with no US help coming.  The British don't have the buying power to help in Europe significantly alone.  
I'll agree your plans may succeed.  But it's a hard road for the Allies.  The Axis has the time to better prepare for this threat.  If the Allies lose momentum, Russia will fall.  I've tried this many times (I still am).  Unfortunately, the Axis can get the upperhand more often...  
Logged
Zero
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 290


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 08, 2002, 06:39:00 pm »
0

I don't like to attack Hawaii on turn 1 for 2 reasons.  

1.  It think its best to use the battleships for the intial turns to assist in amphibious assaults on more valuable territories.

2.  There is a considerable risk in attacking Hawaii.  If the Japanese only get 2 hits in round one.  The U.S. can retreat its sub towards the Japanese mainland.  If both Japanese Battleships are at Hawaii, then any transports at Japan will be poorly defended and at a severe risk for being sunk by the US sub.  If Japan loses 2 or more transports on turn 1 to the US sub, it would stall the Asia invasion for 1-2 turns.


Logged
Barbaric Overlord
Guest
« Reply #10 on: January 08, 2002, 09:01:00 pm »
0

Germany and Japan have to take British and Russian territory. Britain and Russia have to stop them from doing this. G and J are richer than B and R, and they start with much stronger armies. Thus, B and R require help from the USA. So, the secondary objective of G and J is stop USA from helping its allies.

Most naval units have better defense than offense and so do fighters. Japan gains nothing from destroying USA's navy. USA must destroy Japan's navy if it is going to get strong help to Asia. Thus, Japan should pull back its navy and defend - USA will have to attack it eventually. Because naval units and fighters have better defense, Japan always has the odds in its favour when USA attacks its navy. Thus, Japan should concentrate on the invasion of Asia and just build a navy that is as big or almost as big as USA's to defend.
Logged
greensleeves
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 143


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 09, 2002, 03:56:00 am »
0

i dont agree with that, a battleship and a carrier in the atlantic on turn 3 is lethal for germany. Battleships wont help much if the allies retreat their forces inland (sinkiang, china, yakut). Only Africa is then at risk of being captured thanks to the ships.

edit: same goes for fighters, they will help you capture terrain more easily but you will most likely run out of infantry sooner or later.

[ This Message was edited by: greensleeves on 2002-01-09 03:57 ]
Logged
Major_Damage
Guest
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2002, 08:34:00 am »
0

Field Marshall:

I totally agree with you...I was just setting an example for you.  Japan can hold off the US, but not without drawing funds from the mainland.  If US goes after Japan then Germany is given a chance at taking Russia.  I agree.

Barbaric Overlord:

your quote: "Japan gains nothing from destroying USA's navy."

my response:  "WHAT?!?"  are you kidding?  Japan has everything to gain by destroying the US navy at Hawaii...and so does Germany.  Japan has overwhelming fire power to send at the US.  I've done it more than once where I was Japan, and came out victorious with no loses. Not even my sub was hit.  Its all about odds...and the odds are with Japan for this attack.  I see your point about naval units defences being stronger than their attack values, and your principal may be applied in other circumstances,  but at the same time the Japanese can easily take out the US fleet.  Sometimes aggressive play is called for to have a long term effect.
Logged
greensleeves
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 143


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2002, 09:26:00 am »
0

attacking is superior to defending in several ways:

1. planes, ships and tanks can move to the battlefield from other territories, you cant move when defending a territory so you cant call in reinforcements from other territories.

2. The attacker chooses territory to attack, attacking troops and defending troops. Thats why a battle is most likely gonna end up in favour of the attacker and gonna hurt the defender more.
Logged
Major_Damage
Guest
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2002, 10:22:00 am »
0

and also...

not attacking may hurt you in the long run.  It may just give the enemy that extra bit of time they need to over power you.

CARPE DIEM!!!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2018 Support Drive

Read about this support drive.
Support Level
Forum Username
Note: payee will appear as Livid Labs, LLC.
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]

Latest Articles

I Will Never Grow Up Games



Axis and Allies.org Official Gold Partner: Historical Board Gaming
Silver and Bronze Partners
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2015 Livid Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
Axis & Allies is registered trademark of Wizards of the Coast, a division of Hasbro, Inc.
Note: the copyright below is for the forum software only.
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!