It is the combination of the IPC boost and the IPCs that the allies dont get to spend that leads to the long run advantage
Beating J1
-
@shadowhawk said in Beating J1:
And the russian units can be back well before moscow is under threath.
I love it when the Allied player believes this. Anything you sent to China other than planes is not going to make it back.
Marsh
-
@shadowhawk A curious thing happens when the US ignores Japan to go “full bore” on Germany. The Allies lose.
To be less brief, Japan does not need all those planes to win. Certainly they help, but if the US ignores the Pacific Japan can project power wherever it needs. Money islands? Locked up. India income constrained? No problem.
By moving Russian units into China, you create a situation where the Russian units have to move last and you have to know where they’ll be moving on the previous US turn. It’s rather easy to mess those things up. Mess it up and the Russian units die cheap.
Is it worth sacrificing a couple of Japanese planes to keep four Russian units out of Moscow? Yes, and I might get the plane too.
So yeah, whatever you send to China
Russiaain’t coming back (assuming my plan is to win by crushing Russia).EDIT: Corrected Russia to China in final paragraph.
-
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
However, even this assumes that the US has not moved anything down to Queensland yet. The way I play, I move bombers there ASAP, and also would fly the tac down, since it is excess to the carrier and 3 plane scramble from Hawaii. So I would already have 5 bombers and a tac there. With a 3 phase attack of:
US: 5 bombers, 1 tac
UK: 2fg, 1 tac, ships depending on location (I moved them west to keep them out of range, so none in my example)
AZ: 3fg, 1 DD, 1 CASo I am not understanding why you seem to think the UK ships and/or ANZAC ships can get to Malaya on Turn 3? At the end of J1 there is a large Jap fleet in the south threatening SZ54 off Queensland. Therefore, the ANZAC DD and CA are not going to be off Queensland on A1. The UK CA and DD if they did not head to the Indian Ocean are going to be off India in SZ39. The US fleet is going to be off Hawaii. Assuming the original bomber is on Hawaii the US2 threat on SZ6/Japan is (1) SS, (2) DD, (2) CA, (1)CV, (1) BB, (1) Ftr, (1) Tac and 1 Bmb. The four bombers purchased on US1 are going to be on the Mainland and cannot threaten SZ6/Japan. To defend against this (1) SS, (2) DD, (2) CA, (1) CV, (1) BB, (1) Ftr, (1) Tac and 1 Bmb US threat the IJN needs about (1) DD, (1) CA, (2) CV, (1) BB, (5) Ftr and (2) Tac. This means there is going to still be plenty of ships in the south that when Japan takes the money islands the UK and ANZAC fleets will not be able to be off India or off Queensland at the end of the Allied 2 Turn without facing destruction. That means the Turn 3 Allied attack per your details is US = (5) bombers plus (1) tactical, UK = (2) fighters plus (1) tactical and ANZAC = (3) fighters.
Since the Japanese will take Shan State and Malaya on J3 there is no landing zone for the US tactical. Assuming UK takes Shan State ANZAC would have a landing zone. So the actual Allied Turn 3 attack is US = (5) bombers, UK = (2) fighters plus (1) tactical and ANZAC = (3) fighters. The real issue is defending against the US air attack and having enough left that the UK forces don’t want to get killed in a follow on attack. Since any fighters will land on Malaya sea units are actually probably better than carriers. So you are right probably a DD, CA and CV with 2 fighters is probably not enough off Malaya based on you flying the US bombers down there on US2. Instead, we would need to add an additional destroyer and battleship.
Since the US bombers are in Australia the loss of those two ships does not affect our defense of Japan. Since the Malaya fleet can still make the Philippines on J4 there is no difference in the ultimate Japanese defense on J4. Therefore, I disagree with your premise that Japan cannot take Malaya on J3 and be safe.
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
Now, onto the $ islands.
In my scenario AZ can take 1 back AZ3. I chose Java (reason based on UK ship positioning).
US4 take back Celebes and Borneo.
UK4, take back Sumatra. TT had previously been moved west to keep it safe from the Japs.
So now, beginning rd5 I have the massive Combined Fleet sitting at the Philippines plus a 3fg scramble (since those planes are clearly not needed on the homeland for the time being).
US and AZ fleet and all planes on Queensland and SZ54 with the following exceptions:
US DD blocking in SZ25.
US DD blocking in SZ46.
AZ DD blocking in SZ45.So at the end of J2 and J3 the money islands are under the control of the Japanese. On US3 the US fleet moves from Hawaii to Queensland and since the main IJN is off Japan they do not have to block in the south but they do block SZ25 as you stated. I am not sure how ANZAC is taking Java on A3 unless the Japanese abandoned it and why would they do that? On J4 the Japanese send a sub and planes to kill the SZ25 blocker and consolidate their fleet as already described off the Philippines. Per your instructions the Allies should be able to take all four money islands back, I agree with this, and block only in the south? Maybe, depends on what Japan built on J4; most likely they will have to block SZ25 again.
On J5 Japan will be able to take back all the islands EXCEPT Sumatra which I already stated earlier the IJN cannot hold Sumatra based on your plans. However, they kill all four transports and both of the blockers probably with a sub and destroyer unless they want to risk the hit on a plane. My guess is the IJN ends up in Java.
So I disagree with your overall assessment. Up tp this point the Allies are down 4 transports and most likely 4 destroyers as blockers. The Japanese are down two subs and two destroyers killing blockers though some may be alive to possibly cause additional casualties from any counter attack. Add to that, due to the bombers, two Japanese transports are also toast, Borneo and Celebes. The Allies have lost more units than the Japanese in these trades, the US still cannot blow up the IJN and the US fleet cannot stand toe to toe with the IJN so they either vacate Queensland or block again.
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
I think the situation for Japan at this point is quite worse than you had laid out.
AZ is safe at this point with all the land units and fighters stacked there. Queensland can’t be attacked until J7 anyway since J5 and J6 would have to be spent killing the blockers then killing the fleet. But even then, 5 fully loaded TTs and 6 fully loaded carriers isn’t enough to take it.
India could be threated on J6 but the burma stack will have time to retreat and Japan would have to sacrifice multiple planes to take it.
Lastly, Japan could go to the Carolines J5, then take Hawaii J6. This would at least force the US to invest in units to protect the west coast. But with several more turns for UK and AZ to build their forces getting that 6th VC would be impossible for several more turns. The US bombers could be flown to India to wipe out any units on weakly held Jap territories and allow UK to take back the entire peninsula.
Meanwhile with all 4 $ islands lost, Japan will not be in a great position economically regardless of the direction they take unless they start re-taking islands, which will likely delay the assault on any VC. And Japan definitely needs to kill the allied TTs J5.
Another downside of building so many carriers is that remaining number of planes on the mainland is significantly reduced in order to load the carriers. This makes it even more difficult to kill the UK stack, wherever it may be.Finally our perspectives match some and don’t match in other areas.
- I agree ANZAC (Sydney) is safe
- I agree India (Calcutta) is safe
- I disagree the money islands are not in Japanese hands. After retaking 3 of the four islands on J6 they take Sumatra or ignore it to push against the US fleet or the Carolines. Not sure what would be best; have to see how the board looks at that point.
- I agree the UK stack is safe since the Jap planes are on their fleet.
The overall situation is not good for the Allies. As mentioned before, logistically, China is losing or stalemated, India is losing, Russia is being ignored and Japan controls the money islands. Japan has a significantly larger fleet in the Pacific than the combined Allies do which means unless the US puts a bunch of money in the water the IJN is going to push the US navy out of the Pacific. In that case they will eventually win. If the US continues to focus on the Pacific then the Allies will lose in Europe.
Your entire strategy is based on quickly building a large US air threat and forcing the IJN to hide or run away. That is not going to happen thus the strategy fails.
-
@andrewaagamer said in Beating J1:
So I am not understanding why you seem to think the UK ships and/or ANZAC ships can get to Malaya on Turn 3? At the end of J1 there is a large Jap fleet in the south threatening SZ54 off Queensland. Therefore, the ANZAC DD and CA are not going to be off Queensland on A1.
They don’t need to be there at the end of A1, just A2. At the end of J2, I have the Jap southern fleet divided between Sumatra, Java, and Celebes, with a TT in each SZ. The Celebes TT can be left unprotected as no Allied units can reach it. The Java group needs the most protection, so I have roughly 2/3 of the southern fleet there, and the rest off Sumatra. Only the stuff off Java can reach SZ54, and attacking SZ54 would be suicidal for the Japs on J3. They’ll take a few hits from the DD, CA, and 3fg scramble and then be creamed by the USN and all US planes on US3.
@andrewaagamer said in Beating J1:
Since the Japanese will take Shan State and Malaya on J3 there is no landing zone for the US tactical.
I have the Indian land units consolidate on Burma on UK1, then move to Shan State UK2. Japan can’t kill that stack and Malaya on J3 unless they want to sacrifice around 4 planes, if so be my guest. A more typical response I see is to consolidate the Jap fleet off Malaya and use a blocker in SZ42. UK can take back Malaya on UK3 unless you made the aforementioned plane sacrifice.
@andrewaagamer said in Beating J1:
I am not sure how ANZAC is taking Java on A3 unless the Japanese abandoned it and why would they do that?
Not sure what you’re proposing as an alternative, but since you want to attack both Malaya and Shan State J3 and not use any blockers, I assumed you would load all units from the J2 $ island grab back onto the TTs. If not you’ll have an empty TT.
Overall, you’ve got a situation where the 6th VC should be safe until at least J8 or J9 and Japan goes several turns with a 9 IPC hit to income from losing Sumatra and the NO. The most vulnerable VC is Hawaii, and yet that is the easiest for the Allies to take back given it’s proximity to the massive US industrial base.
This strategy should accomplish the following:
- Slow Japan’s rapid progress as they have to make defensive moves to protect their fleet starting J3
- Dent Japan’s income
- Allow the US to spend 100% of its income in the Atlantic US 3, 4 and 5
- Provide strategic flexibility. If Japan never allows its fleet to be attacked, the US can fly the bombers to India, then to Cairo or somewhere and they can join forces with the US assets coming from the east coast. The loss of investment in the Pacific can be replaced with another turn or 2 of fleet building off the west coast later.
Mikawa released his ships to operate independently of his flagship, and at 01:31 he ordered "Every ship attack."
-
@andrewaagamer said in Beating J1:
The Celebes TT can be left unprotected as no Allied units can reach it.Andrew, I believe this is only true if there are no strat bombers in Queensland or that Dutch New Guinea, New Guinea, and Guam landing sites are not available to the strat bomber (I’m assuming the Japanese are in possession of the Philippines).
Marsh
-
@marshmallow-of-war
That’s correct, and in this scenario Japan takes Celebes on J2, and the US first US bombers don’t arrive in Queensland until US2.
-
@mikawagunichi Correct, I see that now.
However, if ANZAC actually got a strat bomber as part of the bid…
-
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
I have the Indian land units consolidate on Burma on UK1, then move to Shan State UK2.
That is a very aggressive move for the UK as that stack in Shan State cannot be back to the capital to protect until UK4. Can Japan not be in position to capture India on J4? They should have 6 or 7 transports along with most of their air force. Do you just walk out of India and allow an easy sacking which is a big swing even if it can be recaptured immediately?
-
bingo. most of whats being said here seems to be in a vacuum as far as what either Germany or Japan is doing and that they will just wait to be destroyed at a time when initiative of the game is on their side. a 100% US japan play is certain death for Russia, a 100% bomber play means no fleet can defend itself, also Japan has gigantic resources to begin with and can easily block SZ 6 so unless the USA does buy 3 CV it has several turns to do as it will while the allies build up…the USA can’t even determine when the war begins to determine what strategy is best–I know the post is about J1 but the japanese player decides that, not the allies.
-
@arthur-bomber-harris said in Beating J1:
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
I have the Indian land units consolidate on Burma on UK1, then move to Shan State UK2.
That is a very aggressive move for the UK as that stack in Shan State cannot be back to the capital to protect until UK4. Can Japan not be in position to capture India on J4? They should have 6 or 7 transports along with most of their air force. Do you just walk out of India and allow an easy sacking which is a big swing even if it can be recaptured immediately?
Agree with @arthur bomber harris here. If UK stacks Shan State on UK 2 then Japan will move to take India on J4. I am good with that as japan.
-
@shadowhawk said in Beating J1:
Eh the 4 bombers build on USA1 can attack SZ6 without any issues.
They got 7 movement. its 5 moves to SZ6 and that leaves 2 moves to land, so 3 russian landing spots.
Russia can declare war in R1 on japan, as this does not affect any state on european board. It also have no negative effects and allows russia to move into china.Yep thanks. Brain fart thinking Russia was unavailable as a landing zone since they were not at war. Would need to beef up the SZ6/Japan fleet for sure to take into account the (4) additional US bombers. Have to pull back some of those ships that were staying in the Philippines.
-
@mikawagunichi said in Beating J1:
This strategy should accomplish the following:
- Slow Japan’s rapid progress as they have to make defensive moves to protect their fleet starting J3
- Dent Japan’s income
- Allow the US to spend 100% of its income in the Atlantic US 3, 4 and 5
- Provide strategic flexibility. If Japan never allows its fleet to be attacked, the US can fly the bombers to India, then to Cairo or somewhere and they can join forces with the US assets coming from the east coast. The loss of investment in the Pacific can be replaced with another turn or 2 of fleet building off the west coast later.
Thinking we are just going to disagree. I feel I have shown the US air threat is not strong enough to accomplish your stated goal of forcing the IJN to hide and huddle. At best you might force the IJN to block SZ16 though I don’t think so. Therefore, this strategy is not going to keep the Japanese from taking all the money islands, at least trading them early on and gaining ultimate domination over them once the US fleet is forced away. As long as the Japanese can accomplish the goal of taking the money islands they have enough money to stalemate India, stalemate China and still build some fleet units.
If the US spends no money in the Pacific on US3, US4 and US5 Japan is going to have at least 7 and more likely 8-9 carriers in the water versus the US navy having a mere 1. That means the Japanese can do whatever the heck they want and the US fleet will have to waste ships blocking or get annihilated. Even then they can get pushed out of the Pacific altogether once Japan moves against Hawaii.
Early on it really makes no difference if China and India are stalemated versus being actually captured. As Japan I do not have to take them to win the game as the Axis. I just need a fleet that is superior to the US so I can move to Hawaii and take it and hold it and block any attempts by the US to take it back. Then at my leisure I finish off India or take Sydney.
-
@andrewaagamer let’s assume that the Allies have a typical 40 PU bid before the game to balance out the match. Do you think there are ways to a KJF bomber strat can be adjusted with to accelerate a counter Japan plan?
I could see a carrier in SZ26, bomber in Hawaii and bomber in W USA leading to immense pressure against the IJN immediately, albeit with huge sacrifice to the European theater. Probably not worth it.
-
@Arthur-Bomber-Harris, I agree with @ShadowHAwk. If you give the bid to the US (maybe you put a DD in to buff up sea zone 26 to prevent that J1 variant), then you immediately give Japan more tasty options for J1. Instead, using the bid to buff up ANZAC and UK Pacific seems a better option.
One of the things I’ve done with spare bid money in the past is put an AA gun into the Philippines. It helps the defense a little and has a decent shot at taking out a Japanese plane. I’m not necessarily recommending this for the bid - there are a lot of areas where beefing up the minor Allied players in the Pacific has a bigger impact, like dropping a couple of artillery in China and a guy in Yunnan.
Marsh
-
I prefer to spend the money in Europe since I think that that is the side the Axis have an easier time to win on. So not in favor of a BIG Bid in the Pacific but I agree with some of what has been said here.
Places I might put money in if I had enough would be extra infantry for China and/or UK Pacific. One to three artillery for Russia. Maybe a sub for ANZAC?
EDIT - Corrected spelling/typing errors
-
@shadowhawk, I always look at bids and how much extra value they can bring in the first couple of rounds. For example a Scottish fighter will both save one of the fleets and help destroy remaining German Navy on UK1 so might return an extra 15 PUs of expected value beyond having a very useful extra fighter for the long run.
The Med sub also adds tremendous value, destroying Italian shipping and possibly causing additional casualties during the inevitable counter attack. Other bids like African units for the UK are also immediately impactful. Obviously the NG infantry is extremely beneficial if allowed.
My question is if any Pacific Allied bids designed to counter the IJN would contribute a huge multiplier of value if combined with a heavy US1 and US2 Bomber build? I want that 30-40 PUs to lead to even bigger changes in the game balance over the first few turns.
-
Are we talking about beating J1 or making it harder to accomplish at all?
Marsh
-
@ShadowHAwk I am going to agree with @Arthur-Bomber-Harris. I like the bid to save high value units or put the Allies in the position to accomplish some of their major goals. Saving half the UK fleet and stopping Italy cold are high on my list of objectives. Not sure where you would put a high bid in the pacific because I have never done it. You seem to think there is potential so please detail where you would put that bid.
As I said earlier I would agree with some Chinese and UK Pacific infantry, Russian artillery and maybe a sub for ANZAC and UK Pacific and a ground unit for US in the Philippines. That is maybe as much as much as $45 leaving what for Europe? A UK fighter? Not sure I see the benefit of that versus having a strong Britain in Europe. To me the key is Europe. Germany unrestrained is going to win; no doubt. I have seen many a game where Japan is on her knees and the Axis wins in Europe.
-
@andrewaagamer. What is the minimum bid spend for the Allies to hold Yunnan on J2?
Here are some of my priorities that add up to 41 PUs
China: art in Kweichow, art in Szechwan, infantry in Yunnan
Russia: Tank in Volgograd, tank in Caucasus. Perhaps an art in Amur and a tank in Sakha to attack Korea on R1?
UK Pacific: Burma art, India mechIf Russia builds three more fighters in Moscow on R1, they can end up in Yunnan the next round and hold the territory.
Has anybody tried this hold-Yunnan at all costs on J2 strategy and if so, did it work? I could see immense problems in the European theater as Germany and Italy can become monsters without having to worry about American interference for many turns, and Russia has weakened themselves considerably.
-
@mikawagunichi So any screenshot or tripleA file?
“I’m working through a game now based on the Japan 3 CV purchases and consolidate in the Philippines scenario Andrew laid out above. Busy at work today but once I get through about 4 rounds can put up some screenshots and/or share the triple a file.”
Suggested Topics
