Should Japan attack Pearl on first turn?


  • As the Axis, you must utilize all of your resources simultaneously until you achieve a higher collective IPC count than the Allies. You can take out the Pearl Harbor fleet, as well as buy transports on J1 in order to support the Asian invasion. Taking out the Pearl Harbor fleet with every last one of your available ships will cripple the Us effort in the Pacific, giving Japan plenty of time to buy transports at will. I usually take both BB, a trans for cannon fodder, sub, AC, and the fighter from Japan. Then I use the fighter from Philip, and those 2 inf to support SE Asia, and Bomber from Japan can help out either cause.

    If US tries to retalliate with its BB and trans, and planes, they will almost always lose leaving u with at least 1 BB or even both. Then u have at least 3 more turns to do what you wish in the pacific.


  • Look at it this way and do a little math, then when you’re done consider my strategy.

    Take the US and Japan’s pacific fleet and add up their total number of defensive and offensive rolls. (Ex: AC=1Attack, 3Defense)

    US Attack- 10
    US Defense- 14

    Japan Attack- 17 (using the 2 pacific fighters)
    Japan Defense- 23 (using the 2 pacific fighters)

    Now, keeping in mind these numbers, know that I play no Russian restricted and yes on Bidding. For my bid, I spend 22 and give Japan 2 transports and 2 I in Burma. This allows me to considerably hasten my rush to Russia, and I use my two pacific fighters to first take out the India transport then support in the Asian invasion. Usually I have all of East Asia and by turn 5 I have an army that can present a very good chance of taking Moscow.

    The way I see it is simple: don’t attack pearl harbor, if anything not doing this will just tempt the US player into pulling their resources away from Europe and they’ll get suckered into the defensive upper hand of the Japes. Use your extra fighters in your Asian conquest and don’t worry if the US island hops, they’re wasting valuable time and resources in the Pacific, when they should be helping in Europe. There is no way the US can fight both battles at once.

    As Germany, use a little more of the strafing attacks and less bold assaults on the Eastern Front while you wait for Japan to help you corner Russia. The big benefit of Japan’s rushing strategy is that the typical Shuck-Shuck (if you’re familiar with the term) strategy of the US and the UK for supplying Europe with reinforcements is not nearly as effective. By the time they have a fleet of transports with enough BB or AC support and units to shuck across the water Japan will be dominant in East Asia, and the Shuck Shuck strategy only allows for reinforcing West Europe and Asia, not east.

    Keep in mind that the reason I place 2inf in Burma is in case of an India IC by the British, in which case they’ve just given you a nice little factory to use for the rest of the game. Russia hates having to deal with a major attack on their weak eastern front, and a large part of launching your assault on Asia means not attacking that pacific fleet.

    Remember, the differential between the US and Japanese naval battles in die roles are this:

    Japan attacking- Japan in favor by 3
    US attacking- Japan in favor by 13

    :D :D :D


  • No friggin’ way. I don’t care what you bid to Japan it will not help the Japs get to Moscow! 8) This is a very hard concept for many newer players to accept, but the weaker Germany is then the less attention Russia has to pay to them, and likewise the less of their army has be stationed in Karelia. If you bid nothing to Germany I would let you take all of East Asia, but I would get all of Africa, and Germany would have to back out of EEuro very soon. At which point the Western Allies need only shuck new troops to Finland/Karelia while Russia throws its might against the Japanese. Regardless of how well they are doing it will be hard to deal with so soon in the game.


  • Guys, Guys, Guys…your missing the whole point! Germany and Japan’s fate rests on the first move of the game!!! If Germany can establish a foothold in Finland/Norway and Western Europe. He/She is free to reak havoc on Russia.

    1st Round (Germany)=Purchase 9 inf/1 tank (NO RESEARCH!!!)
    -Send troopes to take Ukraine
    -3 Fighters to North Sea + Bomber
    -Africa=tank blitz through French/Equit to Egypt
    -Reinforce Eastern Europe with inf and tanks in
    Germany
    1st Round (Japan)= Purchase all fighters and some change in Inf.
    -Load transport in Japan with inf. attack Soviet Far East
    (must have battleship support!)
    -Attack Sinkang and China with Asian Troops and
    Fighters
    -Load transport in Phillipines with 2 troops and send
    fighter to Indochina/ Burma
    -Send all availible ships to Hawaii (Battleship, Aircraft
    Carrier, Submarine, 1 Fighter,)


  • No! Their fate does not rest on the results of the first turn, but on longterm logistical planning, and likewise for the Allies.

    Now to analyze your turn1 plans…If you are suggesting a hard response to Ukr on G1 then perphaps you should consider that any troops you put there will be killed on R2. Moreover, what would you do if I strafed Ukr on R1? Secondly an all out mad dash by Japan for Moscow/Novo is bound to fail as the Russians are simply too powerful once they pull back to their home base in Moscow. Furthermore, with such massive investments in ftrs you will be hard pressed to maintain your offensive push on turn 3 and 4. Just because Japan makes a lot of attacks on J1 does not mean they are going to be doing any better than if they did 1 or 2.


  • No, I agree with Agent Smith that a long term plan is required for either side.

    Consider only the one point from your objectives.

    Africa=tank blitz through French/Equit to Egypt

    I would also say that it is very useful to the Axis cause for Germany to take and hold (for as long as possible) Africa, I think we agree on this. However, consider that in a no-bid game, the UK can counter attack you and with any luck on their part, re-take Egypt and destroy all but one German Inf in Africa. And they can sink your Mediteranian fleet with the UK Med fleet on UK1 as well, therefore keeping Germany out of Africa, probably for the entire game. As Germany you really need to consider taking out the British med fleet as well (not in your plans).

    If the UK is planning to give up Asia to keep Africa as part of a long term plan, this is one way they might go. I’ve seen alternate playing where the UK plays to keep India (giving up Africa for a while).

    If you are Germany and part of your long term plans includes taking and holding Africa as long as possible (which B.T.W. isn’t really necessary for Germany), I would suggest you consider clearing out both the North Sea and Mediteranian of the UK Navy. If the game is not Russia Restricted, then use the transport to move either 1 tank or 2 inf from Norway to Africa (you are weakening Norway to strengthen Africa). You could either play to take Egypt as before and plan to retake it (if lost) on G2 with additional forces from S. Europe (and your tank from Norway) or build in Libya G1 and attack on G2 with these additional forces. On G3 you should then be in pretty good position to take the remainder of Africa and hold it for awhile. You might even consider moving a fighter to Africa on G1 or G2 to assist latter Africa campains and defense if your G1 naval attacks went well.

    This is getting long-winded, so I’ll quit here. But my point is that a long term plan is necessary because the first turns (even with stunning Axis victories) do not make the game.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Excuse my ignorance here, but I think mixing any bidding into the debate would be rather unwise. Mostly because the bidding is too dynamic to contribute to the debate.

    There are good and bad points to attacking Hawaii’s fleet. First the bad:

    You could loose valuable ships you’ll need later.
    You might need the aircraft you assign to the fleet there for a mainland attack.
    You might loose your battle-boats if the US counter attacks with aircraft and has lucky rolls in the defense of it’s fleet.

    On the plus side:

    You arn’t going to be using those Battle-boats for anything else, anyway. Admit it, most Russian players pull their forces away from the Far East to assist in creating an Eastern Defensive Line (7 Inf. 1 Armor.)

    The carrier just makes good fodder.

    You can still pull all your fighters in to assist on the mainland attack.

    Odds are the Far East is a walk in.

    What in the world were you going to do with that submarine in the solomn’s anyway?

    I guess I’m saying I always take the attack against the Carrier Group in Hawaii because I think the Japanese fleet should be utilized.

    If you let the US Fleet survive they MIGHT, if they don’t know any better, try to build a fleet to take you out. However, most players I know will just add the extra fighter, sub and carrier to the battle-boat and transport on their way over to the east coast…making it all that much harder on Germany.


  • Excuse my ignorance here, but I think mixing any bidding into the debate would be rather unwise. Mostly because the bidding is too dynamic to contribute to the debate.

    No I think its necessary because there are those out there who incorrectly believe that by bidding large amounts of troops to Japan this enables them to hit Pearl as they have a greater ability to deal with the risk that you talk about.

    You could loose valuable ships you’ll need later.

    But so could the Americans. I can say as the Allies you’d better not even give me the option to retreat the sub because with this one unit I can cause all kinds of havoc. In otherwords Japan has to attack Pearl, and better get 3hits on the first round of combat.

    You might need the aircraft you assign to the fleet there for a mainland attack.

    Yes but giving America ships is always unwise, not only because they can be used in the Pacific but because they can be moved to the Atlantic as well. Also, if Japan is smart and commits plenty of forces to pearl at most they should lose 1 ftr which isn’t bad.

    You might loose your battle-boats if the US counter attacks with aircraft and has lucky rolls in the defense of it’s fleet.

    And America should rarely do this. Even when I retreat the US sub and have 3 ships I am not necessarily going to attack the fleet. The deciding factor is how important will the battleship be in the Atlantic, and just how weak is the Jap fleet in Pearl. If they have 2bb 2ftrs Cv no way will I risk it eventhough it could work out. It just isn’t worth the risk. However, if its 2bb Cv ftr then I might.

    The carrier just makes good fodder.

    Never do this! The Jap carrier is one of the most important pieces on the board as it will most effectively deter/prevent a US Pacific strategy, or from the Allies mauling the Jap fleet if and when it moves to the RedSz many turns down the road.

    If you let the US Fleet survive they MIGHT, if they don’t know any better, try to build a fleet to take you out. However, most players I know will just add the extra fighter, sub and carrier to the battle-boat and transport on their way over to the east coast…making it all that much harder on Germany.

    But this isn’t such a bad idea. Dumping American money into the Pacific forces Japan to as well rather than in Asia which is much prefered. The question of course is can the UK and Russia deal with Germany. If Germany is weak because too much of the bid went to Japan then you just might see it.


  • Very good points, all of you. Everyone has their own opinion and I love to hear about them. I think that if I were to play some of you in A&A I could explain what I mean about a 1st round Blitz by the Axis that can decide who wins or who loses. I think it is just hard to explain. Alright, thanks for the ideas.

    We have two ears and one mouth, so we can listen twice as well as we speak.
    -Albert Einstein

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Mr. AgentSmith:

    I think you got the wrong impression of my arguement. Other then the bidding aspect anyway, which you got right on. What I was trying to do was point out both the pro’s and con’s to attacking Pearl on the first round.

    As for saving the sub, I have to admit, that was something I never thought to do. What I am more worried about, as the Jap player, is allowing the US to have a carrier and BB in the Atlantic. Germany has a big enough headache without having to worry about a BB and AC w/2 fighters defending US transports and an AC w/2 fighters defending British Transports. After all, there is only so much you can dump into fighters to attack enemy fleets w/o the USSR crushing you.

    Just my opinion. For the record, however, I always, ALWAYS attack Pearl. My BB’s and Sub arn’t doing anything else anyway (especially in USSR Rest. games) and if I loose a BB and/or the sub, it isnt a big deal.

    If you can force the US to blow 18 of those 36 starter IPCs on a new carrier, that’s 2 of 4 possible transports s/he can’t buy.


  • What units do you send for pearling after Man-Kwa attack by russians and uk?

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I send two BBs, the AC, the Sub and a fighter. Everything else can and should be used to attack US, UK and USSR Forces in the Asian conflict.


  • If you can force the US to blow 18 of those 36 starter IPCs on a new carrier, that’s 2 of 4 possible transports s/he can’t buy.

    But why should the US buy a carrier at all. Additionally, if you use all your surface ships to Pearl and I retreat my sub I can do all sorts of damage in the Pacific. My favorite is to retreat it to Mexico to allow both the bb trn to move immediately to the Atlantic. However, I may be tempted to attack 2-3 trns in the JapSz. Not because its high percentage but because there is little to lose. More importantly, with the sub if the pearl attack goes even slightly bad I will counterattack always. Even if there is a 2bb Cv 2ftrs I may attack with bb sub trn 2ftrs bmb. With that I should score 3 hits to the Japanese 3. On round 2 I will clear the seazone, and lose 1-2 more units. So really the Americans should take with 1-2 units which is not a bad tradeoff to make at all.

  • Moderator

    I usually do Pearl on J1, I just don’t like seeing those US ships in the Pacific.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I like to have my own AC when I play the US. Adds str to any atlantic fleet and comes in handy later when I need to take out Japan. Seeings as round one is most likely the only round the US will see all 36 IPCs, it’s logically the best round to get the carrier. Besides, you can still send both fighters to the UK and get some transports. You arn’t going to be invading W Euro or Finland in the first round anyway, so you have a round to kill. Not to mention, if you just build trannies, the Jerries can send a bomber or two (if they built another one for some reason) to take out all your trannies if you dont have SOME defense of them.

    Now, if you are playing with destroyers, we’ve got a different situation on our hands. I’d rather get a destroyer and 3 trannies then a carrier and 2 trannies.


  • I like to have my own AC when I play the US. Adds str to any atlantic fleet and comes in handy later when I need to take out Japan.

    I don’t for several reasons. First, when Berlin falls then the US can buy a carrier to throw against Japan, and since they are likely to take Berlin they will have the money. Secondly, why buy a carrier when you get a bb for free. Third, a carrier without ftrs is weak, but leaving ftrs on it deprives other places of air support. Finally, I hate buying naval units, even for America. Recently, I’ve been retreating the sub from Pearl so as to spirt the WUS transport immediately to the Atlantic. Since the US already starts with 2trannies that greatly reduces their naval build up to only 16-24ipcs into these units. However, you want to spend 40-48ipcs, I think that me spending half of what you will is going to do better in the short term, and the long term.

    the Jerries can send a bomber or two (if they built another one for some reason) to take out all your trannies if you dont have SOME defense of them.

    I will always let them send a bmb versus 3trns, but I would also reinforce with Russian units to help defend. On G2 they can only hit the EUSSz with a bmb, and since I send the WUS fleet to the WPanSz fleet this will be the only time they will get a shot at my transports unescorted. Further, US1-US2 will likely be the last turn I buy any naval units for the US.


  • Now these are the two main places where the US can attack the Japanese. But Midway only has 1 infantry and the Hawaiian Islands has 1 infantry, Aircraft carrier(), Submarine, and fighter(). Now I am always Japan when I play. What I normally do is attack Midway and well guard it. But the US will have a huge advantage with Midway because they can well guard it with naval units. If there was a way to do take out 2 places at once.(hint: I might have a guide for that). But if you attack Midway, Hawaii will start its attack on the Japanese Islands. Hard to say. Midway will fortify it self for sure. So it is up to the Japs plans.


  • Did anyone ever try to conquer hawaii in J1, then move on with the trans and 1 of 2 inf and the surviving battlefleet to panama? Would be allmost worth trying to see the look on my opponents face when i enter the Atlantic with 2 bbs and a carrier (allthough i guess i need loads of luck to actually get there with all those ships and do something useful)


  • I have seen hawaii taken in the first turn. It is sort of a pain for the US because hawaii is close enough to the coast to be used as a staging ground. However, I don’t think it is worth it for japan. You have to expend extra effort to hit pearl hard, and then extra planes to make sure you take hawaii. On top of that, you are not using a transport for asia, which you really need.

    While the thought of having a navy in the atlantic would be great and all, it will not last very long and as you said would have to have incredible luck.


  • I don’t bother taking Hawaii on J1, it is only 1 ipc and slows down the necessary Jap push in Asia. A smart US player will ignore this, and the possibility of Jap strat bombing the west coast isn’t too great a concern until much later in the game (when the game should already be decided). A smart Jap player will be better off strat bombing USSR - becasue the bomber(s) will be in position to assist other endeavers such as a possible capture of Moscow. However, if I am trying for economic victory as the Axis, I will likely take it (perhaps turn 7).

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

27

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts