I believe Cow is attempting to say that it is too difficult to conquer Tokyo, Japan and that one could expect that the Germans will control Moscow before the Americans control Tokyo in most games. To that, I agree. The only problem with that assertion is: “Why do I need Tokyo?”
In a “kill Japan first game” I find it is more about sequestering the Japanese on Japan (Tokyo) and less about taking Tokyo Japan. You should be able to win with Victory Cities as well, without actually taking Tokyo.
Meanwhile, you’re Japan. You have to magically take out China, take India, handle the remnants of the far eastern contingent of the Russian Army as well as now you have American carriers, destroyers and transports scratching at your soft under belly. Perhaps England puts a complex in India, in conjunction with the American attack? Now you have attacks from over land, attacks at the sea (from a nation earning as much or more than you), the Chinese to deal with, you can pretty much give up the NO for India/Australia now, Russians you have to over-whelm to get into their meaty districts, etc, etc, etc…if you don’t know how to handle it, you’re going to get screwed without lube. If you do, maybe you can buy time for the Germans and Italians to win?
Meanwhile, keep in mind that England + Russia > Germany + Italy. Especially if England stacked Egypt and prevented it from falling, and focused on sinking and keeping the Italian navy sunk. Russia can turtle for a bit, then when England is ready to help (round 3, maybe 2 if you’re lucky) they can push forward with the old Infantry Push Mechanic with Britians landing and moving into newly taken territories to keep the Germans from effective counter attack.
Yes, that’s a “perfect” game. I understand. But it is also a realistic game.