@drdachel Welcome to the forum :slightly_smiling_face:
A transport can’t be part of a land combat.
During Combat Movement you would need to move naval and/or air units into the transport’s seazone to conduct naval combat there.
I need help defeating Britian plz reply
-
yeah, it is VERY important to work w/ your ally when you’re the axis… maybe even more important than working together as the allies, since you can do whatever you want and still win anyway (w/out bids + RR)
-
What SB and ozone say are good advice. To elaborate, with only two transports, I suggest even more, you can put more units on mainland asia than the IC in India. Eventually you can overwhelm India and use the IC for your own purposes. I suggest your IC in Manchuria be used to advance against Russia. I don’t like IC in Manchuria because itis too close to Japan. Transports can do the same job. That’s for your next game. My biggest Question is Where is your Navy and what is the US doing in the Pacific? Your main objective should be to get units in asia to advance against Russia and at least neutralize the India IC. When attacking, always use infantry to absorbe defensive hits in conjunction with fighters bombers or tanks to inflict offensive casualties. Remember, if your attack is going badly you have the option to retreat. PROTECT YOUR AIR FORCE and to a lesser extent your armor. I hope this is helpful. Good Luck!
, -
yes, it is VERY important for you to protect your fighters. (didn’t you already lose your bomber though?) just keep bringing men to the mainland, and build the 3 tanks per turn in manchuria.(or maybe a fighter and 2 tanks)
-
Part of the problem, I think, was that 1st-turn IC purchase in Manchuria. Japan should usually avoid big-ticket items such as ICs or Aircraft Cariers (CVs) etc. until she’s expanded her economy a bit. Remember you are almost as poor as USSR on your 1st turn…
Ozone27
-
but since he has the IC there now, i think he should utilize it at least by puting 3 tanks or 2 tanks and 1 fighter there
-
in the begining of the game it is possible to take china singkiang and india and kill the american carrier on the first turn(taking out china is a must).if england builds an ic in india(lol) kick back and relax a little cuz they just gave you an ic.depending on if the germans are holding africa try sending a transport or 2 with some inf or tanks as that is where 1/3 of englands money comes from.a rich japan is russias worst nightmare. when nearing ussr with japan watchout for a preemptive counterstrike.if properly timed it will give ya a headache.
-
i do agree, taking china on turn 1 is very important; you definitely don’t want the chinese to be attacking kwantung on turn 1
-
I agree, when playing Japan my top priority on t1 is to eliminate the US fighter in China and gives Japan control of a centrally located territory. Even if it means leaving Burma wide open. This discourages a US IC in asia,allows tanks landing in Manchuria to blitz through to the interior among other advantages. I can retake Burma on the next turn and have a good chnce of taking a possible UK IC in India soon after. My motto as Japan is never build an IC if the UK will do it for you.
-
but since he has the IC there now, i think he should utilize it at least by puting 3 tanks or 2 tanks and 1 fighter there
…definitely. Next game though, consider building the IC on T2 instead–by which time you should have a pretty good economy.
Taking China & eliminating the US fleet at Hawaii are good, achievable goals for T1…
Ozone27
-
turn 1 goals for japan: china occupied
peral harbor destroyed
india occupied (usually only possible if britain didn’t move his transport into the french indo china sea) tons os infantry in manchuria and french indo china -
hey strong bad- what are you trying to accomplish with japan? what do you do as japan if in T1 russia takes manchuria? not critisism only a question.
-
well i almost always play russia restricted, so russia can’t take manchuria on turn 1. and even if we do let russia attack on turn 1, than we have high bids and usually an extra infantry or two or three gets placed in manchuria, so it would be virtually impossible for russia to take manchuria on turn 1
-
what are bids?
-
when 2 people play the game, both players bid for the axis. this means they both select a number, and the player with the lower number gets the axis. the player with the lowest number gets that many IPC’s to spend on axis units before the game starts.
e.g. player 1 bids 7, player 2 bids 6. player 2 plays as the axis, and he gets 6 IPC’s to spend (or save) as he sees fit on units for the axis before the game starts. the units he places can (obviously) only be placed in axis controlled territory. so player 2 decides to build 2 infantry in manchuria, so before the USSR even makes their first move there are 5 infantry in manchuria instead of 3
-
How do you bid in the case of 5 players?
-
In my opinion USSR taking Manchuria on T1 is practically a death warrant for Russia. Why?
1.) You would almost certainly take heavy losses in INF before you prevail.
2.) Japan will be forced to take back Manchuria on T1. This will indeed slow down Japan’s advance in East Asia for a turn, but the tradeoff is not worth it because…
3.) USSR is forced to either leave the rest of their Eastern territories underdefended, or to commit signifigant forces from the West to shore them up. Either way you’ve weakened USSR far more than the measly 3 IPC gain for 1 turn or the setback of Japan are worth.
CAVEAT:I suppose with careful follow-up planning by all the Allies, the situation could be exploited for a possible edge on Japan. A case in point would be if all the Allies gang up on Japan T1 with concerted attacks, or if the UK wish to place an IC on India. The USSR siezure of Manchuria could then prove valuable to the overall Allied picture. But in general I believe it would be far more useful for USSR, if he/she is feeling aggressive, to hit-and-run Manchuria by scoring 1 or 2 hits & retreating with whatever’s left, than to actually take the territory & set in motion a chain of events that would be detrimental to the Allied cause…
Just my opinion…
Ozone27
Suggested Topics
