Axis "J2/I2" Strategy

[SubmersedElk]

@Marshmallow:

@simon33:

I’m going to take some convincing this strategy of yours is impregnable.

There are no impregnable strategies.

Marsh

If the game were balanced that would be true. I’m not convinced it is. I’ve yet to see an example of a game where Axis played well and still lost.

[MarshmallowofWar]

@SubmersedElk:

You’d have to weight the cost/benefit between that and forgoing the use of the immensely-powerful harbor in the Philippines.  The reach of naval units from there is incredible, it’s a major force multiplier and threat projection platform.

Yes, the Philippines is an amazing location for the Japanese fleet.

Marsh

[simon33]

@SubmersedElk:

One thing about this play is that the J1 moves are quite modest so it gives the US the signal it’s free to go Atlantic. But it’s quite solid even if the US goes west instead.

So the general idea is to lure the US into ignoring Japan? Hmm, can’t knock it because it seems to have worked in the example game you show. What if the US bulks up Hawaii on land and positions their fleet for a counter strike as I’m suggesting? Your transports are out of position for a landing on Australia. You can probably only land on one of the money islands because a counter attack is more or less assured. Can’t reach India on J2. I’m guessing you just stick to the script in that scenario around DEI. What does the Caroline force do? I’m guessing stay put and wait for the transports to come from SZ6.

@ShadowHAwk:

It does not mather if you can or cannot defend against it. It mathers that japan has to commit a lot to kill it and might be in a position where the US can finish off a large part of its fleet.

It is only 10 VS 12 dice and only 11 vs 12 hitpoints you cannot count the carriers unless you really want to throw away that fleet against a US counter. And you dont have a naval base so your ships will still be damaged the next round :)

I’d wondered about that but the damaged fleet can limp back towards Philippines and be out of reach of the US fleet.

[simon33]

I guess one option is to strengthen both Queensland and Hawaii. Neither could stand against the full weight of the maximum Caroline force, but the survivors of the battle would need to fight off the other force. Let’s look at that:
Hawaii (SZ26): 2DD, AC, 2 Cruiser, BB, Sub, 3Ftr Scramble, 2Ftr on AC. Attacking this force, Japan needs to sacrifice at least two hits to its carriers which will leave the US with two units on average. (I don’t play low luck.) If IJN sacrifices three hits on its carriers it has an average of 1-2 units left. Sacrificing more can’t be simulated in the calculator.

If two more inf and a tac bomber are landed on Hawaii, the Japanese can take this down 64% of the time with 3 inf and 3 art. You might land the strat bomber on Johnson Island or the Line Islands to help clean up the left overs which would allow it to threaten SZ54 as well. Oh actually it can do so from Western USA.

But suffice to say, this appears to be a pretty strong option and forces a retreat from the Carolines or requires its reinforcement from a sensible Japanese player.

[SubmersedElk]

The general idea is to play the most solid, risk-free offensive moves possible. It’s based on the theory that the game is grossly unbalanced in Axis’ favor and therefore all risk should be eschewed, because assuming risk can only work in the Allies’ favor.

Unless my opponent is informed beforehand by telling him exactly what I plan to do, he will almost always go Atlantic with US. It’s not at all necessary that he does, that’s just what ends up happening. If he goes Pacific, no biggie, half the fleet is in the Philippines and can protect SZ6 as long as need be. I’ve playtested both scenarios and it’s frustrating as all hell for Allies because he can’t advance anywhere that matters, and what advances he does make are glacially slow in the execution.

The Allies always get the choice of whether to give either the European Axis or Japan a better game, by deciding which way the US will focus. This strategy accommodates either choice. If the US goes Atlantic, Germany builds defensively a bit earlier, ends up more in a stalemate with Russia, and Italy goes defensive for the whole game - but Japan runs rampant and becomes a superpower. If the US goes Pacific, Japan will still get to be large enough to hold the US off more than long enough for a Germany that builds fast land units almost exclusively to overrun Russia. I anticipate in either case Italy will be reduced to a rump player, so beating up on Italy in the Med doesn’t faze me, its only truly essential job is to hold Rome.

Doesn’t matter which poison the Allies pick, they still get the poison.

[SubmersedElk]

Simon, just to be clear, Japan never needs to hit Hawaii. US can build up there all they like, all Japan needs to do is prevent that force from moving to SZ6, and a modest home fleet plus DD blockers can get the job done cheaply.

Eventually the US can build up enough to move to Carolines to project some real threat, but that too can be frustrated with blockers. Any US advance gets forced around the perimeter into DEI and they need to wait for reinforcements - the closer they get to the Japanese air force the bigger the fleet they need - so it’s slow going the whole way. By the time they can actually force Japan back, Germany is done with Russia. Keep in mind that Japan is making 65-70 IPC the whole time and there’s absolutely nothing the Allies can do to prevent that.

If I were on the other side of the board, I’d probably do 1-2 turns in Pac for US to create some threat the Japanese have to deal with, then focus Atlantic so Germany doesn’t get out of hand, then switch back once the UK and Russia have Germany stalled out. I’m not really sure it can be done successfully if played right by Axis, but if it were to be done that’s the way I’d do it. Alternately I’d consolidate starting US forces in Pac, build 1 turn there, and then build from scratch in the Atlantic starting US2, the result is pretty similar.

[simon33]

I think going Atlantic with the US underestimates the strength of this J1 move. I wouldn’t mind a game, but I’m in Sydney, AU.

[Juan_de_Marco]

Allright, interesting strategy from the original poster. It’s also important to think about what the opponent could do to counter it.

It’s clear that Malaya is essential if Japan wants to go for India since you need the staging post. And the Allies can hold Malaya easily against such a declaration on J2, and the 4 transports near Japan can’t be sure to have a clear path into the Philippines, which annuls some of that strategy.

Allies can respond to the strategy in the following way:
Transport infantry to Malaya (UK), land planes in Malaya (UK+ANZ).
Creating 6 inf, 3 fig, 1 tac in Malaya. Hit expectation: around 4.5 hits.
The Japanese are sure to bleed groundunits then in Malaya OR expensive planes. And what dies in Malaya, can’t be transported onward to India. Even if Japan offers up expensive planes, that means that those planes cannot help out in the attack on India later.
And, if there is no declaration of war on J1,
UK can send the BB to Seazone 20, and the US can send the DD or Sub to seazone 21. Now the 4 transports from Japan are blocked from going to the Philippines on J2.

I’m also not convinced that war on J1 is worth it, as your transport capacity is so low that you can’t follow up attacks if they go badly, plus your units in Seazone 19 and 20 cannot project any power except the Philippines. In our games, US usually spends most of the money in the Pacific to at least equal the japanese combat fleet. The earlier they manage that, the earlier the Japanese are threatened with game end. Additionally, the Russians can declare war on R2, threatening Japan by allowing US fig and tac planes to land there from Midway on US2 and strat bombers from Hawaii (and it doesn’t matter whether it is a J1 or J2 declaration of war). That’s an 18 inf stack that doesn’t even have to attack, but can chill and defend for a long time while the US pumps bombers and harrasses the japanese to such an extent from Amur that any delaying strategies by Anzac and UK will inevitably cripple Japan. I don’t really see a path to victory for the Axis on the Pacific Map. Does anyone have any ideas beyond the initial moves, however nicely calculated with low losses they may be?

As to a J1 attack on the Philippines, it can maximally consist of:
3 inf, 2 art, 1 tank, 1 fig, 1 tac from Seazone 33 (no shore bombardment since there is a naval combat)
defense: 2 inf, 1 fig
This foregoes the Borneo move to deprive the UK of much-needed income but otherwise would mean only 4 land units land.
It’s completely normal that the US scores 1 or 2 hits. Meaning you have instead of the 6 or 4 land units, only 5 to 2 remaining available to hit Malaya J2, or again, or you have to sacrifce 1 or 2 airunits. Like the previous strategy, this complicates going for India again later similarly. Again, everything you lose as Japan along the way to India, doesn’t fight in India. So again, sacrificing 1 or 2 air units in the Philippines, and another 4 in Malaya MIGHT mean you have 6 land units available for the J3 strike on India, at the cost of ±50 to 60 IPC worth of planes. It’s likely there is a fleet in Seazone 38 in front of India, so no shore bombardment. Unless you also build a naval base adjacent to Seazone 36 on J2, no additional units can land in India. It’s a dicey proposition at best with competent UK buys (1 fig, 1 arm on UK1? 2 arm, 1 mech on UK1? 5 infs on UK1? then later 4 infs on UK2? they have the luxury to see what is coming of course).

[simon33]

I’ve never had much success with going after India as Japan. I’m wondering if it is better to just contain it.

BTW, I don’t think you should send the 2 UK fighters to Malaya as the Allies. You need 3 fighters to defend against SBR by 2 bombers.

[Nippon-koku]

@simon33:

I’ve never had much success with going after India as Japan. I’m wondering if it is better to just contain it.

BTW, I don’t think you should send the 2 UK fighters to Malaya as the Allies. You need 3 fighters to defend against SBR by 2 bombers.

India can definitely be taken, but the Pacific Allies can definitely make it a pain for Japan.  I’ve lost India, but never within the first five or six rounds.