I must retract my statement about the IC in Alaska. I did not realize this was the AAR board and assumed we were talking AA50. Not sure if it would make a difference or not but…… I have done it in AA50 but not in AAR. Sorry.
Japan Strategies
-
So whats the purchase for japan? trannies? factories?
what is the current status of factories vs. transports in terms of overall japan strategy.
i favor transports unless you got India , then you would substantually benifit with a factory.
-
I like 3 transports, 2 infantry.
Depending on what american does, I might build an IC on J2.
I never go for the US as Japan, but if Germany takes the UK and the games not over (depdning on your personal winning conditions), its always fun to have German invade eastern canada and japan invade western to make the US freak out.
-
I prefer this as well.
Transports act as fodder, can take/retake islands, cant be captured and the revised rules allow 1 tank and 1 infantry capacity.
they act as a good threat against american west coast and can add ships to a crippled fleet. Very good to fluff up a navy if allies are going KJF.
However for 16 IPC for can land four units while those factories can only produce 3 units.
India factory is good because it takes transports 2 turns to get their.
Problem with transports is your limited to build only 8 units so if you have more than 4 transports its a problem of diminishing returns.
So i suspect after you have 4-6 transports and all those island soldiers have been picked up you may need to build factories to sustain the growing economy.
-
With a bid of $1, 1 IC, 2 TRN, the IC going to FIC or Manch depending on my choice of openning move.
There are actually a LOT of Japan strats earlier in the threads (I know I posted QUITE a few in early 2006).
-
i like transports and fighters, (a few inf to go in trans ports) but lightning asssault is AWSOME! run over and amphibious assault us in one turn! WOOT WOOT!
-
Japan’s overall strategy is of course clear Asia and march westward unto Moscow.
it’s pretty much the same basic strategy eventually you’re going to want 1-2 IC’s on the mainland + some transports.
it’s just how are you going to arrive to that point and which way you want to get to Moscow.it all depends on if there is a bid, and what happened between Russia1, Germany1, UK1.
you might have an extra IPC to be able to build 1 IC and 2 trns right away or just 3 trns + some infantry.
I also like to support the German troops in Africa and put early pressure on Caucasus
-
I agree. Pearl2 is not an option, it’s a necessity.
The fine line for Japan is in judging exactly what forces to commit to that battle. A lot of that decision comes down to what Russia and the UK did on R1, B1. One of my primary motives as Allies in round 1 is to try and give Japan a lot of tough decisions to make in J1. You can’t take very much Japanese territory before J1, but you can put them into position to lose alot if they don’t do something about your impending invasions quickly.
~Josh
I personally agree people should attack PH. But I know one very fine player Allweneedislove, who runs a great no PH strategy. So some people out there dont do it and can make it work.
-
personally, i would like to see more strats for STOPPING the juggernaut that is japan besides kgf :-P
-
personally, i would like to see more strats for STOPPING the juggernaut that is japan besides kgf :-P
http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=5456&highlight=bushido
-
I love playing Japan, a lot of players under estimate Japan’s potential. Given Japan’s at start position they should have no problem, taking China, destroying the Peal Harbor fleet, crushing any UK offensive moves, and defending against a Russian Build up in Bury.
With no bid, I would buy 3 transports, 2inf.
With $1 from the bid I would buy 2 transports, 1IC.
With $2 from the bid I would buy 4 transports.Also, I consider Pearl Harbor a must, allowing the PH fleet to survive gives the US a fleet of 2fgt, 1CV, 1BB, 1DD, 1SS, 1tp in sz55 plus any units they purchase…that is suicide. Japan will have to divert IPC’s to protecting the pacific instead of troops for Asia.
-
Also, I consider Pearl Harbor a must, allowing the PH fleet to survive gives the US a fleet of 2fgt, 1CV, 1BB, 1DD, 1SS, 1tp in sz55 plus any units they purchase…that is suicide.Â
Join Triple A and play AWNIL. He is currently #5 over there.
-
seen and/or done that. against skilled japanese play it is an expensive waste, especially if you also have skilled german play crushing russia in europe. i am intrigued by the “asian wall” potential and am wanting to experiment with the much maligned south african complex shuttleing troops into sino-asia combined with an american solomon island staging area and/or sink complex.
unfortunately it still seems like heavy uk/usa pressure on germany to free ussr up to push back at japan seems to be the bestsince most of our games are the full 5 player it is harder to coordinate the allies effectively. however, last week we did the sinky binky with heavy russian presence to the east and held japan back long enough to crush germany. as a caveat however, the skill level of the axis players was in the average range at about 6 games each. i am confident that if a more experienced player was at the helm japan would have been drinking vodka and headed for the bratwust stand
-
crit, what post were you responding to?
-
crit, what post were you responding to?
The one in his head?
–
IMHO S. Africa IC is useless until you’re already winning. Beginning game, I’m too busy setting up the infrastructure to challenge Europe and North Africa. If I spent IPCs in South America, you get South Africa and a decent UK navy if you saved the Australian fleet, but in return, Germany does all sorts of stuff with threatened invasion of London, German transports in Mediterranean, or it just goes tanks and transports on G3+.
-
Â
unfortunately it still seems like heavy uk/usa pressure on germany to free ussr up to push back at japan seems to be the bestunfortunately, I agree. Revised plays out like classic, with the most of the US chain going though northern Africa instead of the classic Norway chain.
If you’re looking for a more strategic rules set with many, many different playouts, try A&ARe or “Enhanced”. See http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=15339
-
Posted by: newpaintbrush
Quote from: squirecam on January 26, 2007, 02:34:05 PM
crit, what post were you responding to?The one in his head?
the one that was responding to me perhaps?
IMHO S. Africa IC is useless until you’re already winning
i wouldn’t go so far as to say worthless, it cleans up africa and allows usa to go europe or pacific as well as setting up a flow of troops into persia. since this is a thread about japan and having a way to get into south east asia would involve japan and some of us are willing to try new concepts even if “the powers that be” find them sub-optimal i felt it worth mentioning, even if it is only ‘in my head’
-
Critmonster - “some of us are willing to try new concepts even if “the powers that be” find them sub-optimal i felt it worth mentioning, even if it is only ‘in my head’”
–
oh yeah, my bad. I meant “in the head” thing as a joke.
–
Also, please do not say that I am a “power that be”. If anything, I encourage thought.
You did notice I wrote “IMHO”. That means “In My Humble Opinion”. That does NOT mean that I am telling you how to play, or that I say that I have a perfect paradigm, or any such nonsense.
If you want to call me an arrogant bastard, that’s fine, even accurate a fair amount of the time. But call me an arrogant bastard because I’m an arrogant bastard, don’t misquote me!
–
Also, please do not refer to yourself as “some of us”. Some of us find that offensive. :roll:
–
A S. Africa IC IS worth mentioning. But I do not PERSONALLY believe that a S. Africa IC is a good purchase for the beginning of the game, for the reasons already mentioned. You will note that I wrote “IMHO S. Africa IC is useless until you’re already winning”. Since I do not feel that this thread is strictly correct for explaining this, if you want to discuss a S. African IC strategy, please make a new thread if you really want to discuss the merits of such a strategy.
If you COULD really set up a “flow of troops into Persia”, it would definitely be worth considering. But I do not believe that you CAN set up a flow of troops into Persia, cost-effectively, anyways.
–
I am going to say ahead of time that I believe a S. African IC is a strategy that is usually only useful in one of three situations. One, if you are playing in a game in which you do NOT CARE if the Axis or Allies win, so long as you gain territory with UK. Two, it is possibly a plan that you would use if you have absolutely no faith whatsoever in either the US or USSR players. The third possibility is a horrible German build and bid placement.
In the first case, you place a S. African IC because you want to keep your African IPCs and provide some support to India and Australia. Of course, while you have all those IPCs down south, Moscow is going to be horribly imperiled.
In the second case, you can’t count on the US or the USSR for any kind of support. So you can’t rely on the US to help you free Africa OR to support in Asia, and you can’t depend on USSR not to pull all its forces out of a territory leaving your fighters stranded. Basically, if the US and USSR are total idiots, you have to do your own thing, and S. Africa is how you do it.
In the third case, Germany did something dumb like maybe buying two aircraft carriers and a fighter for G1. So the Allies may not be going for KGF because of the German navy, but on the other hand, Russia should do quite wel because of the lack of German units on the front on the initial turns. In this case, the Allies MAY want to go KJF, in which case I think an Indian/Ssinkiang IC strat would perform better. But it is POSSIBLE that a UK fleet unification southwest of Australia combined with a S. Africa IC combined with a US Pacific build could work as well. But understand, I feel that if Germany did something like buying 2 ACs and a sub on G1, that the Allies are ALREADY winning, that is, satisfying the “IMHO S. Africa IC is useless until you’re already winning” statement I already made.
-
Best way to get UK troops to Persia is Archangel - Moscow - Caucasus.
South African IC sounds crazy to me. Remember, the point is to maximize your IPCs. Build the IC and you are instantly down 15 IPCs. How many turns until you make that back in gained African income? Probably forever, because to make use of the IC you’ll be spending minimum 6 IPCs per turn down there to build Infantry, which on its own almost completely offsets the few IPCs in territory that you keep in Allied hands and out of Axis hands.
Might as well build an IC in Australia.
-
If you want to call me an arrogant bastard, that’s fine, even accurate a fair amount of the time. But call me an arrogant bastard because I’m an arrogant bastard, don’t misquote me!
i have no desire to call you that, nor was i offended by your post :mrgreen:
i apologise for poor emoticon use :oops:
Suggested Topics
