J1–>Alaska; J3 Game Over.

I don’t think this move would have worked had the US player been paying attention.  With the Japense in Alaska and with a large transport buy, why were they not anticapating an invasion?  And since Japan attacked on turn 1, that gives the US 55 or so to buy a counter.

5 Fighters?  Why not 9 or 10 tanks?  Combined with 5 Infantry from a first round buy and the starting planes, and I don’t think Japan has much of a chance.

I think a Japanese attack could work if alterned.  I’ve been toying with the idea of a J4 attack.  This gives Japan more buying power through 3 turns.  Japan waits to leave on turn 3 and sails into SZ1, but doesn’t attack.  You’re forecasting your move, but not giving the US any added income.  Sure, they’ll be at war on J4, but the fleet is just 1 space away and can’t be destroyer blocked.

Sorry I’m late in returning to this party, but there’s a few things I’d like to throw in…

@Tragedy:

• I agree, attacking the Japan fleet in S.Z. 10 with the U.S. fleet + Planes would prolly work.
  Which got me thinking; What if the Japan Fleet in S.Z.6 moves to S.Z.2, and blocks S.Z.1 and 9 with Destroyers? It seems like that would cause problems for the U.S. fleet. They can’t really attack, and if they move to Hawaiian Isles they can be blocked from getting back to S.Z.10. Thoughts?

Judging by your move in your games, you seem to have figured out that this does not keep the US from attacking z1 and landing in Alaska.  However, if you move 1 BB, 4 fig, 2 CV, 1 CC, 1 DD, and 1 SS to z1, the US can still send 1 bmr, 1 tnk, 1 inf to Alaska, all other naval and air units in range to z1, and all remaining land units to Bco, and they have, by my figuring, about a 65% chance of winning all three.  That, however, is not necessarily their best counter, depending on what else happens J1.

@Tragedy:

The pros and cons of not taking Alaska back are debatable imo. The combination of Escorted Bombing Raids and Japan subs in S.Z.10 can be a massive economic disruption and really ties the U.S. up logistically.

@Gwlachmai:

I don’t think it really matters if you take Alaska back as long as you build a solid defense. Unless the US player doesn’t see it coming, a move against the Western US is a bad strat.

The most solid of defenses will not guarantee you security if you do not fight back strategically.  Unimpeded after a J1 move which takes both Bco and Alaska, Japan can attack WUS on J3 with 8 inf, 3 art, 1 tnk, 4 bmr, 10 tac, and 14 fig.  Wus at best, as far as I can tell, will have 15 inf, 1 mec, 1 art, 2 tnk, 11 fig (4 are ANZ), 3 tac, and 3 bmr.  I believe that, accounting for the AA gun, that gives Japan a 65-70% chance of conquering the territory.  Also, bombing raids against Wus should not be happening, since there should be 7+ fighters there to defend after US2

@Tragedy:

This is a all or nothing strat. Japan is “all in” on round 3. Either they take Western U.S. and essentially win imo, or they fail and have wasted their resources to a point they can’t recover from. There is no middle ground or stalling tactics.

Maybe it is, and maybe it isn’t.  As I said before:@Stoney229:

If the allies respond to a KUSAF in such a way that they lose if Japan decides not to go through with it, then it’s still a working strategy

The allies are forced to go “all out” to defend against it, so a KUSAF strategy that is able to take advantage of this by neglecting Wus and eliminating the vulnerable US fleet and invading the now undefended Philippines, Hawaii, New Zealand, etc is worth considering.  With that said, test games should probably not require the Jap player to attack on J3.  The ultimate goal of a test game, in my opinion, should not be to see if Japan can invade Wus on exactly J3, but to see if Japan will win a game with a certain opening strategy - in this case one that threatens to conquer Wus by J3.  However, my guess is that this “fake out” strategy will still not be as effective as a good India rush strategy.

@Tragedy:

If you would like to play a forum game so you can show me why this is a bad strat that would be great. I’m not saying I don’t believe you, I’m saying show me.
The “That should never happen, It’s easy to counter” comments with not much backing it up are getting old.

Well spoken, sir.  I agree.

@Tragedy:

If Western U.S. goes down and Japan collects U.S. points, asking U.K./ ANZAC to win the game by conquering Japan is a tall order imo. Especially with a Major Complex in Kiangsu and a boat load of points to spend.

@gamerman01:

The point someone made earlier about WUS only being worth 10 is silly.  It’s worth 50 to the WUS, and if the US is out of the game that early, this game is unwinnable by the Allies (to answer your question, Tragedy)

I’m not saying I think UK/ANZAC will win even if this strategy is successful, but I stick to my opinion that the idea is not too far-fetched or “silly”.  As Tragedy said, this is an “all out” strategy.  Japan can take all of the DEI if they want, but they essentially give it to the UK by going for Wus instead.  In a simple glance, you can see that Japan taking Wus is an income swing of 50 in favor of Japan, but the UK having the DEI instead of Japan is an income swing of 40 in favor of the Allies.  The Allies can still double Japan’s income even if Japan has all of North America, Hawaii, and Philippines.  The question may be whether or not Japan will still have enough of it’s originally superior military to swing that imbalance back toward Japan’s favor quickly enough.

@The:

What on earth are you guys talking about with these forum games? How do you play them? I would really like to show off my strategic brilliance once in a while.  :wink:

The “AModulePack” that is currently linked to in the stickied “ABattlemap Module” thread on the Anniversary board does not yet include the P40 module (as far as I know), since the current P40 module will not be the final one.  You can find the latest P40 module, however, in the first post of this thread.  A new and near-final version will be released with or soon after the next update of ABattleMap.  The updated program will include new features, such as support for P40’s convoy system, and the updated module will utilize the newly supported features.  In the meantime, feel free to dive into the wondrous world of forum play and show us your strategic brilliance!

Stoney, it’s a bit early to say this, but since you just posted -

I am waiting for J3 in our test game.  There is no requirement to attack J3, but as I said in the game thread, it’s probably the best option at this point.

The “all-out” defense of the allies to defend against a possible J3 attack of Wus is really not even that inconveniencing.  I sent 3 ANZAC fighters to Wus that don’t have anything to do anyway, and the US has bought 11 infantry and 4 fighters in her first 2 rounds.  Units that could be put to good use if the J3 attack does not happen.

No, I think the J1, 2, and 3 attack on Wus is a pie in the sky idea.  It’s not practical, and is not high percentage.  Whether Japan attacks on round 3 or pulls back like it was one big bluff, Japan is in a poor situation.  As you said, an India rush (or really, any combination of attacks on India, China, and ANZAC/USA) is preferable.  After 2 rounds, well, let me get the current map for you.  In my estimation, it is not looking good for Japan at all.

Now if J can get USA’s 60, that will help their cause, but J will lose an awful lot of material taking Wus.  China is already getting to be a beast, and without J airpower, will continue to take more territory.

China has 18, UK has 28, ANZAC has 28, and J is clear up in Alaska.

In the 20% or so chance that Wus falls, the minor allies are actually still looking good, I think.  But like I said, let’s wait for J3.

Tragedy v Gamer P40 ANZAC2.AAM

@gamerman01:

The “all-out” defense of the allies to defend against a possible J3 attack of Wus is really not even that inconveniencing.  I sent 3 ANZAC fighters to Wus that don’t have anything to do anyway, and the US has bought 11 infantry and 4 fighters in her first 2 rounds.  Units that could be put to good use if the J3 attack does not happen.

Another “all out” option…

Assuming a five infantry buy US1, then you bought 6 Inf 4 fighters US 2. Thats 10 units and 28 defense. (12+16). At an IPC cost of 58 IPC.

9 Tanks + 1 inf = 29 defense. Costs 57 IPC.

Just a bit more defense.

Thanks for the idea, squire, but tanks are not as conducive for future transporting.  Only 1 tank per transport.

@gamerman01:

Thanks for the idea, squire, but tanks are not as conducive for future transporting.  Only 1 tank per transport.

Thats true. I was just thinking, if the point was “all out defense” then what options would be feasible.

And the game is decided on J3.  US and ANZAC remaining forces - 3 ANZAC fighters, 5 USA fighters, and 2 USA Tac bombers.

One Jap Strat bomber limps away from the battlefield, and all that’s left of the Jap fleet, a damaged battleship, a destroyer, a cruiser, and 3 transports face imminent destruction in USA3.

This pretty much concludes the J-1 –>Alaska; J3 Game Over thread.

It’s Game Over, all right.  For Japan.  Fastest way they could possibly lose.  :-)

Thanks for the demonstration, Tragedy, it was fun and interesting.
I recommend strongly against a KUSAF strategy against a good opponent.

@Tragedy:

Not to beat a dead horse, but there is one more thing I need to try, before I can conclude with certainty that this is doesn’t work. (I have received some really good PM’s with some great ideas and feedback).

I’m ready for a rematch whenever you are. Do you mind letting me be Japan one more time?  :-D

No, I don’t mind.  Sounds good - let’s do it.

@Tragedy:

Thanks a ton for your P40 map, its awesome!

You’re very welcome, my pleasure.  Thanks to Attila for the great program.  Did you ever get your toolbar fixed/did you see my post about it in your game?

Where do I go to view these games? It’d be interesting to see each turn play out and to try and tweak it.

@Mino1124:

Where do I go to view these games? It’d be interesting to see each turn play out and to try and tweak it.

There are links to them several posts down.
Or, just go to the “Play Boardgames” section of forums and look for them.

@Mino1124:

Where do I go to view these games? It’d be interesting to see each turn play out and to try and tweak it.

@Tragedy:

Gwlachmai:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=17513.0

gamerman01:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=17514.0

Thanks you 2

Lol maybe when I have a chance to set it up this week I’ll be able to follow all the acronyms. As it is I have a hard time remembering it all.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7842.0
Mino, this link is to a thread that helps people new to this site with abbreviations commonly used.

Thanks for the link I knew about that ome it’s just a lot to temember. My week off I’ll look over it again. Thanks again gamerman.

So my group has completed a game where Japan went for America.  We figure that whether or not Japan wins is dependent on a few things.

I don’t remember whether the final assualt on WUS happened on J3 or J4.  I think it was J4, and they waited until J3 to attack Alaska?  Either way, the statistics were about a 45% chance for Japan to take WUS.  They needed some AA misses to throw it in their favor.

There really is little that the UK and ANZAC player can contribute to the defense of WUS.  The best thing for them to do is go crazy in the absence of the Japanese forces.  By the time America fell, the UK had liberated most of China, and had several rounds to build up a navy with the help of the DEI income.  Australia also had a bonus going on, adding 2 loaded carriers to supplement defense of the UK fleet.

Japan thought about going straight for Australia, but the UK fleet with transports(deploying from  Kwangtung and Kiangsu factories) was already threatening Japan.

While America had fallen, they only gained +10 income from America, +Mexico +Alaska, while giving up on their territories in the Chinese mainland.  They were being out produced by the Allies, and out of position to restablish a hold on the mainland.