Hmm…but theoretically, a heavy stack at Pearl on J1 or J2 encourages America to look to Europe giving Japan a freer hand and since it is relatively simple for Japan to get 6 Victory Cities, wouldnt this be wise?
You start with Japan and Kiangsu.
It is relatively simple to get Kwangtung (Hong Kong), Hawaii and Philippines if you crush the American navy early.
That is 5 of 6, all you need is South Wales or India and of the two, India is significantly harder to get, so crush Australia. No? Then Germany only has to posture and make threats while Japan does the hard work. (Since Germany needs either London or Ottowa and both of those are going to be significantly harder for Germany to get than Japan to get Australia.)
Or am I missing something?
I don’t believe so, that is why my initial thoughts make me thing the game favors the axis under the new rules…However, others have been play testing and claim it is very close.
My theory is that most players fight for India and the Australia option is disregarded. I have no idea how many play tests have focused on Hawaii and New South Wales, instead of Calcutta.
It is hard to hold Hawaii sometimes, so I favor taking it last for the win…it is closer to your Production base, and Australia is farther away…this makes liberating New south wales a daunting task for the allies.
When I play the allies, I figure I have time in Europe and I focus on Japan early, goal is building infantry in Australia and Hawaii to force a large Japanese transport build late game. India just buys time. Then I shift to a large Europe effort and later balance out the builds based on board…the Fact that America has to split, handicaps the allies in my opinion. Again, others have done the play testing, I will have to try this as well.