• @shadowguidex:

    No way, because you’re taking out Japanese INF.  The more INF you kill the better - make them earn every single square inch of land because each battle whittles away from of their INF.  Two FTR and two INF make for a nasty island to capture, and if you have a blocking ship there to ruin bombardments, all the better.  It’s a LONG way from Japan to anywhere, especially when you gotta guard those TRN the whole way - and getting the TRN back to Japan is even worse.

    As long as one infantry survives that battle, it’s definitely a losing proposition for you.  I’ve still taken it, and you’ve lost your fighters.  India needs its fighters, and Australia gets a whole lot of utility out of them too - like covering the American fleet in newly taken islands, for example.  Now you don’t get that.  This is great for Japan.  I really don’t care that some of my infantry died.  They’re supposed to.  As long as the Japanese flag is on that island, however many died is fairly irrelevant.  I’ll just evacuate and take some other island next turn.  Infantry aren’t that hard to get from Japan really.  1 DD between Japan and Hawaii means that I don’t need to protect them in SZ 6.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Agreed.  I am willing to trade 5 infantry for 1 British or Australian fighter/tact bomber in the Pacific.  Also willing to trade 2 fighters for the Chinese one.

  • '10

    @Alsch91:

    @shadowguidex:

    No way, because you’re taking out Japanese INF.  The more INF you kill the better - make them earn every single square inch of land because each battle whittles away from of their INF.  Two FTR and two INF make for a nasty island to capture, and if you have a blocking ship there to ruin bombardments, all the better.  It’s a LONG way from Japan to anywhere, especially when you gotta guard those TRN the whole way - and getting the TRN back to Japan is even worse.

    As long as one infantry survives that battle, it’s definitely a losing proposition for you.  I’ve still taken it, and you’ve lost your fighters.  India needs its fighters, and Australia gets a whole lot of utility out of them too - like covering the American fleet in newly taken islands, for example.  Now you don’t get that.  This is great for Japan.  I really don’t care that some of my infantry died.  They’re supposed to.  As long as the Japanese flag is on that island, however many died is fairly irrelevant.  I’ll just evacuate and take some other island next turn.  Infantry aren’t that hard to get from Japan really.  1 DD between Japan and Hawaii means that I don’t need to protect them in SZ 6.

    I also completely agree with Alsch91.
    UK planes are the most precious units for India, and those units can never be replaced with proper Japan play. Spending 2 of them to “protect” an island usually makes no sense.

    @shadowguidex:

    I follow your comments very closely and your opinions are always so skewed towards an outcome you desire…

    Well, so do i with your comments Shadowguidex, and i have to say that what you say of Jennifer is sometimes true with your own comments … Often you’re writing with the same degree of certainty you would have if you were THE  A&A. Oracle…

    Let me just give you an example from one of your last posts :

    @shadowguidex:

    Once the Japanese player begins to build minor IC everywhere, you know he is beaten because he’ll undoubtedly make the error of building tanks, but that’s a fools errand and will lead to nothing.

    At first sight, that might appear a “cute” statement…But when you think of it seriously, you have to conclude that while it is true in a lot of positions, is is also completely false in a lot of other positions…

    I don’t know, maybe you should spend less time tracking down Jennifer’s inacuracies and spend more time thinking about yours…

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    There is no inaccuracy, it was a one time thing.  Never claimed you would ALWAYS be able to do this, nor am I expecting too.  I am not entirely certain you would WANT to fracture yourself in such a way for a modest one round gain.  It did work out very well.

    Another such was the opening round hitting Hawaii and stacking the crud out of SZ 26 before swooping down to take New Zealand and then New South Wales.  Do I expect this to always be possible?  No.  It is not all that hard to stop really, but that does not mean it cannot happen (it did and that opponent was on these boards and if he wishes to make himself known he may do so).  Point in fact, I actually lost that game, despite having all of the Pacific (including Australia).  But I did get all of the Pacific!


  • interesting, wish I had been around for the debate.

    I have come to the same conclusions as Jenn.  If Japan is heading for Calcutta, then why detour through China?  You’re better off diverting to SEAsia where China cannot touch you to support your amphib attack on India.

    The /only/ caveat about this move is you are ceding the coast to China and Japan won’t realistically ever be able to return.  However, since in this strategy the Axis are trying to win on the Europe board, Japan is better off trying to impact that board than try and create their own empire.  Therefore the best ways for Japan to influence the Europe board is to advance quickly through Russia to try and create another front.  To attempt an attack on India to prevent India from reinforcing the Middle East or Moscow.  Finally Japan’s mission is to tie up as much American attention for as long as possible to give Germany the breathing space their need to take Moscow.

    The latest moves I have been experimenting with to try and defeat the 100% Pacific strategy is to have Italy focus on troop builds in Europe.  This means when war comes to Russia Italy can create enough pressure to hold Europe during that crucial round where Germany reinforces the Russian front.  This is all in an attempt to drive to Moscow/Stalingrad as fast as possible, while Italy begins to switch to a more Mediterranean (Cairo) strategy.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I am currently having great success ignoring the Pacific and China (India and Australia as well, of course) and pounding Russia into dust in my current game with EM.  Japan’s earning next to nothing with India, Australia and China earning equivalent income and yes, I will most likely never be able to take China with Japan but with 6 loaded carriers and a couple battleships, and with America going Kill Italy First, it seems to be working out okay.  Not great, but okay.

    Russia just lost 6 Infantry, 7 MI, 19 Armor and an AA GUN taking out 23 MI, 11 Armor, Artillery, 2 Fighters, Tactical and an AA GUn taking out the Japanese stack, but this leaves Russia naked against Germany.

    It wasnt the best trade ever in a game, but it seems to be effective.  Yet again, I would not expect this to happen often, hell the defending AA Gun got 50% accuracy and that’s not to be expected routinely either.

  • Customizer

    Hey Jen, I know what you mean about those fluky AA Gun successes.  I once had a Sealion go very bad for me because of that.  I went in with 2 fighters, 3 tacs and 1 bomber.  The dang British AA Gun killed 1 fighter, 2 tacs and the bomber.  2/3 of my airforce whacked out just like that.

    So the way you guys play Japan is more or less as fodder for the Allies so less pressure is on Germany/Italy so that they might win in Europe?  You don’t try to have Japan win on the Pacific side?  Some people have said that if USA goes mostly for Europe, then it is somewhat easy for Japan to get their 6 victory cities and win the game for the Axis.  If USA goes all Pacific, then Japan is probably doomed anyway and best choice would probably be to try and tie up US forces as long as possible so Germany can take down Russia.  However, if you see US going heavy in the Atlantic, don’t you want to try to win with Japan?

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

28

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts