What Turn to Attack with Japan?


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    After thinking about the long term logistics and economics of the game a fair bit, I am getting comfortable with my Germany strategy.

    What puzzles me though is the Japan entry in the war and how it may affect the European board.

    My current idea for Japan is the following:

    Turn 1:

    Build 3 transports, 1 Mech

    Declare war on US, UK, Anzac

    Combat 1: Repeat of Prince of Wales sinking, with 2 strategic bombers, cruiser from 20 and fighter from Formosa.

    Combat 2: Land 1 infantry in Borneo (infantry from Kiangsi), Transport from zone 20, covers with fleet from Carolinas

    Combat 3:  Attack Phillipines

    Ground battle, 1 tank, 1 artillery and 2 infantry (2 remaining transport)
    Tac bomber / figther from Carolinas carrier

    See battle, 2 subs (zone 6 and 19), zone 19 battleship, zone 19 destroyer, cruiser from zone 6 and 2 carriers + planes from zone 6.

    Combat 4: Take chahar with 1 infantry from Jehol

    Combat 5: 2 infantry from Siam take French Indo

    Combat 6: Attack Kwantung
    1 Art from Kiangsi
    2 INF from Kwangsi
    2 Tac from Japan
    1 fighter from Okinawa
    1 fighter from Kiangsu
    1 tac from Kiangsu

    Combat 7: Attack Anwhe
    1 Infantry and 1 Art from Jehol
    3 infantry and 1 art from Kiangsu
    3 infantry and 1 art from Shantung
    1 Mech from Mandchuria

    Combat 8: Attack Hunan
    2 Inf from Kiangsi
    2 fighters from Mandchuria (Goes to Kwangsi)
    2 tac from Mandchuria (goes to Kwangsi)

    Non Combat
    4 Infantry from Korea into Mandchuria
    6 Infantry from Mandchuria in Jehol

    In Kwangsi
    5 fighters (2 from Mandchuria, 1 Okinawa, 1 Formosa, 1 Kiangsu)
    5 tactical bombers
    2 bombers
    1 ART
    1 Inf

    In Anwhe

    7 Inf
    1 Mec
    3 Artillery

    Leave in Japan to protect against Hawai fleet
    2 DD
    1 BB
    3 fighters (1 from Korea, 2 from Japan)

    Losses
    1 cruiser zone 20
    1 infantry in Kwantung
    1 infantry in Hunnan
    2 infantry in Phillipines
    Total: 24 IPC

    Japan collects 40 IPC

    The result of Turn 1 is:

    a) Weakened UK southeast fleet by destroying battleship, forces UK to spend all money on fleet and potentially pull out of the Med to reinforce India, giving relief to Italy.
    b) took 7 IPC off UK bankrolll with Hong Kong and Borneo
    c) UK / Anzac are not in position to take Dutch islands
    d) japan well positioned to attack Malaya (Pounding on India more and crippling Anzac further)
    e) China is pushed back a little bit and a decent stack of land units is moving down China
    f) US loses Philipines (2 IPC + 5 IPC bonus)
    g) preservation of Japanese Navy, Fleet off philipines can easily pull back to Japan as necesary
    h) There is not much that India, China and Anzac or US can do in the immediate to retaliate.

    Obvious disadvantage is that US gets more income immediately and has the initiative in Europe. For example. US forces could head straight for Gibraltar and link up with a portion of the British navy that survives. But, a critical portion of my European strategy is to control Gibraltar…

    Let’s assume this continues:

    On Turn 2, Japan:

    May buy a carrier if US fleet is threatening
    6 land units (infantry and mech infantry)
    Maybe something else (e.g., or another transport)

    Takes Malaya (UK down to 9, assuming persia was taken)
    Takes Shan States to start putting pressure on India (UK down to 😎
    If Malaya is weak and if not costly to protect transport, take one of the Dutch Islands
    Navy destroys blockers off 37, 42, 41, 38 and may attack fleet in Zone 39
    Stays quiet and China, takes free territory, but avoid battles while moving south
    Japan drops 6 land units on mainland with transport built (Kiangsu)
    Watch moves of US navy and Anzac for transports and counter attacks on islands.

    You note that I am not cutting the Burma road, but given the firepower in Hunnan and Kwangsi, the Chinese will build up stay back on Turn 2.

    Meanwhile, the Italians focus on coming through Irak to squeeze in India good.

    In Turn 3, japan builds up navy to handle US and keep expanding his grasp on the Islands and builds.

    In Turn 4, India should fall and Japan will have plenty to face China, at least on a defensive basis (planes)

    I think the US would need to react to this and spend a decent deal of IPCs in the Pacific?

    My strategy with Germany is to steadily build a counter to UK / US invation while grinding into Russia with some help with the Italians (main objective is Leningrad and keeping Norway with a strong Navy.

    Thoughts?

    I’ve considered a Japan attack turn 2 strategy, but in this case I can’t seem to benefit as much from the initiative (don’t count on mistakes on the Allies’s players part, he’s quite good)



  • hmmm, so what are your ultimate goals for Japan?  Capture of 6VC’s?  Why do you not also hit Sealion with this strategy, that would force UK to decide if they want to use their fleet in the Med to defend London or India.  Also, how are you scrambling a ftr from korea to defend the fleet in sz6 without an AB purchase?

    I like some of the ideas posted here, I would change a few, for instance I see no need to take FIC on J1, the allies are not collecting for it, it is not needed in your plan as an IC place, and it seems to be a territory that the Allies will eventually take back from you. I think a better move would be 1 inf in Shah states J1 to try and draw units out of Malaya.

    I have been using Japan to assist the Axis on the Europe board, a Japanese push through Siberia pretty much seals the deal for Moscow.  I would also be worried about my chances at Sealion by bringing the US into the war J1.  Now US can build a CV on the first turn and fly aircraft to UK or defend Gibraltar, how do you contest Gibraltar with this move?


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    My ultimate goal is for Japan to become very predominant (IPC from DEI is juicy) and work using the overall logistics of the game to the Axis’ advantage:

    1. Force US to spend most IPC in Pacific, therefore using Japan’s navy and airforce. Logistics work against the US here if US has to attack. Japan is always a turn ahead and has island / scramble / plane recovery / naval base repair advantage. Taking India forces the US to not conceed Hawai, it has to hold it.

    2. Seems important to prevent India and Australia to become significant (they can with the DEI and the special conditions, the UK forces are significant if they get the chance to regroup, e.g., BB off Malays), need to keep those powers small and ineffective.

    3. Similarly, in Europe, German works on using its logitics the best. It expands in Russia to weaken it and grow in strength, but does not ovextend. Keeping lines short and being patient. Preserve and build air force and Navy to make Allies’ life complicated (and allowing Italians to prosper in the Med). Without very strong US support, the threat will not be sufficient to have Germany in danger. Be clever with use of airforce as can help on Eastern front and Western Front.

    4. IF Japan manages to hold out in Pacific, (especially if US does a mistake), Japan should be able to go around China with its land power and clean up the middle east / Threaten Russia / link up with Italy.

    I don’t like the US reinforcing Europe very quickly (including gibraltar and Uk, question is wether Germany can live wth this in the long run)…  Also the US is getting a lot of IPCs on Turn 2 and 3.

    As part of this plan, Sealion is a possibility if a mistake is made by UK, the German buy is one carrier, 1 sub, 1 transport (I’ve also considered 2 transports). I don’t think Sealion has a chance to succeed with the US in the war, however (e.g., can move planes over quickly). The key point of building out the Navy and transport is to take Leningrad, hold Norway and force Allies to invest heavily in Naby before any ground troops land on continent (subs and planes are cheap)

    So I guess in my plan, the Axis would be gaining a long term advantage by being selectively aggressive and conservative and using logistics to their advantage (and in the hope of the allies losing patience / waisting resources). I don’t think IPC parity is needed to sustain the advantage in those conditions, and the hope is that agressive moves on japan’s part at the beginning are going to help close the gap enough.

    I am moving into FIC to preserve my forces, gain more IPC and put pressure on Yunnan to avoid China threatening my planes in Kwangsi (I thought about the alternative and thought that my trops in Shan States would be wiped out anywa, leaving everything exposed thereafter)

    The fighter from Korea is mobing to Japan to cover the fleet.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    To make it clear, it is not realistic for Germany to go after London or Moscow in the first 5-6 turns of the game with this approach (Japan does the land conquests via India and climb back with Caucausus).  I don’t think attacking Siberia would help (but I would not mind setting a trap for the Siberian troops if they become too ambitious).

    With this strategy, Germany is the Anvil, Japan is the hammer and Italy is used to punch holes, make blocks, harrass and capture the oil fields.



  • I would like to here from anybody who has won in the Pacific (against an opponent worth their wieght in salt) after attacking the US J1.



  • I agree with the theroy presented here. I have always advocated that Japan should be played as a power in its own right, and not just to force a win in Europe. The timming is the only thing I disagree with. It’s difficult it judge when the best time is for Japan to strike, there a far to many variables, but I think turn 1 is too soon. Japan gains a 10IPC bonus for not being at war with the west and not occupying French positions (which I think is kinda stupid but oh well). Japan is better suited to use these bonuses until the west’s hand is forced, usually at the end of turn 3, begining of turn 4 at the latest.

    Weather to strike on J3 or see if you can wait till J4 will always depend on the individual situation, but I perfer to strike on J3, just to be safe. I had a very big suprise one game when, UK India launched an attack on its turn 3 and totally screwed up my over all plan.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    I would like to here from anybody who has won in the Pacific (against an opponent worth their wieght in salt) after attacking the US J1.

    OOB? np lol.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    The overall impression I get is that people believe Japan will end up getting wacked by the US and unable to capitalize on taking the DEI and India?

    I may indeed look at the naval builds more closely (over several turns) to see how long the initial Japan naval and air superiority enables Japan to hang in there.

    If Japan does not attach on turn 1, the Brits can regroup and can start grabbing the DEI and become a more serious threat. If Japan attacks on G2, the allies have some option to counter. Of course Japan gets 10 IPC and the US is deprived of several IPCs…



  • Attacking the US fleet J1 will not get you any closer to taking and holding San Fransisco. Better to go after Calcutta.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    @Young:

    Attacking the US fleet J1 will not get you any closer to taking and holding San Fransisco. Better to go after Calcutta.

    Agreed, none of the move above gets to the US fleet in the Hawai zone. Still planning to attack Phillipines on J1


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    So many threads about what Germany should do, looks like people don’t have ideas for what’s best to play with Japan…

    On another forum, one guy suggested to get straight at Russia’s throat on J1 and more or less ignore everything else. I have my doubts!


  • '10

    I like round two, or sometimes three, depending on both nearby positioning and Europe.

    First round purchase has evolved into a minor on the mainland and two transports.  In a long game, Japan absolutely has to have production on the mainland to keep up with China and India.  I look to be able to take Phillipines, Malaya (tough, but worth it), Borneo, Kwangtung, and maybe Java the round I attack.  I also try to use most, maybe all, of my subs to attack Anzac income and force them to build destroyers and move them the wrong direction.

    Can’t bring myself to attack first round.  I think about it, but I just don’t see it.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    @eudemonist:

    I like round two, or sometimes three, depending on both nearby positioning and Europe.

    First round purchase has evolved into a minor on the mainland and two transports.  In a long game, Japan absolutely has to have production on the mainland to keep up with China and India.  I look to be able to take Phillipines, Malaya (tough, but worth it), Borneo, Kwangtung, and maybe Java the round I attack.  I also try to use most, maybe all, of my subs to attack Anzac income and force them to build destroyers and move them the wrong direction.

    Can’t bring myself to attack first round.  I think about it, but I just don’t see it.

    How do you deal with combined threat of US navy moving to Haiwai, the UK regrouping / building its fleet and Anzac sending fighters over to help the UK?

    IS the UK / Anzac taking over the DEI?



  • in the most recent game im playing, i moved my entire fleet to z26, save 2 trns, and 1 loaded AC, this way, the us has to choose between portecting hawaii, or the mainland…. or they might not even realizeyou can get to the mainland.


  • Customizer

    @Omega1759:

    On another forum, one guy suggested to get straight at Russia’s throat on J1 and more or less ignore everything else. I have my doubts!

    Yeah, I agree with you.  I don’t think that is a good strategy, at least not for Japan’s well being.  If the Axis are playing a game to simply win on the Europe board, and Germany’s attack into Russia is going pretty good, then perhaps a Japanese thrust into Russia would be good.  The farther they get, the less IPCs Russia has to defend against the German onslaught.  It’s even possible that a Japanese force can threaten Moscow.
    However, this would be near suicide for Japan itself.  For one thing, all those Russian territories produce very little income for Japan and you would be probably giving up on getting the DEI, Malaya, Philippines and Kwangtung.  Those territories nearly double Japan’s income plus include 2 victory cities.  Also, the Chinese are eventually going to build up enough strength and with British help will start taking those expensive coastal territories, cutting Japan’s income even further.  So Japan will start to make less money than they started with.  Finally, USA could quickly build up enough navy to not only smash the Japanese navy but possibly even invade Japan.  All this to help Germany’s conquest on the other side of the world.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    @knp7765:

    @Omega1759:

    On another forum, one guy suggested to get straight at Russia’s throat on J1 and more or less ignore everything else. I have my doubts!

    Yeah, I agree with you.  I don’t think that is a good strategy, at least not for Japan’s well being.  If the Axis are playing a game to simply win on the Europe board, and Germany’s attack into Russia is going pretty good, then perhaps a Japanese thrust into Russia would be good.  The farther they get, the less IPCs Russia has to defend against the German onslaught.  It’s even possible that a Japanese force can threaten Moscow.
    However, this would be near suicide for Japan itself.  For one thing, all those Russian territories produce very little income for Japan and you would be probably giving up on getting the DEI, Malaya, Philippines and Kwangtung.  Those territories nearly double Japan’s income plus include 2 victory cities.  Also, the Chinese are eventually going to build up enough strength and with British help will start taking those expensive coastal territories, cutting Japan’s income even further.  So Japan will start to make less money than they started with.  Finally, USA could quickly build up enough navy to not only smash the Japanese navy but possibly even invade Japan.  All this to help Germany’s conquest on the other side of the world.

    I never viewed the game as a victory city play, always tried to win total world domination and that’s an entirely different ruleset. I am wondering if those strategies focused on winning one side of the map could result inthe Axis really winning in the long run… If Japan is dealt with one turn after the Europeans Axis manage to capture their victory cities, I can’t see how the Axis can survive in the long run.



  • I would try your idea but each time we reach a VC win, both players are wayyy tired and ready to be done.  If you can find someone who is willing to play to the bitter end, then I would suggest trying this strategy and seeing if you can then resuscitate the Japanese.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    @JimmyHat:

    I would try your idea but each time we reach a VC win, both players are wayyy tired and ready to be done.  If you can find someone who is willing to play to the bitter end, then I would suggest trying this strategy and seeing if you can then resuscitate the Japanese.

    Generally, we would look at the IPC count and the board to see who would win at that point. We don’t need to fight to the end, we give up when the other side has a sustainable advantage that cannot be turned.

    After the scenario where both Germany and Japan go after russia…

    Would have US at 70, UK at 30, India in the 25-30s, Anzac in the 20s, China in the 20s  (160 total) against:

    Japan in the 30s (Japan + Russia soon to be dead)
    Germany in the 60s (original + russia less Norway / iron ore)
    Italy in the 20s (can’t be that successful if India is strong)

    110…

    I think we would consider at that point that the allies have won…


  • '10

    @Omega1759:

    How do you deal with combined threat of US navy moving to Haiwai, the UK regrouping / building its fleet and Anzac sending fighters over to help the UK?

    IS the UK / Anzac taking over the DEI?

    I do my best to cat-and-mouse with the Americans…destroyer blocks work o.k., and can cause them to spread their fleet.  The U.K. fleet, even after regrouping, isn’t all that tough to take out, and they don’t often have the cash to buy more ships.

    The DEI is usually 3/4, if not entirely, enemy-controlled by the time I spring, but usually with one (at most two) infantry per.  Most often there are two Zacks on Java, an empty Borneo, and maybe one each in Celebes and Sumatra.  I usually hit the lightly defended ones in my first war round, along with any U.K./ANZAC boats that can support them, and clean up the others next round.  U.S. is rarely in a position to support them.

    The hardest part is keeping the U.S. out of a position where they can bring their weight to bear.  I dodge 'em (and occasionally leave juicy targets for them simply to get them to go after them and be out of position) while trying to secure (most of) China and the South Pacific, choking Anzerk with subs. Try not to go head-to-head until you’re cranking good money, and really not even then if you can help it.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    On your point in bold, the UK India fleet will be:

    1 Carrier built turn 1, equiped with 2 planes
    1 BB
    1 Cruiser
    1 Destroyer
    1 Destroyer from South Africa
    1 French destroyer
    Potentially the Egypt Aircraft Carrier and Cruiser and any Turn 2 purchases (if UK takes DEI, they will have money to buy more ships)
    Potential to use Anzac planes

    Combine this with threat from US fleet and I think you would be outnumbered by Turn 3.

    @eudemonist:

    @Omega1759:

    How do you deal with combined threat of US navy moving to Haiwai, the UK regrouping / building its fleet and Anzac sending fighters over to help the UK?

    IS the UK / Anzac taking over the DEI?

    I do my best to cat-and-mouse with the Americans…destroyer blocks work o.k., and can cause them to spread their fleet.  The U.K. fleet, even after regrouping, isn’t all that tough to take out, and they don’t often have the cash to buy more ships.

    The DEI is usually 3/4, if not entirely, enemy-controlled by the time I spring, but usually with one (at most two) infantry per.  Most often there are two Zacks on Java, an empty Borneo, and maybe one each in Celebes and Sumatra.  I usually hit the lightly defended ones in my first war round, along with any U.K./ANZAC boats that can support them, and clean up the others next round.  U.S. is rarely in a position to support them.

    The hardest part is keeping the U.S. out of a position where they can bring their weight to bear.  I dodge 'em (and occasionally leave juicy targets for them simply to get them to go after them and be out of position) while trying to secure (most of) China and the South Pacific, choking Anzerk with subs. Try not to go head-to-head until you’re cranking good money, and really not even then if you can help it.


  • '10

    Oh yeah…but they aren’t combined with the U.S. Fleet by turn 3.  It’s conceivable the Brits could meet up with the U.S. by 3, but they wouldn’t be doing it off of India.  I don’t usually see that happen, though.  U.S. often hangs around Hawaii turn one and two, waiting for its first build to hit the water and then catch up, leaving them starting from Hawaii on their third turn.

    The Japs can easily overpower the Calcutta navy by itself, I think, even if they do build a carrier first round (never seen that, not sure I think it’s a good idea, but o.k.).  Japs have two fully loaded carriers, even if they leave on to mess with America, plus a cruiser or two, a battleship at least, and a farkton of planes (including a couple of bombers).  I’d be happy to see them building nothing but navy, as it means I’m likely winning on the mainland (I usually purchase a minor factory first round).

    If I can pull the U.K. boats from the Med and Africa to my side of the board, that makes me pretty happy as well.  I probably won’t be winning that game, but Italy better own the damn Med, and hopefully German U-Boats will be raiding off of western Africa.  Could probably still knock those out, though, I think.

    The only way the Medfica boats could meet the Americans, to get them ALL in one place on round three, would be with the starting American fleet (no builds) in, what, Malaya or something, maybe?


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    The UK / US fleets don’t need to meet to be an issue for Japan.

    In start of UK Turn 3, the UK fleet I talked about can be assembled in India. It’s available for counterattack on any Japan fleet(s) that would want to grab the DEI. In order for DEI Japanese fleet to survive, it preferably needs a couple of carriers. The deterrent will probably result in Japan being much more prudent about invading the DEI

    In the meantime, the US navy is building up in Hawai. This means Japan can’t leave it’s own sea zone too weak either.

    3 AC
    1 BB
    2 Cruis
    2 DD
    1 Sub
    5 FG
    1 Tac

    Another option would be for the Jap navy to attack the UK navy in the india zone. However, on top of the fleet I mentioned, there are the 2 anzac fighters that can be landed on the carrier, making the rest of the RAF available for scramble. To send all this at the bottom of the ocean is possible for Japan, but it will come at a cost (not mentioning that UK could block you if you really bring everything south).

    @eudemonist:

    Oh yeah…but they aren’t combined with the U.S. Fleet by turn 3.  It’s conceivable the Brits could meet up with the U.S. by 3, but they wouldn’t be doing it off of India.  I don’t usually see that happen, though.  U.S. often hangs around Hawaii turn one and two, waiting for its first build to hit the water and then catch up, leaving them starting from Hawaii on their third turn.

    The Japs can easily overpower the Calcutta navy by itself, I think, even if they do build a carrier first round (never seen that, not sure I think it’s a good idea, but o.k.).  Japs have two fully loaded carriers, even if they leave on to mess with America, plus a cruiser or two, a battleship at least, and a farkton of planes (including a couple of bombers).  I’d be happy to see them building nothing but navy, as it means I’m likely winning on the mainland (I usually purchase a minor factory first round).

    If I can pull the U.K. boats from the Med and Africa to my side of the board, that makes me pretty happy as well.  I probably won’t be winning that game, but Italy better own the damn Med, and hopefully German U-Boats will be raiding off of western Africa.  Could probably still knock those out, though, I think.

    The only way the Medfica boats could meet the Americans, to get them ALL in one place on round three, would be with the starting American fleet (no builds) in, what, Malaya or something, maybe?


  • '10

    Heh, I didn’t say it would be easy.  Just sharing my experience with how it usually goes in our games.  Again, Calcutta building a CV first round would tickle me pink, as would U.K. sending the Med fleet east.  Sending Anzac fighters to India gives me a similar warm 'n fuzzy.

    I think it’s cool that they’ve got it set up to where you’re tempted to strike with Japan round one.  It’s just not tempting enough, for me personally.



  • Have you already tried this in a game? It depends on tour opponent’s reaction, until then its guessing. I personally do not think it is worth it, mainly because you unleash the US as a war machine and you give them the initiative, not in the last place in the European theater. I also think the UK fleet in the Med is better used against Italy than against Japan.


  • 2017 2016 '13 '12

    I tried it in one game and went after Pearl Harbor on Turn 1. I pursued and destroyed the US Navy, but at ridiculous level of losses (my opponent rolled 9 out of 9 dice spot on during the first round of battle)

    So no, I have not tried this again, but obviously thinking about it.

    The US gains some tactical flexibility (especially in Europe).

    If US focuses solely on Europe, I would think Japan can pull out the victory cities before Germany falls.

    If US focuses solely on Japan, I’ve looked at how purchases / moves play out, and it seems like Japan is able to use its air force to maintain naval parity by building carriers (see below)

    This below assume that Anzac and UK don’t cause too much trouble. Basically, the Japanese air force is worth 222 IPCs, what use are you getting for it if you don’t attack early?

    The numbers below show how the board would look like at the beginning of the US turn. Important to watch is the attack value of the third column (Hawai) against the defense value of the first column (Japan). The second column represents the Japanese fleet that should take care of the UK / India, along with transports built Turn 1 and a ground push.

    Turn 2 US Turn
    Japan JP Other US Hawai US Cal
    AC 2 2 1 2
    BB 1 1 1 0
    Cruis 0 1 2 0
    DD 2 2 2 0
    Sub 0 2 1 0
    FG 5 2 1 4
    Tac 2 2 1 0

    Value 38 31 23 12
    Hits 15 15 11 8

    Turn 3 US Turn
    Japan JP Other US Hawai US Cal
    AC 4 2 3 1
    BB 1 1 1 0
    Cruis 0 1 2 0
    DD 2 2 2 0
    Sub 0 2 1 5
    FG 7 2 5 1
    Tac 4 2 1 1

    Value 56 31 35 17
    Hits 23 15 19 9

    Turn 4 US Turn
    Japan JP Other US Hawai US Cal
    AC 6 2 4 1
    BB 1 1 1 0
    Cruis 0 1 2 0
    DD 2 2 2 0
    Sub 0 2 6 5
    FG 9 2 6 1
    Tac 6 2 2 1

    Value 74 31 52 17
    Hits 31 15 28 9

    Turn 5 US Turn
    Japan JP Other US Hawai US Cal
    AC 7 0 5 1
    BB 2 0 1 0
    Cruis 1 0 2 0
    DD 4 0 2 0
    Sub 2 0 11 5
    FG 10 0 7 1
    Tac 7 0 3 1

    Value 96 0 69 17
    Hits 42 0 37 9


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 22
  • 12
  • 43
  • 43
  • 16
  • 17
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games

45
Online

13.4k
Users

33.8k
Topics

1.3m
Posts