Questions on fighting on the mainland with Japan

I DISAGREE with Roc monsters proposed strategy.

Ships - though serving their purpose, will never net you IPC’s, take territories, or win you the game.

for $2 more, spend $10 on a fighter instead of a destroyer.  Focus your builds on getting MEN on the GROUND, in Russia, China, and India.  Use air power - because of it’s effective range, mobility, improved attack, and versatility.

As the allies, my GREATEST HOPE is that Japan keeps building ships.  The more the merrier, because they have NO IMPACT on any theatre of the game, other than the general, and blockable seazones they occupy.

Well Garg, it’s cheap, offensively-powerful subs that will keep the American fleet from advancing.  Fighters can do it, too, but not nearly as efficiently (and therefore effectively).
Naval dominance in the Pacific is just as important as a mainland presence for Japan.
Keeping the American fleet out means you get to keep your islands - more IPCs.

So it’s an indirect method, but ships will get you IPCs.
And being able to convoy Calcutta/Sydney is swinging the economics in your favor as well.

And fighters can’t block.  That’s important as well.

I agree with gargantua key for Japans victory is ruining the allies economy. For China you need to capture yunnan and keep the coastal territories. For UK pacific you need to take malay and all their territories in DEI then you can easily take Calcutta. And for anzac it doesnt matter if you want to take Sidney or Honolulu just destroy anzac navy so they will build more navy and USA might send fleet there so you might get opportunity to land on hawaiji.

Someone wrote about this being an economic game.  I agree, and here is some insight from a business perspective:

China is NOT a major player, but poses a threat if not contained.  In order to mitigate that threat, Japan must take and hold Yunnan or invest resources deeply into a ground war.

Once that objective has been met, you have to re-evaluate your position:

India presents a Single Point of Failure for your mitigating strategy of holding Yunnan which is KEY to your strategy against the Chinese.  To be clear, the SPF is that units purchased in India can reach Yunnan in a single round.  From a business perspective, this is unacceptable.  Your options are to continue to invest in units in Yunnan, or to eliminate that SPF via conquest.

In order to remove the India threat, you will first have to deny it resources through either Conquest (DEI, Borneo, Malaya, Kwangtung) or through Convoy (SZ’s around those territories).  A combination of both Conquest and Convoy should address the resource denial phase.

Once the resources are denied to India, the Conquest and removal of the SPF threat can be accomplished.  This takes planning and “strategery” from the very beginning of the game.

You have to get units into position to attack India, and also have enough of them to minimize your economic loss for accomplishing it.  Further, you have to mitigate defenses in place to prevent your resources from reaching India.  This involves strategic moves on J2 to first remove blockers and then move units through later on.

In effect:

J1: 3 Trn, Take FIC, Yunnan
J2: NB in FIC, clear out SZ37, and either SZ38 or SZ41.  Stage Trn with invasion force in SZ36, NCM fleets to prevent new blockers from arriving.  Assess resource centers of India and Anzac in the South Pacific and setup Subs to Convoy those locations if possible.
J3: Invade India, taking losses in an economic way to further your next objective (Anzac, USA, Fly Aircraft to cover a German advance in Russia, whatever)

I think Subs in the Pacific are one of the most undervalued units for all sides concerned. 
They can Convoy the hotly contested seazones. 
They can be fodder for bigger fleets to take hits. 
They can force the other side to have to address a red chips worth of subs within a fleet due to their first strike ability.

US doesn’t want to buy DD early on, but seeing 6+ Japanese Subs running rampant in the Pacific will make the US reconsider that CV with a Ftr/TacB combo’s strength in a seazone where the aircraft cannot land on the territory.

+1 to the previous.

However the only ships I build as Japan before attacking ANZAC/US are subs and rarely a blocking or anti-sub destroyer. Transports too.

Ships simply aren’t a good investment for Japan.

Every game I find myself too concerned with the US as Japan, and the next time I’m just as concerned.

Sure, the US is big, but they aren’t going to snatch Japan out from under your nose. You don’t need 2 carriers parked off the Western US. Put those to use elsewhere.

Japan doesn’t really need a lot of income if it can deny UK Pacific and ANZAC their income.  Take Malaya, Borneo, any DEIs that they took first, and one of the islands north of Australia if they have Dutch New Guinea.  The rest is a matter of convoy raiding and sinking any transports.  If the overall goal is to win on the Europe map, then don’t overextend Japan to take Sydney or Calcutta.  No need.  Once both of them are basically broke they can’t really do anything to Japan and then its up to the USA to contain Japan.  Keeping UK/ANZAC broke keeps USA busy spending on the Pacific side while Germany works on the Soviets.  Japan can help by marching across the north of Russia and perhaps across China to threaten Stalingrad and make USSR fight a 2 front war.

@Vance:

make USSR fight a 2 front war.

In my opinion the most boring, yet reliable strategy to winning as the Axis.

I prefer the uncommon win by the Japanese because… well, its harder to accomplish.

Attacking Malaya, Borneo, and Dutch islands is all well and good, but Japan begins the game at war with only China. When does Japan attack these Pacific allied territories which would bring them so much $, and also bring the US into the war?

Declare war round 3.  In the meantime you can pick on China.