• Sponsor

    Looking to refine my Japan strategy, what are your thoughts on a J1 attack vs. a J2 attack.

  • I usually would go J2 just for the extra logistical movements and getting some early hits done in China.  I haven’t played Japan too often so that’s just my humble opinion 🙂

  • TripleA

    This survey was done several times. After each survey the curve shifted closer to J1. I think it is close between J1 and J2.

    To be honest I think they are on par, which is why I prefer J1, sooner I get rolling the more fun I will have.

    At this point, it is just preference. I have not done J2 DOW in ages… every time I think about how I am going to setup for J2 DOW… I just end up declaring war on J1 anyway lol.

  • TripleA

    I land my bombers with the rest of my air. I do pretty much what I do on my thread, some small adjustments have been made.

    As far as dice games go, I might shift back to J2 dow because losing phil @ 1 % odds is brutal, I noticed when that happens I get super screwed. 6 high rolling units should beat 2 inf and a fighter SIGH. But I don’t let that stop me anymore… I mean it happens about as often as germany failing france (despite everything sent).

  • '16 '15 '10

    That’s a good point about dicing on J1 Cow.  It would be a good statistics/math problem to calculate the risk of dicing on J1 and apply it to an analysis of whether J1 or J2 or better.  IMHO J1 is best IF you get average (low luck) rolls, but there have been many occasions when I got diced and I felt I would have been better off with a more conservative J2 approach.

    Grasshopper, I also attacked the anzac dd/tpt for my first few J1 games, but I gave up on the idea, as my results were rather poor, and generally I’ll get that transport on J2 anyway….so I can’t justify the risk.

    Ultimately, J1 and J2 are both good and you are in position to win the Pacific war with either.

  • Hey new user, but I have occasionally read posts in the past.

    I’ve played the game numerous times and I actually believe that a J3 attack is usually the best, unless allies player blunders and leaves targets.  This will aslo give the Axis player in Europe time to attack Russia.  Even with a turn 3 hit, a good Japanese player should be able to run over the allies in India in just several more turns and hold an extreme IPC advantage

  • TripleA

    I disagree.

    There is no real reason to delay war until round 3 for Japan. The USA bonus income is lower than what you would gain from attacking on Japan round 2. We can count right now.

    phil +2J -2USA
    Kwang +3J -3UK
    Shan +1J-1UK
    Malaya +3J-3UK
    Borneo +4J -4UK

    That is 26 right there. Plus you can capture one more island, say celebes. +3 Japan.
    29 ipc. USA bonus is +20. That is 9 ipc advantage you could have going to war on Japan 2. (OK so Japan gets a +10 bonus for not being at war, but french indochina is worth 2, so if you are going to include that you still get +1 ipc advantage)

    The question is, do you really want to put off a series of battles for the later rounds? The better players will take advantage of this. Also if the allies take 2 islands on round 1, they will collect that income for 2-3 rounds. You want to give that up too?

  • I understand the IPC conditions.  You do lose 20 IPC with Japan in bonuses for not being at war for those two rounds.  It also gives Germany time to fight the Soviets unencumbered.  I personally am curious how a turn 1 hit would go, as I have thought of it several times.  The Malaysia battle does not carry great odds, and neither does the Phillipines battle.  It also makes it difficult to get rid of China, which a turn 3 hit allows you to get rid of by turn 4 or 5 at the latest.

    I also play with very expertised allies players, and allowing them to put pressure on Germany right away could slow the German advance to Russia, and allow a good allied player to fly fighters from the middle east into Russia making it impossible to take over Moscow.

    I am interested in trying a turn 1 hit, as it may work well.  But if you play it right a turn 3 hit should allow you to accomplish near domination within 5-7 rounds

  • 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Alas, J4 here is my preferred rout.  It just takes that long to get enough transports etc together and a harbor and more naval units.

  • In all honesty the ONLY real reason why japan would wait past turn 2, is if he wants to give Germany more time on russia.  It actually helps Japan if Japan declares earlier since it closes the economic gap soo quickly.

  • TripleA

    Easy to save Russia. Just fly fighters in. Anzac often gets 3 fighters on Java, which go to india, which go to Russia when Russia needs it. UK has air in the region too. That goes to russia… so far 6 air. Europe uk air comes in that is 10?

    10 fighters fly in.

    Also delayed Japan war does not necessarily mean weak china. UK pac + China merge at yunnan can be brutal.

  • '16 '15 '10


    In all honesty the ONLY real reason why japan would wait past turn 2, is if he wants to give Germany more time on russia.  It actually helps Japan if Japan declares earlier since it closes the economic gap soo quickly.

    Similarly, if Japan doesn’t declare by J2, then in many scenarios UK should declare and get the extra +15.

    True, this could keep USA out of the war for another turn (though without income diminution), but Japan pays a price by not taking the strategically essential Philippines on J3 (or the also important FIC, if Japan wants the +10).  As Cow notes, an early declaration by UK can also be advantageous if it helps China.

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Holding the Americans in z101 until round 4 could be useful if Germany is taking a fast run at Moscow, building tanks/mechs the first 2 rounds and then bombers to intimidate Russia into full turtle then Moscow capitulation.  With a schedule like that Germany can devote its round 4 build to stacking up France in preparation to counterattack a D-day invasion that comes round 5 at the earliest.

    So I wonder if Japan could do anything in China to entice UK into Yunnan?  Maybe some kind of fake India crush setup?  Replace a sealion threat that slows down Barbarossa with an India crush threat that allows both Japan and Germany to do stuff to Russia as well as UK/ANZAC all the while keeping USA stuck in neutral?  Get Malaya and the DEIs first, then Philippines and FIC round 4, maybe Calcutta round 5?

  • Why not attack as allies on UK Pac 2?

    If Japan passed on a DOW, UK and Anzac get 3 NOs by attacking and can stack Yunnan.

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    I guess the downside to UK pacific declaring war on round 2 would be that if Japan has enough transports they can probably grab Malaya, Borneo, Kwangtung and all 4 Dutch colonies and still keep USA neutral for another turn.  But they can do most of that anyway, so I guess the incentive for Uk to declare war on round 2 just for the NOs is pretty strong.  But anyway this is only in the unusual case that Japan is holding off declaring war first.

  • J1 attack.

    I’ve been successful with J2 and J3 attacks, but am always open to new ideas.  I spent a lot of time analyzing a good J1 attack, but could not find anything that could even compare to a J2 or J3 attack.  What is a blueprint for a successful J1 attack?  Am I just missing something?

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Look for Cow’s Japan Playbook posted on here in the Global 1940 thread

  • '16 '15 '10


    J1 attack.

    I’ve been successful with J2 and J3 attacks, but am always open to new ideas.  I spent a lot of time analyzing a good J1 attack, but could not find anything that could even compare to a J2 or J3 attack.  What is a blueprint for a successful J1 attack?  Am I just missing something?

    The blueprint is fairly obvious–kill as much Allied material as you can.

    Total IPC value of the Allied material (not counting China) destroyed on J1=56.

    Total ipc value of losses to Japan in these attacks (assuming average rolls, a scenario that favors Japan)=19 + 3 lost at Yunnan considering that attack won’t be as strong.  So 22.

    Japan NO forfeited=10

    USA NO +20 and Anzac +10=30

    Extra ipcs gained by Japan=10
    Ipcs lost by Allies=8
    1 ipc lost to Japan not taking Hunan

    If you add all this up Japan comes out ahead by 11 ipcs.

    Now that is not the end of the argument, because Allies gain strategically by having USA in the war earlier, including +3 from Brazil.  Also, sometimes Japan gets diced in one of these battles and loses a fighter which negates the gain.

    However, Japan has also made important strategic gains, including capturing 2 key islands without sacrificing units, and is able to put down 2 ics in ideal locations on J2.  They are in great position to wage a war on China or India.

    I’m quite open to the possibility that J2 is actually better but I think J1 has great strengths.

  • How does China turn out with a J1 attack?  Are you still able to know them out by J4 or latest J5 with a J1 attack? or do they stick around for the game?

  • 2020 '18 '17 '15

    I disagree with the flying Anzac/India planes into Russia.  If the allies move their planes out of the theater, they would hand a Pacific victory to a competent Japanese player.  If they go for a J3 or J4 India crush move, it becomes even easier without any Indian planes.  then if they double back for AUS and didn’t take nearly as many land losses, and ANZAC has no defensive planes, it’s pretty much giving them another victory city.

    it would require substantial US spending in the Pacific, which might offset any fighter advantage.

  • Sponsor

    I was leaning toward a J2 attack, however, once I calculated that it was impossible to claim the $5 NO for the Islands at the end of turn 2, I choose to stick with the J1 attack.

Suggested Topics

  • 23
  • 13
  • 34
  • 6
  • 14
  • 11
  • 11
  • 2
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys