Did not mean to imply I was ignoring China/India at all.Â Just no reason to go full throttle after them if you have a long game planned for Japan in the Pacific.Â Without any help from USA/ANZAC the powers of China/India are not that strong.Â You can’t just let them go unhindered cause they’ll just mass up a super stack of infantry, but you can keep trading the Burma road for quite a while if you divert 8-12 IPC a round (income depending) on pushing the US into the Atlantic.Â It just doesn’t lead to a round 5-7 sack of Calcutta if you do.Â
Not a huge fan of always going hardcore for Moscow and Calcutta - it’s so BORING to do the same thing in every game. lol
I was adressing the OP, sorry for the confusion :-).
About the OP’s strategy in general:
I did it once so it can definately work. But I think it is more of an opportunity to grab if you see it is there.
The only way I can see this working is if you can plan ahead and grab Hawaii/Sydney the same turn as Germany takes India.
The problem with Hawaii/Sydney is, if you take it, your remaining (and possibly crippled) IJN must stay there and must constantly (and heavily) be reinforced. This opens up the doors at the far end from where you are boldly staying (where no1 has ever… ;-)). IOW: if you are camping at Hawaii, you will most likely loose the DEI and SEAsia so go there as late as you possibly can to prevent camping.
In the game I did it, I was only able to do so because the USA was spending too much on Europe and so I grabbed Hawaii late in the game. In order to not loose any of the other Japanese VC I had to contain India+ ANZAC as well. Since Germany was loosing in Europe anyway, I decided to march it’s army to India. The initial German approach was full focus into Russia, without any naval builds and the battle for Calcutta would still have been tricky. The massive US fleet in the med could still have liberated India, but I was able to surprise them. By the time the US realized what I was doing, it was too late. India would be liberated 1 turn too late…
If the USA had spent more in the PAC and less in Europe, this plan would not have worked because A) Japan would not have been able to take Hawaii/Sydney and B) Germany taking India would have weakened the Euro-axis beyond repair (Russia becomes a superpower at the cost of a LOT of German income).
The UK focussing a lot on the med, not building up for a second front in the west also helped a lot.
So once again, it is a plan I would keep in the back of my head and do it when opportunity arrives, but not put all my money on this one horse from the start of the game before even knowing what the allies are up to.