The Borneo gambit

Why Borneo and not Sumatra?

Your entire plan requires Japan to invade USSR. I have yet to experience a Japanese player to do that and I am usually USSR>

@variance:

Why Borneo and not Sumatra?

Quite. If the Allies are bulking up on the money islands, the UK should do it on Sumatra, ANZAC on Java. I suppose UK could focus on Java too but it’s further from their home base and more difficult to maintain.

@PainState:

IF the UK Pacific and Anzac can make Japan to focus on the islands it makes the Allies victory that much easier, in less the Japan player has a sneaky plan for a naval victory stomp on Sydney and Hawaii.

100% agreement across the community

Russia stacks the north, make the Japs attack them. If the Japs take the bait and go all in, then Japan is not going to war with USA until J4.

IF Japan goes all in on Russia on J1.

UK/ANZAC DOW on Japan.

India Moves 2 Inf into Borneo.

UK2 Moves two more INF from Singapore and the ANZAC forces drop 2 more INF. Now, Borneo has 6 INF on it + 3 ANZAC FTRs. USA does not fly their FTR off to the East and keeps it in Manila, it can then fly to Borneo once DOW on USA happens.

On J4 Borneo is stacked.

The “money islands” are no longer a cake walk and Japan has to actually fight for Manilla and the money islands and tie them up for at least one turn and most likely two turns.
If the Japan player is not paying attention and builds no fleet or a small fleet with no TRS then the “Money Islands” might be a total no go, no chance to take them.

** NOTE **

The gambit only works if Russia stacks Machuria on the opening turn and Japan goes all in to eliminate Russia and goes J1 on Russia.

I disagree, this isn’t a gambit, it’s a great goal. And no it doesn’t only work if Russia stacks Manchuria; threatening Manchuria/Korea does a great job of tying up Japanese units.

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF): On triplea live, games are starting to lean more towards the allies (and only with a small bid to the allies and in many cases no bid now).

Doesn’t really matter which money island or combination of islands (situation dictates). The point is that if the allies just keep shoving everything everywhere it can overwhelm Japan much quicker than Germany.

Japan is the weaker of the major Axis forces. For those playing triplea live (Bird of Prey / Zhukov, please chime in, he was surprised how well I shut Japan down in a game and I’m still very experienced playing allies). Just shoving everything at Japan has become much more prevalent. I learned this from a player (who’s going to YG’s tournament, not mentioning his name because he like to remain anonymous). When I first got into this game, allies’ players would be very cautious because of the 20+ planes that Japan has. India would always turtle and China would just fall back which would permit Japan to produce ground units. Japan cannot hit every target each turn. If there is a huge Russian stack that comes into Korea or Manchuria on R3 and the allies keep stacking Yunnan turn after turn, while adding troops to the money islands when possible, Japan runs out of ground troops. US goes to either of 3 locations (situation dictates): SZ6, Carolines (to threaten Chinese coastal factories), or ANZAC coast to help contest money islands.

Also, players are more often taking risks and attacking lone Japanese infantry with their UK Pac planes early on. Japan runs out of fodder real quick and has to decide to give ground or attack large stacks of troops with only their planes. These tactics of just shoving everything used to be mostly employed in a J3 type Japanese plan. However, I’m seeing them more now from the beginning. More allies players are doing a DOW on UK2 or ANZAC turn 3 (depending on Japan’s transport locations).

Most of my games are as an Axis player. When I face this strategy, as Japan I can never establish it as a dominate power. I pretty much have to decide one target like Russia north, china, money islands, and or the south and try to drive for India. Meanwhile one or all of the areas get overrun. This puts tremendous pressure on Germany to get Moscow real quick before the US can start building near 100% Atlantic side.

Your plan is great, but Borneo is the worst choice.  Java and Sumatra are both better.  UK fighters can join as well.  If it works, build an airbase.

Don’t forget that the 3 dutch territories can be landed by air on the turn they are taken.  They are liberated/friendlies that have a unique rule.

Japan can still destroy you, but it takes everything and an odds battle.  If you think Japan is about to knock out your node, the fighters can run for their lives.    Problems include that those 5-7 fighters aren’t properly placed to get to Moscow before G5 in most cases.

The Russian part of your idea isn’t required or a good idea as the Russian player.  If Russia moves to the coast R1-R2 they will get annhiliated.  It can be a good way of wasting Japan’s time, but infantry aren’t intimidating to a player that has an equal number of planes.  Now, after J3, Japan may be running after the southern objectives and so may not have the planes or ground troops needed to kill so many Russians.  But we all know, men alone are not much of a threat and leaving all of them in the east is folly.    Who cares what you accomplished in the islands when Moscow falls with ease (and the Axis retain their lightsaber of tanks and air–now they have the money too).

Those Russians are crucial and while some or all of them could stay over on the east side, tempting Japan to attack you or attacking japan is folly unless you are combining that with another grand plan which has to be coordinated in time such that Japan can only strike one node or the other but never both.

@taamvan:

If Russia moves to the coast R1-R2 they will get annihilated.� Â

Agreed. I see people leaving them safely in Buryatia then moving them forward on R2 if or when Japan’s ground aren’t in position (like moved to Jehol) and most of the planes are down at Kwangsi.

Also, good points on pointing at that Borneo may not be the best spot…Dutch islands permit fighters landing right away, ect.

In general, this sounds at least like a plan! And I admit, that so far only few strategies have discussed/experienced that include to offer the Japanese to attack 18+2 Russians at Amur J1.
I guess it can be taken for granted that Sumatra or Java are the way better targets compared to Borneo.

However, there are some points you underestimate:

1.

If the Japs take the bait and go all in, then Japan is not going to war with USA until J4.

No! Why? A J2 might be off the table, but I do not see any reason why not do J3 then.

However, according to your strat, this does not matter as UK does DOW anyway. This brings me to my next point

2.

UK/ANZAC DOW on Japan.

Why? All those plans could be done without DOW, can’t they?

3.

IF the UK Pacific and Anzac can make Japan to focus on the islands it makes the Allies victory that much easier,

Don’t underestimate these things:

• Even if Japan does not get the money islands easy, they get all the Russian territories in exchange, +6-7 IPCs soon which compensates well for -9 in case Java is missing, especially as Russia loses Siberia AND some home comers.
• Even with some ground and, AA and air at a moneyisland, these are certainly not invincible, Japan can quickly get 10-12 ground plus 8-10 air for an attack (keep in mind the USA must watch until turn 4)
• Japan could just decide to skip the money islands and rush to India

In a nutshell: Offering the 18 Russians R1 is an option that is worth being evaluated. But those “simple” plans to get Japan down usually don’t work. Japan is too strong for early all-in strategies and if wisely played by Japan, this usually backfires.
So what you could do: Make the R1 offer and if Japan attacks, look at the map and find the best move. This is usually the best strategy. A&A has too many variables to make plans on paper for a couple of turns in advance a good idea, this works better in chess:D

@JDOW:

2.

UK/ANZAC DOW on Japan.

Why? All those plans could be done without DOW, can’t they?

I didn’t understand that either.  Why would you delay getting the US in the war when you don’t have to?

What about the US bonus money you’re missing out on though?

Forgive me I forget, if UK/AZ declares war then US has to wait until which turn to declare war and get it’s bonuses?  Is it end of turn 3 or 4?

@PainState:

@IKE:

What about the US bonus money you’re missing out on though? �

Forgive me I forget, if UK/AZ declares war then US has to wait until which turn to declare war and get it’s bonuses?�  Is it end of turn 3 or 4?

What? Sir, head upstairs to the bathroom and find your 1940 Rule book under the sink and take a seat, good sir. :-o

The USA is at war on turn 4 if the Axis do not DOW on them.

The USA only enters the war earlier than Turn 4 Based 100% on if Japan goes early on a DOW against them. Yes, Iam discounting the .000258% Chance that Germany DOW’s on the USA in turn one with a surprise sub attack on the East Coast.

USA entry into the war is totally dictated by Japans actions. Only Japan can get them into the war earlier that Turn 4. UK/ANZAC actions have 0 impact on USA entry into the war early.

I don’t have my rulebook in front of me but I believe your understanding to be wrong.  Japan attacks UK/Anzac and the US can declare war that same turn.  UK/Anzac declare war on Japan first, US needs to wait until turn 4 (assuming Japan is smart enough not to attack US directly and London doesn’t fall.   So it’s not only based on Japan declaring war on ‘them’ (US) but also UK/Anzac as well.  That is why we asked about the lost US bonus income from an early UK/Anzac DOW on Japan.

The downside of the UK/ANZAC declare is that the US is decoupled from the alliance and there is no “tripwire” so the US CANNOT declare war on the Axis (without other provocation or London down) until turn 4.    Japan still cant attack US holdings like guam and Philippines, but it can still “pass at peace” and just go right through the US area.

There are 2 good reasons to jump the gun

1)  to enter China to stack on the proactive defense
2) to do the transport-boggle by moving the UK ship into the japan fleet and then having ANZAC declare separately (but as I said before, this is only a trick;  the Japanese can simply leave their troops on the ships and this does nothing)

There are 3 good reasons not to jump the gun

1. you just cost the us 2 turns worth of bonus, in an otherwise J2 game
2. the US has strict movement restrictions such that they cannot even position up
3. decoupled, as above

Don’t confuse this with the point that a constructive declaration of war BY RUSSIA AGAINST JAPAN “does nothing” and has no downside because it is necessary to permit the Russians to enter “allied” territory on the pac board.  It is the border crossing attack that affects Mongolia, not the declaration.

@PainState:

@IKE:

What about the US bonus money you’re missing out on though? �

Forgive me I forget, if UK/AZ declares war then US has to wait until which turn to declare war and get it’s bonuses?� � Is it end of turn 3 or 4?

Japan goes j1 against USA and at the end of Turn 4 the USA has gotten 60 IPC bonus cash at that point.

Correction USA or UK or Anzac.  And it would actually be 80 IPC’s of bonus income by end of their turn 4.

I think you should go find your own rule book and take a seat, my good sir.   :-o

Just curious, how long have you been playing by the wrong rules?

@taamvan:

The downside of the UK/ANZAC declare is that the US is decoupled from the alliance and there is no “tripwire” so the US CANNOT declare war on the Axis (without other provocation or London down) until turn 4.    Japan still cant attack US holdings like guam and Philippines, but it can still “pass at peace” and just go right through the US area.

There are 2 good reasons to jump the gun

1)  to enter China to stack on the proactive defense
2) to do the transport-boggle by moving the UK ship into the japan fleet and then having ANZAC declare separately (but as I said before, this is only a trick;  the Japanese can simply leave their troops on the ships and this does nothing)

There are 3 good reasons not to jump the gun

1. you just cost the us 2 1 turns worth of bonus, in an otherwise J2 game
2. the US has strict movement restrictions such that they cannot even position up
3. decoupled, as above

Don’t confuse this with the point that a constructive declaration of war BY RUSSIA AGAINST JAPAN “does nothing” and has no downside because it is necessary to permit the Russians to enter “allied” territory on the pac board.  It is the border crossing attack that affects Mongolia, not the declaration.

Slight correction.

With a J2 DOW, USA get the bonus on turn 2 but would get it anyway on turn 3. In fact, if there is no Japanese DOW by turn 3 USA will get the Philippines bonus, which compensates for just over 1/3 of the lost income. No one should keep peace with the UK as Japan for 3 turns but you might like peace with the USA if UK/ANZAC DOWs on you.

Thank you Mr. Simon.  Since Japan also gets the 10 oil + scrap bonus for not being at war with USA, I probably should have said something more like it costs the Allies a fair amount of both lost income AND potentially gives extra money to Japan.    Japan could still feel forced to declare on the US, somehow, but if they can avoid it makes give Japan a chance to focus W/o worrying about the biggest enemy of all.

As a result, the UK/ANZAC early declaration should only be used when the potential benefits (holding silk road for multiple turns or boggling the japan transports badly) dramatically outweigh the J4 benefits to Japan.

On UK 2 “So, are those guys on the land, or are they sitting in the hold and playing cards on the landing craft?” would split the difference

Good point. That’s really a 4th reason not to jump the gun.

If the Russians stack R1, the attack has good odds for japan, but I’ve seen the battle go wrong and since its off game-start, Japan can’t affect the odds it just brings everything.    The problem with doing this as Russia is that 18 men can’t attack Manchuria either–they are too weak and the Russians cant affect that until R3, if ever.    On R2, Japan often has 2 more transports and could bring even more naval support, so it would be a blowout.

Either way, Japan calls the shots.    Japan can attack, or not, but that’s not true of Russia all they can do is stack on the coast, or not.  Until USA comes into the war and can add some defense, its just not a good move–you’re right next to Japans main base and if he reduces you, he owns the Russian East.    If Japan “goes for the allies” that was probably the original game plan anyways and he’s free to ignore Russia, or not.

A J1 is awesome.  But it spreads you thin as Japan and brings down the wrath of the US at the expense of UK PAC.  The USA can move pretty freely across the pacific b/c of the bases, and bombers have an immense range so the USA can be all over japan in a KJF, fast.

In my experience, KGF doesn’t work.    You can’t kill Germany until they’ve essentially thrown all their power away on another attack, they are simply too rich and too well defended.  All the key zones are within 2 spaces of their capital, and by land.  Losing fleets, Africa or Denmark still don’t mean Germany is stopped, those are just preliminary steps.

You can spend the whole game 1-8 building up enough forces to start to cut Germany (or more likely, Italy, though its loss hardly matters since the can opener is already doing its job whether Italy lives or dies) apart but if you did it 100% then Japan rages over the little buddies.  Then, with Germany you dance back and forth, whereas if you can hit or threaten Japan hard enough, he has to re-focus away from his $$ objectives.  Some splitting is both possible and necessary with the US–and this includes making decisions after you see what happens.  But less splitting is necessary during a KJF,  if the UK brings a fleet together then the US can have minimal forces in the Atlantic (1 bomber, 1 transport, 1 destroyer gives you options) and still be irritating.