Beating J1



  • I have played many games of Global 1940. I have gotten pretty good at winning as the allies on the Europe side of the board, but J1 proves just too strong. I have tried everything, from using Europe IPCS to help Calcutta, building only in the Pacific for US, and fighting to keep the Burma Road open. However, none of these work and Japan steamrolls in the Pacific and gets all 6 victory cities way too easily. There are very few videos that outline how to beat J1, so I was just asking to see if there are any veteran global '40 players that could help me out. I feel like it is a bit overpowered that Japan can get 4/6 victory cities on the first turn alone, and then they can concentrate all their forces on Sydney and Calcutta.

    I would appreciate the help…



  • @Xnuecguy2000
    Are you playing OOB? What bid are you using as the Allies?



  • @AndrewAAGamer

    We play OOB and we don’t use bids.



  • @Xnuecguy2000
    Well let me first say if you are stopping the Axis from winning on the Europe side of the board with no Bid my hat is off to you. The OOB game with no bid dramatically favors the Axis with bids in the typical range of 30-40 though I have seen and played up to the 60s. That bid helps to stop what you are discussing as it allows the Allies to either place the bid on both sides of the board, and the US plays both sides of the board, or they place it heavily on one side or the other and the US plays the opposite more heavily.

    If Japan decides to take China and India there is not a lot the Allies can do to stop that except to slow them down and make it expensive. However the US and ANZAC should be able to stop Japan from getting Hawaii or Sydney. This is typically done with ANZAC playing an attrition game with Japan forcing them to retake the Money Islands while the US builds a naval fleet that prevents the Japanese from moving forward. Try being more aggressive with ANZAC instead of being defensive. That can be a game changer.



  • I have seen some ANZAC players focusing mainly on preventing capture of Sydney, freeing up USA to execute a KGF strategy. In an OOB game, the Allies will usually get completely overwhelmed in on-line games where players have more time to consider each move. However, you might have more of a chance in face-to-face games where simple blunders can mean losing a capitol far earlier than it should normally happen.



  • @Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Beating J1:

    I have seen some ANZAC players focusing mainly on preventing capture of Sydney, freeing up USA to execute a KGF strategy. In an OOB game, the Allies will usually get completely overwhelmed in on-line games where players have more time to consider each move. However, you might have more of a chance in face-to-face games where simple blunders can mean losing a capitol far earlier than it should normally happen.

    Do you think Anzac should turtle the first turns? If Japan gathers its navy and some transports around carolines the first turn, spreading out with anzacs is sending an invitation for an invasion.



  • I have seen an increasing number of top players focused on KGF with ANZAC turtling for much of the game. It truly is hard for Japan to capture Australia or Hawaii with just a little bit of USA assistance. Fighters are such a great unit since they provide so much protection on defense, can threaten fleets with a few sacrificial subs, and can strafe ground units. Never underestimate the strafe against Japan as ground units are so precious. Often I will sacrifice USA planes for Japan infantry. A 1:2 exchange can still be a strategic victory for the United States.



  • @Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Beating J1:

    I have seen an increasing number of top players focused on KGF with ANZAC turtling for much of the game. It truly is hard for Japan to capture Australia or Hawaii with just a little bit of USA assistance. Fighters are such a great unit since they provide so much protection on defense, can threaten fleets with a few sacrificial subs, and can strafe ground units. Never underestimate the strafe against Japan as ground units are so precious. Often I will sacrifice USA planes for Japan infantry. A 1:2 exchange can still be a strategic victory for the United States.

    I think, when japan consolidates his navy and transports around Carolines on J1 (no DOW) then buying a tpt with anzac is not a good idea. Even when japan DOW on J2 or J3 while slowly building up around carolines, anzac might fall easier than you think. I always thought anzac was very to take in the early game, but buying to much fleet in the beginnin with japan around carolines opens the door to an early invasion.


  • 2020 2018 2017

    @Xnuecguy2000

    Another approach is to use an all-board system of VCs, when we do this we add Johannesburg as a VC. You can either bid or reduce the power of the Axis, examples include removing a Japanese Air Pair, or reducing the NO for Russian VC from 5 to 3 (or other 5’s to 3s’).

    You’re correct sir that its too easy for Japan to win in KGF mode.

    The JDOW J1 is strong and its also a pat opener (no decisions need be made, all the J1 moves are planned for you, more or less). However, it leaves SZ6 and Iwo vulnerable to an immediate step-up by the USA, and buying factories weakens the Japanese effort even further by attempting to take too much too fast. KJF is not a good way to win tne overall OOB game but it is quite effective when a giant USA fleet builds over what Japan has in SZ 6 and then forces Japan to step back to defend its homeland. Since you are denying Japan peak income in this scenario, the USA is simply too powerful for them to stop and while Tokyo may not fall, the smaller Allies have a field day.



  • @taamvan which turn are you proposing that the Allies step up to SZ6 after a J1? I don’t see many options until at least turn 4.


  • 2020 2018 2017

    @Arthur-Bomber-Harris immediately. If 2 J carriers go south they take Iwo on the first turn.

    A careful allocation of stuff left behind on the Home Islands might make that dangerous, but I’ve been beaten at least twice (as Japan JDOWing) when my opponent took advantage of how thin I left the back lines and forced me to recoil back in defense. That could be my lack of finesse/skill though as the axis, and/or it could require that fewer objectives (more conservative play) are taken in the J1 such that more can stay home…I guess I could try it again Saturday



  • @taamvan I always send my Japanese navy South on a J1 DOW, but there is a fair number of forces that could return back to SZ6 or SZ17 on J2 if the United States wanted to send out their tiny force to those areas. I don’t understand why they would want to sacrifice their Pearl Harbor fleet for virtually no gain.

    do check out the standard J1 attack plans since the details are quite important. It is devastating in an OOB match.


  • 2020 2018 2017

    @Arthur-Bomber-Harris I’m not remembering it correctly…its been a while. I guess all I can preserve of my original point is that if Japan is too aggressive and attacks too early, and builds too many factories too quickly, USA can outbuild them–and/or step up and take Iwo.



  • @Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Beating J1:

    @taamvan I always send my Japanese navy South on a J1 DOW, but there is a fair number of forces that could return back to SZ6 or SZ17 on J2 if the United States wanted to send out their tiny force to those areas. I don’t understand why they would want to sacrifice their Pearl Harbor fleet for virtually no gain.

    do check out the standard J1 attack plans since the details are quite important. It is devastating in an OOB match.

    It depends on your builds. A lot of J1 strategies also go for 3 transports. In that case yea sending in your pearl fleet to take down half of the japanese transports on turn 1 could be beneficial. Especialy if they lost a few land units in china and or phili as it will really slow them down for at least 1 more turn.



  • @ShadowHAwk So let’s say someone does the slightly revised Cow J1 attack and has 2 DDs and 3 transports in SZ6 that are also protected by 3 fighters. What would be your response on USA1?

    https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/17005/the-japan-playbook/2



  • There is little point with you fleet then arthur, but people make mistakes.
    What if he had moved all destroyers south because his air would defend SZ6.

    Against perfect play its not that usefull but if someone makes a mistake. Having only 1 air and 2 destroyers left or 3 air and 1 destroyer.

    Also you are forcing out kamis on destroyer+cruiser there as well.

    You can attack with 2 fighters + dest + cruiser + sub, it would be a gamble but every hit past the first 2 would be japan air.

    Its a game, sometimes things go wrong on dice or people overlook things especialy playing live games. So yea it can be usefull to throw the pearl fleet against the japan fleet if the odds are favorable. If there are 3 transports that are just lightly defended i might go for it. Even at a 50/50 chance its favorable.



  • @ShadowHAwk I certainly would attack on US1 if Japan leaves SZ6 with three transports and no destroyers. All you need is a single sub, right?

    In the situation where only one Japanese destroyer is present, it would be an attractive attack if you think your chance of winning the game is only <20% and need to rely on lucky dice to have a better chance of rebalancing the game. A fortuitous victory could be equivalent to a +40 shift towards the Allies as so much of the strategy changes for Japan.

    Perhaps this is the situation for an OOB match played by email against an opponent of equal or superior skill.



  • @Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Beating J1:

    @ShadowHAwk So let’s say someone does the slightly revised Cow J1 attack and has 2 DDs and 3 transports in SZ6 that are also protected by 3 fighters. What would be your response on USA1?

    https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/17005/the-japan-playbook/2

    I would certainly not make that attack. It is a mere 28% chance of success and that does not take into account Kamikazes so it is more likely less than 10%.

    Having said that to @Arthur-Bomber-Harris point there is a threshold that a lesser Player would happily make that attack even at under 50% odds. Since losing those three transports is a disaster for Japan and, while maybe not a game losing move, would dramatically attribute to losing the game a lesser Player certainly would probably take odds all the way down to 33% for the reward vs risk comparison.



  • Well US can attack with 1 sub 1 dest 1 cruisers and 2 fighters.

    Against 2 destroyers and 3 fighters that is kinda dicy. But the odds calculator forgets that Japan can only take 1 destroyer as casualty. So your odds are a bit higher then 26% but not great.

    Ofcourse kamikaze is also a consideration, but he would need 4-5 kamis to make a difference.
    So is it worth it to get rid of 4-5 kamis and a part of his units for that little US fleet.

    If he only has 2 fighters of 1 destroyer defending i would go for it. As he would need to use kami and lose air to defend. And the payoff is pretty great if you win and even if you dont even trade isnt that bad.



  • I ran the full odds assuming 5 Kamikaze attacks used in the defense:
    1 Jap. DD + 2 Jap. fighters: 47% chance of USA victory
    1 Jap. DD + 3 Jap. fighters: 20% chance of USA victory
    2 Jap. DD + 2 Jap. fighters: 14% chance of USA victory
    2 Jap. DD + 3 Jap. fighters: 4% chance of USA victory

    If I were playing against an equally experience Axis opponent in a no-bid OOB game, I would accept the 20% chance of a victory. In a game with a bid to balance the start, I would want the 47% chance to win.

    Game theory optimized (GTO) play becomes an important topic to discuss now. You want your opponent to play more conservatively because he knows that you will take calculated risks if it gives you a higher probability of winning. If the opponent fears the SZ6 attack, they will leave the 2DD + 3Fighters behind in defense. This gives a significant advantage to the Allies even if you don’t attack. If you play overly conservative as Allies, Japan can be more aggressive with his forces and gain more momentum towards India.



  • Well thats the idea arthur.

    First of all 20% chance of victory, though mutual annihilation is decent for the allies.
    You also take out 5 kamis that in a bigger naval battle can be used a lot more effectively. As japan id rather send each kami against its own cruiser/destroyer then grouping them up. So just taking 5 out can help the allies down the line.

    Though weird, with 2dd and 2 fighters your defensive power is a lot less yet you got a higher chance of winning as japan.

    But yea 20% chance of striking a crippling blow against axis round 1 and if you lose its not a big deal for the allies. Its also what does the US lose, well maximum 46ipcs worth of US stuff against 30ish ipcs from japan so thats not a big difference. ( kamis are also worth something but i didnt add that ).
    Allies have to be aggressive at the start to pick off targets of opportunity to slow the axis down.



  • @ShadowHAwk in the cases where the Axis scores 2 kamikaze hits to take out the American destroyer and cruiser (50% chance), the most likely outcome is that the Japanese take minimal damage and have a +35 PU swing from the combat. The benefits magnify over the next few turns as Japan might not need a sacrificial destroyer to shipblock SZ6 movement, and might be able to threaten the USA fleet if they want to move adjacent to Queensland. Germany can go wild with Dark Skies since the United States cannot put enough spending into the Atlantic to protect their fleet and recover in the Pacific. It really will swing the early game significantly in the Axis’ favor to a point where a competent player should have a 95+% chance of winning in a no-bid OOB match.

    The plus side for the Allies is massively advantageous if the dice favor them in the 14-20% USA1 SZ6 battle. Perhaps a big sub build will allow convoy raiding Japan early on since he is down a destroyer or two, and might not be able to build in SZ6 on J2 with the fleet threatening annihilation. Having only 2-3 Japanese destroyers to prevent convoy raids is going to be a huge problem. It will be equivalent to having a 60 PU bid for the Allies.

    I think that the game would almost be at a point to call it decided at that point since there will be very few significant battles to catch back up over the next six or seven turns. This gets back into the discussion of how bad of a first turn outcome are you willing to continue playing through.



  • Yea early battles mather a lot. Though its not that terrible for the US in this case.
    Fleet battles are always a bit wonky in this game even more then land combats. But really 1 dicethrow can screw up every strategy or build.

    Its something to keep in your mind if japan only leaves 1 destroyer + 2 fighters and builds 3 transports well go for it. You have to hurt axis where you can to slow them down.

    Just moving 1 strat bomber from central to western US would make a huge difference in this situation.
    Might be an interesting addition to a bid. Just that 1 bomber does change the dynamices.



  • @ShadowHAwk said in Beating J1:

    Though weird, with 2dd and 2 fighters your defensive power is a lot less yet you got a higher chance of winning as japan.

    That is because the US sub is surviving and killing the Japan transports in the other circumstance. You have to modify the OOL to make sure a Jap DD survives till the end to be around to kill the US sub in case it is not taken as a casualty immediately. Winning the sea/air battle but having a US sub survive to kill the 3 transports is in essence a loss for the Axis.

    Not sure how @Arthur-Bomber-Harris is accounting for the Kamikazes. TripleA does not take them into account. If it were me I would use all 6; 3 on each DD and CA. However using 5 we would go 3 on the Cruiser and 2 on the DD I assume. This definitely tests my math skills but let’s give it a try:
    *70% the CA is hit
    *30% the CA is missed
    *55% the DD also is hit when the CA is hit therefore .70 x .55 = 38.5% both hit
    *70%-38.5% means only the CA is hit 31.5% of the time
    *55% the DD is hit when the CA is missed therefore .3 x .55 = 16.5% only the DD is hit
    *100 - 38.5 - 31.5 - 16.5 = 13.5
    Thus
    *38.5% both CA and DD hit
    *31.5% only the CA hit
    *16.5% only the DD is hit
    *13.5% neither units are hit

    The same battles with OOL of = US DD, CA, 2 fighters, SS vs IJN with one DD always last AND taking into consideration the above percentages for Kamikaze results. For example run the battle without the DD and CA and weight it at 38.5% then again without the CA only at 31.5% and so on for all four possible results…
    1 Jap. DD + 2 Jap. fighters: 54.50% chance of USA victory
    1 Jap. DD + 3 Jap. fighters: 18.98% chance of USA victory
    2 Jap. DD + 2 Jap. fighters: 33.3% chance of USA victory
    2 Jap. DD + 3 Jap. fighters: 9.78% chance of USA victory

    As you can see the Jap defense of 3 fighters and 1 DD, with the DD taken last, is a better defense than 2 DDs and 2 fighters with one of the DDs taken last. Which makes sense because it is 4 units defending at 14 instead of 4 units defending at 12. So in essence if you are willing to accept the risk of losing your transports less than 20% of the time you can go with 1 DD and 3 fighters.



  • I did find a mistake in my spreadsheet. Thanks for catching it. Note that we also have to look at the chance that the USA sub is left to destroy the transports after the lone Japanese destroyer is sunk. That is approximately 45% when Japan is defending with 1 DD and 3 Fighters.

    I think that I am now a convert and would suggest an attack if Japan leaves only one ship in SZ6. If it has extra protection such as another Japanese destroyer or sub, the USA1 attack likely doesn’t make sense unless you are playing against a far superior opponent or Germany had a ridiculously good G1 opening.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 16
  • 36
  • 33
  • 18
  • 16
  • 34
  • 14
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

44
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts