No sorry, I meant Anti-Aircraft Guns.
Response to strong Japanese Navy with 2 hit BB's
If you play the Original version with 2 hit BB’s and Japan decides to hit Pearl Harbor heavily on its opening move, what is the best course for counteracting this with the US. This is considering the Japanese player moves his fleet towards the Atlantic to threaten your shipping. Is it really worth investing the money in carriers and fighters to defend against a threat that may or may not come?
Haven’t played this variation, but it sounds dangerous. I’d probably retreat my pacific bb and trn, but leave the trn in mexico seazone as a blocker. This prevents him from being able to amphibiously assault panama on J2, and effectively buys you an extra round to protect your atlantic shipping if he continues to come. I would try not to drop any extra ships in the water though until he takes panama, but would probably pick up a fighter or two in the interim in the event that I want to drop another AC for defense, but still focus on rolling out my trannies to ramp up my shipping. If he does take panama, theny with 1-2 fighters stationed in WUS and 1-2 trannies in EUS SZ, you could possibly retake panama to shut the door without having to purchase any more capital ships.
If he takes panama heavy enough that you can’t retake, then I’d probably plan on dropping a tranny blocker in cuba seazone to protect a 1 turn capital ship build in EUS SZ.
The blocking strategy will work, but just like the Japanese march on Moscow will be slowed but blocking inf they will eventually reach their destination. As the US, obviously it would be very expensive to use your money on a battleship even when playing as the most economically powerful nation in the game. Therefore, I believe that if the Imperial Navy does become a true threat to your shipping lanes, one must give in and buy a carrier and place two fighters there. This, along with 2-3 subs along with being wise in keeping your transports safe in groups, should slow the Japanese down. Perhaps this is why the original game did not include 2 hit BB’s because of the devastating effect that 2 BB’s, a carrier with fighters and a sub could do when sent to the Atlantic to harass the Allies.
murraymoto last edited by
its been a while since i played the original, can’t remember setup differences too well, so forgive me if i’m off on this, but generally speaking, i’d think that perhaps a strong response back would be to move the pacific BB to the atlantic, yes, leave the trn to block and then buy the BB and empty the bank on subs for U1, and if Japan is still lurking about, follow it up with multiple subs or the carrier on U2. then take the fleet back towards pearl and drive them back, adding subs/trns from w-us. Japan may want to intimidate the US, but not try to go toe to toe with 2 of the US’ BB and sundry others, as if they lose they won’t be able to rebuild before the US is at their port.
the big question is though if Britain can help keep Rus alive long enough without the US support. Japan may have just bought Germany enough time to drop Moscow.
though i guess another thought is just to bulk up the infantry in the continental us, get a few subs to protect the trns and continue the KGF plan, as Japan would take a couple turns to get any number of troops to the US, save alaska, as long as the continental us is protected, you could get by for a couple rounds, bulk up against germany and then turn back to Japan…
Your play probably shouldn’t be too much different with 1 hit vs. 2 hit.
You can still get your US BB with blocker to the Atlantic as suggested.
All it takes is a good US 1 purchase and the threat is gone.
Go inf heavy with placement in Wus.Â You just start your shuck-shuck from Wus instead of Eus.Â By US 2 you have 8 inf in Wcan and 8 inf in Wus, you mix in 1 trn on US 1 and 2 and your almost set.
By US 3 you have 8 inf Ecan (if you’re playing no Wcan to Atlantic), 8 inf Wcan, 8 inf Wus and US is fully operational with no real delays to Europe at all.
If Japan wants to mess with Ala or Hi, let them, b/c Germany should all but be reduced to its core European countries very quickly.
Check this out!!!
There exist a very good move that can take many average players completely by surprise. Their face will turn green, their hands will get sweaty!
in far most cases of the initial japanese attack on Hawaii, Japan will maximum get two “first” hits regardless of how strong forces (even everything available) she engage in the battle. The popular japanese move is to use a force big enough to secure the fleet against counterattack.
When you select your casualties you choose your two most expensive items (they would be worthless anyway). But yes it might sound counterrational, - but that is exactly why, it will become a grim surprise for your opponent. What you do is to sacrifice your carrier and fighter and instead save your sub by retreating it to N.W.Pacific within striking range of SEA OF JAPAN. Since Japan presumably used all naval forces during the attack on Hawaii, nothing will be left to protect japanese trannies in Sea of Japan (well alright, maybe she left the CV in Sea of Japan to protect one or two trannies against a certain fighter plane - but that means China is still yours)
If Japan (maybe prefaring attack on India) did NOT attack China in her first move (where you got your fighter), then attacking with your fighter + sub …… he he… you will get a very nice icecold revenge, my friendÂ Â
losttribe04 last edited by
Colonel Cool, Sounds like a plan worth trying. I will give it a try next time.
More than likely, China figher is gone.
More than likely, 3 hits are almost gauranteed in Pearl Harbor Japan attack
What is the bid?
More than likely, China figher is gone.<<
Yes - name it! Anticipating the theory “More than likely, China figher is gone” the average Japan player will consider the carrier free of all protection duties and ready for fight, and as a result a tranny may be left unprotected as a target of opportunity for the sub.
More than likely, 3 hits are almost gauranteed in Pearl Harbor Japan attack<<
Well, since (in any case regardless of editions and rule versions) the outcome of the very first round of japanese fire logically is considered beyond the sphere of influence of U.S. tactics, let us then academically reduce the possible
effective tactical extension of the aforementioned U.S. initial choice of tactics (we can call it “Colonel Cool’s Manoeuvre” to simplify reference) by agreeing to the logical deduction which we may from now on, refer to as:
COLONEL COOL’S LAWÂ :roll:
(Law on the US choice of tactics during the very first possible Japanese attack on US Pacific Fleet in the strategic boardgame Axis & Allies classic)
Â§1: Proposition: There exist a threat to Japan, a choice of move here labeled “Colonel Cool’s Manoeuvre” that has an element of possible tactical surprise that can be exploited to increase the US Pacific Fleet’s tactical influence of the battle outcome, given a first possible Japanese attack on US Pacific Fleet.
Â§2: The definition of Cool’s Manoeuvre is to retreat the U.S. sub to a sea-zone adjacent to Sea Of Japan (e.g. N.W.Pacific) at first possible chance to do so. The move represents a genuine threat to Japan during a given first Combat Move attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet with reference to Â§3-5.
Â§3: When attacking the US Pacific Fleet in first Combat Move, Japan can NEVER be absolutely certain to hit all three units during first round of fire.
Â§4: If the U.S. are allowed to retreat the sub, it can IN NO CASE be blocked from retreating to a sea-zone adjacent to Sea Of Japan. (threatening the important staging point of Sea of Japan, and thereby achieving a strategic victory which cannot be achieved otherwise).
Â§5: because of Â§4, Japan has no possible way during the following non-combat move to intercept a subsequent U.S. strike capability on the Sea Of Japan (or any vessels in adjacent territories except by moving these out of range during non-combat - which is not always allowed).
Â§6: To nullify the threat tactically: The potential effect of the possible element of surprise in Colonel Cool’s Manoeuvre will decrease only as skilled japanese opponents takes Â§1-5 into consideration.
Â§7: Strategic implications: When skilled japanese opponents takes Â§1-5 into consideration, they aknowledge the tactical potential of Cool’s Manoeuvre BEFORE the rolling of the dice, giving the tactical implications of the manoeuvre some independent strategic influences (e.g. encouraging Japan to avoid landings on russian territory with unprotected tranny, or keeping Japan from purchasing a tranny that will be left unprotected in the Sea Of Japan, etc.)
Â§8: Consequently Colonel Cool’s Manoeuvre represents THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY (given Â§4 during Japans first combat move) TO TACTICALLY INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME and the subsequent tactical drawing of the battlefield BY TACTICAL SURPRISE. In other words; If U.S. do not move the SUB when it’s possible to do so, then the outcome (the subsequent tactical drawing of the battlefield) will in reality be determined only by the rolling of the dice, and the U.S. will most surely be forced back to play a passive role, during the following U.S. turn.
If anyone has a critical comment or analysis to this law of nature, please come forward. The important question concerning Cool’s Manoeuvre is: is it worth it?
-or as Wazzup put it: What is the bid?
If convenient anyone; then check out the move a few times to analyse what possibilities comes up - or what heavy consequenses comes down, then be kind to come back and share ya thoughts.
Will Cool’s Law prevail?Â
Don’t forget that LRA with a US tech buy is possible too.
I guess in my games in AA 2nd ed, when I’ve come after Pearl Harbor, I bring the kitchen sink. I, for one, like the best odds possible in Pearl Harbor.
Unless the Kwangbang is in operation, I concentrate mostly on China and Pearl Harbor. That leaves the chance that scenarios you stated much less likely.
Of course, I don’t play 2nd edition any more, as revised is way more fun and balanced.
Because of Classic’s SUB rules, “Pearl Heavy” is almost a given in Classic where “Pearl Light” or even “Pearl Ultra Light” are superior strats in Revised.
Don’t forget that LRA with a US tech buy is possible too<<
The most vicious development one can imagine - right from the start of U.S. turn
I believe hovever that even a nightmare like this, will not rule out any of the Eight Principles of Cool’s Law as presented above, since there is no interference. The tactical choice of taking advantage of increasing possibilities on the battlefield is not contradicted, or at this point even influenced by a subsequent choice of a B-29 strategy.
But sure, i agree; using a U.S. long range bomber strategy is indeed one way of responding to a strong Japanese Navy, but most often it is not considered the cheapest effective response to Imperial Fleet movements.
As we all know, supporters of Mr.Churchill’s and Comr.Stalin’s “Germany first” strategy (arguably good for beginners) will demand the cheapest possible effective response against The Imperial Fleet, - fighting with what is already at hand in the pacific and only reinforcing when necessary. …and not to forget; praying for the australiansÂ
Want to play me online Colonel and test your goofy theories??
Want to play me online Colonel and test your goofy theories??
My pleasure, but I’m sorry, I don’t have the boardgame right here with me, (I play it with friends i visit regularly)
But as soon as I get it over to my place, or even get to buy the revised version……I’ll let you know.
Your’e scared of me aren’t you Colonel??