German Offensive Troubles..

@MarineIguana:

First of all, I want to say that USA committing any purchases to the pacific is a mistake. For the same amount of resources, the USA can always pressure Germany more than Japan. This is from my experience playing hundreds of revised games, many at a high level.

That said, assuming the US commits to the Pacific…

1. Japan should always sink the US fleet at pearl harbor. If this is done, Japan generally starts with a 1 battleship, 2 carrier, 3 fighter advantage compared to the USA that will take 5+ turns of buildup for the US to overcome.
2. The US can’t make significant advances unless the Japan fleet is destroyed. The best way to stall the USA is to place your fleet in the sea zone off the phillipines or china and deadzone all sea zone within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. Have the carriers filled with fighters AND try to have an equal number of fighters in a land territory that can reach all the sz within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. For example, 2 carriers can support 8 fighters attacking a sea zone.
3. Japan can continue pushing land units into asia, even with all US purchases going to the pacific. My typical purchases are like 6 inf and 2 fighters. With the Japan fleet off of China

From what I have seen when the allies does a KJF is that, PH really isn’t that easy. If UK commits and is lucky, PH can be very difficult. Complete UK commitment would be  UK india ftr attacking the J sub in 45 with the australia sub, and then landing on PH. The Australia TT taking 2 infs to papua, the indian TT taking 2 infs to borneo, The UK CR attacking the japanese TT in 59 and the India CW either standing in 36 or 49.  At this point, taking PH might be difficult for japan. If they do it with air only (5 ftrs + bomber) they will lose about 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs, 1 cw, and 1 sub. The good news is that they will not lose boats to a counterattack, and can use their boats to deal with the british fleet, the bad news is that they are spread out, will be in trouble on land and will take 3 ftrs in losses for only 36 US ipcs (+ 10 UK).  If they try to do a heavy PH, alot of the uk fleet survives and UK will keep borneo until J3.

I still feel it is a bad move, since you are handing africa to the axis, but japan will be in trouble.

@Romulus:

IC in India may fall in Japanese hands if it is not backed up by an Allied Pacific strategy, at least an SJF. If UK place IC in India and goes after Germany it will have less IPCs to spend in UK, this means less quantity and less quality in the UK forces that face Germany.

The same reasoning applies to German CV. Building German CV means less ground units to press on Russia.

I think the better move to avoid India IC is to build all ground units with Germany and increase the pressure on Russia. If UK builds the IC in India then Russia will receive less help from the British.

I see your point… 
I’m not sure that some of my F2F opponents are smart enough to realize that!!    :lol: :lol:

@Woodstock:

In this thread, the G1 AC + 3 TRN buy seems to put quite a load on both UK and USA, right to RND2 at least.

If you know what you are doing, then AC+3T can be a very good buy.

If you dont, you can be defeated much easier.

@ncscswitch:

PACFLT is a modern Department of Defense acronym for PACific FLeeT

I think Pan-Atlantic Conference Flight Leadership and Tactics makes so much more sense.

:lol: he he you made it funny  :lol:

-LT04

I think that without allied support it is hard for Russia to be offensive.  If the Japan and Germany players are on the same page then they are gunning for you.  I agree with switch that the West Russia stack is Russia’s primary offensive weapon but without aid from the other allies they can’t defeat Germany or Japan.  I suggest defending on the Japanese flank and picking your fights wisely on the German front until the UK and US fortify Karelia or attack Western Europe.  No matter how offensive you want to be your primary focus has to be holding Moscow because 99% of the time the Axis will be coming from both sides.

My opening German move to attack UK fleet is ussually kinda like this (the availability of my fighters depends on russian player of course…)

Sub z8 attacks z2 along with Bomber from germany, fighter norway.  (a bit risky move i know…)

Battleship z14 to z 13 along fighter from france

Transport z 14 to z 15 along fighter from balkans,

What i buy is situated to the actions of the russian player, but either i go a battle ship and 3 tanks, or 8 tanks or 6 tanks and a transport to put in italy…  Option on 4 tanks and a transport (italy) and a destroyer (baltic sea) have crosed my mind…

Any thoughts?

Mayhem, we too play with NAs. Actually we did two games in a row with all NAs. On the first game, Germany bought 1 AC and 3 subs on G1. That left him with very little ground force but he just held his cocoon and on G2 built just INF and ART to compensate. In the end, Axis won the game and the subs made the Allies loose at least 60 IPC through the course of the game (which wasn’t very long, maybe 7 turns). Plus the allies were always threatened by a mighty fleet of 1 AC, 1 DD, 5 subs (attacking on 3s), and 2 trannies (one of which was built later on) plus all german air force.

In our second game, Germany made a G1 purchase of 1 AC and 8 INF. Every turn thereafter Germany purchased 1-2 subs. The end results was the same, an Axis victory, but it was a lot safer against Russia with the additionnal 8 INF on G1.

No matter if you play with NA or not, a G1 buy of an AC is HIGHLY recommended.