Russia Restricted and Russia-Japanese Non-Aggression Pact. Opinions?

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?49ebrr853yfud4h

Another way to go is to invade Norway with everything you’ve got its an easy win, then on non-com move 2inf to Karelia and dump your fighters in moscow.  Place 3inf and 3arm in moscow as your purchases and wait for germany to invade Karelia which he will if he wants to win.  R2 counter attack with everything you’ve got, its risky but if done well and with UK’s support with reinforcements for defense Germany will be on the run from that moment on.  Why waste days building stacks of infantry and hope for “two’s” to win the day when the idea should be to attack, attack, attack.  If anything your constant attacks will force Germany to focus more on you and less on UK, which then leaves the UK to invade WE or EU if things go as planned.

Think of it this way, do you want to react to Germany’s moves or do you want him to react to your’s!  What is the worst that can happen…you lose  :-D

I am simply one of those folks who disagrees with attacking Pearl Harbor, under almost every circumstance.  So what if that fleet heads for the UK.  That is 3 rounds from now, and cannot be used against Germany until round 4.  If the Axis is not in a strong economic position by round 4 with a good strangle-hold on Russia by that time as well as possessing a number of UK territories, they might as well surrender.

If Russia took Manchuria, then you consolidate your naval forces to maximize your initial strike on Manchuria (2 BB’s, 2 tranny’s worth of troops, lots of air-support).  If not, then use most of the fleet to either take SFE, or Australia.  Or use your Phillipine Tranny to assist in India (as you suggest).

But for maximum effect against Russia, you have to go 2-prong as Japan, with the main strike eating away Russian IPC’s to reduce INF builds (making Germany’s job easier), and the second prong weakening UK by taking IPC from them and forcing Russia to defend on 3 fronts: in Karelia, against forces coming through Yakut, and against forces coming north out of Persia or Sinkiang.

Russia cannot hold a large number of territories securely.  They can probably build up Novo pretty well, but then cannot also build up in both Evenk and Kaz.  So if you sustain 2 prongs against Russia as Japan, you WILL crack through with at least 1 prong to have troops adjacent to Russia; forcing Russia to defend home territory instead of Western frontier, allowing Germany more chance to advance.  Or, if the strategic situation is right, you converge your 2 prongs on Novo doubling your strike power there and leaving a sizable force adjacent to Russia and able to strike if able, or to sweep north or southwest to gain additonal IPC’s.

Ignoring Russia is a bad idea, especially early when those extra IPC’s create additional INF every round.

Strike hard, strike fast.

the main point in taking hawaii or alaska is to give the US that much less $$$. an often overlooked aspect of taking american land is SBR’s against the W/US. this can be done from alaska, hawaii, midway, etc. if Japan can get one or two bombers within range, the odds of getting shot down is minimal, and it helps if you have heavy bombers.

I was the guest who orignally posted this topic.

Dirtballer, you stated the following:

Supporting Asia and cleaning up the US fleet is the priority. Australia can wait. After you’ve built an IC in Asia, you can then send TWO trns plus whatever to Australia.

No disrespect, but having taken India with the British built factory, I now have an IC in Asia. Also my opponents were not great players :roll: (nor do I pretend to be a top player either :wink: ) so they were not defending well in Asia, never posed a serious threat to retake India, and seemed to be concentrating mainly on the German-Russian front and later (maybe this was their big mistake) on Africa, taken and held for most of the game by Germany.

So I chose to expand into Australia to pick up IPCs quickly. With two inf plus two fighters from the AC, my odds calculator says I should win about 98% of the time (which I did win). And even if I do not, there are plenty of inf on the surrounding islands to try again next turn (one inf plus two fighters from AC and hopefully at least one of the defending inf died in the first attack).

Of course I did continue to push in Asia as well, but knowing how the game usually goes for the Axis, I was trying to build a large economy ASAP and Australia is a very tempting 2 ipc per turn that the Allies cannot take back (and doesn’t even need to be defended) unless they have basically already won the game. From there I went to NZ and then Hawaii with my transport and AC (two more IPCs per turn), while pushing hard into Russia.

B.T.W. We did win as the Axis, as I (Japan) was able to take Moscow before the allies could take Berlin.

I agree that it is foolish to buy anything other than infantry for some time, but I do like to strafe at the begining of the game; it allows me (Russia) to have some control over the front. Not feeling in control is probably one of my worst enemies.

I was wondering the same exact thing. Since Blitz is hard to come by, is AA worth getting. Or anyone know where I can Blitz from?

Another post I agree with. By maintaining a strong ftr. force you can significantly delay a landing made by Allied Forces at both N. Africa or WE.

This forces UK and USA to work together as Allied transports can no longer move unprotected. Forcing money on building a Navy draws away IPCs much needed fronts and slows any build-up.

Ftrs. prove the perfect defense. If you’re defending with 6 inf. and 4 ftrs., the Allies are once again forced to build is higher numbers in order to overrun these defenses.

In all, ftrs. are the best way to slow down any sort of invasion.