Welcome! If you're a returning member of the forums, please reset your password. If you don't receive an email within minutes, it means your account is listed under another, likely older, email address. Contact webmaster@axisandallies.org for help.

Japan Pearl Heavy… 4 tpt buy?



  • Is a Japan turn one 4 tpt enough to stand on it’s own in SZ60?
    Japan has gone hevy to Hawaii… no capital ships or otherwise are in SZ60.

    Assuming Russia still owns buryatia.
    Would you attack that with USA ftr/bmr?

    Does the UK bomber in range alter your decision?



  • Couple of questions…
    1.  Are there UK ships still alive in SZ59?  If so, I would NEVER buy 4 TRN and do Pearl Uber Heavy leaving 4 unguarded TRNs in either SZ60 or 61.
    2.  Is there a UK SUB in SZ45?  If so, then I am not leaving unguarded TRNs in SZ60
    3.  UK BOM, where is it?  Is it in range of either SZ60 or 61?
    4.  Where is the remainder of the UK Pacific and Indian fleets?

    In short, under normal circumstances, I will not do “Pearl Uber Heavy” (including the SZ60 BB) unless the threat from UK forces (naval and air) is non-existent against my home waters.  And even then, I am hesitant to send the BB from SZ60 to Pearl.  If I do, it will be when:
    1.  No UK BOM threatens SZ61
    2.  No other UK naval threat exists.
    And even then, a 4 TRN buy would only go in SZ61.



  • Assuming Russia still owns buryatia.
    Would you attack that with USA ftr/bmr?

    Yes, this could end Japan’s game right there.

    According to Frood it’s 50% to knock out all the transports! And if you’re happy with killing 3 or 4 transports, it’s 62%. That’s an awesome way to kick Japan out.



  • @ncscswitch:

    Couple of questions…
    1.  Are there UK ships still alive in SZ59?  If so, I would NEVER buy 4 TRN and do Pearl Uber Heavy leaving 4 unguarded TRNs in either SZ60 or 61.
    2.  Is there a UK SUB in SZ45?  If so, then I am not leaving unguarded TRNs in SZ60
    3.  UK BOM, where is it?  Is it in range of either SZ60 or 61?
    4.  Where is the remainder of the UK Pacific and Indian fleets?

    In short, under normal circumstances, I will not do “Pearl Uber Heavy” (including the SZ60 BB) unless the threat from UK forces (naval and air) is non-existent against my home waters.  And even then, I am hesitant to send the BB from SZ60 to Pearl.  If I do, it will be when:
    1.  No UK BOM threatens SZ61
    2.  No other UK naval threat exists.
    And even then, a 4 TRN buy would only go in SZ61.

    Any other UK units besides the bomber would be certain suicide for Japan.

    Only units available for attack are the US ftr and bomber (always available USA) and the UK bomber.

    And yes Bean… 50-50 is what I see in my dice sim as well.

    Boils down to the allies trading a ftr and two bombers (maybe just one) for Japans first turn buy.  Probably worth the risk…?



  • It’s easily worth the risk. 1 fig 1 bom doesn’t matter to much to US as much as 4 tps matters to Japan. Any time you can use units that don’t mean much to you at a better than 50% chance to kill units that mean a lot to your opponent is a good move in the long run. You may be discouraged by killing no tps by some stupid luck, but most of the time you will be very happy you do it. And interestingly enough…the dice sim shows 40-50% chance of the US bom surviving…!!!



  • To summarize my prior post…
    I am probably NOT going to buy 4 TRN as Japan AND do Pearl Uber Heavy.



  • @ncscswitch:

    To summarize my prior post…
    I am probably NOT going to buy 4 TRN as Japan AND do Pearl Uber Heavy.

    Note I didn’t say it was a good move for japan, so I agree with you switch. 
    It IS one that I am facing, though.  I was surprised to see the tpts in sz60

    I am leaning towards Beans way of thinking.  It is a huge reward with moderate risk, especially since UK can follow it up.



  • Let us know how it goes! It is the correct risk to take.  🙂


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    This was a problem in Milton Bradley, when UK moved its bomber in range of that Japanese sea zone and it was 3 AP against  one bomber… in those days Id always take the risk as Japan… but in those days we didn’t use sims… we just rolled dice and id give Japan 60% of getting the bomber on the first 2-3 rounds with 3 ones. The reason back then was to assure that Japan has little chance of getting smacked after taking Hawaii. But then again USA had less IPC back then.



  • Could you have 5 transports in A60 ? (The original one and 4 bought if 2 IPC left from bid)
    Could you counterattack Buryat ? (3inf 1art some ftr/bmb)



  • @Magister:

    Could you have 5 transports in A60 ? (The original one and 4 bought if 2 IPC left from bid)
    Could you counterattack Buryat ? (3inf 1art some ftr/bmb)

    That is a strong suggestion.
    Much more likely to stop an Allied air attack.
    Odds decrease to around 25% win for the US ftr and bomber.

    Even with a UK bomber follow-up, that’s much less of a guarenteed kill of the Japanese shipping.



  • And what if we put that 5 trannies at z61?  :roll:



  • @axis_roll:

    Only units available for attack are the US ftr and bomber (always available USA) and the UK bomber.

    Which US fighter and bomber are you talking about?



  • @Magister:

    Could you have 5 transports in A60 ? (The original one and 4 bought if 2 IPC left from bid)

    As allied player I would attack five lonely transports in any cases. Every transport the japanese have less hurts, especially in the first rounds.

    If I have 32 IPC to spend, no capital ship left and allied planes in range of SZ 60/61, I prefer to buy 2 transports and an aircraft carrier instead of four transports. Two additional fighters and the carrier itself should prevent any allied attack. And there would be a naval strongpoint in case of KJF (three fully loaded carriers) and a lot more flexibility.



  • @tekkyy:

    Which US fighter and bomber are you talking about?

    If the japanese haven’t attack Buryatia then the Hawaiian fighter and the bomber from EUS (via ECA, WCA, SZ63, SZ57) can attack at SZ 60 and land in Buryatia.
    It’s a very frustrating move if you see that at the first time (as japanese player, of course).  😄


  • 2018 2017 2016 '11 Moderator

    It’s still worth it to try, even if there are 5 transports present in SZ 60.  Even with a solitary bomber.



  • sinking Transports that arn’t ment to be fodder are always one of the best investments IMO… just hope you don’t get the poor luck i had a a few games back. i sent two German fighters against 2 UK transports that were bringing reinforcments into USSR; it had to be one of the worse millitary blunders in history, round 1, UK 2 hits, Germans 0. i was so mad. still won the game but it wasn’t due to Germany thats for sure.


  • 2018 2017 2016 '11 Moderator

    Yea, I always seem to lose a bomber to any number of transports over 2 (in other words 3 or more transports.)



  • @Croggyl:

    …bomber from EUS (via ECA, WCA, SZ63, SZ57) can attack at SZ 60 and land in Buryatia.
    It’s a very frustrating move if you see that at the first time (as japanese player, of course).  😄

    Thanks. I couldn’t see it at all.
    These bombers movements are becoming a bit like Chinese checkers lol.



  • @Bean:

    Let us know how it goes! It is the correct risk to take.  🙂

    You asked… here it is.

    (ADS).  We got 2 hits rd1, Japan 1 hit.  Lost ftr
    bmr on ftr: 1 hit, tpts: 0
    bmr on 1 tpt, hit, no defense.

    Bomber survives.

    We did well.

    Thanks all for the advice.  Trying to get confirmation on the move.  I think it was think of those “if its too good of a deal, it’s not a good deal” thingys.



  • 😄 Silly Axis, unguarded transports are for kids? 😮

    A 10 IPC fighter for 32 IPCs in tran…tasty  :evil:


  • 2018 2017 2016 '11 Moderator

    Or you could build Destroyer + 2 Transports having 3 or 4 Transports and a Destroyer in SZ 60 and not worry about it. 😛



  • A destroyer has the cost of 1.5 transports, firepower of 3 and endurance of 1.
    Then why not a carrier ? At the cost of 2 trans, can land the fighter meant for Wake for a firepower of 7… and decisively deterring a KJF.


  • 2018 2017 2016 '11 Moderator

    Because a destroyer is cheaper.

    You cannot buy 2 transports and a carrier on Japan 1.  That means trading in a transport to get a carrier, not a trade I want, or getting two transports (3 or 4 total available on Japan 2) and a destroyer thus not tying up your fleet on such non-sense as transport protection duty.

    Not to mention, when I go after the American fleet with Japan, I always wish I had another destroyer.  I never wish I had another transport.  (Talking rounds 12+ when Japan goes after the Allied fleet to protect S. Germany)


Log in to reply
 

Welcome to the new forums! For security and technical reasons, we did not migrate your password. Therefore to get started, please reset your password. You may use your email address or username. Please note that your username is not your display name.

If you're having problems, please send an email to webmaster@axisandallies.org

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 23
  • 39
  • 5
  • 31
  • 5
  • 11
  • 26
  • 53
I Will Never Grow Up Games

49
Online

13.3k
Users

33.5k
Topics

1.3m
Posts