For every action (strong allied pressure on Japan) there is an equal re-action (less pressure on Germany).
But as I stated, it takes only a few simple moves, and no additional resources on the part of Russia and Britain, to hamstring Japan and leave the door open for America. Any additional spending by Britain or Russia against Japan after that is merely icing on the cake.
In Enhanced, Germany is the real Bear. But the German player must do more with less allied pressure than just buy inf and tanks as a ground unit push by Germany is relatively easy to contain for a long enough time for Japan to be taken out of the game.
The German player needs to think of innovative ways to keep the allies honest if they pressure Japan hard. A Strong Atlantic navy is a great way to do this. Keep UK on threat of being amphibiously assaulted, force great losses with convoy raids that force defensive buys for the allied atlantic fleet. Germany can invest in rocket technology to slow UK and Russia enough to overpower their ground forces once a dominant navy is in the atlantic. You can also assist Japan via shared techs of jet power (3 loaded Jap carriers with six fives are hard to sink) or super subs. In Enhanced, the shoe can be on the other Axis foot… Germany must take the pressure off Japan instead of the other way around that is often seen in Revised.
So if Germany is spending all this money on fleet and tech, how are they making ANY progress against Russia? Russia has no Japanese front to worry about if America is bringing heavy pressure against Japan
Learn to play a very conservative Japan. Do not try to do too much as to conserve all your units. Japan needs to hold 4 VCs once the German Bear has knocked down the Kremlins doors.
The Non-argession treaty also can help Japan to keep Russia from moving in on the Japanese asian territories.
I’ve seen a three power attack (US from Sink, Russia from Bury, UK from India) easily sweep aside all Japanese mainland resistance.
This is especially true if any additional efforts were geared towards Japan (Siberian conscripts, British India factory, US Sink factory, heavy airforce deployment)
Concentrate on building an unstoppable IJN. Take two naval national advantages. Kaitens are helpful with their reduced cost.
Yes, Japan can be tough to play in Enhanced. But a shift in philosophy when playing them can help the axis win when played properly.
I agree with Axis Roll. You should play a conservative Japan, the same thing you would do in KJF in Revised. Both sides are stronger, Japan has some interesting NAs up its sleeve and so does the US with nas/convoy raiding, but the basic remains the same.
He’s spot on with Germany being the bear. You have a huge incentive to keep a large German navy (convoy raiding the UK), and if you keep that up with large gains in Africa, you might be able to run over both UK/Russia.
I’ve yet to see a game where Germany can keep up with BOTH the UK navy and the Soviet army…even with convoy raids
For Japan, they have great ways to play conservative. Banzai infantry gives your land war much needed firepower/flexibility
It’s also nearly useless unless you’re planning on a ground war in Asia, which cedes your Island income to US/UK
you can use less fighters than normal and worry less about picket inf + aa guns. +1 dice point to a cheap unit is a very powerful bonus (yeah lasts one round, but that is often the most important round, and when you think about it most battles don’t last more than 1-2 rounds anyways). Kaitens gives you some much needed naval fodder, and in case those carriers aren’t reinforced, then it’s time to give the American’s a huge headache by suiciding into them.
I would probably pick those two NAs. Banzai to break through the land war, Kaitens to give you cheap naval fodder.
I don’t see how Japan can afford to split it’s focus, especially considering it’s lack of ability to expand…they only have so many IPCs to work with, and are often already in the hole if Borneo went badly.
I would also at some point consider going with lots of heavy bombers. That really keeps the US honest, because it is a very hard unit to counter navally speaking.
They also can’t help defend your fleet, and cost more than Japan can really afford, and that’s without needing 4-6 tech dice.
Between cheap subs and heavy bombers, you could tie up the American’s navy for a while.
What stops America from splitting it’s fleet? The bombers can only reach so far, and subs alone cannot do much to a fleet unless they have a significant advanatage in numbers.
As I said…America can afford heavy losses, Japan cannot.
Then hopefully Germany is going nuts, and if it isn’t doing well, then hopefully it’s more of a dice issue or a strategic mistake, and if it’s neither of those, then it’s just time to up the bid.
I’m seeing a 9 to 11 IPC bid in recent games…and it still isn’t enough.
The hardest part I think in AARE is that the US can conduct convoy raids on Japan; this really encourages a big sub strategy using naval industry/reinforced carriers. But on the flip side, Germany can convoy raid UK.
The US can raid Japan without fear, since there is no credible threat to US income.
Germany cannot raid UK without fear, since a heavy fleet gives the Russians a free hand.
You have to adjust to AARE’s ruleset, because it’s designed not to be exactly like AAR. German navy + victory cities are the biggest things to keep in mind, because those are the things that give the Allies headaches they didn’t in Revised.
Germany’s only real chance to gain VCs is against Russia. How can this be achieved if they go heavy on fleet, especially since Russia has no credible second front to worry about?
Japan’s only real chance to gain VCs is HAW and AUS…both of which can be easily defended by the US.
Even if Japan ignores the US and goes full ground against Russia, parking a fleet in SZ 60, the US simply builds ICs in the Islands once taken and starts harrassing the Japanese coast.
I agree that Japan must play conservative…but I fail to see how doing so gains the VCs necessary to win, especially since you both advocate Germany splitting it’s focus onto two fronts, making it that much more difficult to make a significant breakthrough.