bcclark7 last edited by
First I wanted to thank everyone for their contributions on my last post regarding the Brazil IC.
I will be playing the US next game, and plan on aggressively sending troops to africa. I am looking to have roughly 8 transports by turn 4 doing this. I feel this will give me flexibility to invade Europe if need by, and to keep the flow of troops into africa.
My question is how do I slow Japan?
I would like to completely evac the pacific to include my battleship and bring everything to bear on africa and eventually europe. Is it better to use your EUS bomber, fighters in the PAC and your ships off of WUS to destroy the remaining fleet off of pearl harbor?
Also, should my UK partner completely evac India, or should he put up somewhat of a defensive with all 5 available infantry and your fighter?
Once africa is held, I was thinking of building a potential UK IC in egypt to aid in reclaiming India or supporting the caucus region?
Let me know what you guys think.
losttribe04 last edited by
Where are you trying to slow them from going? Most of the time Japan would move into China or the Soviet Union.
As the US player I may move FTR’s and my BMR to Alaska to keep Japan from moving unescorted TRN’s my way.
As the UK player I would decide if we were going SJF, KJF or KGF. Since your topic reads “slowing Japan” I would place an IC in India and work like h*** to keep it. Japan is going to think twice before sending units south and creating a losing dead zone.
As Russia every think they do depends on what Germany is going to do. Sorry that last one isn’t much help.
A good way, in my opinion, to slow Japan is to make them think a Kill Japan First game is starting.
Build valuable naval ships with America. For instance:
USA 1: 2 Aircraft Carriers, Fighter. (Gives you Transport, Destroyer, Battleship, 2 Carriers, 4 Fighters in SZ 55.)
USA 2: 4 Destroyers
USA 3: 3 Destroyers, Transport
USA 4: Move to Panama Canal and get Combined Arms
USA 5: By now Russia is probably falling back from the Germans, and England is struggling, however, you should have naval supremacy.
The idea is to have England clear SZ 5 while America pounds Germany into submission with off shore bombardments. You’ll have 9 Destroyers and a Battleship that should net you 5 kills for each round you attack with one infantry. That’s a 15 IPC SBR each round that you risk virtually nothing for.
But, Japan should have also sabotaged it’s own ground plans by building navy to stop you. (If he did not, then their is no reason not to move up to Alaska and start American landings in Soviet Far East/Buryatia each round, again with 9 destroyers and a battleship to bombard with.)
losttribe04 last edited by
Jennifer if you are going to go that far a few rounds of navel bombardment on Japan with the 15 IPC SBR you discribed may keep Japan closer to home also.
I know, that’s the point. Japan is placed into a position of ignoring the American build up (resulting eventually in the loss of their fleet and their islands) or countering it (which is what most players do) which eases the pressure on Russia significantly.
Anyway, bombarding Japan itself is not as effective as bombarding Germany. That’s because Japan can put a submarine in the water negating the American ships. If Germany puts a submarine in the water, England will kill it with their fleet and the American fleet will be free and clear to bombard the shore.
Guest last edited by
I want to know how USA has $48 to spend on US2, and $44 on US3
And if USA is going THAT heavy on Navy, and Japan is doing a practical response build while still adding Asia land units, then when the USA moves to Panama…
CANADIAN SHIELD BABY! (or a variant since USA will be devoid of units after the move to Panama due to spending their cash THAT round on tech)
If Japan played worth its salt, they have 3 loaded AC’s, a full compliment of TRNs, and several BB’s When USA runs away, and then builds NOTHING in WUS on the round they do it… Japan lands light in Alaska, and HEAVY in WCan. USA has no units to counter on their next move, so they defend in EUS and WUS. CUS, ECan, and Mexico all fall IF the US defends perfectly, CUS and WUS if they do not.
Yea, I’ve been doing enhanced for a while, the destroyers are more expensive in revised.
So America buys 2 Carriers, Fighter then next round 3 destroyers, etc, etc, etc
Anyway, Canadian shield’s no real response. Russia’s going to be all over Germany like flies on a hobo if they even attempt that maneuver while America’s massing ships, hell, even if Germany tries to go land and makes an attempt to roll over Moscow leaving Africa to the English.
The real question is, does Japan ignore America and lose all their islands and their entire fleet or does Japan build in response. Since most players are going to build submarines in response (since they are cheaper than destroyers you can mass more of them faster) then America pulls out after just a few rounds (still more than enough time to rescue England if needed) leaving Japan with a bunch of useless submarines.
Meanwhile, America was building destroyers which, if you get the technology, and why shouldn’t you since you don’t need to build more destroyers at the moment, can bombard the Germans into the stone age with all but no expense to America. (Hell, given that arrangement, I’d recommend Bomber builds to just sink the Germans deeper in debt. You only need 1 infantry a round to do your bombardments.)
Furthermore, now Japan’s building ground units like crazy, but Russia can divert 100% of it’s military power to defending against Japan and England can devote 100% of it’s air and ground power to attacking Japan. Only England’s navy is tasked with ensuring that SZ 5 is cleared of enemy ships so that America is free to bombard each round.