Brainstorming: What's the best way to kill the Japanese Fleet?


  • If you really want to control the islands then you have to control the Tokyo SZ. Sending small fleets with one transport far away from home won’t last. Once you gain control of their main production SZ you can send all the transports you want to take back the islands.

    Same goes for the American airforce, those planes are useless in Australia. Using Alaska as an airforce base allows you to help the Russians if need be and it keeps your counter attack in the Tokyo SZ in place. Japan has plenty of IPC’s so I don’t think it’s wise to allow them to put down small fleets that will eventually overpower whatever you have roaming around the islands. It also keeps the Japanese navy away from India, Africa and the Med.


  • @alwayswin:

    If you really want to control the islands then you have to control the Tokyo SZ. Sending small fleets with one transport far away from home won’t last. Once you gain control of their main production SZ you can send all the transports you want to take back the islands.

    Once you control the main production sea zone…  How precisely do you control the Sea Zone around the enemy’s IC, that is two turns away from your IC, when the opponent has a larger starting fleet and better income than you do?

    The reason why the Solomon Islands tactic might work is because it is one turn away from the West US IC and two turns away from the Japan IC, and it is one turn away from East Indies/Borneo/Philipines, while those are two turns away from the Japan IC as well.


  • Wow, I got a lot of negative karma.  I wonder, for what?  Suggesting ideas that were self-acknowledged to be fringe, to see if they could be developed into something effective?


  • Let’s make one thing clear, US alone cannot kill the Japanese fleet unless the Japanese player don’t know what he’s doing. But if US build only ships and air units in the pacific, then Japan will have to build ships to protect their fleet, or it gets sunk.

    So this means less Japanese units to mainland Asia, but there are no strats to kill the Japanese fleet, assuming axis player is experienced, like you can “easily” kill the Italien fleet.
    The Italien fleet is much more vulnerable than the Japanese.

    Let’s say Japan builds 2 CV and one fighter during turn 1-3, and consolidates in Japan sz. How big navy/air force are you gonna use to kill the Japanese fleet?


  • There should be a UK dd in that fight too, Jen.  Plus, with the buy in turn 1, the 3 carriers are vulnerable in the only place they can stop, SZ 50.  The attack on 3 dd and a fully loaded carrier will likely glean a few zeros before your counter.  3 subs can go tee off on the carrier horde that’s stopped in 50 and the 3 bmb and ftr can clean up the BB/Crs or you can gang up on the carriers if you want to take care of the rest of the fighters.

    At least this way you’ve already started in on it in large part and it’s only turn 2.


  • @Subotai:

    Let’s say Japan builds 2 CV and one fighter during turn 1-3, and consolidates in Japan sz. How big navy/air force are you gonna use to kill the Japanese fleet?

    I’ve developed a new KJF plan.  2 CV and a Fighter are not even close to enough.  By the end of Turn 3, the Allies have a large fleet in Indonesia, 10 Bombers on standby in various locales, and have dropped Japan’s economy by somewhere between 16-25 while giving the Allies a needed infusion.  On Turn 4, the Japanese Fleet will be gone, and Japan  possibly SBRed.  At this point, Japan is pretty much a non-player, and while capturing Japan may be hard, at this point you hardly need to.  While Germany might take Russia and Italy might take Africa/Middle East, they can’t even match the Allies in income, let alone hope to keep what they have and somehow grab VCs in the Pacific.


  • @wodan46:

    @Subotai:

    Let’s say Japan builds 2 CV and one fighter during turn 1-3, and consolidates in Japan sz. How big navy/air force are you gonna use to kill the Japanese fleet?

    I’ve developed a new KJF plan.  2 CV and a Fighter are not even close to enough.  By the end of Turn 3, the Allies have a large fleet in Indonesia, 10 Bombers on standby in various locales, and have dropped Japan’s economy by somewhere between 16-25 while giving the Allies a needed infusion.  On Turn 4, the Japanese Fleet will be gone, and Japan  possibly SBRed.  At this point, Japan is pretty much a non-player, and while capturing Japan may be hard, at this point you hardly need to.  While Germany might take Russia and Italy might take Africa/Middle East, they can’t even match the Allies in income, let alone hope to keep what they have and somehow grab VCs in the Pacific.

    come on. what planet are you living on? japan start with a huge fleet. If US have 10 bombers in turn 3, they have used the vast majority of all their IPC up until this point om bombers, leaving little for fleet and not nearly close enough to be a serious treath to a japan player unless he is a monkey. Backup your far out comments with just a small amount of arguements on how to achieve this or keep em to yourself until you can.


  • maybe the bad karma planet.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    America alone can certainly defeat the Japanese fleet.

    It just cannot be done in less than 5 rounds of game play.


  • @Fighter:

    come on. what planet are you living on? japan start with a huge fleet. If US have 10 bombers in turn 3, they have used the vast majority of all their IPC up until this point om bombers, leaving little for fleet and not nearly close enough to be a serious treath to a japan player unless he is a monkey. Backup your far out comments with just a small amount of arguements on how to achieve this or keep em to yourself until you can.

    At the end of Turn 3, in the East Indies/Borneo/New Guinea/Sea Zone 39, there will be 3 Carrier Groups, 1 Battleship, 2 Destroyers, and 4 Transports.  There will also be 6 Bombers in East Asia, 4 in Australia, and 4 in West US.  Is that clear enough for you?


  • @wodan46:

    I’ve developed a new KJF plan.  2 CV and a Fighter are not even close to enough.  By the end of Turn 3, the Allies have a large fleet in Indonesia, 10 Bombers on standby in various locales, and have dropped Japan’s economy by somewhere between 16-25 while giving the Allies a needed infusion.  On Turn 4, the Japanese Fleet will be gone, and Japan  possibly SBRed.  At this point, Japan is pretty much a non-player, and while capturing Japan may be hard, at this point you hardly need to.  While Germany might take Russia and Italy might take Africa/Middle East, they can’t even match the Allies in income, let alone hope to keep what they have and somehow grab VCs in the Pacific.

    @wodan46:

    At the end of Turn 3, in the East Indies/Borneo/New Guinea/Sea Zone 39, there will be 3 Carrier Groups, 1 Battleship, 2 Destroyers, and 4 Transports.  There will also be 6 Bombers in East Asia, 4 in Australia, and 4 in West US.  Is that clear enough for you?

    i think FighterCommander may have been implying about the how in, how do you get those forces over there by the end of Turn 3.  There’s only one Allied CV to start in the Pacific, and adding two more means building them and picking their way through an active pacific where Japan is threatening (or could control) the islands you mentioned (and Australia & India) and sea zones by the end of turn 3.


  • I am guessing it involves Japan not taking out any of the Allied ships on J1-3 so that they only have to build 100 IPCs of Ships and fighters and 120 IPCs of bombers and get them over there by T3 to do it.  Throw in a UK IC somewhere and crank out the troops and Japan is down 16-25 for income.  sounds pretty automatic to me…I’m sold.  oh yeah…


  • Builds
    B1: 1 IC, 2 Bombers
    B2: 1 Carrier, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
    B3: ???
    A1: 1 Carrier, 1 Bomber, 2 Transports
    A2: 4 Bombers
    A3: 4 Bombers

    The total cost for the air/sea/transport/IC force, including starting units, is about 347 IPCs
    The total cost of the starting Japanese Fleet is about 207 IPCs, plus about 100 IPCs worth of units built on turns 1 through 3.

    My analysis is that Japan could certainly disrupt aspects of their move (taking out the Russian Ground stack or the Indian Fleet), but doing so would leave them fatally vulnerable to other aspects(whichever they didn’t take out, the American Fleet, and the American Bombers).  More importantly, they won’t realize the full extent of what is happening until after J2, and any units built on J2 or J3 would be unable to reach the allied fleet anyway.  Until after J2, it simply looks like America is building up a Fleet, Britain is going for an IC in India, and Russia is being aggressive.  Unless Japan does everything right, they could easily be screwed.  Even if they do plan properly, the situation is going to be a dicey one.


  • I want to know when the Allies liberated Australia that fell on J2 to park those 10 bombers on.


  • @wodan46:

    Builds
    B3: ???

    Is this because 2 FIG from SZ 61 sunk the DD/TRN on J1 (99% win), as well as Borneo and E Indies falling.  Then on J2, Australia was lost as well as the 4 FIG in FIC sinking the CV/BB/TRN off India while not building any ground troops to protect the IC?  Sets up a J3 landing in India.  Dang it’d be nice to have some bombers…

    good try.  try again.


  • also allied shipping will move in range of jap air/naval and will likely be sunk.


  • @a44bigdog:

    I want to know when the Allies liberated Australia that fell on J2 to park those 10 bombers on.

    If Japan goes for Australia, which would be odd given that there is an IC in India and a large Russian stack moving in, they run a good chance of getting sunk outright by the US fleet.  Even if they don’t expose themselves to that, they will lose their holdings in East Asia, and Allies don’t need Australia as a landing spot if the Japanese Fleet moved towards Australia anyways, they will just use Solomon Islands instead.

    Or they might send the Fleet and Bombers to Wake, to sink the Japanese Reinforcements and make hell elsewhere.


  • @LuckyDay:

    Is this because 2 FIG from SZ 61 sunk the DD/TRN on J1 (99% win), as well as Borneo and E Indies falling.

    That is a given.  I assume that the Axis sinks as much fleet as possible, which means that Egypt and Karelia can’t be taken first turn.

    @LuckyDay:

    Then on J2, Australia was lost as well as the 4 FIG in FIC sinking the CV/BB/TRN off India while not building any ground troops to protect the IC?

    4 Fighters vs. CV/BB will end with all 4 Fighters dead, and the CV/BB still alive.  You have a spare Fighter in India anyways most likely.

    In the mean time, the Australia attack will probably cost you another fighter or 2 (assuming you can pull it off at all), while putting your fleet in range of the US most likely, and even if it doesn’t, the US will be nicely positioned to counterattack.

    Oh, and you lose 10 income because you ignored East Asia, and Burma/Manchuria both fall.


  • :lol:

    playtest this dude!

    rofl


  • @atarihuana:

    playtest this dude!

    I offered to play him a game here on the forums to test some of these so called strategies. Haven’t heard an answer back.

    And what US fleet is going to sink At a minimum a loaded carrier a cruiser and a battleship in seazone 39 off of Australia on US 2. Although Normally I like to have 2 CVs there so it would take an even bigger fleet.

    Australia is best grabbed by Japan when they are out and about in the Pacific. It is hard for the Allies to liberate as well. An India IC is no REAL threat to Japan. Japan can produce 8 units, Manchuria 3, Kiangsu or FIC 2,  all that compared to India’s 3?

    wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.


  • The biggest problem with sinking that fleet is the large defensive power of it, combined with if it takes you too long to sink it there factories are already running so its pointless.  You truly have 2 options.  1) build up to hopefully slow down japan as they match you in builds or 2) take back the south pacific, to hell with there fleet.  If you really think about it there fleet is a defensive monster, but not that great on the attack, use that to your advantage to take islands.  Subs and carriers are great for this as the subs keep them away and the carriers defend against the strafe.  A transport is the deadliest weapon in the pacific, use it.


  • @a44bigdog:

    I offered to play him a game here on the forums to test some of these so called strategies. Haven’t heard an answer back.

    I told you that I am unwilling to play on the forums, it would require excessive typing.  I have had a strained arm limiting my ability to do things for about a month now, and am not willing to strain it even worse when I should be resting it.

    I am willing to play it on TripleA, but do not know how to do PBEM with it.

    @a44bigdog:

    And what US fleet is going to sink At a minimum a loaded carrier a cruiser and a battleship in seazone 39 off of Australia on US 2. Although Normally I like to have 2 CVs there so it would take an even bigger fleet.

    If the fleet is in sea zone 39, it can’t.  If in sea zone 37, it can be hit with 4 Fighters and 3 Bombers.  If America wished to, it could hit Sea Zone 39 with 1 Carrier, 1 Destroyer, 4 Fighters, and 2 Bombers, but doing so would be difficult, and would be suicide depending on where the Japanese Fleet is.

    @a44bigdog:

    Australia is best grabbed by Japan when they are out and about in the Pacific. It is hard for the Allies to liberate as well. An India IC is no REAL threat to Japan. Japan can produce 8 units, Manchuria 3, Kiangsu or FIC 2,  all that compared to India’s 3?

    True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.  Things won’t go too well for them then, even if Manchuria is useless to the allies.

    @a44bigdog:

    wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.

    I analyzed the situation and see the nature of the attack.  Still think it involves good prediction of the actions of the Allies and involves sacrificing East Asia, if only temporarily.


  • yes and because of exessive typing u write long posts justifying yourself 😄


  • @wodan46:

    @LuckyDay:

    Is this because 2 FIG from SZ 61 sunk the DD/TRN on J1 (99% win), as well as Borneo and E Indies falling.

    That is a given.  I assume that the Axis sinks as much fleet as possible, which means that Egypt and Karelia can’t be taken first turn.

    who cares about Egypt and Karelia 1st turn in terms of how does this affect Japan/Pacific actions…  First off, how do 4 Jap fighters affect Karelia?  I’ll give you benefit of the doubt and assume you meant some other territory.  Secondly, take Egypt turn 2. 
    my point is that there is no Allied ships off India to help protect your turn 2 UK builds there.

    @LuckyDay:

    Then on J2, Australia was lost as well as the 4 FIG in FIC sinking the CV/BB/TRN off India while not building any ground troops to protect the IC?

    4 Fighters vs. CV/BB will end with all 4 Fighters dead, and the CV/BB still alive.  You have a spare Fighter in India anyways most likely.

    4 FIG vs CV/BB is 28% chance 3 fighters left, 68% 2 fighters left.  ran it 10,000 times. 
    If you moved a fighter to India it didn’t land on the Carrier, but in India, that won’t affect the sea battle.  Not that it matters, since you were so concerned about not taking Egypt, that fighter you would have most likely left there to defend.


  • @wodan46:

    I told you that I am unwilling to play on the forums, it would require excessive typing.  I have had a strained arm limiting my ability to do things for about a month now, and am not willing to strain it even worse when I should be resting it.

    @atarihuana:

    yes and because of exessive typing u write long posts justifying yourself 😄

    HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Wodan,
    you’ve only been posting on the forum since Feb. 4, 2009 and you have 170+ posts and you are worried about excessive typing?

Suggested Topics

  • 26
  • 9
  • 70
  • 63
  • 8
  • 18
  • 2
  • 16
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

42
Online

16.3k
Users

38.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts