I have to concur with the others who have posted. A combined transport and infantry build for Japan on turn 1 is the way to go. If Russia took Manchuria on round 1, and if the UK executed the “Kwangtung Maneuver”, the only place left for Japan to build is Southeast Asia. While initially it MIGHT be safe (the US can take that factory using China and Sinkiang forces one time in 3, and later will threaten it with a southern island hoping fleet), it is too far from Russia to do any good, and forward progress against Russia proper is easilly blocked by Novosibirsk infantry units. Japan HAS to focus on gaining IPC’s in round 1 in order to sustain a transport invasion of Russia through the back door (Manchuria to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia). Also, as Japan builds a transport navy (protect by heavy naval forces that were NOT sacrificed against the US at Hawaii) the US has to garrison Alaska heavilly (that japanease transport fleet ferrying troops to Manchuria is a single move away from an all out invasion of Alaska too). That reduces the number of US dollars that can be spent on the European war, allowing Germany to maintain the frontal assault on Russia that eventually leads to Japan taking Russia. So for an opening move, Japan re-takes Manchuria, takes Australia, blasts the results of the Kwantung Maneuver (if executed) or takes China using air force and Kwantung infantry. If Japan still holds Manchuria, they assault Yakut and take it. If the UK builds in India, that simply takes more pressure off Germany and allows THEM to take Russia, aided by the threat floating through the Siberian lands… too far from India for UK to do a darn thing about. YAKUT is the key for Japan. Take it and hold it, you have one territory with all of your west-marching forces to defend it from the Russians, and you force Russia to try to defend TWO territories against your massing forces. The drain on Russia: defending Evenk AND Novosibirsk plus holding Karelia and the Caucuses with an income of only 20 or so IPC’s is FATAL, REGARDLESS of UK and US support. And with Russia gone, the Alllies WILL lose (economic victory is immediate on taking Russia, world domination only a few moves away)
RR or NRR.
NO BID! :evil: MUHAAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAAHA!!! - Xi
“One who speaks deferentially but increases his preparations will advance; one who speaks belligerently and advances hastily will retreat.” - Sun-tzu, The Art of War
LOL that just sounds funny
Yes I know it sounds like a Porno term.
In Classic, it almost works even better, since the “retreated” Japan fleet, plus additional units moved in to defend it in the retreat sea zone, are then within striking distance of almost anything they want to hit: Austrlia, New Zeland, Alaska, Western US, Mexico, SFE, Alaska, Midway, Hawaii.
And any new navy/consolidation by the US in the Pacific is within striking distance of that same Japan fleet.
Yes but I think you overestimate the importance of Austrailia/NZ/Hawaii and the Eastern Pacific Rim to Japan, and to that extent I think you would be under able to respond given slightly abherrant dice rolls. Further you seem set upon the idea that the US should build a fleet and even with good dice by Japan the US can take the fighter and get it in Europe and have a huge advantage. If over the span of say 8 turns the US builds even 1 additional ftr and bmb then they can attack Germany in WEuro and Berlin with 10-12inf 4ftrs 2bmb bb. This gives them ~6hits round 1 whereas normally they’re looking only at 3-4. IMO this is a huge difference and borders very close to inviting a mid round attack on a Fortress Europe stronghold by the Allies unless you over garrison these terriorites which in turn will mean less Russian committment in the West which will allow it to hold off or even push back the Japanese in Asia. Ultimately you end up with a very strong Russian Asian presence which prevents you from ever going to Africa which in turn deprives you of the IPCs needed to win.
The second possibility is even worse and this is that Japan gets bad or good dice. Should Japan roll bad then obviously a counterattack is possible or the loss negates the effectiveness of this move. Should Japan get “good” dice say take minimal loss while getting two hits, the US can and it should be assumed kill off its carrier ftr in order to retreat the sub so that they can trap the Jap Navy in Pearl to attack it. The best defense against a Pearl counter is to be doing well enough in Africa so as to not give the US the ability to risk its units and thus the game in such a risky counter attack. In other words anytime I’ve seen Pearl get counter attacked by the Americans it was always b/c of either two things. First the Japs rolled bad or two b/c the Germans got mauled in Egypt. Either way however the solution is to not fear the US at Pearl but to make them fear Germany in Europe.