Problem is that people will not understand the rules.

Mongolian rules are already difficult for some people to understand, or the rules around neutrals.

But there are so many things unrealistic in this game that just changing france alone does not make it more realistic.

Normaly i group them round 1 next to amur, then afterwards if japan is not in range i walk back to amur to pose a threat.

With the 2 AA guns you really want japan to attack with its airforce, Japan has a lot of air but if you can take away a lot of those it will help the rest of the allies.

Also attack up north isnt going to leave the planes in position to attack south the next round so plan your allied moves accordingly. Move russia down the same round as you want to move the Us forward and the UK-Pac up and anzac to the money islands.
Even if japan can attack and kill 1 of your forces the others will then have a free hand because surviving japan air is out of position for a few rounds and without the airpower japan is quite weak.

You could use D12 and make it so that bombers hit on a 1
escorting fighters @ 1-2-3
defending fighters @1-2-3-4

That way its not a huge difference but it does reflect the home advantages and the inherit fighter advantages against bombers but also the fact that bombers can defend themself.

Maby not the worst dice but the funnies thing that happened.
Real game so just phisical board, using 4mm dice of 4 different colors to optimize gameplay.
We always throw in the cover of 1 of the boxes because even with these dice getting a few on the board can lead to unrecoverable situation.
So i throw like 30 dice in 1 go and 1 of the dice desided to land on its corner, we where like WTF just happened.

Well my idea wasnt about chosing losses but just to scoring hits.
So bombers can still defend themself against defending fighters and escorting fighters will be a lot stronger them bombers but the defender still has the advantage.
Though AA should also hit on 1 on a D12 as AA fire was pretty ineffective in the war.

Since you got the destroyer if you put that in the channel and get your units from canada home germany has a hard time. You can get the gibraltar fighter home and maby buy 1 fighter + 6 inf. Now you got 3fts on londen. He cannot send 8 air against it because well scramble 1 dd + 3fts vs 1 cruiser = exit invation. But if he sends in 2 many for 110 he wont take london.

Personaly i think island trading is better for them, they can produce right at the front.
Having 2 or 3 country navy is good for defence but not that great for offence. If you take the burden of transports/troops away from the US they can make a bigger navy to threaten more.

And the US can always can open for you making sure you can get to a lightly defended island.

World domination gives the allies the option to go 100% KGF even as far as just pulling away from pacific only holding on to the middle east.
Japan will stall out around the 80-90 ipc mark. With the western help russia will crush germany and will be happy around the 60ish with its bonus ipcs.
Combined with the rest of the income from the allies japan will be hard pressed when they make only 70% of the income the allies have to keep going.

Im not saying it will be a short game or that i would want to play a 20+ round game.
But if allies just go KGF its not likely germany will be able to actualy get russia as round 4 the allies will be knocking on the doors of europe.
In these scenarios the allies just have to make sure that they take out 1 axis player without the other becomming bigger then the combined might. Japan is pretty much capped at how much ipcs they can secure and the US can produce so much units its not realistic to capture them.

But yea it will be a verry verry long game.

How about adding a sub to the BB off malaya, that would be annoying for a J1.

Online match yesterday
defending japan 1 inf 1 art
attacking 3 chinese inf + 1 air

Normal chance of winning 96%
End result japan 1inf 1 art left
china retreated with 1 air.

@andrewaagamer said in Beating J1:

@ShadowHAwk I am going to agree with @Arthur-Bomber-Harris. I like the bid to save high value units or put the Allies in the position to accomplish some of their major goals. Saving half the UK fleet and stopping Italy cold are high on my list of objectives. Not sure where you would put a high bid in the pacific because I have never done it. You seem to think there is potential so please detail where you would put that bid.

As I said earlier I would agree with some Chinese and UK Pacific infantry, Russian artillery and maybe a sub for ANZAC and UK Pacific and a ground unit for US in the Philippines. That is maybe as much as much as $45 leaving what for Europe? A UK fighter? Not sure I see the benefit of that versus having a strong Britain in Europe. To me the key is Europe. Germany unrestrained is going to win; no doubt. I have seen many a game where Japan is on her knees and the Axis wins in Europe.

Its an easy bid that makes sure that some areas are basicaly won. But why not just put a sheet over afrika and the middle east and dont use that part of the board? Saves putting pieces on it and if you dont want to play there its a much easier solution.
UK already is strong in the Med, airpower is a bit overpowered in this game due to insane range. If you want to use a bid to win the game yea put it somewhere that you already overpower.

But if you want a bid to balance the game unbalancing the board even further is not really working towards that goal.
I want the bid to balance the areas where the allies are weak or to prevent some cheap axis openers.

Put a bid in the med and europe will be will germany beat russia before it gets overwhelmed. No med play no ME play just boring germany follows their playbook because they have no other alternatives.
Put a bid in the Pac and Germany might be able to play Med, Japan suddenly cant do a J1.

Its just what you want from the bid. And also OP wanted a way to deal with J1 well this might help him with that.

“When allowed to gamers will try to optimize the fun out of games” this was a quote for PC games but it also might apply to other games.

@arthur-bomber-harris
Depends how you value units. The pacific bids will make a J1 extremely dicy at best.
Forcing japan to not go J1 means UKPac gains 7-11 extra ipcs round 1.
Anzac will gain 4 extra ipcs as their transport will not be destroyed.

If Japan goes J1, what ground units does it have in range of china on round 2. FIC is taken back by the UK. There is a huge stack of fighters on the chinese stack.
India is secure for a few rounds and china becomes a pain for japan for a few more rounds. Is that worth 4 ipcs?

I understand the reasoning of unbalancing some areas of the board to extremes in order to be able to ignore them for the rest of the game. But that does leave for a verry predictable game. Italy is destroyed, Germany cannot get sea-lion or afrika so the only option is east.

@c82rcn
But that isnt the same, if you preplan the whole game you cannot account for bad/good dice. Sometimes the dice can change the game in a radical way.

@andrewaagamer True the axis might have an easier time against russia ( as well italy is dead with our Without bid ) You really dont need the sub in the med.

But if you prevent a J1 with your bid or can punish it severely in a way that it pushes back japan for 2-3 turns thats 2-3 turns of full US production on the atlantic side. Which will help on the european board a lot to slow down germany against russia and it only takes 1-2 turns delay to turn the tide of war.
If every turn there are 3 more fighters landing in moscow and mechs are countering germany while at the same time the allies are landing in france something has got to give.

There is little that a bid can do in europe that you cannot do without the bid. UK can murder italy by itself, the UK navy will be dead Round1. But in the pacific a few added units can counter J1. Saving a destroyer+transport from the anzac, Ensuring that China gets the NO + can build art round2 and almost ensuring that china gets the NO round 3 as well. And slowing down the progress on the money islands.

@arthur-bomber-harris
I think with that bid you could better use it to beef up the other allies in the area.
US cannot hit the extended Japan lines Round1 but there are weak points that if the UK or china and russia would have just a few more units would make japan life hard.

3 art for russia.
2 subs UK pac
1 mech UK pac
Some extra china inf.

Those 18 russian inf will be interesting with 3 art there. Not round 1 but if they move forward round 2 well japan cant ignore it and cant counter it.
2 subs 1 with the BB 1 with the india fleet, I can almost ensure both survive, 1 can take a hit for the BB if i want or not. But if you even think of using the carolines destroyer to attack the anzac fleet its 2 subs vs 1 carrier.

As the allies its not a question of speeding up but rather slowing down. You dont have to win fast you just have to make sure the axis dont win fast. As long as you keep having more income and have decent trades your on the winning side.

@andrewaagamer
Eh the 4 bombers build on USA1 can attack SZ6 without any issues.
They got 7 movement. its 5 moves to SZ6 and that leaves 2 moves to land, so 3 russian landing spots.

Russia can declare war in R1 on japan, as this does not affect any state on european board. It also have no negative effects and allows russia to move into china.

So with 4 bomber build.
USA attack on SZ6 = 1 ss 2 dd 2 CA 1 CV 1 BB 1 figh 1 tact 5 bombers.
With a 1 carrier 3 bomber build
1 SS 2 DD 2CA 1 CV 1 BB 3 fights 1 tact 4 bombers.

So you need a little bit more if you want to defend SZ6 against that.

Also your japanese plans assume a passive UK-Pac and a passive china.
Depending on losses you might not even have land units in range of china so they are going up in income on T2 and are building some arti for extra punch.

If everything goes the right way for the axis yea they are unstopable. If they take a few more losses J1 they can be royaly screwed. Take LL and allies round up and Axis round down japan can be in a pretty bad position pretty fast.

@marshmallow-of-war
Its 2 turns back to moscow.
If germany attacks its at least 4 steps to moscow so thats at least 4 turns unless you want to go mech/armor only.

Szechwan -> Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan -> moscow

Just 2 turns so time to get back before the defence of moscow. Unless japan kills them off at the cost of most of its airforce but in that case USA can go full bore on germany as japan is basicaly KO.

@mikawagunichi Interesting.
Ofcourse this assumed that the US goes through with its buildup on pacific, and japan is slowed down by it.
Ofcourse japan has to act before the US does so it has to make assumptions based on what the US will do.
So if japan counters the US build by a heavy navy build the US can move its new carriers to atlantic R2 build transports there and be ready for an invasion of europe just as quick as before but with a stalled japan.

Something else, Russia and UK-Pac can reinforce china round 1-2 so that japan cannot use its airforce to attack the chinese stack with a decent kill/loss ratio. I would not mind losing the india and starting russia airforce if that also takes out a huge part of the japanese airforce. And if china can keep its NO and even build art round 2 japan is also in a world of hurt.

Typical J1 6 air will be on carriers. Assume 1 fighter lost somewhere ( not weird )
2 fighters will be defending japan itself.
That leaves us with 14 planes 2 strats 6 tacts 6 fighs.
Vs the chines stack of 9 inf 2 mechs 2 tanks(russia ) 5 fighters ( 2 russian, 2 UK ) 2 tacticals. And the russian units can be back well before moscow is under threath.

@andrewaagamer True everything can be countered. But still in your situation. Slowing the situation in china and against india and the money islands is a win for the allies. It then depends what germany did the fleet @hawai is in europe in 1 turn as well if needed so its not that big a deal.

But if you pull back all your fleet from a T1 US naval buy of 2 carries then that means your transports near the money islands have 0 protection. So Anzac can just kill them and take 1 or more islands there which is a decent blow against japan.

But yea every action causes a reaction and you want your opponent to overreact or underreact to what you do.
Which is a lot easier in a F2F game,