Well I like an American Pacific offensive more and more because I find that Japan cannot keep pace in the fleet wars and build up a land force to threaten Moscow at the same time. Either it loses the fleet battle (which means Japan will lose half its income) or it can only send a token force against the Russians. So I go Pacific whenever I can. But if USA starts with a disadvantage in the Pacific (this will be most games), it is not the best strategy. The best players will adapt their strategy to what is happening in the game.
KJF etc.
-
That’s a very bad assumption. There’s almost a 70% Chance that your submarine will survive in SZ 45. It’s much better to assume it lived instead of died.
Simple statistics, which many players included Switch have calculated ages ago.
1 fighter + 1 sub vs 1 sub in solomons.
Fighter = 1/2 chance to hit, sub = 1/3 chance to hit.
Composite chance to hit is 2/3 in the first round (1/2 chance to miss mutiplied by 2/3 chance to miss = 1/3 chance to miss, so 2/3 chance to hit). The solomons sub won’t stay past the first round, so that is all that matters.
Or, simply use Frood. Go with one round of combat. Solomons sub dies 66% of the time on the first round (33% survival rate). Can you please explain where you got your 70% survival rate from?
Okay, so you are going to send 3 Infantry and a Bomber against an Infantry, Artillery and 2 Armor in Egypt?
Shrug, maybe they’re just accepting that Africa will fall for a few rounds (not counterattacking egypt), in exchange for making Japan’s life hell and possibly forcing them to make an error if they’re not skilled enough. It’s give and take, you do better in one theater and do worse in the other theater.The Allies are going to land hard in Africa anyways in the first few rounds according to your own strat Jen, so it’s not like the Germans will have a lasting impression there.
-
Jennifer, would you also do pearl if UK has 2 inf in Borneo, 2 inf in NG, DD sz59,
UK sub in sz45, UK ftr is in sz59 with AC, sz48 on AC, or in sz52 on US AC?
Not to forget UK trans in sz47 and sz48. -
Yup, I’d still go Pearl, but I’d go Pearl heavy and I’d send the Battleship and transport to go liberate Borneo on J1.
Screw the rest of the British fleet. They’re a nuisance that can be dealt with at your convenience. An Aircraft Carrier + 2 Fighters will be more then enough to protect your new transports if they attack, which would be kind of silly for them to do. (AC from SZ 50 would suffice, if you want to go that route) or you could just delay game 1 round.
Myriad of things you could do if England is yielding Africa to Germany. After all, that means England’s earning 21 IPC tops probably closer to 12 IPC in very short order and thus they are out of the game. So who cares about a pair of single hit warships in SZ 59? In this case, America is still the greater devil, in fact, it’s even more a greater devil because England’s now removed all forms of testicular fortitude it might otherwise have had.
-
@Cmdr:
testicular fortitude
excellent!
-
Yup, I’d still go Pearl, but I’d go Pearl heavy and I’d send the Battleship and transport to go liberate Borneo on J1.
(AC from SZ 50 would suffice, if you want to go that route)
I’m just curious how does one go Pearl heavy and not send their carrier to Pearl as well? I would think you need the carrier in order to dissuade a counterstrike off of Hawaii.
Also, I would still consider striking 1 car + 2 fig + 3-4 tran in SZ61 or SZ60 with 1 tran 1 dest 1 car 1 bomb. According to Frood, 2/3 of the end results involve 2 or more losses for the Japanese. If the Japanese sacrifice transports then their land position looks very abysmal for another round, and if they sacrifice anything else then the US can be invited earlier.
-
That’s what I’m saying, why go Pearl heavy? All you do is send your ships out where they are useless and now you have completely left your SZ 60/61 fleet naked, thus you have to choose not to build transports and now instead of having abysmal standing on the mainland, you have NO standing on the mainland.
Meanwhile, Destroyer, Aircraft Carrier, Bomber vs 2 Fighters, Aircraft Carrier, Battleship, 4 Transports may get you two hits. Okay. I damage the battleship and lose a fighter. I have all my transport ability and I’m only 10 IPC down while you’ve lost 43 IPC in equipment including a very nice bomber.
Pearl was light, but so what? I still destroyed everything and I recovered fighters with the SZ 37 Carrier in SZ 45. (Target-able by the battleship/transport, but that’s it. And that results in Defender survival with Fighter/Carrier left. But I might even just keep both fighters to ensure a better success if it goes to Round 2.)
Meanwhile, what have you bought yourself except a lot of dead allied ships?
-
Meanwhile, Destroyer, Aircraft Carrier, Bomber vs 2 Fighters, Aircraft Carrier, Battleship, 4 Transports may get you two hits. Okay. I damage the battleship and lose a fighter. I have all my transport ability and I’m only 10 IPC down while you’ve lost 43 IPC in equipment including a very nice bomber.
Well simply I didn’t assume a battleship staying behind. I thought it was going to Pearl heavy since I saw Pearl heavy being mentioned. With no battleship around, a loaded carrier + tran group can take an annoying amount of casualties. I probably wouldn’t consider it if the BB was around.
Pearl was light, but so what? I still destroyed everything and I recovered fighters with the SZ 37 Carrier in SZ 45. (Target-able by the battleship/transport, but that’s it. And that results in Defender survival with Fighter/Carrier left. But I might even just keep both fighters to ensure a better success if it goes to Round 2.)
Pearl light (3 fig 1 bomb 1 dest) has you taking 3 casualties with no bb to absorb it. That’s a dest + 2 fighters? Or dest + bomb + fighter? You destroyed everything, but 80% indicates a high amount of variation and also loss. Also if you don’t have a bb with your pickup carrier, the US might as well go out and strafe a plain carrier + 1-2 fighters with bb/tran. Good chance to knock 1-2 things out.
-
You keep changing the board layout. Pick one.
Pearl Harbor: Submarine, Destroyer, 3 or 4 Fighters, Bomber vs Submarine, Aircraft Carrier, Fighter.
Most likely outcome: 3 or 4 Fighters, Bomber live. (Possible Destroyer and Submarine too, seen that a lot.)
You could even take the BB from SZ 37 and add some fighters to sink SZ 59, but I’d rather get the American fighter in China.
That leaves you with nothing in SZ 52 or a Japanese Destroyer and/or Submarine left in SZ 52.
If England goes heavy in SZ 52 and gets lucky with your submarine in SZ 45, you still have a good shot at killing everything in SZ 52 and getting away unscathed. Can’t tell you the number of times 2 fighters, carrier, submarine get 0 hits in 4 rounds of combat. But then, you may have to actually move your battleship and carrier in, and then you’ll have to send your battleship, carrier into SZ 59. Either way, you end up destroying everything and taking no serious losses. The only thing is you have to make sure to take Buryatia too so the American bomber can’t hit your transports in SZ 60, or you have to build a destroyer to protect them.
-
Ok board layout is this, it looks like heavy KJF:
Buryatia: 6 Russian inf + 1 fighter
Yakut: 2 arm
India: Russian fig + arm, 4 UK inf
Persia: 1 UK bomber
Moscow: 2 UK figs
Sinkiang : 2 US inf + 2 Russian inf
Kwangtung seazone: 1 tp 1 car 1 dest
Solomons: British sub (your sub is toast)
Pearl: 2 fig 1 car 1 sub
New Guinea: 1 UK tp + 2 inf took the territoryYou don’t have the solomons sub to count on, so Pearl becomes tricky. What is your response? Where do your bbs go? It just seems like to me that taking Pearl light will cost you, and if you send in your carrier it will be toasted afterwards to an American counterattack.
-
@Bean:
Ok board layout is this, it looks like heavy KJF:
Buryatia: 6 Russian inf + 1 fighter
Yakut: 2 arm
India: Russian fig + arm, 4 UK inf
Persia: 1 UK bomber
Moscow: 2 UK figs
Sinkiang : 2 US inf + 2 Russian inf
Kwangtung seazone: 1 tp 1 car 1 dest
Solomons: British sub (your sub is toast)
Pearl: 2 fig 1 car 1 sub
New Guinea: 1 UK tp + 2 inf took the territoryYou don’t have the solomons sub to count on, so Pearl becomes tricky. What is your response? Where do your bbs go? It just seems like to me that taking Pearl light will cost you, and if you send in your carrier it will be toasted afterwards to an American counterattack.
With this allied set-up, I sure hope Germany came hard on russia G1
-
With this allied set-up, I sure hope Germany came hard on russia G1
Doesn´t really matter…
Germany can´t really break russia all alone.
-
Russia can break Germany by herself and Germany can break Russia by herself. It all depends on the first round of dice and the first round of purchases.
This is exactly why I don’t advocate buying an Aircraft Carrier on Germany 1.
Okay, so in Trihero’s version, which is highly unlikely especially the New Guinea result (most likely is 1 fighter remaining and there’s a good chance the British sub is dead along with the Jap sub in SZ 45 and a decnet shot the SZ 59 transport that attacked is also dead) you have a quandry with Japan.
Okay, assuming the board looks as you say it does, and with a little modification to take into account Russian combats that had to have been given up on due to lack of forces and British combats that had to have been given up on due to lack of forces and German combays that are no available along with the fore-knowledge after Russia’s turn that it is a KJF game, here’s what I think needs to be done.
Japan has to do something odd for a change. They got 0 hits in Round 1 which is the worst possible situation for them. But it’s not hopeless. For instance, Russia has 44 IPC of equipment and that’s half their offensive units included on the Japanese front. (8 infantry, 2 armor, 1 figher.) That means they only have 95 IPC facing Germany who has 251 IPC of equipment dedicated to eradicating them from the face of the Earth. Not a bad situation for the Axis powers.
Given this situation, securing fleet is priority one, building ground units priority two.
Japan 1:
Buy(30)
- Aircraft Carrier (16)
- Submarine (8)
- 2 Infantry (6)
Combat Moves:
Battleship, Aricraft Carrier from SZ 37 to SZ 59
Fighter frm Manchuria to SZ 59
Battleship, Transport from SZ 60 to SZ 52
Fighter, Bomber from Japan to SZ 52
Fighter, Carrier, Destroyer from SZ 50 to SZ 52
Fighter from SZ 37 to SZ 47
Fighter from SZ 37 to SZ 52
Fighter Manchuria to SZ 59
2 Infantry, Fighter from Manchuria to China
3 INfantry from Kwangtung to China
2 Infantry, Fighter from FIC to ChinaResult:
SZ 52: Japan (W): 2 Fighters, Bomber, Aircraft Carrier, Destroyer, Battleship (d)
SZ 52: UK/USA (L): 2 Fighters, Submarine, CarrierChance to reclaim SZ 52: 40% with loss of all American war ships and fighters
SZ 59: Japan (W): Battleship (d), Aircraft Carrier remaining
SZ 59: UK (L): Transport, Aircraft Carrier, DestroyerChance to reclaim SZ 59: 0% with loss of Bomber
China: Japan (W): 5 Infantry, Fighter, remaining
China: USA (L): 2 INfnatry, FighterChaince to reclaim China: Very slim and requires an American/Russia 1-2 Punch. Not recommended.
SZ 47: Japan (W): No losses
SZ 47: UK (L): TransportNCM:
Bomber from SZ 52 to Japan
Fighter from China to SZ 60
Fighter from SZ 52 to SZ 60
Fighter from SZ 47 to SZ 52Build: Aircraft Carrier, Submarine in SZ 60
Build: 2 Infantry in JapanCollect 31 IPC
Now, the Allies have been left out to dry. They have next to no possibility to hurt Japan, they can make some short term advances in FIC/Manchuria, but those will go away after J3 when Japan has the time and leisure to go back and get them at her conveniance. Meanwhile, England’s scrambling for her life as she has no chance to get Africa and no chance to do serious damage to Germany to help Russia. Russia is hopelessly out numbered and may very soon find that the 3 IPC she is getting from Manchuria for a round is not enough to recover as she losses W. Russia, Caucasus and Kazakh to the Germans.
The allies can expect a build of 3 Transports on Japan 2 with landings in Manchuria, Kwangtung and FIC on Japan 3. Unless they focus on destroying only Russian equipment first (which is what I’d suggest since America’s not going to be stupid enough to build fleet in SZ 55.)
And, for the sake of Argument, let’s say America does build in SZ 55. They have to defend against a battleship, destroyer, aircraft carrier and 4 fighters. I don’t think there’s much they can build to win against that. Meanwhile, japan can STILL build her transports because she’ll have the battleship and carrier from SZ 59 to protect them.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Battleship, Aricraft Carrier from SZ 37 to SZ 59
Fighter frm Manchuria to SZ 59
Battleship, Transport from SZ 60 to SZ 52
Fighter, Bomber from Japan to SZ 52
Fighter, Carrier, Destroyer from SZ 50 to SZ 52
Fighter from SZ 37 to SZ 47
Fighter from SZ 37 to SZ 52
Fighter Manchuria to SZ 59
2 Infantry, Fighter from Manchuria to China
3 INfantry from Kwangtung to China
2 Infantry, Fighter from FIC to ChinaI didn’t read the rest of your post because I got caught up here. You seem to have duplicated a lot of fighters! Twice you say manchurian fighter to SZ59, and also you said manchuria fighter to China. Could you clarify, please?
-
Manchurian fighter to SZ 59
7 Infantry, Fighter to China resulting in 5 Infantry, Fighter surviving.
Sorry. I made some adjustments on the fly for the ridiculous British round. :P And the silly Russian Non-Combats. hehe. Anyway, NCM should have cleared that up when I only moved a solitary fighter from China to SZ 60.
Map woulda helped too. wink
-
Ok thanks, I think I understand now.
I think the short term trouble Japan in is more serious than it looks. I know Germany is off the hook here, but let’s just focus on the hypothetical with what Japan should be doing and how long it can hold off, because simply that’s all I’m interested at the moment.
Japan lost 2 fighters on their first turn. (off of Kwang, and in Pearl) And have no tranports at the beginning of J2. A total of 5 inf in China is their mainland force.
I forgot to assume that the UK built an IC in India (with 5 inf in UK to help prevent sealion), and their 2 fighters were sent to Moscow.
And, for the sake of Argument, let’s say America does build in SZ 55. They have to defend against a battleship, destroyer, aircraft carrier and 4 fighters. I don’t think there’s much they can build to win against that. Meanwhile, japan can STILL build her transports because she’ll have the battleship and carrier from SZ 59 to protect them.
America could build 2 car 1 fig. That’s a total of 2 car 4 fig 1 bb 1 dest 1 tran in SZ55 at the end of US1, which is 1 tran and 1 car more than the Japanese have, and they’re all on defense! The Americans will be just fine : ).
On Round 2, Russia blitzes to Kwangtung with their tank from India, and occupies Manchuria with 6 inf 2 arm, and lands their 2 figs into Sinkiang. +9 income to Russia :evil:
UK on Round 2, builds 3 tanks for their IC, sends 4 inf + aa gun + 1 fighter into F Indo, the other fighter and bomber land in China.
What does Japan do on their turn 2?
-
Well, that is a problem. No possible way Japan can survive a concerted KJF. Contrary to what Switch and others have been saying for years. :P
But as I said, you can sink the American fleet and still have your own fleet left to augment. Expensive, yes. But not impossible. Meanwhile, Germany (who you cannot just forget because they are a major factor in this) is piling infantry and armor into Russia at a rate the Russian’s cannot absorb without American and British help. So Japan’s doing it’s job. It’s removing IPCs worth of units from the Allies by tying them up in the Pacific. It’s gunna take 5 rounds for the Allies to be secure in the Pan-Asian rim. It’s going to take 6 rounds for Germany to own Moscow.
-
I just wonder how the game plays out in a KJF after both Moscow and Tokyo fall. What the heck would each side try to do to get 9 VCs? I mean Germany could sure try to push out all the way to the ocean, but would still be missing a VC even if they got that far.
I suppose that might be the time when tech is developed - combined bombardment. At this point Germany needs to go out to sea to get a VC (tokyo/LA/Washington/London), but I guess after they control the mainland IPCs?
It’s just so ugly I don’t want to think about it, Africa is up for grabs again, tank driving between Moscow and East Asia… O_O?!
I guess the Allies would be behind, because the US will very likely have their ICs on East Asia later, if not much later, than Moscow is run over. I dunno…
-
Well, in most KJF games Tokyo is a bitch to get. Moscow isn’t so hard. Mainly because America has to build transports to take Tokyo. Germany has to build armor to take Moscow. 5 IPC vs 8 IPC.
After Tokyo falls, Germany better be ready because the allies are going to put 5 ICs in SE asia to keep up with the Germans.
However, Moscow is going to fall first in most games. Especially if Ameirca shares and lets England get some of the islands to keep them in the game.
At this point, Germany would be wise to use all their assets for two rounds for a Kriegsmarine (with battleships for bombarding!)
By SBRing England + bombarding you can keep their income down low enough to prevent positive unit gain and then move for Operation Sea Lion. It’s your only hope because you won’t be holding Asia at that great distance and if you let the Allies start to tie you up, you’re dead.
-
After Tokyo falls, Germany better be ready because the allies are going to put 5 ICs in SE asia to keep up with the Germans.
However, Moscow is going to fall first in most games. Especially if Ameirca shares and lets England get some of the islands to keep them in the game.
It just seems to me like the Germans would get the jump on Asia. Because Tokyo takes a while to whittle away, even one extra turn for the Germans would mean they’ve blitzed to sinkiang, and it’s a short stop to any one of 3 complexes which can’t bear the weight of 20-30 tanks even when combined, much less individually.
-
Exactly my point.
But even if the German’s get a jump, they are not going to liberate Tokyo from Russia. They have to go for something else. Like London.