@Martin You did. Agree.
The Borneo gambit
-
The downside of the UK/ANZAC declare is that the US is decoupled from the alliance and there is no “tripwire” so the US CANNOT declare war on the Axis (without other provocation or London down) until turn 4. Japan still cant attack US holdings like guam and Philippines, but it can still “pass at peace” and just go right through the US area.
There are 2 good reasons to jump the gun
1) to enter China to stack on the proactive defense
2) to do the transport-boggle by moving the UK ship into the japan fleet and then having ANZAC declare separately (but as I said before, this is only a trick; the Japanese can simply leave their troops on the ships and this does nothing)There are 3 good reasons not to jump the gun
- you just cost the us
21 turns worth of bonus, in an otherwise J2 game - the US has strict movement restrictions such that they cannot even position up
- decoupled, as above
Don’t confuse this with the point that a constructive declaration of war BY RUSSIA AGAINST JAPAN “does nothing” and has no downside because it is necessary to permit the Russians to enter “allied” territory on the pac board. It is the border crossing attack that affects Mongolia, not the declaration.
Slight correction.
With a J2 DOW, USA get the bonus on turn 2 but would get it anyway on turn 3. In fact, if there is no Japanese DOW by turn 3 USA will get the Philippines bonus, which compensates for just over 1/3 of the lost income. No one should keep peace with the UK as Japan for 3 turns but you might like peace with the USA if UK/ANZAC DOWs on you.
- you just cost the us
-
Thank you Mr. Simon. Since Japan also gets the 10 oil + scrap bonus for not being at war with USA, I probably should have said something more like it costs the Allies a fair amount of both lost income AND potentially gives extra money to Japan. Japan could still feel forced to declare on the US, somehow, but if they can avoid it makes give Japan a chance to focus W/o worrying about the biggest enemy of all.
As a result, the UK/ANZAC early declaration should only be used when the potential benefits (holding silk road for multiple turns or boggling the japan transports badly) dramatically outweigh the J4 benefits to Japan.
On UK 2 “So, are those guys on the land, or are they sitting in the hold and playing cards on the landing craft?” would split the difference
-
Good point. That’s really a 4th reason not to jump the gun.
-
Simon33: “With a J2 DOW, USA get the bonus on turn 2 but would get it anyway on turn 3. In fact, if there is no Japanese DOW by turn 3 USA will get the Philippines bonus, which compensates for just over 1/3 of the lost income. No one should keep peace with the UK as Japan for 3 turns but you might like peace with the USA if UK/ANZAC DOWs on you.”
USA entry into the war totally hinges on Japan.
This presents interesting dynamics between Japan/Russia/UK/ANZAC, that is what makes it fun. There is give and take on actions by each country.
Russia stacks on R1 the Manchurian border, what does Japan do?
Japan on J1 ignores said stack and goes J1 against the Allies, what do the Allies do?
That is just one scenario.
That is what makes this game fun and interesting when we ‘talk’ about 1940.
What do you do when they do this and then you do that and they do that. It is all inter-related in the first 4 turns.
Another example from a global game.
Does Germany really want Japan to go J1 and get the USA into the war? Which usually means USA is knocking on the Western front on USA3. IMHO a KGF strategy is totally based once again on Japan. Japan goes J1, USA goes all in on Germany to neutralize Germany/Italy ASAP so they can divert over to the Pacific in Turn 5-7.
One last scenario to talk about.
IF Germany is going Sea Lion, that is the plan. How does that influence Japan’s actions? Does Germany really want Japan to go J1 or J2 on the USA?
-
If the Russians stack R1, the attack has good odds for japan, but I’ve seen the battle go wrong and since its off game-start, Japan can’t affect the odds it just brings everything. The problem with doing this as Russia is that 18 men can’t attack Manchuria either–they are too weak and the Russians cant affect that until R3, if ever. On R2, Japan often has 2 more transports and could bring even more naval support, so it would be a blowout.
Either way, Japan calls the shots. Japan can attack, or not, but that’s not true of Russia all they can do is stack on the coast, or not. Until USA comes into the war and can add some defense, its just not a good move–you’re right next to Japans main base and if he reduces you, he owns the Russian East. If Japan “goes for the allies” that was probably the original game plan anyways and he’s free to ignore Russia, or not.
A J1 is awesome. But it spreads you thin as Japan and brings down the wrath of the US at the expense of UK PAC. The USA can move pretty freely across the pacific b/c of the bases, and bombers have an immense range so the USA can be all over japan in a KJF, fast.
In my experience, KGF doesn’t work. You can’t kill Germany until they’ve essentially thrown all their power away on another attack, they are simply too rich and too well defended. All the key zones are within 2 spaces of their capital, and by land. Losing fleets, Africa or Denmark still don’t mean Germany is stopped, those are just preliminary steps.
You can spend the whole game 1-8 building up enough forces to start to cut Germany (or more likely, Italy, though its loss hardly matters since the can opener is already doing its job whether Italy lives or dies) apart but if you did it 100% then Japan rages over the little buddies. Then, with Germany you dance back and forth, whereas if you can hit or threaten Japan hard enough, he has to re-focus away from his $$ objectives. Some splitting is both possible and necessary with the US–and this includes making decisions after you see what happens. But less splitting is necessary during a KJF, if the UK brings a fleet together then the US can have minimal forces in the Atlantic (1 bomber, 1 transport, 1 destroyer gives you options) and still be irritating.
-
But less splitting is necessary during a KJF, if the UK brings a fleet together then the US can have minimal forces in the Atlantic (1 bomber, 1 transport, 1 destroyer gives you options) and still be irritating.
How about 5 bombers and the starting transport and cruiser along with the Brazilians + 2 units from the mainland U.S.?
America sends the bombers over early to hedge against Sealion, then focuses on Japan. The bombers can have fun for a few rounds, then fly over to Moscow when things start getting desperate over there.
-
A J1 is awesome. But it spreads you thin as Japan and brings down the wrath of the US at the expense of UK PAC. The USA can move pretty freely across the pacific b/c of the bases, and bombers have an immense range so the USA can be all over japan in a KJF, fast.
If the US player is going to KJF, he is free to build and position units in the Pacific regardless of what Japan does. Sure he’s limited to 3 ships a turn, but I’m not convinced that it makes much difference to Japan’s calculations.
I don’t think the old ideas about “keeping the U.S. out of the war” hold any merit anymore. As you say, KGF doesn’t work, so U.S. always goes KJF. However, Germany always does a Sealion feint, so the U.S. is distracted for a turn anyways. They also start with so little and are so far away that they are essentially “out of the war” even if they’re at war.
-
I don’t think the old ideas about “keeping the U.S. out of the war” hold any merit anymore.
I’ve had pretty good luck not doing anything to the US/UK/ANZAC till J4… am I in the minority? I do my l level best to keep the US out of the war, I only DOW UK/ANZAC if there is a chance safely knock out ships and take valuable territory. let me know your thoughts!
-
I think the biggest drawbacks are that with a J1 you can steal borneo and HK then Malaya and UK PAC has no money. Strong UK and ANZAC players will occupy New Guinea (5), Celebes (3), Java Sumatra (4 each) for multiple turns, which makes India way too strong and not readily capable of being take over. Once Anzac has a fleet CV DD TTs its leapfrogging with USA, or it can generate 6 total fighters to make a strongpoint.
Japan 4 can focus on China, but they lose India, unless the UK fritters the shelter of diplomacy away…
-
basically you put the UK on its heels right out of the gates… i will have to consider this next game! thanks!
-
Many posts and I don’t think I understand the gambit completely.
It’s a gambit for the allies that requires a USSR attack on Japan, with the idea that Japan needs to take its focus off India? Hmm…
USSR1 you are putting all your troops in Amur and pulling the Japanese north? Am I reading it right? Or only moving there USSR2 after most of the troops have left Manchuria? In the latter case, there’s no real chance of Japan attacking.
-
I feel as though drawing Japan north is a lose lose. Japan can grab easy IPC’s and they don’t have the Russian monkey on their back. They wouldn’t have to worry about a threat to Korea or Manchuria. The best thing for Russia to do is move back to Amur on T2 or T3.
-
I agree sir. What Japan wants is those 20 pieces out of its hair. If it can destroy most or all of them, that’s great. If they leave for Moscow–that’s good for Japan, but not for the Axis after G7, if the Russians can survive that long.
If they stay in the east the whole game, they still aren’t a threat–but Russia holds its territory. Japan needs like 6-8 inf and some planes to ward of that stack. If they stay in the east, that’s good for Germany but not that bad for Japan.
Japan can do a lot of other things, like tie up or destroy UK/ANZAC fighters that are crossing asia heading to Moscow, or stratbomb Moscow from behind. Russia can’t, its too weak and under pressure to accomplish much other that survival.
-
I completely agree. The allies have to use every unit on the board in a very useful way, because they are much more important than the axis units. Once again Japan would love to have free IPCs from Russia while taking out 20 units that the allies need to have.
-
You guys miss the most important part of the Borneo Gambit. If you read the rulebook carefully, you will see that the forces defend at a 6 when positioned on Mt. Kinabalu. There is no way that Japan could dislodge them once dug into that massive pluton. Forget it. Give up. Concede the game.
I have played games against players who heavily stacked one of the money islands. It is effective for a couple of rounds, but if you invest too much income into sustaining the garrisons then Japan can concentrate on either destroying the allied fleet in the Pacific or a land crush of India. I would not invest in building an airbase on an island because it forces the allies to spend even more income on sustaining the protection.
-
Climbing Mount Kinbalu? Isnt that an old Russian expression?
Great advice. Once the Japanese form up with everything they can in range, the fighters have to fly the coop. You already lost your TTs most likely, and 4 infantry isn’t a strongpoint.
Suggested Topics
