Japan invading Brazil - An option?

[axis_roll]

@Sproit:

@axis_roll:

There’s lots of factors for if it’s good or bad.

Taking the South America route makes those pieces ‘useless’ for 3 rounds (yes, grab new zealand on the way).

It’s a long trip, US can prepare (or the US pacific fleet was saved and in the atlantic already)
US can just sacrafice a tpt or two to take it back and now the Jap fleet has nothing to transport.

Japanese air craft would need to be in europe to make a fleet dsh into the atlantic as effective as possible.  Without that, the allies can treat the IJN as a gnat and deal with it when they are ready.  Also, If Japan is working the Indian ocean, US might drop a small backdoor navy in WUS to harass your sz60 transports.

Japan only attacks when ahving enough to leave behind, doh.

Please add detail to your statement or else it might be mis-construed as condescending.

“what is enough”?

I’ve already stipulated that IF you have an Indian ocean fleet working (to feed africa or fight persia, trans-Jordan, etc), then you might not have enough capital ships in/around sz60 to not have to worry about sailing 2 capital ships with support vessels around the south american tip.

US can drop a loaded carrier in sz55, fly a bomber in range, they would be able to hit sz60 with 3 planes.

[Hobbes]

It’s a diversion, nothing more. Distracts the US but it’s impossible to hold Brazil unless the US makes some major mistakes.

I once had a game on triple where J invaded Brazil (which I ignored for that turn) and built an IC on the following turn. He had his entire fleet (2 ACs, 4 FTRs, 2 BB, 1 DES, 1 TRN) and started building submarines. The US simply bought subs, FTRs and ACs. Meanwhile the 24 IPCs spent meant that only 16 or so were being used on Asia which was great for the Russians. The US kept using their 35 IPCs until finally they attacked and sank the entire Jap fleet. The IC was lost on the following turn and Brazil recovered  :-D

[Sproit]

@axis_roll:

@Sproit:

@axis_roll:

There’s lots of factors for if it’s good or bad.

Taking the South America route makes those pieces ‘useless’ for 3 rounds (yes, grab new zealand on the way).

It’s a long trip, US can prepare (or the US pacific fleet was saved and in the atlantic already)
US can just sacrafice a tpt or two to take it back and now the Jap fleet has nothing to transport.

Japanese air craft would need to be in europe to make a fleet dsh into the atlantic as effective as possible.  Without that, the allies can treat the IJN as a gnat and deal with it when they are ready.  Also, If Japan is working the Indian ocean, US might drop a small backdoor navy in WUS to harass your sz60 transports.

Japan only attacks when ahving enough to leave behind, doh.

Please add detail to your statement or else it might be mis-construed as condescending.

“what is enough”?

I’ve already stipulated that IF you have an Indian ocean fleet working (to feed africa or fight persia, trans-Jordan, etc), then you might not have enough capital ships in/around sz60 to not have to worry about sailing 2 capital ships with support vessels around the south american tip.

US can drop a loaded carrier in sz55, fly a bomber in range, they would be able to hit sz60 with 3 planes.

Enough?

Enough when they can manage to keep the Russian pipeline flowing, supporting the fight (if needed) in Persia,

But hopefully the UK and US build both an IC in Sinkiang and India, so units can also be placed there.

It is a risky move, but well, aint war risky any time? ;)

[frood]

Let’s see - commit 50 + IPCs in hardware to take a 3 IPC territory… if you hold it for 16 turns you’ll have enough to replace what you took out of the Pacific theater! I guess half that # of turns really, because you are also depriving the US, but still…

This is another classic example of over-valuing territory and under-valuing units.

[U-505]

I agree partially. Do so only if you can hold it for more than a turn or 2 such as when the US is going to Europe. The fleet you use will be getting to Africa later but they would usually only be taking up space defending your TP’s in sz34. But that’s overkill anyway since the other half of the Japanese navy is more than adequate to defend TP’s in sz34 so their absence won’t be hurting Japan much.

If the US is going to Africa and their fleet is in sz12, I wouldn’t recommend it because you’re going to have to use 1 naval unit each in sz17 and sz18 to block them from destroying the rest of your fleet or risk not only them retaking Brazil but also destroying half the Japanese navy. It’s asking a bit much from Japan to distract the US for a turn at that cost.

[Guest]

Japan fleets off Brazil and Egypt means wide open Pacific for a mid-game USA move against Japan (see most of Darth’s games for an example of the mid game USA Pacific move).

[Magister]

Scenario: it’s around turn 6. Japan had just taken New Zealand having there 1tra+1inf or 2, 1car+2ftr, 1BB.
US has started to heavily KGF with a 5+5 transport fleet, has main fleet in Baltic, only 5 transports in SZ08 (SW of Britain) - enough to deter a lone German bomber - and say 3 fighters in Karelia.

Is this early warning of Japan in NZ strong enough for US to switch to some preventive anti-Japan building ? What would that best be ?

• Extra fighters built in EEU - reducing inf+arty flows ?
• Taking (some) fleet out of Baltic ? But that would mean dividing the (ships-vs-German-air) defense in 3. The Channel area is targetable by German fighters in addition to the bomber. So that may mean needing to take fighters out of Karelia to land on US or UK carrier. What if these fighters were NOW critical to hold the forward European presence ?
• Specific anti-ship units (offensive: sub, defensive and projection: carrier)

The “opportunity cost” problem arises because Japan can’t do very much with the 2car,2BB,1des in an anti-Russia effort not opposed by US KJF. So they may use them “somewhere” essentially for free. Brazil is one possibility, Alaskan raid or Africa others…

[Jennifer]

Hobbes,

I had Japan invade Brazil, build an IC and start invasions of W. Indies and later E. USA.

My opponent wasn’t the sharpest stick in the world, but it was a fun game!

[frood]

I find that the Jap fleet can be very helpful in bombarding Egypt / Persia / Trans-Jordan etc.

Also, if you can get some units through the Suez in time, it can really prolong the life of the German fleet in the Med.

[Jennifer]

No disagreement here.

After Africa is secure, though, pushing through with the Japanese fleet can be a wise decision since it threatens the American shuck and the British shuck usually forcing them to pull their airforces back or build warships or both.

[trihero]

I find that the Jap fleet can be very helpful in bombarding Egypt / Persia / Trans-Jordan etc.

I think this is something very interesting to investigate. Use 2 transports and shuck units from the Indian complex into these areas to up the pressure on the Allies? The Japanese have 2 bbs and a big airforce to spend in Africa while the Allies don’t really want to spend all day in there with the Germans on their minds.

[Jennifer]

No use investigating this, it’s pretty much standard operating procedure.

Though, I’d like to investigate the potential of sailing the Japanese fleet around the Cape of Good Hope (think that’s the one) off the coast of S. Africa and going up to SZ 12 to spit in the face of the allies. =)

Better make sure you keep some cash in reserve to throw down a fleet in SZ 60 if America get’s fancy though.

[Guest]

Japan fleet in the Atlantic is only an issue of the UK is LOCKED into landings in Archangel.  Otherwise, it is a suicide move for Japan.

[trihero]

Well I can’t say I would have a whole lot of fun with the Japanese fleet threatening the shuck fleet going from E. Canada to London. It’s probably suicide to try to go after the advance fleet which has all the US and Uk combo in there, but the support fleet is not that well defended usually.

[Guest]

Perhaps with some players, not with me…

[trihero]

Well even if it was poorly defended you would pretty much need to have 4 fighters with your Japanese fleet to get something done, which is a pretty big waste of resources IMO sailing so far off when your fighters could be used to threaten Moscow, trade Africa, or defend territories.

[Jennifer]

Well, 2 Battleships, 2 or 3 Destroyers, a half dozen submarines, a couple of fodder transports and 4 fighters in the Atlantic under Japanese control at the very least would dictate a response from the allies.  Otherwise, SZ’s 1 and 10 get blockaded ending the American influence in the war.  Sure, the Combined Allied Fleet might survive a direct assault, but no one said the Japanese need to attack the Allies.  They just have to get in the way, right?

[Guest]

If Japan is THAT heavy in the Atlantic, then the Allies are sitting pretty, because Japan is pitifully weak in Africa, Asia, and the Indian Ocean… not to mention ripe for a US PACFLT…

[Jennifer]

@ncscswitch:

If Japan is THAT heavy in the Atlantic, then the Allies are sitting pretty, because Japan is pitifully weak in Africa, Asia, and the Indian Ocean… not to mention ripe for a US PACFLT…

As I said, Japan has to hold some cash in reserve to plop down a navy in SZ 60 if America decides to get fancy and try to put a transport in SZ 55 for free island grabbing.

If Japan is THAT heavy in the Atlantic, then the Allies are doomed, because the Allies are absent from Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean AND their main life line to Russia is severed reducing Allied reinforcements to expensive fighters and bombers and giving the Germans a reprieve from allied one two punches to European landings.

After all, it’s relatively cheap to put two existing fighters on a carrier in SZ 60 and sink whatever America puts in SZ 55 with the loss of 1 or 2 fighters.  Much more expensive for America to build a Carrier, 2 Fighters, Transport(s) and submarines to start to make a threat in the empty Pacific.  Not to mention, that’s 2 or 3 rounds of expenditures in the Pacific while Japan clears up the American and British fleets or locks them in SZ 4/5 while the Germans and Japanese kill off Moscow.

[frood]

Umm - I don’t think that a Japan fleet sufficient to guard a TRN off Brazil is necessarily a strong enough fleet to wipe out the UK and US fleets - both of which are much more quickly reinforced in the atlantic than the Japanese fleet.

BTW, Jennifer, when are you going to shorten your sig? It’s a bit long, and I’m tired of reading Ivanova’s ranting and raving.