UK Fighter to attack Japan's Trn (59)

[DarthMaximus]

@AxisOfEvil:

One variation on u-505 opening that i like to use. I dont think its been mentioned yet:

dd to take out the tran. Sub to take out jap sub in sz45. tran from australia to take New gunea. Tran from india to take Borneo. AC to block retake of borneo by placing in sz 49. Your are only 2 to 1 favorite to take borneo with 2 inf vs 1, but when u do, it sure slows japan down. And with this open, they have so many targets, there no way they can pearl.

I would not make that assumption about Pearl.
Japan has plenty of ships/planes to clear Pearl and sink the UK AC/ftr if it is around and still take China at the very least.

Killing the US units at Pearl and China are more important then the British units.
Depending on UK1 Surviviors my hierarchy of attacks would be:
1 - Pearl
2 - Chi
3 - UK AC with/without Ftr
Then depending on risk I’m willing to take and what I have left
4 - UK DD (sz 59)
5 - trn at ngu
6 - sub at sol

IIRC you can safely do the the Sz 59 attack as well, leaving only 5 and 6 potentially for J2 if they linger in range.

In this scenerio Japan’s purchases and placement are key.  I’ll ususally go some combination of DD/trn/AC/ftr depending on the layout.

@axis_roll:

@U-505:

Plus, against the lone fighter or DD, the sz59 TP survives that combat about 1 in 6 times. It is such an important unit that if you are going to attack it, send 2 units and make sure it sinks.

Funny how I see players in this forum NOT attack the SZ59 Japanese transport.
That confuses me  :?  :?  :?

I am one that usually doesn’t attack it.  :-D
I am not opposed to the attack but at the moment I prefer to unify in Sz 30.

[U-505]

@DarthMaximus:

@axis_roll:

@U-505:

Plus, against the lone fighter or DD, the sz59 TP survives that combat about 1 in 6 times. It is such an important unit that if you are going to attack it, send 2 units and make sure it sinks.

Funny how I see players in this forum NOT attack the SZ59 Japanese transport.
That confuses me  :?  :?  :?

I am one that usually doesn’t attack it.   :-D
I am not opposed to the attack but at the moment I prefer to unify in Sz 30.

I really don’t know how I feel about the sz30 move. Egypt always takes priority for me if it’s doable. I guess it’s nice to save that fleet and be able to slow Japan down with it’s mere presence, but it seems to be a bad idea to me to let Germany keep Egypt and Japan keep that TP just for a fleet that has a negligible benefit when it finally makes it back to Europe. By the time it gets there Germany is usually no threat to the Allied navies. The TP’s do help, though.

For a player of your caliber, DM, I don’t question that move as much because I know you you’ll jump on an opening that presents itself. But for most other players, I’m with axis_roll. Seems like a strange thing not to sink that sz59 TP.

[Funcioneta]

Australian IC is very powerfull, I was amazed the good it was the game I tried. However, z59 must be sunk even in this case, because you risk lose Australia in J2 if you don’t reinforce enough.

There are few cases when z59 should not be attacked:

• For KJF, having 2 less units in Asia mainland in J1 is vital in any case
• For KGF, is still usefull for slow Japan, and that dd, when reach to Atlantic, usually has no use
• The only case I would not attack 59 is if I plan unify fleets in Indian ocean, but I’m not a fan of unify fleets

[DarthMaximus]

@U-505:

@DarthMaximus:

@axis_roll:

@U-505:

Plus, against the lone fighter or DD, the sz59 TP survives that combat about 1 in 6 times. It is such an important unit that if you are going to attack it, send 2 units and make sure it sinks.

Funny how I see players in this forum NOT attack the SZ59 Japanese transport.
That confuses me  :?  :?  :?

I am one that usually doesn’t attack it.   :-D
I am not opposed to the attack but at the moment I prefer to unify in Sz 30.

I really don’t know how I feel about the sz30 move. Egypt always takes priority for me if it’s doable. I guess it’s nice to save that fleet and be able to slow Japan down with it’s mere presence, but it seems to be a bad idea to me to let Germany keep Egypt and Japan keep that TP just for a fleet that has a negligible benefit when it finally makes it back to Europe. By the time it gets there Germany is usually no threat to the Allied navies. The TP’s do help, though.

For a player of your caliber, DM, I don’t question that move as much because I know you you’ll jump on an opening that presents itself. But for most other players, I’m with axis_roll. Seems like a strange thing not to sink that sz59 TP.

I should probably clarify, I generally assume Egy isn’t counterable.  If Ger has at least 3 units in Egy it is doubtful I’ll counter, but given the option I may end up doing the spread attack of Egy, Sz 59 with DD and sub vs. sub at Sol.

But with 2-3 units bid to Afr you really can’t touch Egy unless you get some serious dice in defense.  In this case I’ll probably pull 2 inf from Aus and unify in Sz 30 and pull back to Per from Ind.  This can make for some sweet counter moves on UK2 since Egy, Iea, Trj, Per, and Ind are all within reach of at least 4 inf + planes.

If Japan hits Sz 30, I should take out some ftrs and at the very least an AC and BB are out of position and I’ll probably have a legit shot at a Pearl counter which could lead to a SJF/KJF pending J1 results and board layout.

If the Sz 30 fleet is not attacked on J1, it makes a great deterant against Japan going after Afr early.  I don’t really use it for Europe, more to control the Egy/Trj area and then transport my early UK afr landings to Cauc or help kill the Ger bb/trn (if I can go to the Med) or try to maintain a threat in the Mid East.  Japan can potentially sink it but it’ll take them some time and effort to get things in range to make sure it is a battle worth fighting, but UK can always run away at that point.

[Croggyl]

@Funcioneta:

Australian IC is very powerfull, I was amazed the good it was the game I tried.

I have play the Australien IC once, and it was successful. US also goes pacific, and I unite both UK and US fleet at Solomons and start island hopping.

But I also have seen many problem in that approach: The UK has lost IPC in Africa quick, and if the germans would add some TRA to SZ 5 (they did it not in my games, but what if they do?), then the UK need most of his IPC on homeland for one turn at minimum. UK must invest at UK in home fleet and ground units to get some IPC in africa back and for the case of german fleet unification. And there are not enough IPC for all these.

Do you went pacific with US? How do you have handled Africa? How do you have germany stopped from become a monster and roll over the russians? What units do you have purchased at Australia?

Many question … :)

[Funcioneta]

First round in Australia I think were 1 fig, 1 inf (Jen menaced invasion). After that, 1 fig each round for landing in indian or USA ACs. 1 sea/air unit is enough for outproducing Japan with aid of USA (I also save australian fleet).

About Africa, I was lucky, because Jen risked too much and didn’t destroy Gibraltar BB, so I could kill the italian fleet in UK1. Jen had some mistakes and also some bad rolls (I had Man and FIC ICs in R2, I think).

In fact, it was about 10-15 ipcs to Australia, the rest for Africa and Europe.

With less luck, Australia IC can be more tricky, I know, but menaces taking East Indies in round 4 to 6. Soviets can usually survive that with some help from UK and token USA forces (Japan send less units to west or East Indies can be easily taken, they must buy ships).

[Crazy Ivan]

Always, always, always counter Egypt with everything that can reach.
Never, never, never let Germany get entrenched in Africa.
Yes, you can eventually get Africa back, but letting Germany get extra production IPCs out of it at little or no cost of units is strategically unsound. :wink:

Note: see my new post; Always Never :wink:

[Guest]

Agreed.  A UK IC anywhere, even the main one in London, is not that valuable if UK is collecting $20 or less due to the loss of Africa.  And if UK is trying to defend both London AND Australia after losing Africa…  It sucks to be Monty!

[Jennifer]

Honestly, I like unification of the British Fleet in SZ 30 with 1 Infantry from India.  This makes it financially worse for Japan to attack than for England to be wiped out, strategically worse for Japan to attack (since they’ll lose their air force and have to leave Pearl unattacked maybe even not take China’s fighter out) than for England to be wiped out (all those ships are generally dead by UK 2 anyway, so what have you lost?)  BUT

it really tempts Japan to try!  Furthermore, form here, you can hit E. Indies with 4 Infantry, Fighter if Japan leaves you alone, or you can hit Egypt or you can just dump the infantry in S. Africa to bolster the defenses there.

Furthermore, if you build an IC in S. Africa (which negates the risk of losing Africa and thus your paycheck and allows you to stay in the upper twenties, lower 30s) you can be a relatively annoying pain in the butt. (Once Africa is secure, you can always dump a submarine or two in S. Africa making SZ 34 a threatened zone if you want too.  Or at least pose the risk of doing so if you don’t want too.)

---

That said:

if I had to attack the japanese iwth England, I’d go Destroyer/Carrier to SZ 59; Fighter, Submarine to SZ 45 and land the fighter in SZ 52.  I’ve seen quite a number of Japanese attacks on SZ 52 go south because of that extra fighter.