Thanks. Just wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something!
Why would Japan ever wait to attack? Am I missing something?
-
But you can already pound China with the fighters/bombers that start on the mainland. The real limiting factor for Japan vs. China is the number of land units. Plus, from Turn 1, I have a secure eastern border due to the fact that my sizeable fleet is vastly superior to America’s. They won’t get the added +40IPCs to spend until Turn 2, which means those units won’t be in position until at least Turn 3.
Does it really matter if all of the Allies play at once, when 2/3rds of them are land-locked? The airforce in China can be positioned to attack any new UK transports, and a small bit of the Caroline fleet can break off to deal with any new ANZAC navy.
How exactly do you get your ducks in a row, so to speak? What kind of naval positioning do you do? Wouldn’t the Allies be better positioned against you because they know you’re going to attack?
-
The biggest thing I think Japan is short on is TRs in theater and that is what I build in that first turn or two. This lets me take the DEI and PI (the latter without gambling on a lower-odds attack). It also means that I have more threat capacity against the Anzacs and even Hawaii if the US gets cute.
I’ll look again the next time I have it set up, but the last time this idea was presented I took a long critical look at the advantages of a J1 attack and found them less appealing than a slower and steadier approach of a J2/J3 attack.
Don’t get me wrong, I do see some things I like in a J1 attack (namely killing a LOT of Allied TR capacity in one turn with minimal loss). But my sense of it from watching my Japanese opponents try and lose twice is that you are putting too many balls in the air at once. If you mis-step at all, the whole thing can come crashing down.
-
The biggest thing I think Japan is short on is TRs in theater and that is what I build in that first turn or two. This lets me take the DEI and PI (the latter without gambling on a lower-odds attack). It also means that I have more threat capacity against the Anzacs and even Hawaii if the US gets cute.
I’ll look again the next time I have it set up, but the last time this idea was presented I took a long critical look at the advantages of a J1 attack and found them less appealing than a slower and steadier approach of a J2/J3 attack.
Don’t get me wrong, I do see some things I like in a J1 attack (namely killing a LOT of Allied TR capacity in one turn with minimal loss). But my sense of it from watching my Japanese opponents try and lose twice is that you are putting too many balls in the air at once. If you mis-step at all, the whole thing can come crashing down.
The more I read about strategies for this game, the more I think that it is a risky one when compared with Classic/Revised/AA50/AA42. For J the decision to attack on either J1, J2, J3 or even J4 all involve risks, either by J or the Allies:
- The US Fleet getting in position on Hawaii or not
- UK/ANZAC taking DEI or preventing J from getting
- Number of Allied units that escape the first attack
- NUmber of Japan’s units that are destroyed on the attack or any counterattacks
- Killing China or letting Asia turn into a stalemate for the next turns
The trick is not to let those risks turning into gambles
-
But that’s the point of my strategy is to not have too many balls in the air. Essentially you try and hold off America by threatening with a larger fleet. By the time they have a fleet capable of takling the starting Japanese navy, India (and China) is out of the picture and Japan has more income than America.
Of course no good plan survives contact with the enemy. I think the land-locking the UK and ANZAC player is key, and taking all of the Dutch Indies for the bonus income by the end of Turn 2. If America gets too frisky with its navy, there may be a chance to snatch Hawaii. If the Australia player and UK player have no transports, you have effectively removed those balls juggled in the air, as it limits their options.
-
Some of the attacks you have listed there are not enough overkill for me and in many cases you wont have much follow up on them in China.
For example:
1 Bomber from Japan destroys the Hawaiian transport, and with the assistance of the Japan airbase, can land on the Marshall Islands.
This isnt even possible with the US LBA at Pearl. They will Scramble the Fighter and the TAC and likely trade out well with your bomber.
o 1 Fighter from Formosa, 1 Bomber from Manchuria, and 1 Bomber from Japan wipe out the British Battleship and 2 Transports in SZ 37 around Malay. The Fighter must land in Siam, while the 3 Bombers have enough movement to land in Kwangsi. If you are uncomfortable with the odds, the Bomber in Kiangsu may also participate.
Quite possible, but also potentially expensive. Sure you are killing 20 IPCs of Brit BB, but you are risking 10 IPCs of Japanese air. If you wait and go later on you can often kill the Brit navy for almost zero cost by taking hits on BBs and/or Subs.
o 3 Infantry and 1 Artillery from Kwangsi move into Yunnan. 1 Fighter, 1 Tactical Bomber, and 1 Bomber (if not used against the British Battleship) fly to Yunnan, to land in Kwangsi after the fight.
You’ll obviously win here, but you are unlikely to kill them all on the first round. This means more potential losses of valuable ground troops in China. In addition, you will have less to hold against the all-important Chinese counter-attack.
1 Battleship and 1 Destroyer from the Caroline Islands moves to Sydney and destroys the Australian Destroyer and Transport.
If the Aussie hits, you’ll likely lose both to the RNZAF. If I’m the Allies, that’s a trade I’ll GLADLY make. Even if the DD doesnt hit in the initial battle they might still counter-attack and win (4x3 vs a 4 and a 2 with 3 hits). Japan cannot afford to lose her early superiority piecemeal.
The 2 Transports from Japan move 2 Infantry, 1 Tank, and 1 Artillery into the Philippines. The Fighter and Tactical Bomber from SZ 35 also move in for the island attack.
Again, a pretty risky attack, not in terms of winning, but in terms of what you might lose in the process. That fight is far from overkill vs 2x2, 1x1, and 1x4. A few flukey dice and you could lose most of your ground pounders which will set you back quite a bit.
2 Infantry from Kiangsi attack Kwangtung. Then several Fighters and Tacs fly in from Manchuria and Japan to help.
Ditto. Again, a winning odds battle, but still quite possible to take 2 hits and lose the ground forces. At the very least you have good odds of losing 1 Inf which will not easily be replaced on the continent.
IMO, while none of these attacks are ‘bad’, you are very vulnerable to a few strings of luck leaving you VERY weak on the ground. You have no follow-up to these attacks. In China, with no factory and no additional TRs, you risk becoming bogged down, especially with the Brits free to counter-attack into Yunnan. I consider Yunnan to be CRITICAL to the Japanese victory in Asia and you will need a lot of luck to keep it closed down.
Put it this way, if I HAD to attack on J1, I would likely follow something very similar to what you have here. It is a solid plan for a J1 attack. But IMO leaving the Allies alone for a few turns doesnt really alter the basic equation that Japan has a FAR superior military at the point of attack. What waiting does is allow Japan to position for less battles where the outcome can be remotely in doubt. The goal is to suffer minimal casualties on the turn of attack as well as have follow-up forces already headed into the battle. The idea is to have a more powerful sustained attack rather than a flash in the pan attempt at big success on turn 1.
-
Wow these threads are getting old.
First off, you would send a sub to kill the transport at Pearl, else your getting a US scramble and loosing a bomber.
Secondly, you will not be getting all of the DEI area on J2 as the UK can move 2 boats to SZ 37 & 42 to block off Sum, which just happens to be in range of 6 allied planes that can land on it turn 1, up to 7 more on turn 2 (not saying they should, just saying they could).
Third, you best be getting a mainland factory on J2 unless you want china to stay alive for a good long time. And you best hope the UK player doesn’t help china by stacking the daylights out of Yunnan on UK2.
Fourth, and the worst, on J3 you will be able to take all of the DEI, the problem is on US3 there starting fleet can hit DEI as well. Now they may have to sacrifice a transport to take an island, but, you’ll be trading down there for the remainder of the game. Then it becomes a race, take out India before the US takes over the DEI, or you loose your income advantage that you never really had.
Fifth, and last, is this not the same J1 i’ve seen posted several times by Maher C and originally by Frontovik? Oh no, his was better. He used planes against ANZAC so he didn’t expose any boats. And he knew to send a sub to Pearl.
-
Bazinga!
-
I think another thing is that many people don’t understand the rules completely so they use last edition’s and get inherent advantages because of this. If you use the rules to full effect then this game becomes quite balanced. And word to the wise, a J1 attack will most likely end in a loss for the Japs.
-
A J1 attack will leave Japan with very few ground units on mainland Asia. If the U.K. builds as many ground units a turn as possible, Japan will run out of ground units trying to reach India. The key to this is China. China should hold the Burma Road if possible, but if Japan seems short on ground units, they should swing north and try to push Japan back there. That will force Japan to commit resources where it doesn’t want to.
-
Wow, somebody is not used to thinking, or allowing others to work out their ideas on these boards. I looked over the first several pages and decided to just post again. If these kinds of posts are getting “old” for you, then please stop replying to them.
[cit]First off, you would send a sub to kill the transport at Pearl, else your getting a US scramble and loosing a bomber.[/cit]
That is a good point. A sub would be better suited for the free kill.
[cit]Secondly, you will not be getting all of the DEI area on J2 as the UK can move 2 boats to SZ 37 & 42 to block off Sum, which just happens to be in range of 6 allied planes that can land on it turn 1, up to 7 more on turn 2 (not saying they should, just saying they could).[/cit]
But I landed many Bombers and Fighters on Kwangsi. The Bombers destroy the lone boat in 42, and the Fighters take out the lone boat in 37, allowing my transports free access to whatever.
And as you point out, the UK could land planes on Sumatra instead of reinforcing China, but doesn’t that help my mainland invasion?
If they do concentrate planes on Sumatra, then I suppose I could turn more of my attention to that island. I do have three transports and a small navy in the area, and those 7 Fighters are from two different nations, so their attacking power isn’t as great.[cit]Third, you best be getting a mainland factory on J2 unless you want china to stay alive for a good long time. And you best hope the UK player doesn’t help china by stacking the daylights out of Yunnan on UK2.[/cit]
And? Why wouldn’t I get a mainland factory? Sorry for not pointing out the obvious there. If the UK player “stacked the daylights” out of Yunnan, then that means Malaya is Infantry free, no? If they try to keep infantry on both, then I’d hardly call that “stacking the daylights” out of Yunnan.
[cit]Fourth, and the worst, on J3 you will be able to take all of the DEI, the problem is on US3 there starting fleet can hit DEI as well. Now they may have to sacrifice a transport to take an island, but, you’ll be trading down there for the remainder of the game. Then it becomes a race, take out India before the US takes over the DEI, or you loose your income advantage that you never really had.[/cit]
So how exactly would the America player slip past my Caroline fleet in timely manner? If they did try to go around Australia, wouldn’t the Japanese player see that coming and be able to break off the appropriate amount of ships to deal with them?
[cit]Fifth, and last, is this not the same J1 i’ve seen posted several times by Maher C and originally by Frontovik? Oh no, his was better. He used planes against ANZAC so he didn’t expose any boats. And he knew to send a sub to Pearl.[/cit]
If you use planes against ANZAC, then how exactly are you to take the Philippines? They are the offensive firepower in the above outlined plan. It holds America down to 55 Production instead of 62.
How would someone know that Maher C or Frontovik had posted this “several times”? They’re not on the first several pages of the forum.
Perhaps this conversation is old because you yourself keep posting about it. Isn’t that your post about the economics of a J1 attack just 2 days ago? Not that subject again!
And I doubt you’ve seen the last of someone’s J1 attack plan. Please try and refrain from being a condescending prick for the next guy.
Bazinga, indeed.
-
Would building a couple of small factories offset the lack of mainland presence? Once Japan’s increases, it would be easy to put 3 Infantry and 3 Tanks on the mailand per turn. Combined with their airforce and they could slowly grind away to India. Any left over money could go towards holding off America.
-
IMO it depends on how quickly you can get it into operation. 2x IC on the mainland is 24 IPC and THEN you start putting out troops. Meanwhile the US is making 55/turn and pumping it directly into the Pearl/Australian/DEI line.
IMO the best US strat early on is “hit 'em where they ain’t”. And yes, you can have a nice fleet at the Carolines, but with the US fleet intact and 55 IPCs worth of reinforcements its going to be tough going standing that off for long without massive expenditure yourself (which is harder to do if you are pumping early IPCs into ICs and massed ground troops).
Pretty much my experience is that one Japan’s initial fleet is whittled down she can no longer protect everything she needs to protect while fighting the ground war against China/UK. The J1 attack puts you considerably ‘behind schedule’ in mopping up the mainland (in exchange for slowing the Allies down at sea). The downside I see here is that the US is going come knocking FAR before you are done in Asia.
The goal of the later attack is to have that mainland well in hand before having to deal with the US en masse. The J1 attack disperses and dilutes the IJN a bit (depending on losses) while simultaneously allowing the US to come in full tilt at the same time. I’m not saying it’s doomed by any means, but the short-term payoff doesnt seem as worth it to me as the ‘slow and steady’. YMMV
-
To be fair, your post title says “…Am I missing something?”
You missed the 30 other threads discussing J1 attacks. Vareel and I have no love lost, but I have to defend him/her on this one. As I post this there are J1 threads on Page 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11.
Saying they weren’t on the front page when they are on 4 of the first 6 pages in a forum is just laziness.
-
So looking at the incomes for both sides, Japan is only down by 28 Production to begin with, and considering the size advantage they start out with in terms of Total Unit Vaule, they can stand to wait and better position themselves rather than pull the trigger prematurely.
-
I would say that that is a pretty good summary. How long you wait depends on what opportunities present themselves. J3 would be ‘ideal’ for me, but giving the Brits the 37 IPCs and letting them escape with one TR is something I’d prefer to avoid if possible. I’m thinking of a J2 attack next time depending on what the US does.
-
Wow, somebody is not used to thinking, or allowing others to work out their ideas on these boards. I looked over the first several pages and decided to just post again. If these kinds of posts are getting “old” for you, then please stop replying to them.
But I landed many Bombers and Fighters on Kwangsi. The Bombers destroy the lone boat in 42, and the Fighters take out the lone boat in 37, allowing my transports free access to whatever.
So how exactly would the America player slip past my Caroline fleet in timely manner? If they did try to go around Australia, wouldn’t the Japanese player see that coming and be able to break off the appropriate amount of ships to deal with them?
Perhaps this conversation is old because you yourself keep posting about it. Isn’t that your post about the economics of a J1 attack just 2 days ago? Not that subject again!
And I doubt you’ve seen the last of someone’s J1 attack plan. Please try and refrain from being a condescending prick for the next guy.
Bazinga, indeed.
Ok I have no problem with people thinking and what not, and you are the one who came here acting like a condenscending prick to begin with so I responded in kind. As far as my post on the subject I examined the actual direct income change that a J1 can present to see its true value, and I found it lacking. I did not post some ‘here is my J1 all you people who don’t attack on J1 suck’ thread.
Now for your ‘plan’. Just because you kill those boats does NOT mean you get to go to SZ 41 during your combat move, which means you do NOT get all of DEI turn two.
As for US getting there, turn 1 move to pearl purchase 1 trans/1 DD. Turn 2 move to SZ54 or to SZ 63 if your worried about japan’s fleet at carolines and land planes on New Zealand. Along with moving your purchased DD/trans to SZ 51 and dropping your brand new destroyers and another transport. With this setup the fleet at Carolines is outta range of your reinforcements.
-
Whackamatt, I would like to know when you predict the Japanese will be done with China and India if you attack on J1 as you outline, and the UK buys almost exclusively infantry with just a couple artillery thrown in. Lets say you think you can be celebrating We Love the Emperor Day in Calcutta on turn 6 (I don’t have a number, I’m just throwing it out there). Can the US lock down San Fran, Honolulu and Sydney before then and destroy the IJN at Carolines? Making the Japanese investments in Asia (two ICs + several armor and infantry per turn) may give you a solid hold on Asia but the expense may still put you woefully behind the US and ANZACs. Then there is the final problem. The Japanese player can OWN Asia and it won’t matter if the US and ANZACs can take the home island. I’m not trying to shoot your plan down, I am just trying to see if you have thought this out a bit further. It is easy to look at an early Japanese move and think, “this is over.” But that is the same way it was on December 7th when they hit everything. I think the Allies will still have quite a bit of fight left in them.
Suggested Topics
