Naval Base in Alaska wins the game

[Vareel]

And i’m telling you that you shall loose all your transports used and navy defending them, and your invasion force will be crushed at a loss of some of japan’s airpower and the handful of ground units hanging out in Manchuria.  If your not planning on putting a factory at Korea there is no real value in taking it.  Your drop will not take place until turn what, 4 or 5?  By then the manpower problems in asia should have solved themselves for japan with the factories on the mainland they build and with China being down to 1-3 inf a turn.  The only viable gain for the US to go hard at Korea would be the intention of getting a factory there, then you could get enough ground units to be a thorn in japan’s side in mainland asia.

[Uncle_Joe]

All I’m saying is try this and see how much it cripples Japans ability to advance quickly.

As a ploy to engage the Japanese up north, then a Naval Base in Alaska might have some use. But if you come and make a blanket statement like ‘Naval Base in Alaska wins the game’…well…be prepared for people to refute that fairly vigorously ;)

And unfortunately, it seems a lot of people can’t refute a strategy or debate it’s merits without attacking the IQ/experience/comprehension of the person posting the strategy. You’ll note that anyone who has strong opinions on game balance/strategies will likely have a negative ‘karma’ rating. ;) That alone tells me that a lot of people are not prepared to discuss and debate but rather belittle and discount posted strats.

[Col Hajj]

Joe, that was the first thing I noticed about this site… people are not even willing to test a strategy out before they denounce it as having no value at all.  I’ve seen this work in more then one game… and against me playing Japan.  I’m by no means the best player out there, but I’ve been playing strategy games for over 20 years, so I’m not a retard when it comes to these things.  lol

[spectre_04]

Im going to try it again, with a factory, just not until I am at war this time.

[Col Hajj]

If you can plant and keep a factory there, even better!

[Gargantua]

A factory there is silly.

Just build in WUS and move it there.  That way you end up with an extra $12 of units on the board instead of a factory 2 zones from the American Capital.

[Hobbes]

@Gargantua:

A factory there is silly.

Just build in WUS and move it there.  That way you end up with an extra $12 of units on the board instead of a factory 2 zones from the American Capital.

The advantage is that you can use the IC to build 3 naval units that are in range of attacking right away on SZ6, forcing J to move to defend the area. The risk is that J might decide to take the factory.

[Gargantua]

It’s not worth 12 IPC’s for that very slight advantage.

[Hobbes]

It forces J to reply to it.

US saves 2 IPCs on US1 and ends with 24 IPCs. The moment J attacks the US builds a naval base and an IC there. US also moves his fleet to SZ1. Then the US can spend its entire income threatening SZ6.

Hmm, this might be a interesting idea.

[Van_Trump]

what if japan simply blocks route to Korea with destroyer?

It seems a slow strategy. US needs to get in the game faster.

[Hobbes]

@Van_Trump:

what if japan simply blocks route to Korea with destroyer?

It seems a slow strategy. US needs to get in the game faster.

US might actually be getting faster in the game this way. If J stations a force on the Carolines to prevent the US fleet from moving to Hawaii then this move puts the US fleet in a striking position without risking itself (assuming no massive J fleet stationed on SZ6).

J can send destroyers to block any invasion of Korea but the US can use a sub and planes to take them out and comes out winning 8 IPC to 6 IPC. Plus the more the wait the bigger the US fleet gets until it will be able to advance to Hawaii or elsewhere. And if you keep sending subs spread out through different SZs then J will have to switch to large naval buys of destroyers to hold them off.

[Gargantua]

Because a possible 2 IPC gain on a single encounter, that’s bogging down and locking out the entire American Income is how to win the game.

[Vareel]

And what is to stop Japan from taking Haw and stacking a huge fleet there, seeing as they will not need a fleet in the south with this tactic?

[Hobbes]

@Vareel:

And what is to stop Japan from taking Haw and stacking a huge fleet there, seeing as they will not need a fleet in the south with this tactic?

Absolutely nothing. I’m not saying this tactic will work the whole time. J can also mass its fleet on SZ6 and then threaten to take the IC for itself. But taking Hawaii might be a tougher nut since J will have to position its carriers in range and will have to commit a large number of transports. All of this is a distraction from DEI.

[Vareel]

And what is keeping japan from simply using a small fleet to hold DEI, say 2 subs, a carrier, BB, cruiser, and a pair of destroyers?  UK/ANZAC cannot kill that fleet and it is less than half of the starting fleet for Japan.  That would be 11 hits and around 23 defensive points.

[Hobbes]

@Vareel:

And what is keeping japan from simply using a small fleet to hold DEI, say 2 subs, a carrier, BB, cruiser, and a pair of destroyers?  UK/ANZAC cannot kill that fleet and it is less than half of the starting fleet for Japan.  That would be 11 hits and around 23 defensive points.

If J deploys that fleet then it might not have enough to keep its fleet off Hawaii if it invades on J3.  The remaining J fleet will be 2 DDs, 2 ACs, 1 BB and 1 CA plus planes to take Hawaii, 29 points and 12 hits. If US pulls back its planes it will have 2 SS, 2 DD (1 SS and 1 DD as first US buy), 1 CA, 1 BB, 1 AC, 6 ftrs/tac and 3 bmrs, that’s 48 attacking points and 18 hits.

The only way to survive it is to buy an AC and SSs/DDs for Japan on J2 but with only 30 something that will mean no transports to send south to DEI or China.

[Vareel]

Oh I know they would be unable to strike at the US with the splitting of the fleet, but that really doesn’t matter if they can take/hold DEI area and smash UK.  All they have to do is hang out at carolines/japan, then if you move up to alaska shift everything up to Japan.  Or simply deadzone carolines.  Keep 2 Inf in Manchuria along with some fighters on the home island and the US is pretty much negated.

I’m not saying its a terrible, worthless idea to build an Alaskan naval base, i’m just saying it is situational and pretty easy for Japan to deal with, that it doesn’t ‘win the game’.

[Hobbes]

@Vareel:

Oh I know they would be unable to strike at the US with the splitting of the fleet, but that really doesn’t matter if they can take/hold DEI area and smash UK.  All they have to do is hang out at carolines/japan, then if you move up to alaska shift everything up to Japan.  Or simply deadzone carolines.  Keep 2 Inf in Manchuria along with some fighters on the home island and the US is pretty much negated.

I’m not saying its a terrible, worthless idea to build an Alaskan naval base, i’m just saying it is situational and pretty easy for Japan to deal with, that it doesn’t ‘win the game’.

@Vareel:

Oh I know they would be unable to strike at the US with the splitting of the fleet, but that really doesn’t matter if they can take/hold DEI area and smash UK.  All they have to do is hang out at carolines/japan, then if you move up to alaska shift everything up to Japan.  Or simply deadzone carolines.  Keep 2 Inf in Manchuria along with some fighters on the home island and the US is pretty much negated.

I’m not saying its a terrible, worthless idea to build an Alaskan naval base, i’m just saying it is situational and pretty easy for Japan to deal with, that it doesn’t ‘win the game’.

The Alaskan naval base will not win the game. One possible best use would be to keep sending subs to harass Japan on its home waters but that can also be achieved by building and moving them to Hawaii. DDs can sink them but you spread 1 each to SZs 5, 6, 7, 17, 24, 18, 21, 22, 19, 20 then it turns into a nightmare. J will need 1 DD for each SZ and the remaining subs can either gang up on any Japanese fleet.

[Col Hajj]

I would not put a IC on Hawaii, to much of a risk.  If you could drop and keep one in Korea, that would be a different story.

[thenorthman]

@Col:

I would not put a IC on Hawaii, to much of a risk.  If you could drop and keep one in Korea, that would be a different story.

You can not put an IC on Hawaii. Its an island.

Sean