That it is. But as has been said, if America has any clue what they are doing, they’ll have started from W. USA through Canada to E. Canada, not E. USA.
Though, sometimes i go E. USA because it’s clear Japan is NOT hitting Alaska/Canada. (You can usually tell based on how poorly they start in Asia on their turn and hwere they have their transports.) In that case, I find 5 transports, 8 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 armor available to land on Africa in US 2 is a large enough force to hit Africa and derail some German plans.
But a typical SZ60 placement of a 4 TRN fleet can offload to Alaska/Wcan as easilly as to Bury. And a BB there may only be fleet defense, or a BB shot to hammer any defenders in eitehr territory…
Yes, well, as I said, depending on the Jap set up. :)
Benefit to America is you can set up to counter both German moves and Jap moves. :)
Agreed. And that was a VERy valuable lesson that Darth taught me :-)
your wright totally irealestic but i thought it would be cool to have a airforce in brazil.
I don’t care if Japan lands in Alaska / West Canada.
Let them.
They didn’t land on the Asian coast, which is plenty good enough for me.
(edit)
Oh yeah . . . I never set up W Can/E Can. US1, I usually go 3 trans 3 tank 1 inf or 1 AC 2 trans 2 tank, and US2 move to Algeria while building 2 trns 2 tnk 2 inf (plus assorted). It has to be done RIGHT AWAY before Germany starts partying down from Anglo-Egypt. Once Germany sees 4 inf 4 tank in Africa (2 inf 2 tank from UK), Germany knows that any tanks that go to Africa will probably die in Africa, so Germany has to start making tough decisions. The first two waves of US builds march through Africa so US2 to Libya, US3 to Anglo-Egypt, US4 to Trans-Jordan, US6 to Persia. In the meantime, Japan will have probably stalled against India for a couple turns because of Pearl Harbor, so India falls on J3 at earliest, then J4 Persia. But if Russia managed to stall Japan’s advance at ALL on the India front, US, UK, and Russia can unite at Persia to block the Japs out . . . at which time they head to Africa. But the block isn’t possible if you delay the US1 build or usually even the US2 build because Germany counters the US holdings unless US reinforcements keep arriving.
I could be done if Germany gets the 8 bid to place a sub in SZ8, this killing all UK ships (exept 1 trn in canada)…
But still very, very, very hard.
I agree with newpaintbrush. Getting troops on the ground, especially US armor in Africa, is critical for the allies. On US2 there’s a pretty good chance that armor can roll through Libya (after Britain took it on UK2) and take back Egypt. The timing is critical- the German med navy is then trapped and will be destroyed. If that small navy escapes it can cause alot of trouble, or at the least will make the Japanese navy virtually impregnable.
4 inf/ AA gun does it for me in W Canada early game- I start the Canadian shuck a little later and lock down the west coast of the US for good. If Japan is using forces in Alaska/ Canada early, Russia is a little more relaxed. And frankly unless it’s a sizable force the US doesn’t break a sweat either.
Please tell me Japan is never niave enough to do an Amphib on J1 on Alaska! Please tell me Jap players are usually wise enough to realize they can’t even think about an Alaskan assault until Russia’s been beat back to Moscow.
J1 amphib to Alaska/W. Can is right out. The Japs just can’t afford it, they must land infantry in Asia.
But J2 landing in Alaska/WCan is POTENTIALLY sound against a KGF, because the US should be concentrating on grinding out that early game.
I sometimes harass Alaska/W. Can as a target of opportunity, using batleship support shot(s) and a fighter that lands on a carrier. But that’s rare because a UK bomber near the Asian coast can blow up Jap transports . . . I remember I played against a Japan player once that didn’t guard his transports, and I killled three transports with one bomber (wipes nostalgic tear). But against good US players, I usually leave Alaska alone until J3-J4, then pull light harassment.
J3-J5 you have lots of Japanese transports, and you threaten a major landing at W. Canada, forcing the US to either make a defensive build or PREPARE for a defensive build. Right when Japanese units are at Moscow’s door, more infantry to the Asian coast doesn’t help, and that’s when you start messing with the US in force.
Oh yeah, the topic was KAF . . . don’t try it.
Infantry is verry cost-effective. All the US does is build lots of infantry. All USSR does is build lots of infantry. UK does air/navy.
It’s inefficient for either the Japs OR the Germans to attack US in force. Japan needs EIGHT transports to set up a constant chain between Japan and Alaska/W. Canada, and that takes a while to build. If you keep harassing the US while you’re building up to eight transports, the US just uses its W. US infantry plus some air to keep Japan back. The US1-US2 retake of Africa in the KGF plan is not slowed, and by the time Japan gets around to serious business, it’s 10 inf 2 fighters at W. Canada, with more reinforcements on the way.
Germany trying to invade the US is pretty dismal. You can pull some harassment of Brazil, or go to Mexico and so forth, but the Germans need a lot of expensive transports to pull the attack off, and Russia just keeps the pressure up.
Exactly my point. As the Allies you should be falling all over yourselves with glee when you see Japan land in Africa/Canada on J1 or even J2. It’s so easy to repell, it shouldn’t even disrupt your European plans more hten 3 or 4 less units for one round. That’s nothing!
I am still a fan of a MAJOR Japan landing in Alaska/WCan about 3 turns ahead of a massive German push in Europe.
It forces the US to abandone their shuck for a minimum of 1 turn to repel the invasion (if they do not, CUS makes an extra 6 IPC for Japan…)
1 turn of zero troops by the US to the European/Africa theater can be CRITICAL to German advances.
Of course there is also the “annoyance” landing. But that is just a move for the hell of it, and has little, if any, strategic impact on the game.
But as far as trying to KILL America… DO NOT EVER TRY IT as the Axis. At least not unless you already have Moscow or London.
As America, with a landing of a few units in Alaska on R3 or later, you really arn’t going to disrupt me too much. So I might have to reduce my move that turn from 10 units to 4 units…meanwhile, I’ve cost Japan 1 full round of moving units from Japan against Russia which means Russia has that much more power against Germany and I’m still landing some troops on the turn I spank Japan for robbing me of my lobster fishing!
Caspian sub has a way to take on America. It only works if the American player does not see it. Check caspian sub out.
Dang there’s a lot of if’s in that scenario and they’re all moot if America even sets up a rudimentary shuck-shuck through Canada
Or he continues on his normal path of building in W. USA moving to W. Can to E. Can to Europe and let’s you land in Alaska then hits you with 2 or 3 fighters and a couple of infantry killing your invasion force and only costing the allies 2-3 infantry out of 10 a round to Europe.
Meanwhile, Axis are out transports, infantry, and time for two rounds.
Meanwhile, Axis are out transports, infantry, and time for two rounds.
Not necessarilly. Darth has previously posted one option to allow Japan to sustain the offensive unbroken in WCan and Alaska.
And Japan can still send the TRNs back to Japan and bridge to Asia in the same turn, so the TRNs are NEVER wasted.
Okay, but now we arn’t talking an invasion in the first 3-5 rounds of battle, we’re probably looking at closer to round 6 or 7 in which case America should be producing 10 ground units a round (total of 30 in North America in nay given round) and Germany should be having a hard time resisting against Russian, British and American forces hitting their stacks (UK, then USA, then USSR, which works well since it helps recover income for Russia)
Nope, still T3, or T4 or later if you want to be more sneaky about it.
