you can still come onto china pretty hard. 3inf(leaving 1 in indchina) + 2 figs(off the east indies car) Vs 2inf, 1fig
there a good chance that you’ll take it with 1 inf if not kill everything there. then you can send
3 INF (2 Manch, 1 Japan via TRN),1 ARM (from Japan via TRN),1 BB shot, 4fig(jp, man,fic, carolina) , and 1 bmb to that fight you end up with all your planes,the tank and possibly infs. a 80% chance of ending up wit the arm and the planes or better. then you move your entire navy to japan and the navy you have in the east indies goes to the Philippines with 2 figs on it.
so you end up with
japan sz- 2 Fig, 4 Tra, 1 Car, 1 Sub, 1 Des, 1 Bat
Philippines sz- 2 Fighters, 1 Aircraft Carrier, 1 Battleship
china- 1 inf
FIC- 1inf
Manchuria- 4figs
buryatia, 1arm, 1inf
then you can collect 33 ipcs for japan as usual then on J2 you can either attack the UK fleet or the American fleet.(depends if you go on the outside or inside of japan)
edit: accidentally put 2 carriers in japan.
I would prefer U-505’s strat to Cyan’s. Here’s why.
In a non KJF game, Japan usually has very little resistance until it gets to Moscow (or Novisibirsk at least). I would rather not squander my numerical superiority as Japan on marginal attacks (if you don’t take China you could be in trouble), particularly when I can force my opponent into a retreat the following round versus overwhelming odds.
Even when you succeed in marginal attacks, you almost always lose more inf in the attack than you would have if you had waited 1 turn and attacked with overwhelming force. So you gain 2 more IPCs in production for one turn for winning the extra territory, but meanwhile you lose 1-2 more inf on the frontline (3-6 IPCs). Are you really coming out ahead? And what if the dice aren’t favourable? Now you don’t even take the territory (because it was a marginal attack to begin with), plus you lose even more inf. Definitely not coming out ahead on that one.
Bottom line, with Japan you don’t want to leave yourself open to any kind of attack, and just build up your forces can you can roll through to Moscow pretty much unopposed.
if you just leave china alone the us can be a nussiance US1. they can take FIC and march into hong kong. thats why you have to at least clear china out so really its more like 11 ipcs that in danger. the can even kill whatever figs you have in man. thats why you have to destory chinese infantry or captur the terrotry.
Agree. So rather than spread forces between China and Bury, in this instance I would focus on China, while strafing the UK fleet. As U-505 said.
China + Bury + UK fleet is too much on J1. IMHO.
you should not attack the uk flleet if you attack china and buyatia. the uk fleet is usless and you can attack it J2. the us flleet 2 can be handled on J2. if the us didn’t do anything threating towards you can can attack teh british and then the americans.
I think both are viable options (ie. China + Bury vs. China + Uk fleet). I would prefer to take out the UK fleet (and take out the russian fighter!). The Bury stack is not very threatening in actuality (barely any reinforcements), and you can force it to retreat the following round anyway.
That would be my motivation for playing it that way.
if you use the china+fleet option you can always use 2 support shots on J2 in buryatia. . the only problem is if the russians wise up and turn west.
Sure. But I would rather my opponents retreat on all fronts without firing a shot and have the flexibility to land my forces anywhere I want as opposed to having to commit ground units to a particular route and make them leave.
In this case, the Bury+China attacks are not an option. The sz59 fleet becomes priority. If you let it survive intact, and it is able to link up with the Hawaiian fleet in sz50 or sz58, then you not only have an ugly Allied fleet, that will be costly to crack, sitting in your living room but also the Russians will have a fighter to support their eastern front which makes them considerably more dangerous. Also, that fleet combined with the Australian infantry and TP means your high priced islands are now under immediate threat and all of those infantry are stuck defending when they should be on transports heading for Moscow.
To me, the China/sz59 attacks are the safe bet that also allows you the most options on J2.
Newpaintbrush: Just a few pointers to your response to your message.
First of all, using transport in the Bury fight will remove the “0” from the UK battle leaving you with one free hit and then removing offensive units. The forces you have picked out to attack would have an average first round of 3 hits thus making it likely for carrier/fighter to survive first round at the same time as the UK fleet has an average of 2,5 hits.
Of course the decision to either withdraw or wipe them out is heavily based on the results of the first roll but if you do decide to remove that fleet you would be leaving your units in SZ59. Also, using naval bombardment with the Bury attack makes it impossible to disrupt attacks and retreat to SZ60.That leaves us with a BB and possibly a number of transports in SZ60. Buying offensive vessels with Japan is not an option as I would think that would make this strategy a success. With Pearl untouched I could go with at least of sub/carrier/3 fig against SZ60 which I would do without hesitating at all. Since you are committing all your possible forces in the combat phase there is a slight chance I could go with a bomber there as well and that would most likely kill of most of the transports (if not all) you might have purchased and that would be a heavy setback for Japan.
And I don’t see why it should be such a huge setback for the German progress. You still haven’t allocated any resources against Jap with neither UK nor US. The heaviest cost should be the Russian fighter, other than that it doesn’t take more than 2 additional infantry and possibly an armor to delay the Japanese from the northern route (where the Jap really doesn’t expand his IPC fast enough). By turn 4 it should be possible to start hammering the German territories quite heavily (with smaller landings the previous turns) and the question is if the Germans are far enough into Russia by then.
I presume you refer to the Kwangtung battle. The “0” is not a transport. Battleships in Axis and Allies Revised have two hit points, so take two hits to kill. The “0” is the free hit from the battleship. Leaving the Japanese navy in the middle of the ocean is not a problem, because any Allied attack will mean a lot of dead Allies, and maybe a dead Jap fighter. The battleship used to attack Kwangtung is the one in the South Pacific. I hope that clears things up.
I feel that I have explained in detail why there will be a considerable setback against Germany, particularly since it is NOT the case that " You still haven’t allocated any resources against Jap with neither UK nor US." Your post stated that UK was going to attack Kwangtung. That is serious resource allocation; allocation of your existing resources. You also stated that you were NOT going to retake Anglo-Egypt. You can use 2 inf 1 tank in Yakut if you want, but that’s even MORE drain against Germany, and you’ll be forced to retreat as soon as China falls anyways. Finally, with the listed moves, it should not be a question of IF the Germans are far into Russia. Without a Russian fighter to trade territories, and African-powered German industry, and Russian strength being bled off to the Japanese front, I believe that Germany being a good way into Russia is inevitable, UNLESS the German player really sucks horribly.
(edit) Look, I really hate this whole “It doesn’t cost you anything!” Okay, I’m going to take EVERYTHING that Germany has and consolidate in Berlin. That doesn’t cost me anything at all!
OR DOES IT
DUN DUN DUN
(/edit)
good way to delay japan is to play tradeoff with them in Ind (Uk), Yak (Rus), Sin (Us) with whatever inf is available. In the end he will beat you at tradeoffs, but its better than going to an arms race between Russia (getting somewhat pressure by Ger) and Japan. That will definately delay him/her.
