Don's Axis stratgey

Dezrtfish,
@mjcarney2(abridged):

Turn 1-Japan
[PURCHASE] Buy 3 transports
3) Attack Pearl Harbour with Japan Battleship, Japan Fighter, Carrier Fighter, Bomber and Submarine. Kill Sub and Battleship

@dezrtfish:

Use the Phillippine Fighter it can’t be used any where else and the Jap fighter can be used in China.

@mjcarney2:

4. Load 3 Infantry on to 2 Transports and Move them to Solomon Island, Move Battleship and Carrier to Solomon Islands.

It appears mj will keep the Car sz CV and BB out of the Haw sz battle for the move to the Sol sz to land the 2 ftrs identified on the CV there.

Maybe I’m wrong. Whatever the plan…I would not do it as it takes the pressure off USSR(unless you are playing a “US First” rules variation!)
:P

Dammit! Got bumped again. Think I’ll change my ID here to “Bumped.”

That was me on the last guest post. Think I’ll start claiming all the good and great guest posts as mine(oh, yeah, sure! Like they’ll believe that!!)

El Jefe

It is never neccesary to retreat from Eastern Europe in turn 1. Keep Russia honest by moving all available infantry into the zone, all available tanks, a minimum of 3 fighters, and most importantly, your AA gun from Southern Europe. Defend Western Europe accordingly. Usually 3 infrantry, a fighter, and your bomber will always do the job. The bomber in “Western” is always essential to detour the US from developing straight trasports, as opposed to a capital ship in the first year. No Allied bomber is in range for a SBR on Southern Europe until turn 2, and only then from Africa, or a suspect stronghold in the Caucasus. Always keep the threat of blitzkrieg and never retreat from a withering Russia in the early years.

Thus the army is established by deceit, moves for advantage, and changes through segmenting and reuniting. -Sun Tzu

You’re listing the moves for some obscure game versus an incompetent opponent. How can you post this as an actual strategy?

Thus one who exels at warfare seeks victory through the strategic configuration of power, not from reliance on men.- Sun Tzu

I’m 100% against a Japaneese IC in any place at any time during the first 10 turns. Transports are more efficient. We had a wonderful discussion about the issue about a year ago.

@mat:

Yes i have heard of it :wink:
Wouldn’t the “Nazikazi Version” belong in the house rules forum?

Have you ever actually played this variation, Xi?

mat, I guess I ought to put it there, but I’ve never met anyone else who believed/played it.

The guys I played with thought we made it up. Though I don’t think we were coherent enough to be that creative. It was about 28 years ago…we were always looped on beer, hard liquor or…other stuff(you know.) The guys I played with are in a mental institution, prison, on the state Ten Most Wanted list, or a lieutenant(I doubt that’s the right title)in the local Mafia the last I heard. :)

I agree with Yanny, though often never build a Japanese IC in Asia. I build 2 trans on J1 and 1 tran each turn until I have 1 more tran than I have IPCs to load it. This gives me fodder or the option to split forces in a different way(like 2 extra IPCs available to build armor and hit Hawaii or some such.) I am always pumping 8 inf or 6 inf and 1 arm unit into Asia.
@mjcarney2:

well how many transports do you get until you start to use IC?

Again, as for me, I’d rather build an extra bmr or ftr once I have 6-7 trans.

Not! Unless you roll for tech and get it. Then roll a 6 for Heavy Bombers(HBMRs!)

Otherwise you slow your inf gain on USSR at the risk of averaging 6 IPCs of USSR or UK’s total lost before you lose a HBMR. Remember if you send 2 HBMRs against Allied ICs with AA guns, the Allies have 2 chances to roll a 1.

Of course, if you are playing a new or fairly inexperienced player…Go for it!

That’s another question open for debate…

:oops: A dumb guy’s question…
Is the Don from Don’s Essays the don_riggins who has a good # of posts here? Saw a few good one and a couple of quickies. :roll: A guy who cvould spew that much strategy/logistics might just post like that on other websites. Just asking!?! :-?

The first one. My Opinion of course.

@El:

:oops: A dumb guy’s question…
Is the Don from Don’s Essays the don_riggins who has a good # of posts here? Saw a few good one and a couple of quickies. :roll: A guy who cvould spew that much strategy/logistics might just post like that on other websites. Just asking!?! :-?

Yes

The german purchase you guys are suggesting is wrong. On the first turn you should still maintain some armor. You should buy 4 Inf and 4 Arm. You need the armor to counterattack any allied landing in france. The destruction of an allied landing really slows down the allied advance and makes things easier for japan. Thus, the allies are forced to try to go through finland and karelia to defend russia, which is a really slow process. If you have 4 Arm coming out a turn, then you can wipe out an invasion of 20 some infantry, when the US lands in around 4-5 turns.
I also disagree with your japanese strategy. Japan should concentrate all their forces on India and on Russia in the beginning of the game. Having an IPC and you’re navy there is a huge bonus, because you get battleship shots, and you can grab infantry sitting on the islands. The IPC factory is absolutely necessary. That way you can drop 3 tanks in every turn, which is an incredible amount of offensive firepower, which transports would be very slow in providing. You also need the constant production of tanks to be flexible in going from india up to russia, because infantry take a lot longer to walk. Right after taking India, Japan can start a nice little bastion out in novosibirsk, which russia cannot counter. Thus, using the rapid movement of the tanks, with the infantry that have built up from using the two transports you have in the beginning, Russia will be deprived of money, and facing 6 tanks a turn, infantry, and a superior japanese airforce.
However, I do agree that the game becomes whether russia or germany falls first, and in my experience, it is germany.

Clayton Keir

w.r.t. Germany - i think it is not a good idea to be producing 4 tanks in the first turn. Maybe in the second or third, but you need the infantry for cannon fodder and defense of EEU. You can always leave a bunch in WEU as defense as well, but the ipc differences between meaningful defence and offense i think is in the favor of at least an initial all inf purchase. Also retaking WEU - will happen with planes usually backed by inf. Still, its a fun idea having that many armor, but I think that Russia will be able to take EEU far too easily with this leaving the UK with the question of whether they want to go with Normandy, or simply support their friends in the east.
As far as Japan goes - you might purchase an ipc in the 3rd turn, however you need the extra trns to toss on the infantry only Japan can produce. So you can produce 8 inf and 3 armor in a turn - big deal? If you’re only tossing 4 inf and 3 arm/turn then you’re losing your steam. Your tanks will catch up to the inf that you toss onto the mainland soon enough, and you won’t lose any momentum either.
Does this make sense?