Luftwaffe Strategy

It doesn’t matter either way if he’s got them and you don’t you’re going to lose.  Therefore the purchase of AA guns is irrelevent.  Obviously if you’ve developed Heavies and have some extra cash then AA’s can be bought, but remember that someone with Heavies is likely going to target your factories so that you cannot develop this tech yourself.  Once he can eliminate that threat the game is over.  In other words you need to develop tech while you still can.

well i dont know about some break out stradegy but if u are the allies and of course u have russia if u wont them to win they need some more ipc’s and the best way to do that is to just give them allie territory like have the us pull out of there two asia spots by attaking japan and have the english attack japan from india with what little stuff tthey have that gives the russians 7 more to spend each turn then 2 more u mostlikely get from there first move atatck to make a front other wise ur going to be hammering it away with germany for a long time in till either side gets a little ahead then ur screwd ive found thjis plan to work several times and ur thinking then russia has to deal with japan no just have the us put alot of heat on them and have britan take germany out of africa and then there pertected there

Agent Smith, you factor in the possibility of a lost Japanese bomber as if it was a battle of attrrition between Japan and Russia.  It is not, hence your error.  It does not matter if the bomber gets shot down.  All that maters is impacting Russias income so that they can afford less infantry on the German front.  See, you say “blah, blah, blah, it only does 3 IPC per turn.”  But that is blatantly wrong.  It does 3.5 per turn.  You are factoring the potential loss of the bomber as if thuis makes the potential bombing run do less damage than it actually does.  It is not attrition between Japan and Russia.  Finally, there is no way it flies over multiple AA guns.

Finally, you asume that all the allies air power can be flown to U.K.  B.S. I’d like to see a Japan player just trounce you.  Thrown everything at Germany and its like rolling the dice that Japan doesn’t win the game outright.  Here’s a factoid you might not know.  If everyone throws everything at Germany and takes it and Japan throws everything at Russia and takes it, Japan will win.  Most Japaness players surrender when Germany is taken.  That is the wrong thing to do.  It Japan control Russia they will win.

Well, don;t congratulate me too much yet.  I still need to play-test the consolidation of Japan strategies against various counters and against pre-emptive strikes.

The taking of Manchuria as a pre-emptive by Russia does not bother me (I actually think it is to Japan’s advantage to have Russia take Manchuria in R1).  But the Kwangtung Maneuver and the Yakut Consolidation could both create some glitches… Kwangtung requiring a shift of forces to re-take Kwangtung, a shift that splits the capital ship consolidation; and also opens up India to taking in J1.  Both of those open up holes in the Japan front leaving them strategically vulnerable, but also represent very significant tactical and economic victories.

I need to evaluate just how much Russia can send land forces to re-inforce Yakut and the K/N/E perimiter, and what counter-attacks may be possible on Sinkiang and how quickly Japan can reinforce Central Asia.  Allied land and air force shifts also need to be reviewed; both through Russia and through Africa.

What impact would a US Submarine Wolfpack being built in US2 have on the strategy?  Or Hawaii, surrounded by the initial US Pacific Fleet, stacked with 3 INF, and used as a BOMBER BASE would have (bombers to threaten Japan tranny’s if the capital ships fled, or to tilt the scales to allow the US PAC FLT, with strong air support, to sweep in and neutralize Japan’s stream of forces to Asia.  Or perhaps staging forward to Wake to allow those same bombers to SBR Japan?

Oviously this Japan strategy is not fool proof.  What it is is an example of a counter to a KGF strategy that just MIGHT force the US to pay more attention to the Pacific, or risk Japan and Germany linking up in the Eastern Med.

And preventing all  3 Allies from ganging up on Germany is the idea… Germany can beat Russia 1-on-1, and can stand toe-to-toe with Russia and an economically weakened UK in a defensive war.  The US is what tips the scales against Germany, so delaying that 3rd ally joining in Europe and/or moving forward so fast and so strongly that Japan is able to criple UK economically, as well as weaken Russia, are the only ways the Axis can win.

I meant that each fighter has a 50% chance of a hit. You really only need one, IMO. (sorry, I just plain dont see that transport as a threat. it’s only 1 tank or 2 infantry!) Besides, the UK can take it out later.

And yea, I conceed that you might still loose the sub in spain. So perhaps dumping that tranny on Canada would be better.

I’m still not going all out with Russia as mentioned in post 1. Although, I was thinking about it, and it is a good way to reduce the number of units on the board, dramatically. Perhaps a way to open Finland or E. Euro up for an invasion sooner by the allies? (BTW, unless I can get jap fighters, I don’t like to attack with my eastern russian forces. If I can get jap fighters, I’ll sacrifice 7 infantry and a tank just to get 1 or 2 enemy fighters!)

The basic stratagy is to get your men of the island and counter an allied factory in India. So you need more transports to get everything done…

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it
The ends DO often justify the means

In my personal Opinion, Japans main point in exsisting, Is to take some of the allies attention away from Germany, and to force russia into a two front war. Since Japan has a larger Pacific fleet then America does, after you deystroy the hawaiin fleet, the coastal fleet will run to panama with its tail between its legs. While japan attacks china, india and russia, this takes IPCs away that cant be used against Germany. Japan Is usually the turning point against The sovies.