U.S.A Playbook: suggestions for countering a J1 attack

You forget that the Japanese only need to have 1 DD present + as many air as they like (which they have already) to attack submarine packs.  At the cost of 1 DD, the air units get all their round 1 hits against the subs at a minimum with zero possibility of retaliation as the subs can never hit the opposing air.

Again, I do agree that subs are pretty sweet, but you have so many +1s there it makes it seem like you can win almost solely with subs.

Well, you get subs, because you want to attack not be on the defense.

If you are having issues getting in range to attack Japan’s naval, do what I do when that situation comes up, sprinkle subs around so you can counter attack. Japan hits the subs with dds and air, you counter attack all the spots. Pretty simple.

@Eqqman:

You forget that the Japanese only need to have 1 DD present + as many air as they like (which they have already) to attack submarine packs.� At the cost of 1 DD, the air units get all their round 1 hits against the subs at a minimum with zero possibility of retaliation as the subs can never hit the opposing air.

Again, I do agree that subs are pretty sweet, but you have so many +1s there it makes it seem like you can win almost solely with subs.

You cannot beat Japan solely with SS, you’d need a large investment into a Navy, TT’s and a significant amount of invading units.  Beating Japan takes too long, and is a drain on resources sorely needed to bail out Moscow and the UK.

Japanese advances are the EXACT reason why Japan is essential to German success in Europe because the standard Allied player has to choose between investing heavily in the Pacific against a hyper aggressive Japan or building up to try to force Germany to turn around from Moscow.

My strategy cuts that investment down for the Allies and even requires Japan to continually purchase DD to address new SS purchases each round by the Allies with a nice little caveat that the allied ships can ignore bigger fleets with no DD and move around with relative impunity.  Even better is when Japan puts down a DD and 2-3 TT and relies on 3 aircraft to scramble over it in SZ6.  Next thing you know those 8 SS in Hawaii attack, take a few losses, but every SS hit beyond the first one sinks TT.  Whoops… Hope you didn’t need those TT for anything…

Something to consider:  Japan is just a bigger version of India and Italy.  You just have to take out the ships, enforce the convoy and let them rot on their capital until you feel like dealing with them.  With Japan that is MUCH easier said than done in comparison to the other powers I mentioned.  HOWEVER, SS appear to me to be the MOST efficient use of resources that requires a non-standard strategy that puts Japan on the defensive rather quickly to protect her most important asset: her ships.  With most builds centered around TT exclusive purchases for at least 2 rounds, this presents a quandry for Japan - one I rather enjoy to see as an Allied player.

@Cow:

Usually bid rules are 1 unit per territory when it comes to bidding. Most people also only allow bids for usa, uk, russia and anzac. Basically countries with capitals only.

Prevents stacking strategic locations for the purposes of turtle.

I have seen the New Guinea infantry posted a couple times now. Don’t most people play with a bid requirement that there has to be a unit of that country already in the territory or seazone? If that’s not the norm, what is?

What I’ve seen is what Cow listed, plus the requirement that there be a unit already there, and that all funds are spent that can be (ie, only 0, 1, or 2 IPC can be “banked”). What is the general consensus? Or is there one?

Not in the rules I see for the Global league.

–Jeff

I’m not a fan of subs in the Pacific only for the USA. Maybe I haven’t seen it in action enough, or there is more to Spendo’s strategy than I can see here.

Where are these packs stationed so they don’t get trapped by Japan? How are you stopping Queensland from falling?

What are you doing with your original fleet? Do you add to it?

I prefer a stack of subs as fleet fodder, with some DDs, etc. and about 4 carriers filled with planes off of Queensland to keep Japan from the 6 VCs. Then eventually work your way to the Carolines.

There are downsides to subs that Spendo glossed over, although he makes a compelling case:

1. Subs defend at 1. One destroyer coming out of Malaya factory or a naval base/factory on Hainan, combined with air out of the Phillipines can clear 3-4 sub packs in one battle round before they can even convoy. +10 to 24 for Japan depending on whether the US’s 3 to 4 defense 1s actually hit.

2. Japan doesn’t have much to do with their airforce anyway after the first few rounds, hunting sub packs would be fun.

3. Subs can’t block. Japan can load up a nice fleet in Malaya with a couple DDs and an airbase and threaten 2 capitols.

4. When Japan gets rolling in the 70s in IPC income, a DD or two will hardly matter. They could even have their own fodder subs to protect against fleet naval hits.

It seems better to fight to keep Japan from all 4 DEI islands and buying blocking destroyers to keep your sub stack from attacking.

–Jeff

I think we are talking about 2-3 sub purchases a turn here. I could be mistaken, I tend to not go over that amount for the pacific. For the Atlantic I like a few subs to convoy and to replace lost ones.

If Japan left your fleet in 26 you are pretty good. A full purchase on the european side gives you many options. R1 I purchase 3 bombers 1 transport  1 destroyer. Bombers are awesome round 1 purchase to harry the advance of germany and italy. Americans will stage in gilbralter and grow powerful. Take brazil r1. They can move north to be picked up by transports you build on r2. Converge fleet in Hawaii if safe. Fly tactical to east coast. Bomber to london. I prefer to fly hawaii fighters to Australlia and turtle on west coast. block japanese transports with a destroyer so japan can’t take hawaii on r2. The strategy is to build in gibralter. USA builds in europe for a knockout of italy. Japan’s first 2 rounds are spent going after the DEI. USA plays to knock out italy. Sprinkle as little money into the pacific that japan will allow you too. Do not be afraid to abandon india for west india with the UK. I’ve swapped that capitol 3 times in 1 game, sapping japan’s time. In the same game i lost Moscow, but retook impressively with russia on their turn. If allies play to extend the game, time is on their side. USA can take Spain while germany is off fighting Russia. What? Attack a neutral? Allies can do it if they attack more than 1 neutral. A factory for the US on spain might be worth it. A combined allied effort usually will hold it. Also Anzac’s fighters can come to europe through somoa and brazil if you force japan to fight back and forth for calcutta. Cow’s strategy is fun, but its not unbalancing. It is far from a sure thing. People need to remember china can save money for a large reinforcement of allied forces. Taking out china is hard. Japan can’t do everything at once, and they get a lot of money. But no matter how much money you have, you always wish you had about 15 more bucks. At least I do. Also attacking neutral will allow the usa to absorb south america. +6ipc for usa. Get crazy with allies. Go pretty much full europe side purchases for like 5 to 7 rounds. then come back and slam purchases in the pacific if you think japan might get its VC win.

Attacking neutrals in South America and Spain is a mistake as the USA to me.

When Turkey flips pro-axis, GG Russia as Germ walks in from Greece and gets 8 inf next to the Caucaus and 2 away from Volgograd.

That doesn’t count 6 more free inf they get in Sweden.

Leaving Japan alone for 5-7 turns, heck the game would be over.

2 would be the most for me.