Japan's Inf.

Don’t worry about the Americans. If they split up their IPC’s between Japan and Germany, the Allies will end up loosing the fight. The Brits, if aggressive, can normaly only attack one of both Axispowers. Even if they sink your tranny and your sub, there’s nothing to be affraid of. You can destroy a lot with few efforts when the UK-fleet strikes at the Japanese in turn one, using your fighters.
The only problem is that if and when the UK strikes at the Japanese in UK1, you can probably expect a KJF. Then it’s up to the Germans to Panzer their way to Moscow.
If UK strikes the Japs on UK1, but then divert their offensive actions towards Germany, you shouldn’t have any trouble wiping them out of the Pacific and start nibbling on their income. Especially if USA splits its income between Germany and Japan.
Anyway, that’s what I’ve experienced in the games that I’ve played. An Allied player who tries to assault both Germany and Japans digs his own grave…

Actually Cragi, he stated that they flew over Western to attack, and back over Western to retreat.  For that to be the case (in the #1 example at the start of the thread) the FIGs would HAVE to be attacking, not defending.

And under LHTR, Attacking aircraft retreat as I specified.

@axis_roll:

@newpaintbrush:

Axis_Roll, I think the question isn’t Japan Vs. The World, but a game in which Japan has captured Moscow and the Allies have captured Berlin.

Then the thread is mis-titled.

Perhaps it should read Japan versus the remaining allies…
or
What we call a “J.A.B.”

Japan vs. America & Britain

Well, after Germany and Russia fall, it IS Japan vs. the rest of the world.

I never heard of that jibber JABber, fool!

Tanks are strong!

But you have a good three rounds before you need to really keep up with America, maybe 4 if you play your cards right.

And the raiding would help out.  5 Submarines = 10 IPC a round if you can ever knock out the American fleet, which, honestly, is doable, but difficult.

Because a destroyer is cheaper.

You cannot buy 2 transports and a carrier on Japan 1.  That means trading in a transport to get a carrier, not a trade I want, or getting two transports (3 or 4 total available on Japan 2) and a destroyer thus not tying up your fleet on such non-sense as transport protection duty.

Not to mention, when I go after the American fleet with Japan, I always wish I had another destroyer.  I never wish I had another transport.  (Talking rounds 12+ when Japan goes after the Allied fleet to protect S. Germany)

@newpaintbrush:

So are you saying that the Norway-Wrus-Ukr attack is bad for LL and for ADS for the SAME REASONS?  No, of course not.  See my last post.  Would you like to expound on the idea that what is good for ADS is good for LL and vice versa?  For I disagree.

My contention is that what is good in LL is good in ADS HOWEVER what is good in ADS may not be good in LL.
My point about the nor/wrus/ukr battle is that just b/c you may succeed in certian battles (either individual battles here and there or a few battles taken in the same turn) in LL way way way more in ADS does not make it a sound strategy for the entire game.  And I laid out just a couple of example where you could have high odds battles but it hurts you in the long run (the Moscow scenerio and the crazy ala move etc.)

It is much easier to translate LL strats to ADS.

I don’t think I said this triple would “inevitablely” fail in LL, I believe I said it “may” fail which in a way would confirm what the ADS odds told you in rd 1.
I certainly think there could be a coerrelation between LL odds and ADS odds.

Due to the nature of LL we know you can have a battle of a 100% success, which in ADS may be 90-95%.  I don’t think it is then unreasonable to think that multiple battles in LL where you have 80% success awould translate to maybe 65% in ADS.  Thus it isn’t unreasonable to think a LL battle with 60% success rate may then indeed be 40% in ADS (per your triple example).

So when playing a game in ADS if you have a threshold to actually go through with most battles (say you would like a 60-70% chance to succeed in ADS) that does not mean you’d have 60-70 in LL, the LL odds would probably be much closer to 80.  So when you see a battle at 40% success in ADS it should probably tell you that you have maybe 60% or so in LL BUT those AREN’T great odds for LL, considering you can be much more efficient in your attacks in LL.

60% odds are not that great for LL, considering the best LL players probably should win about 75-80% of their games.  Why lower your standards to 60%?  It just doesn’t make sense to me.  Maybe it is a good opening and causes enough damage to Germany, but I think it can leave Russia a bit too thin.

And yes there are times where 1-1 is a good trade and even times where you come out on the low end but the battle can still be deemed a success, but I don’t think Russia 1 is that time esp since the Axis can usually make an Africa push and Japan can make early gains in Asia, and it still takes the UK/US a few turns to get their shuck going.

Edit:

I should also say that by strat, I mean a series of moves (or buys) that take place over several turns not something a player may do in only one move or one turn.

First off, the production limits will go a long way to making those IC’s less than valuable.

Second, build a LOT of trannies as Japan in J1 and start offloading into Asia.  If you took out the US Fleet at Pearl on J1, then on J2 send your 3-4 trannies to FIC to offload full cargoes of INF, plus your ART and ARM.  Build more trannies and refills for your existing units in J2.  Then in J2 sen the new trannies to FIC and bring the old ones back to SZ60 to offload remaining land forces from your J2 buy into Bury to start your Russia strike, or for movement to Manch, then China, then Sinkiang.

Use your AF (3 FIG and 1 BOM) to provide offensive punch to your forces in Asia.  Consolidate your Capital Ships to SZ60 (this position is superior to SZ61 for purposes of protecting Japan and its territories from US fleet) in J2.

In J3, you should be able to take the India factory (if UK is sending lots of AF in, or pulling forces out of Africa to protect it, so much the better… Russia is not getting ground support in Karelia/Archangel from UK, and Africa has been handed to Germany).  If UK has reinforced it, wait for your J3 transports to FIC then take it in J4.

Odds are you can take India in J3 though, and then with your J3 landing to FIC, in J4 you move those forces to China, plus some forces coming from Bury to China, and on J5 or so the US IC is also taken.

By now, Japan has a nice fleet of trannies as buffer for the US fleet and to tranny forces to Asia, 2 new IC’s to send ARM/ART/INF against Russia, and you are ready to continue your Asia strike w/o build limits (you can now build 13 units a round in your 3 IC’s), and you can add the occasional capital ship if the US gets too threatening with their AF (remember, the US can’t spend too much on Pacific Navy… they have an IC in Sinkiang to support, and they BETTER be sending forces to Europe, or by now Russia is all but dead from lack of support from both UK and USA)

Enough ideas to get you going?

if you are playing with optionional rules it might work out( cos briton is probably going to put his free IC on INDIA and Amer get’s one infantry for free every turn in sinkiang or china), but if you are playing without them it would be unfair (cos U.K. and U.S. will lose their teritories and won’t be able to get them back. Trust me. I prefer playing with optional rules(all of them) because lots of things gests balanced