Hi, Thanks for reply,
- You can’t leave Pearl alone! It will bite you in the atlantic or it will start annoy Japan in the pacific, either way you are in deep trouble.
Yes, agreed , Pearl Harbour attack is a no-brainer, I should have mentioned it earlier. I would send enough forces to ensure the survival of the BBs and CV, the sub and FTR are attrition losses.
- The attack on china, it can’t be poorly defended, because USA didn’t have time to move their pieces! If you don’t take out China with sufficient forces or leave it all alone you might get stuck with an USA IC on Sinkang. It will get you nowhere near Moscow in the near future…
What I meant was the possibility of the Brits attacking Burma (and losing) or sending their INF into Africa and India being weakly defended. If India is weak then an all out push could Knock UK and US out of Asis by JT1 or JT2 (depending on opening placement of bid items)
or if USSR/UK sending reinforcements into INDIA China eg FTRs from russia or INF from africa. Then a more defensive stance is needed until JAP has sufficient INF reserves to take and hold any gains against counter attack.
Obviously If territories in SE Asia can be taken on J-T1 then the Jap player should be more aggressive and even go all out to gain as many territories as possible. But If the Allies have piled up reserves and are in a strong counter attack position then if the Japs are too aggressive they might not be able to hold any gains.
- In your territory summary is no Russian territory at all! You want exactly those territories!!! Each IPC less for the Russian player is less infantry!
Obvioulsy There is potential Russian Territory that can be take but they can also shuttle enough troops acroos from Russia to stall a direct northern advance. This is why I am suggesting the Southern route. If It is possible both can be done thus attacking through Sov Far East and up through india and into Russia itself. The classic Pincer movement.
What I wanted to demonstrate is how a strong southern push could gain income parity without any large scale invasion of Russia. Let Russia build its INF and hold its central territories while Germany and Japan carve up the Brits strung out holdings.
- Don’t waste your time island hopping! You want Russian Heartlands! Islands are worth less IPC’s, so why bother about them! You can take them later if you have a solid troop supply comming in. Now you have nowhere near enough troops to go after islands which are worth nothing
.
I do agree that Islands are a waste of time 90% of the time but If they can be gained quickly and easily against minimal opposition then the IPC reversal will add up over time. Even the threat of having a TRN within range of Africa could cause allies to redeploy troops away from Germany.
- A first round IC is weak, because it slows Japan enormously! Transporters are way better to funnel your infantry over to the mainland! Don’t think about a mainland IC before round 3-4! The rounds before that you can just take lands with inf and airforce! After round 3-4 you can start pump tanks on mainland IC’s. you have the income base for it and enough infantry as fodder for your precious tanks.
The difference is that the items built on the mainland are in theatre straight away. It also expands the threat radius that newly constructed troops can reach in one turn.
Also the difference between 4 TRN and and IC + 2 TRN is slight
4 TRN
8 INF = 24 IPC
2 TRN + IC
6 INF + ARM = 23 IPC
The 4 TRN is probably more efficient but the ARM in burma has more potential to blitz through undefended regions like syria once the Brits in India are gone.
Assuming by turn 2-3 JAP had about 30-33 to spend then that allows total utilisation plus another TRN per turn to be built
