Revisiting the Kill Japan First (KJF) Strategy

@MarineIguana:

First of all, I want to say that USA committing any purchases to the pacific is a mistake. For the same amount of resources, the USA can always pressure Germany more than Japan. This is from my experience playing hundreds of revised games, many at a high level.

That said, assuming the US commits to the Pacific…

1. Japan should always sink the US fleet at pearl harbor. If this is done, Japan generally starts with a 1 battleship, 2 carrier, 3 fighter advantage compared to the USA that will take 5+ turns of buildup for the US to overcome.
2. The US can’t make significant advances unless the Japan fleet is destroyed. The best way to stall the USA is to place your fleet in the sea zone off the phillipines or china and deadzone all sea zone within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. Have the carriers filled with fighters AND try to have an equal number of fighters in a land territory that can reach all the sz within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. For example, 2 carriers can support 8 fighters attacking a sea zone.
3. Japan can continue pushing land units into asia, even with all US purchases going to the pacific. My typical purchases are like 6 inf and 2 fighters. With the Japan fleet off of China

From what I have seen when the allies does a KJF is that, PH really isn’t that easy. If UK commits and is lucky, PH can be very difficult. Complete UK commitment would be  UK india ftr attacking the J sub in 45 with the australia sub, and then landing on PH. The Australia TT taking 2 infs to papua, the indian TT taking 2 infs to borneo, The UK CR attacking the japanese TT in 59 and the India CW either standing in 36 or 49.  At this point, taking PH might be difficult for japan. If they do it with air only (5 ftrs + bomber) they will lose about 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs, 1 cw, and 1 sub. The good news is that they will not lose boats to a counterattack, and can use their boats to deal with the british fleet, the bad news is that they are spread out, will be in trouble on land and will take 3 ftrs in losses for only 36 US ipcs (+ 10 UK).  If they try to do a heavy PH, alot of the uk fleet survives and UK will keep borneo until J3.

I still feel it is a bad move, since you are handing africa to the axis, but japan will be in trouble.

@OLver:

Thanks for the input guys. My oponent should really have landed in Africa with UK on the first turn.

I also thought that sending a Russian fighter in Anglo Egypt was a big mistake made by my oponent, so was it to not leave Leningrad completly empty.

My bad I said 1 inf and one art from Africa but of course it was 1 tank and 1 inf. I also forgot to say that my two subs in the baltic were moved in  seazone 7. I knew my navy was going to be destroyed, but it forced my oponent to split his airforce, and I saved a sub and killed one fighter with my transport/dest fleet.

There are two approaches to a non-Baltic fleet buy that I’ve seen and use.

1.  Stay put.  If the UK attacks with its air, the Germans kill UK air.  The Germans lose a lot of navy which they weren’t using a lot (they would have used the Baltic transport), and the UK loses its valuable and hard-to-replace air.

2.  Split into four groups.  If the UK splits its air up, German subs can surrender and German destroyer and/or transport have a better chance of bringing down some UK air.  If the UK doesn’t split its air up, then at least three German units survive.  Note that the US bomber will probably knock out another German naval unit.

I guess my oponent did not play really well  with Russia because even thought I had few land units on the Russian front, my fighters always allowed me to trade territories and to keep UK and US navy at bay for a while.

Yes, trading territories is - after a fashion - a strength of the German fighter buy, but REALLY, you should have been bled dry, especially with having to transport units to Africa.

Now I have to explain what were, in my opinion the advantages of such a move. UK and USA had to buy much more navy to protect their transports, so even thought my russian front was some kind of weak, Germany was almost never threatened, and the Allies coult not build any fleet in the Pacific. On UK1, my oponent send his Indian SZ Fighter to destroy my tank in Anglo-Egypt along with the Transjordan inf. He succeded, but my lonely Japan transport stayed alive, so I only had to buy one on J1 and could already build a factory in Mandchuria. On J1 I took China and Buryatia. Two turn later a factory was build in French Indochina, and another one in India a turn later.

German fighters have nothing to do with a fleet in the Pacific.  Nothing you have yet described prevents the Allies from building a fleet in Atlantic OR Pacific.  (Of course, if they build in the Atlantic, they’ll have to overcome that German air force, but I digress)

The UK can still send their carrier and destroyer against the Japanese transport at Kwangtung - and they should, too, in view of the fact they used the Indian fighter against Anglo-Egypt.  More weak play.  :wink:

I think you spent way too many IPCs on industrial complexes.  If you purchase 16 IPC of transports, you can move up to four units from Japan to the mainland, and vary between anywhere from Soviet Far East to French Indochina; furthermore, those transports can be used as naval fodder and to pick up Japanese infantry from isolated islands where they are doing no good.  Compare with a 15 IPC industrial complex that produces three units, cannot switch where units are placed, cannot be used as naval fodder, and do not solve the problem of wasted Japanese infantry resources sitting on isolated islands.  I know Caspian Sub states 2 transports 1 industrial complex is good, but I think I would prefer 3 transports 1 tank on J1 regardless of bid - if I can claim India and put an IC there with Japan, the positional advantage is huge.

–

In practice, those German fighters have limited range, exactly as I previously mentioned; you will probably end up having to split the German fighters between eastern territories and Western Europe.  This isn’t too bad in practice.  What you will probably see is the Allies building up a fleet off Eastern Canada; when the Allies feel like it, they will unite newly built naval units from Eastern US with the existing fleet off Eastern Canada and land at Algeria, where with no surviving Baltic fleet elements and your German Mediterranean fleet probably not in a position to counter, and insufficient German fighters at Western Europe (considering that you have to split between Western Europe and eastern territories), you can do nothing THAT TURN.

On the next turn, though, you can land 10 fighter 1 bomber (possibly 9 fighter 1 bomber) at Western Europe.  If the Allied navy stay off Algeria, you beat them up, if the Allied navy retreats from Algeria, you may have a problem.  Why a problem?  Because even a pretty tame Allied fleet will land 6 US and 4 UK ground units (2 starting UK transports and 2 starting US transports plus 1 US transport bought on US1); you may easily have to deal with a lot more.  And although you have air at Western Europe that can hit Algeria, you need cheap German ground units to act as fodder; you can get 2 German infantry in with the Mediterranean transport, but otherwise - well, you can see that you might have a problem to deal with.

So let us say that is what happens.  On the German turn, you fly all your fighters to Western Europe, and the Allies respond by pulling their navy back to Eastern Canada and buying another US carrier at Eastern US (I assume they bought one already on US1 after seeing the German fighter build).  Germany does nothing about the Allied forces in Algeria.

Germany’s next turn, you can only trade off Karelia and one other territory easily (that other territory being the one your German bomber can hit).  BUT now what?  If you fly away from Western Europe, the Allies will land MORE units at Algeria.  And if you do NOT fly away from Western Europe, the Allies STILL land at Algeria, with probable 6 transports (up to 7 or 8 easily), 2 destroyers, 2 carriers, 4 fighters, 1 battleship.  EVEN with that mighty air force, there is nothing you can do.  So let us say you GIVE UP Algeria and start harassing Russia with your mighty air force.  The Allies have sunk 32 IPC in carriers, and are just making their landing at Africa; they are out of position to help Russia.

So as you can see, what have you gained at best?  Nothing but TIME.  Time for Japan to push on Russia.  Time for the Germans to keep the IPCs they gained in Africa.  And that is EXACTLY why I recommend using African bid units instead of Ukraine.  You need to control Africa early while you still can; you WILL lose Africa eventually.

–

And remember these things too:

1.  The Allies can still go KJF (if they do, Germany has to try to control and keep control of Africa.)

2.  By buying so many fighters early, you lock yourself into a certain line of German play.  You may do better to stagger your fighter buys out (say 1 German fighter a turn or even 2 German fighters on G1) so you can have some early infantry to trade with Russia sooner.

In short - yes, if the Allies go KGF, German fighters are useful - however, I do not think that 4 fighters RIGHT AWAY is necessary or proper; I think 2 fighters is the most that the Germans can afford on G1.

In a good KJF, Germany will be stopped before getting 50 IPC, Switch.  Any layman player who puts some thought into it can easily slow Germany enough to prevent them from being at the doorstep of Moscow before Round 10, at which point, Japan should be castrated.

The trick is to put 2-3 transports of troops into Africa a turn.  Easy to do without building a single extra transport.  Actually, odds are, you’re putting 4 transports in a round.  Maybe more, if England is focused on Africa and fighters for Russia.  America can take Japan without England’s help.  Just use the English fleet to make it near impossible to sink the American fleet and let America take the islands.

Hello there

New member on the forum, however I’ve been surfing around here for a few weeks and I’m gonna throw myself into the fray :)
I’m not saying “I know the perfect way” but would like to give you a few advices how to play a defensive Jap and what to think of when on a KJF hunt is coming.

What I first want to say is that our current group plays with no bids, no tech, no NA. Still have a few new players so bids are not needed (yet?).
I have a lot of games behind me, both old and revised.
A lot of this will contain “this gives this and that, all of it ofc changes depending on what the enemy buys/does” and I can’t write all things that can happend and I won’t, this will be a long post anyway :D

What I do as Japan is first of all, avoid pearl if england flies it’s fighter there and you’ve lost the sub (I prefer pearl light), the 2 BB’s are really needed when defending.
The key in my Japanese defensive is to build transports (3 first turn with a followup of INF+ART + ftr if I can afford since you only need to fill 3 Trn, the last one is down in the south taking inf from the southern islands).
Ofc you have to kill China…if you don’t you ARE doomed, seen to many games with US pumping fighters/tanks in sinkiang.

So I prefer killing off the Brittish fleet and China, reinforce FIC from Jap and wait with Buy 1 turn (you get 3 TRN next turn that can massacre Buy)
Japan need to get going, but with a “slow-starter” you will get more troops (IC on mainland is a “fast starter”) and you have time to react if they go all out KJF and adjust for defence instead of offense.

Now when US comes over the pacific there are a few very important things to remember.
1. If he goes for extra bomber+ftr he will be a monster in offense, however his defence is weaker.
2. If he goes for AC you must be prepared for a very strong US fleet and you must equid your carriers with ftr’s.

Now the pacific is big, utilize SZ60 for naval defence if he goes wake island (to be able to use extra fighters) he won’t go for east indies.
Use the fact ftr have 4 in movement (ftr on AC SZ60 has a range 3 inland, and therefore you can move that one in ashore while a fighter ashore also attacks and flies out to the AC. You still reach Yakut and China from Sz60 and ofc FIC, therefore 6 fighters can act both defence for SZ60 and land and still be attacking every round).
The bomber should be in Kwantung as much as possible, same here, it will be able to strike the importand islands and wake island seazone.
(remember this is a defending japan, and that is what you are doing on a KJF, because if japan grows outside Novo/China/india well…then you’re not having a KJF).

What I want is the US fleet trading island in the southern pacific…why? because if the US moves his whole fleet to southern pacific he will be too far away to reinforce it from US and with 3 transports, 2 BB and 2 AC you can take 7 hits before even loosing attackpower (yes I mean you should sacrifice AC’s when it comes to a naval clash everything is about sinking US BB’s while keeping yours).
If he only uses TRN for taking you island, use ftr to sink the trn, 1TRN to retake the island with the help of a bomber from mainland.
A lot of people are obsessed with “taking IPC’s” but trading a 3 IPC island 3 moves away from your factory while the enemy has 1 move…that is not a good thing to do, because japan can easily get more land troops. US cannot.
Japan only needs 1 transport to retake islands, US need loads of transports to threaten japan.
And after 1 switch you have 1 INF (hopefully 2) on the island and suddenly US must dedicate more than “just 1 TRN” to take the island.

The biggest problem comes to…when should you attack the US fleet?
that depends way to much on how the US fleet looks like, I prefer boxing Japan and if I feel too threatened I go 1 round of only making 1DD + 2 Sub

So to sum up:
Kill off the brits so you only have to worry about 1 fleet.
Gather up you BB’s with extra TRN for superb defence.
Reinforce fleet with 1 ship / round if they are going KJF. (you can still afford 3-4 INF and 1-2 ART units to ship ashore)
If you are being reduced to 1 TRN, make that ship a TRN, if not build a sub, US really hates when he only has his trn+BB to choose what will die. If you feel rich make a DD

Japan will probably not grow, but that means that Germany can take Africa and more important put pressure on Rus. Important here is that I usually make a TRN buy for Baltic and then a DD on G2 to secure Baltic and simply hammer any brittish fleet trying to take Norway/WE, utilize your luftwaffe and you are secure.
(with 2 TRN in Baltic and 1 in Meditteranian sea you can send 6 INF/ART to the front each turn making a 4 INF 2 ART 4 ARM i very solid build for smashing Russia fast).
(When US goes pacific you simply sacrifice 1-2 planes to take out the american fleet if he tries going for africa).

I don’t know how your US are doing the KJF, I’m really interested in the US1-2 Buy.
A smart american buys a strike force US1-2 and skip transports to simply eliminate the Jap fleet and THEN start invading with TRN.
However most players buy Transports + INF to have with them in the 1st attack…which means the US fleet ain’t as strong as it could be. How does it look for you?

Yep… I had that argument with Tri in one of our earlier games…  I was using the box rules which implied somethign else, he was using LHTR, which are explicit.

This discussion has brought a few more things to mind.  If the Axis player can stand to last that long, what do you guys believe is the best way to move in on Japan?  I know tri and nc started discussing it a little bit.  I personally would establish IC’s with UK on Asian mainland as soon as it is obvious that Japan cannot capture them.  Then, if Russia’s economy is still low, I generally use them for SBR’s considering the time and money needed for a tran and troop buildup in the Pacific is simply too much for the Russians; unless they are in control of Berlin and the majority of Europe.  As the US I will generally start building up trannies with inf and arm with air and naval support.  If Allied naval power allows, an island hopping strategy is another good way to put a joke hold on Japan, while also eliminating any reinforcements to Tokyo.

Another question, which could quite possibly be a stupid one considering the good amount of years that I’ve played this game is, “Can a nation have negative income?”  Of course, my initial response is no but this would be an interesting house rule.  For instance, if the nation’s economy is -3, it must take away 1 inf a turn until restored.  This may give the SBR privelage even more power than it already posesses but it could be interesting to try once.

The reason for the mass of troops is FIC.

Japan can dump forces into Asia while the US floats across the South Pacific.  Japan either comes out and attacks the fleet, pulling their trannies of bridge duty to serve as fodder, or Japan stays put and ferries troops.

If they do the former, then you have taken a LOT of pressure of Russia.

If they do the latter, then the US lands HEAVY in FIC:  10+ divisions of mixed INF/ART/ARM
… behind the Japan front in Asia
And with a piece of property that can be reinforced immediately by UK AF before Japan can counter (maybe even FIGS from Russia itself).  Drop an IC…

Allied HARD point in south Asia, with massed fleet heavy on transports, which is a lot of defensive fodder, and a rapid threat to India, Africa, and even Japan itself in a few rounds.

Japan has to take the bait and move out on that fleet, otherwise they get pierced in their underbelly, with no way to remove the spearhead.

Eitherway, it stops the flow against Russia from Japan.

Now if you want to fine tune the specific naval builds… do an AC and FIG with 1 TRN one round, a BB and TRN the next, that is up to you.  But the more TRN you have in the mix, the greater the land and IPC threat to Japan.