Brainstorming: What's the best way to kill the Japanese Fleet?

u dont need to kill jap fleet, you just need to force him to move his fleet back to japan seazone ( to protect his new builds/ protect his main fleet) , then u can retake saome of the islands.

its all about controlling the center in pazifc. ( carolines, wake, philippines, okinawa).

moreover. if you put all your effort on killing jap fleet, you win the war at sea, but loose it on land. so u got to take away jap money in pazifk and give the brits some ( SOL 5 ipc, AUS 7 ipc ( if brits control med). harder targets are borneo, sumatra. (also good for JAP NO)

also with large fleets since a lot of subs are prolly involed, youll get trading battles to prevent attacking, since however attacks is at an advantage (since both sides prolly have some bombers)
so u put an DD between the fleets. if he clears it with a sub + planes, he isnt preventing your movement , so he needs to send an DD too.

I agree with all the people that have said you don’t need to kill the Japanese fleet just force it back to Sz 62.

I prefer AC + ftrs b/c you can threaten more sea zones.  Depending on where the J ACs and ftrs end up on J1, I may wait until US 2 to buy tons of ships so I’d go more air on US 1 (ftrs for a later AC) and a few inf so I can always shuck at least 2 inf to support the UK in the Atlantic.

If Sz 56 is fairly safe, you can buy 1 ac + 3 dds and have: 4 dds, 2 ac, 4 ftrs all in Sz 56 at the end of US 1.  Japan needs an awful lot of ftrs in range to even threaten that and they likely won’t since most gear up for potential strikes on Ind or Aus as early as rd 2.  4 dds, 2 ac, 4 ftrs is essentially even with a 9-10 ftr attack, so again you are pretty safe in most cases.

After that, in Rd 2 is when I drop some subs and more dds for fodder.  You’ll probably have ~48 to spend so that is 8 subs, 6 dds, or 4 subs 3 dds.  You might need one more turn (rd 3) of surface ships (subs + dds, probaly good to get a trn now), before you can go back to AC + air.  You can probably go to Sol by US 4 and from here you just need to time your later moves right and wait for the right opportunity.  By rd 6 or so Japan should be pretty well confined to the Northern seazones and out of range of anything at Sol or EI, except for air only but 4-5 ACs and 8-10 ftrs + a few DDs is plenty for air only defense.

It does take patience and time so you need to be on your game with Rus and UK b/c it is pretty much just those two against a pretty strong Germany/Ita.  You won’t see the effects of the US build up until after rd 6 or so.

and then hopefully that 30 IPC swing ( borneo / sumatra / australia /JAP NO / UK NO) isnt late :D

i like, both in 1941, but especially in 1942(japan is weaker then) to fortify australia
might sound crazy at first, but think: supported with atleast 2 fighters and bombers together with 3 UK inf and canon and AA gun…
it’ll hold a little while
and, from australia, you can cover with your bombers a pretty large territory

still sound so stupid?

depends on J1 really. but its not a big deal if japan has it a few rounds before u take it back since its only 2 ipc .u cant really prevent japan from taking india (the NO). lateron carolines is a better bomber base

So exactly  how are you getting your fleet to Midway?

If you left all of the US fleet completely alone, then the US has 3 dd’s, 1 bb, 1 cv, 4 fig, 2 bmb, AND 6 subs to attack your 1 dd, 2 cv’s, 4 fig, 1 ca, and 1 bb at Midway.  As America, I will attack you like that every game.  I mean, if your going to let me build a navy in the Pacific, why shouldn’t I?

Killing America’s navy is more important than killing a few Russian infantry which are stopping you from building your turn 1 Manchurian IC.  If you must have a turn 1 IC, and Russia stacked Buryatia, then build it in Fic instead.

I didn’t leave anything alone except the carrier group in the corner of the map and possibly the US BB. Everything else is gone. Where did you get the idea that i did?

The factory is placed in the event that the Soviets pile up infantry in Buryatia, which is destroyed instead of that Hawaii BB

If the Soviets leave Buryatia with 1 -2 Infantry, then i take out the US BB as well leaving:

Japan with 1 BB, 3 CV, fighters, 1 DD vs. 1 CV, fighters, 1 DD, possible bombers.

IPC would be for J2 is 30-32 and USA is 38. The difference in IPC will not overcome the japanese material advantage

The japanese spacial advantage would not overcome. After J2 Japan gets about 5 or 6 more IPC which makes it an equal fight.

My fleet would be in one spot at Midway and will strike out at your builds on west coast because your subs wont block my fleet from moving and while you set up a picket fence to avoid losing subs, i strike out your fleet leaving you with subs. But i also buy subs and 1 destroyer and link up with main body.

you dont play NO,s? i think u should give it a try

The NOs do make Japan very killer.  Its what forces the USA to seriously consider the consequences of leaving Japan to itself in the Pacific.  They need to start island hopping to get the Japanese to protect its income, or at least some of it.

@Imperious:

So exactly  how are you getting your fleet to Midway?

If you left all of the US fleet completely alone, then the US has 3 dd’s, 1 bb, 1 cv, 4 fig, 2 bmb, AND 6 subs to attack your 1 dd, 2 cv’s, 4 fig, 1 ca, and 1 bb at Midway.  As America, I will attack you like that every game.  I mean, if your going to let me build a navy in the Pacific, why shouldn’t I?

Killing America’s navy is more important than killing a few Russian infantry which are stopping you from building your turn 1 Manchurian IC.  If you must have a turn 1 IC, and Russia stacked Buryatia, then build it in Fic instead.

I didn’t leave anything alone except the carrier group in the corner of the map and possibly the US BB. Everything else is gone. Where did you get the idea that i did?

Because you said that you are consolidating your ENTIRE fleet at Midway on J2, that means that on J1, you are sending NO naval units to the naval battle for the Philippines, and you are not hitting the British dd+tr in sz35.

The factory is placed in the event that the Soviets pile up infantry in Buryatia, which is destroyed instead of that Hawaii BB

If the Soviets leave Buryatia with 1 -2 Infantry, then i take out the US BB as well leaving:

Japan with 1 BB, 3 CV, fighters, 1 DD vs. 1 CV, fighters, 1 DD, possible bombers.

IPC would be for J2 is 30-32 and USA is 38. The difference in IPC will not overcome the japanese material advantage

The japanese spacial advantage would not overcome. After J2 Japan gets about 5 or 6 more IPC which makes it an equal fight.

My fleet would be in one spot at Midway and will strike out at your builds on west coast because your subs wont block my fleet from moving and while you set up a picket fence to avoid losing subs, i strike out your fleet leaving you with subs. But i also buy subs and 1 destroyer and link up with main body.

Because you said that you are consolidating your ENTIRE fleet at Midway on J2, that means that on J1, you are sending NO naval units to the naval battle for the Philippines, and you are not hitting the British dd+tr in sz35.

I said that but for turn J2 not J1.

The Soviet 7 inf stack = 21 IPCs, and seven dice for 2 if attacked in J1.  The US BB = 20 IPCs and 1 die for 4.  It’s a no-brainer to me, I want that Soviet pile attacked if I’m the allies.  The BB is infinitely more useful when it’s got other ships with it instead of stranded alone in sz 53.  Also, for 1 IPC more the Soviets are going to get a shot at killing MANY more Japanese units, and if he brings more than 3 ground units, you’re doing much too well in other places to worry about the lack of value of the units you kill compared to the ones the BB might (or might not) kill.

Not only that, it’s leaving even more American or British units alive because every land and air unit fighting for that 1 IPC territory on turn 1 isn’t going at a 2 or 7 IPC Phillipines, Hawaii which is the only real way to complete a first turn 3 NO grab for JP, 4 IPC Borneo, 4 IPC EI, Kwangtung/New Guinea which completes the 2nd NO. 2 IPC burma, SZ 35 which is very valuable to the Brits.  AFAIC, the 7 inf Red stack is about the LEAST of JP’s worries on turn 1.  America and Britain need to be taxed or you’ll find yourself monetarily dominated VERY quickly in the Pacific.

yea and the BB that japan leaves alone may just go to Europe which takes out of the game for a few turns, and taking or ruining 7 infantry will get a jump on the Soviets forcing them to shuck more to the east. Usually i still got my tank so i can blitz the next turn empty territories.

If i don’t take out Buryatia force and the Americans decide to go after japan, then i got less to worry about because the 7 infantry are more of a threat than one BB, if japan is forced to buy naval for a few turns. The less opposing infantry and the Manchurian factory make it so i don’t need to worry so much about transports shucking, when they can take India and Australia.

Also the amphibious attacks now allow retreat at least for the infantry that moved by land, so its not really a gamble at all attacking Buryatia, while no matter what you can hold your new factory so you can start buying tanks.

The second factory candidate is for India.

Yes, the Russians are dead and the units they’ve taken with them are generally on par, IPC wise, of those taken by the US BB.  My argument is the long range ramifications of JP are at least two-fold worse for leaving that BB around, up to and including fighting for the big money in the SW Pacific.

Firstly, if 50 is cleared but not taken… depending on what’s in that SZ, it’s vulnerable to BB, bmb, ftr.  It’s not entirely appetizing, but if it’s just the BB, I’m going to take my shot to kill it in 1 turn at 0 value loss to America.  I’d also be tempted to just send the ftr and bmb at it, but that’s probably a poor risk as you’re giving up anything that stays there, anyhow.

Realistically, anyone who rolls the backbone of a good naval fleet across the world and out of action for a couple of turns needs their head examined.  Japan has told the Americans what they’re going to do with their game, leaving them a nearly fully functional fleet in the Pacific.  I mean, did you even send anything at SZ 56?  If not, the fleet’s already going to be on par with whatever JP wants to throw at them.  If not, it’s still VERY much a threat.  That fleet, in particular could be REALLY effective gathering in SZ 46 (2 inf if trn 56 is alive, 2bmb, ftr on sol from US, 2 inf from brit) and shipping out from there.  My first turn US answer to that is 3 subs, ftr and a bmb dropped in Pacific theater.  Sure, that fleet inf 46 attack able by many planes in 61 and any ships that are in 50, but there are a few key points to this.  Any aircraft wanting to attack this hearty fleet (BB soak, 2-3 destroyers before you’re doing any good dmg) from SZ 62 will FORCE a carrier to stop in sz 51, in range of the build of US, and the bmb and ftr on land in the solomons.  Sol’s in a bit of danger and loses SOME punch if the US trn isn’t there, but if JP wants to send every unit that can reach a 0 cost territory in turn 2 after sending a ton of their units at a 1 cost territory in turn 1, they’re just not doing acquiring the wealth they NEED to compete with the US.  Along with beginning to chip away at the substantial unit advantage JP has on them int he start,

Of course, playing without NOs allows you to ignore Phi and by extension, US, a bit more.  I do seem to remember this was all predicated on you saying you play without NO… and when Haw is worth 6 to JP turn 1, Phi is worth 7 to the US and is part of another NO for JP, they tend to get ignored less.  Still, no NOs tends to favor the Allies a bit more, and that’d make fighting for big money territories like EI and Borneo all the more appealing for the US/UK.

Dunno, 7 infantry is not that strong a defense for the IPC and utility.  At least in my opinion.

I’ve seen 7 infantry go down to 5 infantry and 2 tanks with minimal damage to the attacker.  Now factor in all those fighters buzzing around. (Yes, I would ignore the BB in SZ 53 and the DD/Trn in SZ 56 in this case so I could obliterate the Russians.)

Once the Russians and the Chinese are destroyed, utterly and completely, on Japan 1, I can focus the majority of my income to ships for the pacific if America goes that route (And they probably will with the gift of +28 IPC in naval ships of the line)

Honestly, with 3 carriers, it’s a matter of working Japan up to 12 fighters and then putting battleships and destroyers in the water.  If America just builds and never advances, you can use your fighters against mainland enemies, if they do, you can quickly fly them back to cover your fleet and increase the threat range of your naval power. (6 fighters on a carrier + 6 fighters on land can all attack at once if you need them too.)

I’m not doubting their obliteration, but crunching the numbers the IPC’s lost against the BB on average are lower.  If the DD is in the battle, that’s 8 IPCs hit 2/3 of the time in round 1.  The Russian stack averages 2.33 hits on 3 IPC units–5 1/3 IPC for the BB (6.66 for a fighter only attack), 7 IPC for the inf.

Also, why is America building but never advancing?  If I’m left with a completely unmolested fleet outside of sz 50, I’m certainly making my presence felt US1.  Alas, the only way to really prove that is on the board though.

I seriously doubt that there are any good ways to kill the Japanese fleet in the -41 scenario, assuming the axis player is somewhat decent.

Japan will only have 10 ipc less in production level than the US by the end of J1. By the end of J2, Japan will be near parity with the US.

And if US starts building in WUS it means much less stuff is going to Europe, then there’s the risk of Germany + Italy can push against Russia and at the same time take most of Africa.

@Subotai:

Japan will only have 10 ipc less in production level than the US by the end of J1. By the end of J2, Japan will be near parity with the US.

But the US can essentially spend 85-95% on Navy/Air for the Pac while Japan is doing a 50/50 split at best.  Japan still needs to buy some ICs and gorund troops for Asia.  The US can commit 2 inf per turn (only 6 ipc) to Afr/Euro using the trn they start with while they use the remaining 42 ipc on navy.

At the end of US 1 the navy in Sz 56 can consist of 4 dd, 2 ac, 4 ftrs with 2 boms nearby.  At the end of US 2 you can have: 1 sub, 5 dd, 3 ac, 6 ftrs.  After that you mix in a trn with more subs and dds for fodder and you can probably move on the Sol by US 4-5.

I’m not saying you can kill the J fleet easily, but you can get to her islands.

@Subotai:

And if US starts building in WUS it means much less stuff is going to Europe, then there’s the risk of Germany + Italy can push against Russia and at the same time take most of Africa.

True.  Russia needs to play a solid defensive game, and be able to trade Belo/Euk/Ukr.  But the UK should be able to help from its mid east units since Japan should be somewhat preoccupied by the growing US fleet.

why not buy 6 subs US1? they are solomones/ carolines US2, scattered around eastindies US3. japan has got to protect their transports.

lets say sz56 /53 got cleared

US1 6 Subs save 4
US2: AC BB 2 DD save 2
US3: loaded AC 2 DD

leaves u with 3AC 6 ftr 1 BB 5DD in sz56 end US3 and 6 subs already scatterd in the pazific.

japan often buys 2trannies or and IC round1. even if they buy 2 DD J1 and 5 J2 they got 3 AC 6ftr BB CA and 7 DD J2. they will prolly spend another 30-40 IPC J3 and put some subs in the water too…

american bombers at least should sbr italythe first 3 turns. id risk those 4 shots at 1 and then move them back into the pacific.

America is building and not advancing because if they advance they have a significant naval threat to contend with that could eliminate them in short order.

Remember, Japan has 9 Fighters in their starting set up!  With 6 Fighters on Carriers and 3 Fighters along the coast, it is theoretically possible to hit the Solomon’s Sea Zone with Cruiser, Battleship, Destroyer and 9 Fighters.

America can get, at most, 2 Destroyers, Carrier, 2 Fighters, Battleship in Solomons by the end of US 1.

That’s a 99% in favor of Japan battle, by the calculator.

Now, if America buys, say, 5 or 6 submarines in SZ 56 and consolidates there, why wouldn’t Japan buy 3 Fighters and some ground units?  (This would give them 12 fighters that can hit your navy; 6 on carriers that land on ground territories and 6 from ground territories that can land on carriers.)

And if America continues, Japan only needs +2 Destroyers to effectively end the Submarine threat from any one or two territories on the board.

With 12 Fighters, 3 Carriers, 3 Destroyers, Cruiser, Battleship (+46 IPC) the Japanese are effectively ensconced in protection for a while and still able to give America enough pause that they keep a wide berth between them.

And once Japan gets 2 or 3 ICs running on the mainland, they don’t need to control SZ 62 any longer and can move their fleet away.

Do not get me wrong.  I am not saying America cannot defeat the Japanese in the Pacific.  I have plans that I think work effectively at dismantling the Japanese fleet.  But submarines are not the mainland idea behind it.

I believe America needs to focus on Destroyers, another carrier (to land those fighters on), bombers for long range punch and battleships.  Honestly, in this scenario, Cruisers are not cost effective.  Just my opinion on that.  Cruisers are great for the Atlantic, they give you bombardments and can be added to the British fleet at minimal costs to protect against the Luftwaffe. (Carrier, 2 Fighters, 3 Transports and just enough cruisers to stop Germany from posing a serious threat to the fleet is my aim.)

As for submarines, those are units I add in two rounds before I think I’ll engage the enemy.  Why two rounds?  1 Round to move them into position, one round to make the combat move.  By the time i think of serious submarine commitment, the enemy fleet should already be dead, I’m just adding some units for the coup de gras and insurance.

After you control the Pacific, it’s a good idea to put a serious investment of submarines in the water since you can set up a scenario where you can sink anything the enemy builds and have units immune from enemy attack.