Posts made by Ansbach

You know what though? Zero has inadvertantly hit on the most (only?) feasible KJF strategy - going after Japan by pushing all your troops through Russia:

The Long, Slow Death of Japan
This will make for a very long game, but at least you could say you did it. Once. You stick with the basic strategy used in a Crush Germany game for the first several turns, namely setting up UK and US fleets in the North Sea to pump infantry into Karelia through Norway. But you never go into Eastern Europe. Instead you push as many troops as possible through Russia to the Russian/Japanese front, always leaving behind just enough troops in Karelia to keep Germany in check. All excess troops (say for example, all USA troops) get sent east to slowly push Japan back into the Pacific. It certainly wouldn’t be an easy battle, but Russia will never be in real danger and you would win eventually. While technically this is a very feasible strategy, in reality it’s worthless because at that point it’s still much easier to crush Germany and you would be going after Japan instead just for the novelty of it - all you are doing is pointlessly dragging the game out and probably pissing off your opponent, although he may be content to keep playing since Germany will still be going strong.

So really it’s just a technicality and doesn’t count as a true KJF strategy.

Edit: Actually, what would probably wind up happening is that there will be so many troops on the EE/Karelia border that one of you will wind up making a mistake in numbers (or the numbers will get so big that you will both be in new “Do I have enough to win this battle?” territory) and a giant battle will ensue before Japan falls.

Now here is a quick thought on why Kill Japan First is officially a Big Fat Waste of Time in a balanced game against a good Axis player:

Look at how hard it is for the Allies, 3 on 1, to crush Germany when Germany is being fully defensive and buying 95% infantry.
Now take away half of the pressure Germany gets from Russia, half of the pressure Germany gets from the UK, and make Germany an island. :o

Not 100% accurate, but you get the picture… :lol:

Well… since this topic has been revived, here are my thoughts on the Grand Strategy of this idea.

First of all let me state that my official position is that this thread is a Big Fat Waste of Time! :)

I don’t think you can do it against a good Axis player. But as a logical exercise it would be fun to work on the problem. This will be a rambling, ‘think out loud’ process covering the basics from the Allies perspective, and will partially be no-brainers for the experienced players. I won’t get into any specific tactics or whether or not it can even be done (I doubt it can), just try to summarize what has to happen so that tactics can be developed.

With a Germany First strategy the question has always been, “Can Japan take Russia before the Allies take Germany?”

Under a Japan First strategy this question changes to “Can the USA take Japan before Germany takes Russia?” This basically implies that the Allies will have to be defensive in Western Europe, holding out against Germany as long as possible, while at the same time push on Japan as quickly as possible.

Can the USA even take Japan by itself? Probably not. In most games Japan will have an income equal to or higher than the USA by turn 3 and there is little the USA can do about it.

So the USA needs help. Before we can answer “Who?”, we need to decide “Where and how?” and factor in dealing with Germany.

The USA needs an ally to help reduce Japan’s income, which means either on the mainland or the islands, or both. I think the mainland is a much easier target than the islands for many reasons that I won’t get into, so let’s go with that.

Goal#1: We need Russia and/or the UK to help the USA kick Japan off the mainland.

Sounds like a simple, common sense statement so far… let’s look at Germany.

Can Russia stop Germany by itself? No, of course not. Why? Not enough income. Can they increase their income in our new scenario? Technically yes, by taking the 3 countries from the Japanese mainland for +9 income. Is that feasible? Who knows - probably not. Is that enough? Yes, if Germany doesn’t have Africa, no if they do have Africa. Can Russia stop Germany from taking Africa? No way. So in order to hold off Germany by itself, Russia has to divert enough troops away from the Eastern Front with Germany to take all 3 Japanese mainland countries and needs the UK to hold Africa - all of this against a Germany that has no pressure on the Eastern Front and no worries from the USA. I think I am definitely barking up the wrong tree here, so let’s stick with the idea that Russia has to get direct help from the UK against Germany. Where? That’s an easy one since there is only one answer - Karelia.

Goal#2: We need the UK’s direct support in holding Karelia.

Another easy, common sense goal. Not much progress in and of itself, but if we combine the two goals we suddenly hit on the real meat of the problem and the first big question:

Big Question: How can the UK and Russia hold Karelia against Germany, while at the same time one or both of them help the USA kick Japan off the mainland?

Can the UK and USSR even hold of Germany in Karelia without any help from the USA? Africa is the the key - yes if the UK holds Africa, no if Germany takes Africa. So now we have to revise our Big Question:

Revised Big Question: How can the UK and Russia hold Karelia against Germany, prevent Germany from taking Africa, and at the same time one or both of them help the USA kick Japan off the mainland?

Can Russia even help out in Africa? A little, by pushing troops through Persia, but not really - looks like the bulk of the job is up to the UK. Can the UK help defend Karelia and send troops to Africa? Probably. Can they help defend Karelia, send troops to Africa, and help the US kick Japan off the mainland? Probably not. So it also looks like the bulk of that job falls to Russia, so we at least need Russia’s help in kicking Japan off the mainland. Now we have a basic set of goals for everyone.

I think I’ll wrap up with some major and minor goals for each of the three Allied countries:

Russia Major Goals - Defend Karelia, help the USA kick Japan off the mainland.
Russia Minor Goal - Help the UK defend Africa.

UK Major Goals - Defend Karelia, keep Germany out of Africa.
UK Minor Goal - Help the USA kick Japan off the mainland.

USA Major Goals - Kick Japan off the mainland, take Japan.
USA Minor Goals - Take some islands from Japan, help out in Africa if needed.

Any specific tactics we come up with are going to need to fit into these goals.
This certainly isn’t the only possible approach, but I think its a good summary if the USA is going 90% + after Japan.

The other strategy (that some of you guys were kind of developing above) is what I would call a Half-A$$ed Japan Crush, where all three Allies go partially after Japan. The goal here would be for them to do just enough to keep Germany in stalemate, sending everything else that was not used for that purpose against Japan. But when you look at that idea compare to the goals above, all we are really talking about is shifting some Majors and Minors around, so they still present a good working frame.

Well if nothing else, you get a glimpse at how the hamsters run on the little wheel in my brain! :o

@Soon_U_Die:

In 3rd Edition, Aerial Retreat allows you to retreat air at anytime during an Amphib assault. It doesn’t matter whether ground units are left or not, air can retreat, but it must all retreat, or none of it. Ground units fight to the death. These rules have also been clarified by Milton Bradley.

SUD - Thanks for clarifying my comments - I through those out pretty hastily. Question though - it’s strange - I wonder what made me think that air units can’t retreat until the land units are gone? I could have sworn we have always played that way… but now I can’t remember. Was that a common misconception that got clarified by MB and I missed it, or did I just pull that out of thin air in a sleep-deprived haze? :-?

I’m not 100% sure that they will ship overseas, but you can buy the game at www.spring1942.com - there is a link on the front page.

@EmuGod:

Ansbach, I’ll take you up on that offer!

Sure thing! Just send me an e-mail and let me know when you want met up - weekdays between 5pm - 11pm CST work best for me.

jg2_ansbach@yahoo.com

@EmuGod:

Actually, the Americans knew EXACTLY who was on the plane. Pearl Harbor had intercepted and decoded a Jaapnese mssage that outlined Admiral Yamamoto’s exact itinerary for his trip. The attack was meant to have him assassinated. It served no other purpose because there was no need to send that many P58s to dogifght against numerically inferior Japanese fighters. He was the main target. Another Japanese officer, in the plane behnd, made a full description of the attack and how the American fighters fiercely concetrated on Yamamoto’s plane.

I can confirm having read the same thing - they intercepted a message, knew where he would be, and went after him. Of course at the time the Americans didn’t know that he was almost considered “pro-American” - he was the Main Bad Guy. Just another irony of the war I guess.

@Guest:

woo hoo…I have just finish my first game of A&A and I won :D

Congratulations!

This game is great, isn’t it? I’m envious - I don’t even remember my first game! And one of the great things about A&A is that there is so much depth - you will be able to play for years and years and it will just get more challenging… there are some players online that I played with in tournaments back in the 80’s!!! :o

We never would have guessed that we would still be playing each other 15 years later from our houses on a computer!

@Ozone27:

The fact is this often doesn’t come up because if you COULD HAVE attacked with additional units, you usually WOULD HAVE, rather than leave some behind. But sometimes it makes sense in your contingency plans.

Yeah, and it usually only happens when you get really lucky in a battle - one where you were expecting to lose your units on a counter-attack. Instead, you do so well that you realize you can now hold the country if you reinforce it during the non-combat move, when under ‘typical’ battle results you wouldn’t have been able to. Strategy and tactics count for very little in Axis and Allies - it’s all about the dice! ;)

Ansbach’s Golden Rules of Axis and Allies, #12:

“It’s better to be lucky than good!”

:lol:

1. can air unit retreat alone (not all units retreat) in the combat?

No.

2. if all seazone is occpied by emeny around the sub, how can it retreat? can it stay at the original sea zone? in this case, is any diff between attacked by air unit and naval unit?

It can’t retreat, unless you are playing with the optional submersible subs rule, in which case it could submerge.

3. when amphibious assault, if there are enemy naval units in that sea zone, does the attacker transport (/w cargo) invlove this sea battle?

Yes, it could be destroyed (along with the infantry on board). You have to resolve the naval battle first and the transport has to survive to be able to unload the units into the amphibious assault.

4. if there are sea battle before amphibious assault, only the land unit(unload from transport) can involve the land war? or i need to decide the air units (no involve the sea battle before) to attack that island in the combat movement pharse?

That is correct. The land units from the transports can participate if the transport survives the naval battle, and you designate which air units are in the naval battle and which are in the land battle during the combat movement phase.

5. if all chips and units on the board, how i purchase more units(using sth to represent it), or this is the offical limited, to control the number of units?

Just go get some more poker chips! :) Supposedly you can’t. However, we always thought this was a stupid rule that has nothing to do with the game - we have pieces from two games combined into one. :P

6. if i got back the place which original belongs to my ally, then now, the place is belongs to me, or back to my ally?

It belongs to your ally.

7. in amphibious assault, can the attacker retreat? and how to do? back to transports?

Land units can not retreat - they must fight to the death. Air units can retreat if they are all that is remaining.

8. after amphibious assault, is the battleship legal to move after the “one-shot” attack in non-combat movement phrase?

No. The bombardment counts as an attack so it can’t move. This also means that it can’t fight a naval battle and bombard on the same turn, for example during an amphibious assault where the sea space was occupied by the enemy.

I think you are guilty of something we are all guilty of when we are working on a new strategy - there is a default tendancy to assume that our opponents will play exactly into our hands. You get excited about one specific strategy and you have tunnel vision focusing on that strategy.

For example:

America Turn 2 (A2):
Because Germany needs to constantly reinforce the troops in Eastern Europe just to keep up with the Russian forces Eastern Europe will be weakly defended. So invade Western Europe using the support of your Fighters and Bomber.

That’s just crazy! Even if you only have a few games worth of experience, I guarantee that if you were playing as Germany in a game there is no way you would allow the US to take Western Europe on the second turn of the game. So why do you assume your opponent will allow this?

OK, you have an idea of what you want to do with the Allies for the first few turns, right? So now you need to play devil’s advocate - play as the Axis against your Allied strategy and look for the best way to stop it. Then go back and tweak it, test it again, etc. - until you are happy with it. Then test it out against some live opponents.

Just as an example, you missed some important things on Japan 1: If you leave your 2 infantry and fighter in India you will lose them. I will attack them with 3 infantry and a fighter from Burma, and the bomber from Japan. I have about an 80% chance of taking India with one Infantry remaining on average. I will land 2 infantry in Burma to protect the bomber, and 2 in Manchuria to reinforce as above. So everything that you have planned out after Japan 1 is invalid in this case. No factory in India. No factory in Sinkiang - if you build a factory in Sinkiang, you will lose it on turn 2 - I can attack it on Japan 2 with 2-4 infantry and 2-5 planes. You will lose the Yakut factory on Turn 3.

I am assuming that by coming to this website and posting various strategies to get feedback on them, your overall goal is to become a better player as quickly as possible. Probably so that you can deliver a butt whoopin’ to your friends. :D
Well here are some good ways to get a jump start on that:

Below is a website that has several essays that are a great resource for newer players. The strategies aren’t as black and white as the author makes them out to be, but overall they are sound and will help improve your game significantly. Among other things they describe a UK India factory strategy that is decent.

http://donsessays.freeservers.com/
One relevant quote:

“… you will have to believe that your death will occur if you make a purchasing mistake on the first, second, and third turns against seasoned A&A players.”

As I said earlier, all of this depends on your opponents. If you are playing against friends who are relatively new to the game, there are a lot more viable strategies for both the Axis and Allies. But if you are trying to improve your gameplay as quickly as possible by posting strategy ideas on a board with a lot of experienced players, then you need to learn what works, what doesn’t work, and why.

Take an in-depth look at these essays, absorb them, and then practice the strategies in them against your friends. They won’t stand a chance - you will deliver some serious beatings!

If you do want to improve quickly, get the CD game if you don’t own it already and start playing others on The Zone. There are about 100 people playing every night. I’d be happy to meet you there and help you get started, both with the game and with your Allied strategy. You can send me an e-mail at jg2_ansbach@yahoo.com.

There are also three great Online Axis and Allies clubs:

War Club: http://www.axis-allies.com
BOP: http://www.balance-of-power.net
Spring 1942: http://www.spring1942.com

You can join any or all of them! They have a lot of newbie support and resources, as well as various levels of opponents. Your play will improve dramatically, you will have more potential opponents than you ever dreamed of, and you will have a blast!

Also, if you like it here you ought to quit logging in as a guest and join this BB community as well! Continue to post questions and strategy ideas so that we can disscus them with you. This board will help you improve your strategy as well, IF you take what’s discussed here and try it out in real games.

Good luck!

I understand what you are trying to accomplish, but you are missing a few things after Japan 1:

1.) There are no US troops in China - I own it. (This is a ‘golden rule’ of Japan 1 - they should always, without exception, take China on their first turn.) All you have are 2 infantry in Sinkang - if you build a factory there I have a good shot at taking it on my second turn, depending on how many infantry survived in China and what my Burma infantry did. Sometimes I will even take Sinkang on Japan 1 from Burma.

2.) Even if I choose to ignore the Sinkang factory, I am attacking Yakut on Japan 3 with 14 infantry and 6 planes. US1 - build a factory, US2- build troops at factory… Yakut falls before US3. There are no US troops able to support Yakut in time unless you vacate Sinkang and give me a second free factory.

3.) The UK will not be ‘sweeping’ anywhere. There are 3 Japanese infantry in Burma at the start of the game. All England has is 3 infantry and a fighter, and the fighter will probably have to defend one of the factories. If you leave 3 infantry and a fighter in India on turn 1, I would probably hit that from Burma, spliting forces between India and China. Just 3 infantry from Burma, a fighter, and a bomber has a 70% chance of taking India - not a 35% chance. If I bring the transport and 2 more infantry it is a sure thing. (There is an odds calculator, “P10000”, that you can dowload from this website that is very helpful in evaluating strategies.) Also, it is easy to sink the transport if it tries to go to to Australia, which would only be 2 addition infantry on UK turn 3 anyway. I would probably ignore that move as well - let you bring the 2 infantry to me to be killed - saves me the trip out there. Also I’ll be glad to let you vacate Australia for me so that later on I can pop 1 infantry there and take it at my convience.

4.) Japan can still easily out-produce both Allied factories in this part of the world, so both will fall sooner or later. Allied factories in Asia are nothing more than a delaying move - to delay Japan’s push on Russia while they take care of Germany.

5.) By far most importantly, all this action in Asia means Germany is having a field day in Europe and Africa. Remember, every ‘positive’ move made by the Allies in Asia has negative consequences in Europe. If too much effort is spent in Asia by the Allies, Germany will quickly become unstoppable. One of the other players on this board has a good saying for the Allies:

“What’s the worst Japan can do? Take Russia. What’s the worst Germany can do? Win the game.”

Tonight, play out your USSR 1, UK 1, and then this Japan 1. See if you like the way things look for the Allies afterwards. I think you will find that a UK factory in India instead of the Russian factory will accomplish the same goals you are striving for, only much more effectively.

There is nothing wrong with trying out new strategies though, and it all depends on the experience level of your opponent. Your strategy could be devesating to a player unable to deal with it, and it might help you rack up a quick victory.

Wow! And my friends think my Russian opener is radical because I move all 4 infantry from Russia to Novo! :)

Guest: this is very short term thinking and would never work on experienced players. All you are doing is buying a factory for Japan and giving Germany a 5 infantry head start on the front lines. With a factory in Yakut, Germany and Japan are going to party like it’s 1939! groan :roll:

Also, the Magic number for the Allies is 110.

Your strategy might be fatal to an agressive attack by Germany and Japan - I would have to look at it in more detail. But below are some quick thoughts on a more conservative counter - I won’t detail every move, just the part that applies to your strategy. To understand why this would be effective and why your strategy is ineffective, you have to look at the bigger picture instead of just one or two turns ahead:

Germany: On Germany’s first turn, with 5 less infantry defending Karelia, I would straffe Karelia for 1 round - meaning I would attack with everything adjacent (except my planes) and then retreat to Eastern Europe after one round of combat. On average, this will kill about 5 more Russian infantry and I will lose about 6 German infantry (but I ‘rescued’ 3 infantry and a tank from Norway). Long term: Karelia now has 10 less infantry than it would normally have, which means there will be virtually no Russian pressure on Eastern Europe from Karelia until the Americans arrive several turns later. This frees up the German troops that are normally stuck in Eastern Europe, allowing Germany to send extra support to Africa as mentioned above.

Japan: Buy the standard 2 transports and 3 infantry. On Japan’s first turn I would ignore Yakut and the Soviet Far East, attacking China with 1 infantry from Manchuria and everything from Kwangtung, as well as all planes that can make it. There would be 2 infantry left behind in Manchuria, all fighters would land there, and the two Japanese transports would land 4 more infantry there as well. At the end of turn 1 Japan has 6 infantry and 4 fighters in Manchuria, so that a Russian attack from Yakut on turn 2 would be suicide. On turn 2, Japan will land 8 more infantry in Manchuria, still ignoring Yakut. On turn 3 Japan will take Yakut, attacking with 14 infantry, 5 fighters, and a bomber. Long term: the now Japanese-owned factory will start cranking out 2 tanks per turn while I transport 12 infantry every turn on to the mainland towards Russia.

Now, ignoring the details, there are two important tips to take from this example: a.) Russia has to put as much pressure as possible on Eastern Europe so that it ties up German forces in Germany and reinforcements to Africa are kept to a minimum, and b.) with a factory in Yakut, Japan will be landing 8-12 infantry per turn into Manchuria and your factory will soon be overwhelmed, then used against you.

Something to keep in mind - Axis and Allies is a game that changes style dramatically as you become more experienced. When you first start playing A&A, all kinds of wild strategies are possible and games will often end suddenly and violently in just a few turns. As you gain experience the game becomes much slower and more subtle, similiar to chess in a few respects: a.) there are only a few good opening moves with slight variations - anything else and you will lose several turns later, and b.) the games are slower paced and last much longer with an evolving beginning, middle, and endgame, and you have to look at the consequence of every move several turns in advance.

Then the day will come when you have perfected your game to an artform and you will be able to execute your plans with the style of a Grand Master. After hours of near-perfect play, you will see the inevitable flaw in your opponent’s game and make your move. Basking in all your glory as you transfer your units to the battle board for the decisive battle, you taunt your opponent. “Checkmate,” you grin.

Your opponent grimaces, closes his eyes, and rolls… 5 out of 6 1’s for his AA guns - costing you the game and prompting you to throw your dice across the room and into the wall - and you quickly realize that A&A is nothing like chess after all… :o

Good news - if he’s good he will probably ignore Japan!

What he will most likely do is set up a pipeline of US troops to Europe, so your main goal is to take Russia before Germany falls. Sub-goals are to take Africa later in the game and swing your navy around to disrupt his pipeline. Also if your Germany partner is a rookie, make sure he buys a ton of infantry!

Let us know what rules you are playing with - specifically Russia Restricted, 2 hit battleships, submersible subs, etc. - that will vary the specific advice…

Here is a recent thread where we covered this topic:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=696

Also, there is a topic below on G1 w/2-hit battleships - 95% of it applies to 1-hit battleships as well. It has some good ideas for Turn 1 German strategies:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=718

You are correct - strafing is an important strategy, but against a good German player it won’t be an option until later in the game - at which point Russia is either starting to buy tanks to push after Germany or has shifted back to defend against Japan.

In addition, if the German player has a stack of tanks and you are buying tanks too, it’s going to be easier for him to hit you - infantry en masse is more of a deterant.

I would highly recommend buying all infantry with Russia for at least the first five or so turns, with the exception of the one fighter mentioned above. But I certainly respect your opinon or anyone else’s who would disagree.

@bossk:

I never place ICs within transport range of Japan; I consider it a bit of a waste. The only time I really buy one is to place in former Soviet territories (or India occationally), as it can be a frustratingly slow task to get infantry from the caost all the way to the front lines.

Ah, but the main point of a factory is not to reduce the travel time of infantry - it’s to produce tanks on the mainland because they can’t be transported as efficiently. A factory producing 3 tanks is doing the equivilent work of transporting 6 infantry. Also, building factories in former Soviet territories is a bad idea - you can only build 2 units per turn instead of 3. That one extra tank on the mainland every turn really adds up.

No, you are correct - if you are playing against a decent player, then buy all Infantry, protect you tanks and fighters as if they were gold, and play full defense. When you are feeling safe, usually a couple of turns into the game, it’s probably a good idea to buy a third fighter. The way I almost always see Russia played is defensive the whole game. By the time things are looking good against Germany, Japan will be knocking at your back door and you will have to shift your troops to Russia’s eastern front.

There is one big exception to this though - you can ‘reverse-roles’ and use the US troops to defend Russia from Japan. Press on Germany with the UK and USSR - in which case you will want to start buying some Russian tanks later in the game. This works well, but I think it’s slightly inferior to defending Russia with Russia and attacking Germany with the UK and US.

“The best defense is a good offense” doesn’t really apply to the Allies in the limited scope of this board game - in general the more defensive the Allies play, the better chance they have of winning. They have time and the economy on their side - the longer the game lasts, the better chance the Allies have.

@Zero:

I think there is one time when building an IC on turn 1 is a good move for Japan.

If the allies are going all out on Germany and ignoring Japan completely. By this I mean that the U.K. withdraws from India to Egypt, then I think that Japan should buy an IC and a transport, and place the IC in Kwangtung. There is are enough infantry on the surrounding islands to max out 3 transports for turn 2. The Japanese airforce is sent to Europe to bolster the German defenses, and is replaced offensively with tanks from Kwangtung.

I agree with your overall strategy of being even more aggressive in that instance, and sending your fighters to Germany and replacing them with tanks is an excellent point and something you will have to do sooner or later anyway. But tactically it will still be more effective if you wait until about turn 3 to buy a factory. Germany can hold out on its own for several turns - you don’t want to send the Japanese fighters too early (i.e. before they are really needed) or they will just be a wasted resource. And if the UK withdraws from India to Africa then you have less of a need of early tanks.

Another important strategy for Japan along those lines - send your Japanese bomber to Germany as soon as possible so that the Allies can’t split up their fleet!

Manchuria is a very good buy, but not too early in the game or it will just slow you down. A first turn Japanese factory is probably the most common “rookie mistake” out there - a perfect example of the difference between looking one or two turns ahead instead of looking five or six turns ahead. It helps in the early, small battles for minor territories, but it hurts you in the big battles that really count - Novo and then Russia. The factory is mainly for buying tanks, and you need to get a good amount of infantry onto the mainland to support them first. A quick push will just stall out as you get close to Russia and your tanks will end up waiting on infantry reinforcements. This may already be basic knowledge to you - I don’t know your level of experience - but never go all or heavy tanks with any country. Try to keep at least a 3 to 1 ratio of Infantry to Tanks - I usually go 4 or 5 to 1 since Japan has plenty of planes for offense. I just mention that because a common rookie Japan strategy is to buy 2 factories as soon as possible and start cranking out all tanks - this is easily defeatable by a decent Russian player.

Here is what I like to do - I wouldn’t consider it too agressive or too conservative:

Turn #1: Buy 2 Transports and 3 Infantry
Turn #2: Buy 1 Transport and spend the rest on Infantry
Turn #3: Buy 10 infantry, save the rest
Turn #4: Buy 10 infantry, save the rest
etc…

This way I am transporting 10 infantry a turn to the mainland, and as soon as the ‘saved’ IPCs add up to 15 I buy a factory, which is usually Turn #5.
I will continue to buy the 10 infantry each turn in Japan, and then whatever is left over will get spent on 3 units at the factory - usually a mixture of tanks and infantry until you get to 45 IPCs per turn.

You will also want to buy a second factory a few turns later, either in Burma or more preferably in India.

A more agressive strategy would be to buy the factory on turn 3 or 4, and probably in Burma instead of Manchuria. A more conservative strategy would be to get up to 6 transports and 12 infantry a turn before buying a factory, and then sticking with one factory the whole game.

All three have pros and cons and their effectiveness depends mostly on your playstyle.