Yes, the fighter on WAK is overkill. It’s imperative to use all fleet and as much aircraft to pose a legitimate threat to USA round 2. Early production in WUS buys at least a turn for France - which is infinitely more valuable than Italy.

As this game played out, Japan took AUS and IND, Germany never won Russia, but it didn’t have to. Which is another subject entirely. I recall stopping myself, thinking what’s the point in taking Russia when it can’t really do anything? I turned to UK and though I lost Italy, the allies never got into FRA! We called it a day after seven rounds and the allies just looking for holes. It was awesome!

Hi all,

AA50 came off the shelf this weekend. Being Japan, in the past I’ve taken an aggressive approach to China, Russia and the Indian Ocean. This time I played:

Purchase 2DD

Pacific
3fig z57 - z53
1fig z57, 1inf jpn 1inf iwo via z62 trn - z57, mid
1inf car via z51 trn - z46, sol
2fig z61 - z50
1inf 1art via z61 trn, 2inf car via z51 trn - z50, phi
1bb 1cru 2inf via trn z61 - z52, wak

Asia - less committed
2inf kia, 1fig man - fuk
2inf fic, 1fig for - kwa

Hold 1ftr jpn for non-combat support to pacific fleet.

Depending on Pacific FTR losses, noncombat
1dd z51 - z57
1cv z61 - z52
all surviving ftr in Pacific land on carriers, including 1ftr jpn so 3 in z57 and hopefully more than 1 in z52
if naval FTR loss is heavy (3 or more), consolidate fleet on z52

This removes 2 NO for the USA straight away, and there’s a good chance 3 ftrs are not lost, which allow 2 fleets to protect WUS threatening trn at z57 and z52.

PRO - USA must consider unfavorable counterattack or a pacific fleet build and/or WUS land defense; little or no KGF commitment.

CONS - UK ships are untouched, minimal damage to China, end turn @21 + 5 = 26ipc

I’m curious what experts have to say about the UK/USA first round response? Does this increase probability of an IC in India? If so, does it not limit KGF for both UK and USA?