Assuming the Japanese don’t attack J1, One strat I tried was for the US to Move the Fleet to Wake, and I built a naval base there on US 1. If Guam is open on US1, move the fighter and troops there too. Now your forces at Wake are in range to counter attack or reinforce Guam, and the Aussies can fly up all four fighters on ANZAC 2 (actually, 1 can move up on ANZAC 1).
Guam is a key location for the Allies, specifcally the US, to attack Asia & lots of targets from.
Just something to consider. :-)
What I was referring to by “heavy sub and air buys”, was maybe 3 subs a turn for the US. Along with 1 or 2 loaded transports, and rest of the IPCs in air craft.
What I was thinking of, is an island hopping campaign. Buy a naval base for Wake, and set the US fleet there. Yes, leave a little something in HI for defense, but use Wake as the jumping off point. From there, send 1 trans to Iwo with a tank and a man. J will kill the trans, but you will have the island. On the following turn, send in a bunch of planes and and build an air base, the turn after that you can reinforce w/ Inf and and have air cover for your trans. On the same turn you build the air base, you can send another trans to Guam or the PI and try the same strategy there. Pumping men ( to hold the island bases) and air craft forward to support your subs, which by now would spread out in the J shipping lanes, taking away IPCs and hopefully helping to kill J DD’s along with the newly arrived air power. The bulk of the US fleet would just stay at Wake as a threat, unless J gives you a juicy present.
The goal of the drive would be to start pumping men to the Asian mainland and get an IC built. Then you can really put the heat on J.
I know this sounds really good on paper, but I will not have the chance to try it out f2f until 4/21. If even part of this works, I would think that it would pull some J resources back to the north, maybe allowing ANZAC to sneak into the DEI.
Yeah, I know what you’re getting at, and I’m thinking the same thing, but from the other end of the “what to buy” spectrum. I was thinking of trying to secure airbases on islands that transports could skip to, one from the other. The Allies will need troops, transports, lots of air and DDs in there too, as well as subs.
So yeah, I’m on the same page with you there brotha!
The real test is to try it out though, like we did with Van Trump’s strategy, maybe this one will work though! :lol:
I don’t know fellas, but I’m thinking that the US and ANZAC player(s) had better start thinking and building from the onset with the thought in mind that India & China are going to fall, sooner or later.
Japan has a huge edge in air units. My thinking at this point is that the US needs to try getting as many fighters as possible each turn early. I’m leaning toward air heavy builds for the Allies. Subs work great with air, but I think my main emphasis would be on air builds. Also I would be looking at getting airbases, whether capturing or building, or a combination of the two.
If the US can grab Iwo early, that should give the US 56 IPCs a turn, enough for three fighters and two transports full of infantry a turn. I don’t know that the US needs two fully loaded transports every turn, but I’m thinking at least one a turn.
When India and China go bye-bye, then Japan is going to have to make an invasion against Australia, and will most likely have to build a major IC in Singapore.
I’m thinking that the US should be aiming at Manchuria with the intent of trying to get an IC of their own in there. If I remember the rules right, China can come back to life in the game if its territories become freed, so a couple American tanks could do wonders to reinvent China in the game, especially if the Japanese have swept through China down toward India and left the backfield empty.
Anyway, the rules say that Japan needs six of the eight VCs to win, and in the games we’ve played, we’ve called it a game when India bites the bullet. To be fair, in those games it was all over too because we sold out the opening US & ANZAC buys and moves going all out to save India.
My question at this point is can Australia be held after India & China fall, or in China’s case, after it goes dormant.
I would even go so far as to suggest the following. ANZAC1 buy 1 transport, bank 3 IPCs. Send the at start Transport to New Guinea with two infantry with the aim of securing Dutch New Guinea and hopefully getting the ANZAC income to 15 IPCs by ANZAC2.
On ANZAC2, buy a minor IC and place it in either Queensland or in New Zealand. If the Japanese are doing their thing in the DEI, then the ANZACs could have 16 IPCs and two ICs going by ANZAC3, giving them the opportunity to place five infantry a turn. If you place it in New Zealand, you run the risk of allowing the Japanese to knock out your transport “bridge”. That one transport bought on ANZAC 1 can ferry the two extra troops each turn. An IC in Queensland doesn’t need the transport bridge, but is a bit more exposed to capture by the Japanese.
I’d go even further by suggesting that the RAF fly out of India at the latest possible turn and fly to Australia, where they can reach either Western Australia or the Northern Territory.
The cool thing for the Allies when India falls, is that the Japanese won’t recieve a really big boost to their IPCs from capturing India for gaining Britians currently held IPCs! Britian will normally only be holding like 3 or 4 IPCs…maybe. With a sub sitting off India, Britian collects only 2 IPCs, and it could be down to just 1! So if you see the Japanese pull a sub off the shores of India, you know he or she is going to strike the next turn! If they don’t they will have just sunk 2/3 IPCs they could have captured; just saying.
Anyway, if Japan controls all of China, and all of Britian’s stuff (they hopefully don’t have Canadian B.C.) in the Far East, Vietnam, the DEI & the PI, they’ll be at 73 with the DEI bonus.
The Allies could be at 55 for the US and 15 for the ANZAC player with that bonus, which is 70. Like I said earlier, if the US grabs Iwo early on, it’d be 72 Japan vs 71 Allies. Japan going for Australia, the US trying to get a toe hold in Asia. I mean, at this point, by comparing IPCs, it should still be a game. If the ANZACers get a second minor IC going, then I’m hoping that Australia could be a tough fight.
Who knows though, we’ve always sold out the Allied buys and moves on trying to go all out to save India, and that has always resulted in Australia being wide open.
If the Allies try instead concentrating on building up Australia right off, and the US building up it’s air strength and grabbing key bases to work from early like Iwo; a naval base on Wake; trying to grab Guam or the Marshalls; then it could be a game. The Allies use China and Britian to grind down as much Japanese units as is possible while allowing the US & ANZACers to build up strength for the coming fight.
Who knows, maybe in the Europe version, India will have another half that the British can fall back further to? I mean, if Austarlia now has several territories with a total of like 7 or so IPCs overall, surely India won’t just be a one, 3 IPC territory? The other half surely has to have another seperate territory with it’s own IPC value and possibly IC & bases.
So maybe the design took into account that India may get whacked, but the Japanese still need 6 VCs to win.
I think this was one of the earlier strategies proposed. IIRC, it just takes too long. By the time you get enough subs in place to start seriously impacting income, India has already or is about to fall and then its a cake walk to Australia or Hawaii since there is no substall.
There’s been a number of different Allied strategies examined:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4mY7o0GhHA
:lol:
I think he’s right, Europe is needed to balance this game. Russians on the north and Commonwealth units from the Mediterranean to bolster India is what is needed.
That’s new “rant” in the link above! I thought it was going to be the other one, LOL!!!
Well bring Europe on then dammit!!! :-D
Autarch may be right though, the "“other half” of this game may be sorely needed in order to make “this half” work.
Gotta go to work now, I’ll get back with my thoughts later after work. :-D
What I think they missed was a combination of the construction of a Naval Base in Kwa and Japan’s ability to simply and for little cost airsweep the UK’s units off the board if they step forward to Burma. I think the answer is like almost all of there games previous to this a bid system to allow the game to keep up with evolving tactics.
Yeah, but how can you miss the intial set up attack? On J1, it’s all right there before you, it’s not like a J2 or J3 attack, where you’d have to figure in potential buys, moves and who attacks who first.
J1 is right in front of your face, right there. No speculating, no guessing as to who is buying what, or who is doing what. Blam, it’s right there in front of you.
I hope to hell this whole J1 attack thing is just a temporary fad with a solution that nobody has thought of yet. The retail on this one demands it, $90.00 bucks for a lemon isn’t going to cut it with me. :x
If they missed something, then they better un-miss it and correct it, IMO.
J1 attack does break the game, unfortunately. We had to adopt 2 house rules to rebalance and AFAIK they’ve worked: (1) Japan cannot attack the UK, ANZAC, Dutch or the United States on turn 1 and (2) The UK, ANZAC and United States cannot attack Japan on turn 1. Easy fix.
If that’s the case, I think an official errata should be made to the game.
Something…
Add a US DD to at start transport at Hawaii? Or add a US infantry to Wake, Guam &/or Midway?
I haven’t decided myself, but broken game is not an option, especially for the price tag on this one.
The game clearly has been broken with out a bid, to even it up. Anyone have any thoughts on what they would bid?
How could the designers have missed the J1 attack?
If that is the case, then there should be an official errata to the set up, IMO.
OK, I’m heading to Dayton Ohio late tomorrow night after work, to try the J1 attack and see if we can find some way to counter it. From what I’ve seen and read on here, I’m not hopeful. :|
I’m also a little worried, as my friend just bought a copy of the game (the one we’re going to be playing), and if we find out now that the game is broken, I might get broken! I can see it now…
“Why didn’t you discover the Allies can’t win before I bought the damn thing!?!”
:-D :oops: :-D
First game of AAP:40 we played, one of the main thoughts was to deny the US those 40 IPCs as long as possible.
We soon began to see that if Japan waited until J3 to attack, then Britian recieved a considerable boost to their IPC level that nearly offset the 40 IPCs the US would not get on T2. So we thought OK, Japan would be better off attacking J2 and denying Britian the extra IPCs.
So that thought pretty much dominated our thinking for many games.
Now we’re looking at the J1 attack, and here’s how those 40 IPCs figure into the decision.
First of all, the US doesn’t get an extra 40 IPCs, that is nothing more than a myth. It’s actually an extra 33 IPCs if Japan attacks on J1 that the US gets.
From most all of the accounts I’ve read, the J1 attack means that Japan will be taking the PI on J1. That means that the US will be collecting 50 IPCs for the western US, 2 for alaska, 1 for Hawaii, & 2 for Mexico. Atotal of 55 IPCs. Had Japan not attacked, the US would be collecting 22 IPCs. Do the math, it’s only a difference of 33 IPCs if Japan attacks J1 as opposed to J2.
As far as the J1 attack goes, the US will loose everything in the PI, including the bomber, the DD & the transport. The bomber alone is an extra 12 IPCs that will offset the extra 33 the US will get. The US is also going to loose the transport in Hawaii, another 7 IPCs. If you used to sneak out the DD & transport from the PI, then the offset in IPCs the US will loose in aJ1 attack, it looks something like this: 12 (Bomber) + 8 (DD) + 14 (PI & Hawaii transports) = 34.
34 extra IPCs lost vs a gain of 33 by the US. Hmm, no reason for the Japanese to not attack early for fear of giving the US extra income from J1 to J2.
The British are going to loose their BB & those two transports right out of the gate without getting to the DEI. Alot of the time, the British BB escapes destruction in a J2 or J3 attack to fight on usefully for the Allies. In every game I’ve played, the British transports get whacked on J2, and don’t last long in a J3 attack. So loosing them on J1 is nothing new. However, loosing at the very least 8 IPCs the troops that they take to the DEI will collect, is a real loss for the British in a J1 attack. That plus the 20 for their BB. So a J1 attack causes the loss of 28 IPCs more for the British from a J1 to a J2 attack.
So the bottom line is that the Japanese have a lot to gain in the IPC department by attacking on J1 than waiting for J2 or J3. As long as the Japanese take the PI when they do attack, the US is not going to gain 40 IPCs, they will only gain 33, as the 2 lost for the PI plus the extra 5 IPCs lost for the national objective will automatically take 7 of those extra 40 IPCs away from the US.
When you start looking at the added income the US will gain as 33, then deduct the extra stuff the Japanese are going to cost the Allies in a J1 attack, then that bonus income isn’t much of a deterrent at all.
In fact, the Japanese have more to gain by attacking early, as far as IPCs go.
Waiting, although it does keep the Western US to only 10IPCs, is going to put more IPCs in the Allies pockets than the extra IPCs the US will get by attacking right out of the gates!
No CA buys here, it’s all subs, DDs and the occassional CV. :-)
I suspect the playtesters completely missed the Bombers + fighter attack on the UK BB + transports; as well as this crushing Midway invasion J1.
I mean, what was the point of placing both transports in Singapore? It just teases the UK player. At least put one of the transports next to India.
Maybe they thought the IPC boost to USA would be enough of a deterrent and didn’t worry about the consequences of a J1.So I move a tank/mech inf to Alaska US1. Defend Hawaii with everything I’ve got. Build 2 DD’s.
Hopefully ANZAC can spare some fighters. If all ANZ fighters are there I move the US fleet to Hawaii.
On US2 where do I move the fleet if Japan moves Bombers back to Japan on 2?It may be the only way to balance the game is to ban a J1 attack. It has the advantage of simplicity.
From what I’m seeing of this strat so far, if Japan buys 3 transports J1 & banks the other 5 IPCs, then on J2, they can buy 3 more transports and a minor complex for Asia, and still have a 4 IPC reserve to repair the airbase on Midway should the US bomb it.
Hawaii is extremely vulnerable to invasion on J3 with the second batch of transports arriving in Japan, even with the ANZAC fighters there. 2 X DDs is a good US1 buy if you’re looking to make some kind of block move, but I’m thinking that a transport & a fighter may be better if you are trying to all-out defend Hawaii. The at start transport from the US can either try to sneak past the Japanese sub (I wouldn’t do this) on US1 to reinforce Hawaii on US1, or it can go in with the DD, the DD & air taking out the sub.
If the US buys another transport & fighter, both can go to Hawaii on US2 to further bolster Hawaii’s defenses. I doubt the Japanese can be stopped at sea in a sea battle there, but the land fight might be possible to hold…maybe? :?
That’s the best I can offer on the subject right now, hopefully we get another game session going soon to start working on this issue. I’ll have to actually play it our a game or three before forming a more solid opinion on the “broken” aspect. :|
If J2 move 3 loaded transports to Midway + Naval base build, US MUST buy ground defense.
It’s late here on my end right now, but on US2, does the US have the option of a sea zone blocking move against Midway to defend the western US?
I don’t have the board out right now to look at it, but I tossed the idea about the other day. It would have to be a 2 zone block, but think it was possible. Especially if the US opts for a US1 buy of 2 x DDs. I wonder if this move, combined with a bombing attack on the naval base, following on the heels of bombing the airbase, would work to some good effect?
Tomorrow, I"ll have to get the map out. I was thinking about trying a block move against an amphibious assault on the western US as a means of allowing a more aggresive, fighter oriented buy for the US on T2.
It just seems to get worse and worse. It reminds me of having a winning position in Chess. You have tons of options and everything seems to work perfectly in concert. The poor player in the losing position is forced to make one perfect defensive move after another; a single misstep ends the game.
Since the J1 attack has become the default for my gaming group Japan has racked up win after win. It was fairly even on J2 and J3 assaults, but, I question how well the J1 assault was play tested.
We agree in our playgroup…the J1 attack cannot be stopped. Very disappointed with the playtesting for this 100.00 game.
Oh brother, this kind of talk has me concerned. :-o
I sure hope this isn’t the case, but for the life of me, I can’t find cause to say otherwise now. :?
I agree that a J2 capture of Hawaii is a stretch; impossible if ANZAC moves their fighters there.
On J2 does japan build more transports in addition to the naval base on Midway?
The Anzac fighters scrambling ability means the US could conceivably move the fleet to Hawaii, even with Tac Bombers reaching from Japan. Jap regular bombers are helping out on mainland; they certainly would be useful against the US fleet (based out of Midway).This J strategy certainly brings out the full paranoia of invasion that existed historically in the USA after Pearl.
Great that a game can emulate reality.The whole point of this strategy is Japan does not have to go after India. Hawaii + Sydney wins the game.
Given this emphasis it certainly makes sense to retreat the bombers to Japan J2, unless the tactical opportunity exists to destroy some UK fighters stacked in Yunnan.Can Japan build up enough of an invasion force to take Hawaii before US can build up fleet to threaten Japanese naval supremacy? US has to waste one turn building ground troops in Western US.
Japan can send DD screens from Midway if necessary.
UK’s transports are gone. The money islands are in Japanese hands by the end of J3. UK’s miniscule builds are no threat. China has to pray to the dice gods to have a chance.
Game is definitely tilted in Japan’s favor. Japan can survive making mistakes. The allies cannot.
btw Midway is tiny, as in 2 square miles total area.
http://www.infoplease.com/atlas/state/midwayislands.html
Great post, especially the part about the invasion paranoia. :-o :-)
Good Lord, Midway is microscopic!
I just ordered HBO tonight and saw the first episode of “The Pacific” earlier…wow, about all I can say. Hanks & Spielburg get it, great start to what I’m sure will be another fantastic miniseries. 8-)
US1, 3 infantry & 1 arty move to BC. US buys 1 mech. infantry, 1 arty & 3 infantry.
US2, US counter attacks Alaska with 6 inf (+ off shore bombardment from SZ1), 2 arty, 2 mech, 1 armor, 3 bombers, 1 CV fighter & 1 CV dive bomber.
Of course, it’s a heck of a lot easier to just block SZ8 & 25. :-)
The problem I see with your response is if J2 sees the Naval base build in Midway, the IJN can reach the US west coast. This threat forces US to build defenders on Western US. Also, the US Fleet better not stick around San Francisco or they’ll end up on the bottom of San Francisco Bay.
Howdy, yeah it was your post that I referred to in my OP. Great J1 attack, the Japanese grabbing Midway right out of the gates, then buying a naval base on J2, which would put Japan in range of the US west coast by J3.
What I’ve been thinking about is the situation on US1, right after the Japanese opening move. 1 transport with one infantry at Midway, along with 2 CVs with all fighters, 2 BBs, 1 CA, 2 DDs (1 DD in the PI, and 1 to take out the ANZAC sub). 3 more Japanese transports in Japan.
Japan can’t hit the west coast until J3 from Midway, and they will be telescoping their intentions (a 55 IPC US buy will be waiting for them: 8 more tanks, 1 arty, 1 inf. + 4 AA shots on Japanese air). If the Japanese transports from Japan move to Alaska on J2, with the rest of the Japanese fleet in Midway, none of the fleet units will be able to join those transports, which will be defenseless to the US sub or bombers on US2.
With the Japanese fleet at Midway on US1, with all fighters loaded, they can only hit the US fleet at San Fran with their 4 fighters & 1 sub, requiring the Japanese fleet to move to SZ9 or 12. In that scenario, the US would get two free hits, as the BB & CV would “auto repair” in the following US turn, being on a naval base. If the US load two fighters of their own on the CV, then they are shooting back at 3 "4"s, a “3”, two "2"s & a “1”. I could see the Japanese loosing all 4 fighters & inflicting little damage to the US. Then the US could repair on their naval base, and kamikaze themselves with all available air into the Japanese, who have no island to land planes on now and probably 4 dive bombers from Japan loaded. If the Japanese survive with two damaged BBs, as you correctly point out, then the ANZAC air is now in a position to knock that out.
On top of that, if the Japanese are intending to move the 3 transports from Japan to either Midway, Alaska or Pearl on J2, they’ll be completely unguarded without that Japanese fleet on T2.
If the J2 target is Pearl for the 3 transports in Japan, the only planes that could make the land battle would have to come from your CVs at Midway. For each plane that would move from a CV to the land battle, it would negate one of the dive bombers at Japan from joing the sea battle, as any fighter that goes from a CV at Midway into a land battle at Pearl will have to land back on one of the CVs. So at most, Japan could send in 3 fighters to Pearl in the land attack, with 4 Japanese infantry, and I’m guess 3 arty to take on the 2 infantry, 3 US dive bombers, 4 Anzac fighters, 2 US bombers, and a minimum of 1 additional US fighter (possibly 2 if the US buys a fighter & transport on US1).
If Japan were to take all 4 fighters to the land battle at Pearl on J2, then the fleet would have no air support from Japan or the Caroline Islands, and the Allies would have the option to bring out all its fighters and dive bombers to a sea battle.
So I’ve been batting around US1 buys and responses.
Kaufs, who has been winning the majority of the games between you and your good friend. We have a Japanese strat going right now (I’ve mentioned this J1 attack a few times already) that is 6-0. We can’t figure out what to do with the Allies to get a win. Since you have played alot of games, I’m curious to know if you think the game is balanced.
We are really thinking of starting a few house rules to stop the Japanese player from using the same J1 strat that is dominating our games.
Ah, lets see here…I thinks it’s been 18 games now. I think we’ve had 2 Allied wins… it might be 3. Either way, it’s been all Japan.
We’ve been searching for ways to play the Allies better, and every time we come up with a strat for the Allies, there winds up being a counter for Japan that makes the overall situation even worse for the Allies!
Like recently, we got on to the fact that a US1 naval base on Wake helped the US get involved quickly and threaten Japan. Midway is even better for the Allies.
Then we see the J1 attack that not only squashes that strat, but turns it around on the US with Japan taking Midway on J1 and having the potential to build a naval base there of their own, threatening the entire west coast of US & Canada! :-o :-D
Other than, we’re doing the exact same thing you are, trying to figure out a way to get the Allies in a game. Right now, we’re not even interested in finishing a game, just trying to see if we can get the game to a point where the Allies have a chance.
To be fair to the game, I will say that we’ve learned how to counter some of the Japanese moves and strats, so we’re not giving up on the game just yet, or resorting to house rules. We’re looking at it more from a point of view of how can we play the Allies better.
First off, “Hi” to everybody here on these boards! I’ve kinda lurked around on these and other boards for some time now, but lately have decided that this is my favorite site for Axis & Allies talk (I haven’t been to Larry’s site that much).
A good friend of mine and myself have been playing this new Pacific version as much as we’ve been able in the past few months since it came out, and we’ve logged just under 100 game hours so far.
Up to now, we’ve been seeing the Japanese concentrate on taking out India with mostly J2 attacks, but with a few J3 attacks in there too. Japan has been taking Singapore on J2 and placing a major IC there on J3. J1 has been mostly 2 transports and a minor IC for Japanese builds. Anyways, that’s the way our games have been going up to recently.
In another thread I started here recently, one of the people who replied outlined a brief J1 attack, in which:
*The Japanese took their transport from the Caroline Islands to take Midway on J1.
*They also took a sub to Pearl on J1 to sink the transport there.
*They take out the ANZAC sub, and take two transports to the PI with a small fleet of 1 CV, 1 CA & 1DD.
*The British BB & transports get attacked by, I think it was 3 bombers and a fighter.
*The rest of the Japanese fleet goes to Midway.
The reason for this particular J1 move was in response to the US being able to build a naval base on either Wake or Midway early in the game, even as early as US1.
I’ve since read a little bit on a couple other J1 attack variations here on these boards which are pretty interesting.
The move briefly outlined above went on to have the Japanese plan a naval base for Midway on J2. There are 3 transports in SZ6 to start J2, which could move on Alaska/Canada, Pearl, or reinforce Midway.
I don’t know about anybody else, but I thought that particular J1 attack was pretty good. I was thinking of what options the Japanese could go with on J2, and what the US & Allies could do in response.
One issue that kept popping into my mind was Pearl. Could the US & ANZAC fighters hang on to it? After a little time pondering this, it occurred to me that the Japanese could attack Pearl on J3 with a combined force of 3 more transports from Japan (built on J2) along with the 3 built on J1. The Japanese could also bring in extra air on J2, to beef up the J3 attack, basing them at Midway.
With only 17 IPCs on US1, there just isn’t a whole lot the US can bring in to Pearl on US2 to help defend Pearl before J3. I think Pearl could hold up on J2, but J3 it is extremely vulnerable to attack. If the Japanese skip building a naval base for Midway on J2, they could add an extra transport from Japan to the J3 attack.
The best response I can come up with right now is for the US to build 2 transports on US1, and hold the fleet on the West Coast with 2 fighters on the CV. All other us Air & the ANZAC air go to Pearl. If the Japanese are massing for a J3 attack, then the US fleet can move to Pearl on US2 and bring all the troops from the US and land the CV air groups on Pearl?
So I’m kinda curious about what kind of J1 & J2 builds people are going with for J1 attacks, and what direction do you go with your J1 attack? Pearl, Alaska, West Coast, Wake & Midway?
A naval base on Midway for the Japanese puts the whole West Coast under threat. Anyone building naval or air bases?
The irony is I had thought I had discovered a great strategy for USA, building a NB on Midway…
LOL!!! We were thinking the same thing about Wake! :lol:
In the end, what these moves wind up being are good options to keep in mind depending on the what the Japanese player does.
So there is a good move for the Allies, then the Japanese counter with a move of their own…now the ball is back in the Allies court to see if they can volley. :?
The Allied counter is to push on Asia as much as possible and prevent Japan from taking all of the DEI by landing all UK fighters in one of the islands, possibly even sending ANZAC transports to reinforce them. And 1 minor IC only produces 3 units: China/UK will be producing at least 7 units per turn.
Exactly where I was turning my attention to, what can the Allies do in the DEI? I was thinking about the option of sending fighters to the islands, but at first though, I figured I’d sound like a lunatic for even mentioning the idea! :-o What else can the Allies do there though? Massing the fighters on one island is a good idea and one option to try. :-)
J1 attack is pretty wicked though, I must say.
Can US hold Hawaii? He can if all 4 ANZAC fighters reinf Hawaii.
Yeah, I’m thinking from what you’re describing that Pearl has to hold.
Realize that IF Hawaii falls and is reinforced with Jap fighters Japan doesnt need to take India for 6 cities. Japan just needs Sydney which is conveniently nearby and underdefended.
Well, if you can manage to hang on to Pearl with air, that air can be rapidly shifted to Australia, so that would appear to be the way to go.
So that’s what the J1 attack stacks up as, eh? :-o
Pretty feakin’ nasty sounding if you ask me. :evil:
One thing I kinda have enjoyed about this game so far, is that everytime we come up with a new type twist or strat for one side or the other, there has always been a counter to be had to it, I sure hope there is a survival plan for the Allies on this one! :? :|
We’ll have to put a wrench on this one, the J1 attack looks devilish to me!
Should be fun working the problem though! 8-)
Even nastier than Wake is Midway. I was planning to use the Midway naval base when I play usa this Saturday.
Yeah, I was thinking about this too. Can’t you sail through SZ6 and into SZ19 from Midway with a naval base, and thus attack Manchuria? I mean, if Japan just has fighters defending Japan and SZ 6 is empty, for example.
On J2 (after a J1 attack) I send two thirds of the IJN to Truk, so USA has to build up their fleet before venturing out.
Having said that the naval base on Wake is an excellent move.
Instead of one japanese DD needed to block attacks on Japan or the mainland Japan now needs 3 DD’s.
In the games as we’ve been playing (and we just have our point of view to go on thus far), we haven’t tried any of the J1 attacks so far.
We’ve had game after game go the Japanese way via India falling, and all of them on J2 attacks (mostly), with a couple J3 attacks thrown in there.
With the main part of the Japanese fleet normally tearing into the British and the DEI for the most part of our games, we’ve been struggling to find ways for the US to bring effective pressure against Japan and force the Japanese to respond to the US, thus drawing some of the heat off Britian.
We thought that a naval base on Wake put the US fleet in a much more threatening position on just the second turn of the game. This also seemed to give the US fleet more options than from Pearl, but obviously each game is going to be different, so you still have to play the game. Other than that, we liked what we saw in moving the main US base up to Wake. Not saying you gotta do it, just that it is a good option to keep in mind.