A friend of mine is planning to try this strat on our next game. I belive it is viable if you get rocket without spending too much IPC into it, i.e. not spend your whole 40 IPC in it.
I find it cheesy though so I don’t think that I’ll try it myself.
I think the same way about the US buying only bombers and researching heavy bomber when they have like 6 bombers. Without the LHTR rule revision for the SBR this is almost a sure win for the Allies.
Wood
Just to throw my 2 cents in there…
If the allied navy didn’t engage combat with the german navy, it’s probably because it has too much defensive value and it is best left alone. In that case, moving the allied fleet in SZ 4 could mean an isolated fleet. The German navy could easily move to SZ 3 and stay put… blocking the access to the UK reinforcement. In that case the allies are forced to attack the fleet, encuring serious casualties… slowing down their war effort… which is the purpose of a baltic fleet IMHO.
I do not believe it is a wise move to move to SZ 4 because of that… and also like 88 mm said, it gives Germany a breather.
Wood the Rook.
Speaking about tournament…
I would also be interested in knowing about tournaments in Montreal, Qc in Canada.
Does anyone have info on that?
Crit,
The Japs rarely loose their second BB, I was saying that at pearl, they only have one BB left. Sure J can move it’s second BB into position right away, but it’s rarely done since most player attempt to sink the UK fleet with it. I assume that if you’re aware that the US are going in the Pac, it’s easy to position your fleet to counter most of the threat in the Pac… but that should slow down the troops deployment in Asia… unless you build one or two IC like you suggested.
So I guess that this strat works well when most players expect a KGF strategy.
Switch… I’ll have a look at those games and write back later. Thanks for the info.
Wood the Rook
Also Switch…
You mention ample evidence of the failure of a Solokmon strike in some of the games on this site… but I’ve never seen a player attempt to solely take one island and hold it. Can you please direct me to a game where it happens… or where at least the US player tries to do it. And do not mention your game against Octo… you failed to do anything good with the US navy.
Wood the Rook.
Switch,
Skilled or not, if the english player do what they have to do, i.e. take out the tranny, sink the sub and land their fig at pearl… there is a high chance that the Japanese player is left with only a BB an AC and a fig (or two) after Pearl. This small fleet won’t be able to face what the US is putting on the water this turn. So this mean they need to regroup. If they don’t then my plan will succeed. But if they do… and as you said if they strike at Solomon with everything they have on J3… then it was a lot of money spent by the US to sink a part of the J navy. But the dice can play a big part in this… and Japan can loose a lot… so it’s not really a waste on the US part. After all a BB, an AC, a destroyer, a sub, two trannies and 2 figs are not so easy to sink (22 total defense and 9 hit points total)
So I guess you’re right… a skilled Axis player would be able to avoid this… but I’m still convinced it’s a good move to make because there is a lot of other things you can do to avoid a confrontation with the J fleet.
To Crit… why I think US 4-5 is too late… well going against Japan on US 1 like I mentionned takes about until US 4 to become a real threat (having a complex in the Pac with a fleet to defend). Let’s say you start doing what I said on US 4… that means that the US will be a threath at about US 7 or 8… which is way too late to make a difference. For exemple:
Build the fleet on US 4
Move it to striking distance on US 5
Take one island on US 6 (or Japan if not defended…)
On US 7 you can reach the coast of Africa or Asia… hence you’re able to slow Japan a little.
But you must admit that by J6 or J7, the Japanese player has a solid hold of the mainland and he won’t need his fleet to support his invasion… so he’ll be able to easily counter the pressure.
But at the start of the game, when Japan needs his trannies to convey his troops, he can’t afford to go around chasing the bait that is the US fleet.
Well it’s nothing but my opinion…
Wood the Rook.
Crit,
Let’s say that on US2 the US fleet moves to Solomon.
On J3, the Japs can either:
1- attack the fleet if they are in range;
2- move to SZ60 to protect Japan.
If they don’t do either you can attack Japan with 2 trannies, 2 figs and 1BB… maybe taking it… a big plus :wink:
If they do attack… well it’s going to be a bloody battle since US fleet is better a defending and that, usually, the J fleets haven’t linked up yet (depending on what they did on J1 and J2). So it’s probably going to be a wash out. I think in this situation Japan has the upper hand since it’s highly improbable that US will spend more money in the Pac.
If they decide to protect Japan with their fleet, on US 3 you take East Indies. On J4 Japan moves it’s fleet in range. On US 4 you build the IC. On J5 Japan attacks the fleet, wipes it but suffers high casualties… especially if the UK fleet came to fortify the US fleet (I usually spare my AC + 2 trannies + sub as the UK just in the event Us would do the above). They might be able to take the island on this turn but my guess is that their transports are destroyed during the sea battle. Either that or they don’t have much air support because it went to the sea battle… so I think the island won’t fall on this turn. On US 5, you can build either ground units + air units to defend (for a total of 8 units on the island) or you can buy 4 boats (2 subs and 2 destroyers… or an AC + 2 fig + 1 sub). Given this, Japan cannot take back the island at their leisure. It’s still a big pain in the ass.
My take on this is that Japan has to be slowed down… and I think this is the most efficient way to do it. Not only will you take out some of it’s income, but you will divert it’s attention from the Asian theatre (if they bring trannies to take the island, they don’t disembark troops in Asia). US will also increase it’s income, negating the loss of China. All that at a cost of one turn. I think it’s a great strat… unless the US fleet is sunk at Solomon.
I also believe that going to the Pacific on turn 4 or 5 is a waste of time. By that time, Japan has a hold of Asia and doesn’t need it’s fleet for support, so they can deal with the US menace more easily without disturbing their flow of troops.
Wood the Rook
Switch,
Russia sending a few troops to the east doesn’t give you control of the 11+ IPC in the Pacific. Russia can only slow down Japan… they won’t be able to stop them. One turn of purchase is not that much for all the pressure you put on Japan. If the US succeed in building the factory you can be sure that Japan has lost control of the Pac and won’t be able to put much pressure on Russia… who can then put more pressure on Germany, which compensate for the one turn US didn’t put pressure on them. So for one turn of purchase, sure you delay the Europe landing for one turn… but you gain an edge in the Asia/Pacific theatre of operation. Plus the Africa landing is not really delayed since you can still send the two starting trannies to the south.
Wood the Rook
I think USA is the most fun to play given all the options they have ( Pacific, atlantic, Africa, bombers….) but only if you plan on finishing the game. I played so many times where the US force was getting to a point where they would matter and some players would have to go to sleep or wherever they had to be. It’s like getting out without cumming :wink:. England is another fun country, which has a more options than the US (if you let go of the classic bridge to Norway/WEur) but they lack the funds to fully exploit them.
Why not postpone the Japan attack on Alsake/Western Can to J3.
On J1 buy 3 tran + take China + Pearl
On J2 buy stuff to fill 4 trannies + take Buryata (make sure the navy is in the SZ right by it)
On J3 use the trannies in SZ 60 (I believe that’s the one by Bury) and disembark all in Western (maybe some in Alaska but it would lower the pressure on Western US). Doing this, the US would be hard pressed to reinforce WUS. If they did only buy navy up to this point… or focused solely on the eastern coast, they’ll have to spend all this turn income on defense… end even then, the Japs have a slight chance of taking WUS with their 4 INF, 4 ART and between 2 to 4 figs + 2 BB.
I don’t usually do that but it might be a good diversion… and might turn into a game breaker if Japan take WUS.
Your thought?
Here’s my take on the US way of playing.
I think it’s important for the Us to harass Japan in the Pacific, especially since J has such a high IPC value concentrated on three islands. The problem is that US can’t spend too much IPC toward that goal since they have to help the Brits and Russia in their quest for a better Europe.
I usually spend my whole first turn income on a Pacific fleet: one AC, one tranny, 2 tanks and one sub. That gives me a Pac fleet of 1BB, 1DD (from Panama), 1 AC, 2 Fig, 2 Tran (filled up) and 1 sub. That fleet is decent enough to HOLD a sea zone. By holding I mean taking a defensive position which would be costly to attack. There is no way that fleet can attack and defeat the Jap navy. But the point is not to attack, it’s to threaten vital ressources. By holding Solomon, which was suggested earlier on, you can target vital areas ( 3 islands worth 11 IPC total) plus Japan itself, which if left poorly defended could be taken by your 2 trannies.
Basically, the goal of this taskforce is to take one of the three high IPC islands, hold it with your fleet in a defensive position until you can build an IC there. A lot of people argue that an island IC is a waste, that you should put it in FIC or Kwangt, but I disagree. Trying to hold a mainland territory with your supply chain so spread out is a suicide at best. It won’t be possible to hold a territory for the 3 turns it takes to start producing units on your IC with only 2 inf and 2 tanks (plus maybe 2 fig).
On the other hand, an island IC can “easily” be held out since that in order to reach it, Japan has to punch through your navy. I assume that Japan could probably destroy the US navy, but at what cost? If they plan to land on the island, they have to take casualties on ships beside their trannies, which is what US wants. And beside, even if they blow the US navy out, they don’t have the island yet. They still need to retake it, which leaves time for the US to reinforce with their IC.
Other advantages of an island IC over a mainland one is that it covers more ground. Navy build from the East indies can reach Africa, Asia, Australia and all the important islands in the Pac. East Indies is also out of reach of Japan sea zone… which could be a good or bad thing… good for it allows you more time to build the IC (if the Jap navy was originally in SZ 60 or 61 when US first landed on EI)… bad because you can’t strike Japan with your newly bought unit.
Another advantage is the possibility of building more units (4 instead of three). Let say J attack US fleet and retreat after doing some damage (in order to repair their BB)… the next turn US can build 4 ships right in J territory (2 subs and 2 DD would be a great boon for the US).
But I’m rambling on…
So basically first turn US build its fleet, move to Solomon on turn 2 and attack East Indies on US3… which gives the US an operationnal factory on US 5 if everything goes smootly… but it rarely does :wink:. During that time, starting on round 2 I build a lot of troops and trannies to help the allies deal with the German threat.
Wood the Rook
Mayhem, we too play with NAs. Actually we did two games in a row with all NAs. On the first game, Germany bought 1 AC and 3 subs on G1. That left him with very little ground force but he just held his cocoon and on G2 built just INF and ART to compensate. In the end, Axis won the game and the subs made the Allies loose at least 60 IPC through the course of the game (which wasn’t very long, maybe 7 turns). Plus the allies were always threatened by a mighty fleet of 1 AC, 1 DD, 5 subs (attacking on 3s), and 2 trannies (one of which was built later on) plus all german air force.
In our second game, Germany made a G1 purchase of 1 AC and 8 INF. Every turn thereafter Germany purchased 1-2 subs. The end results was the same, an Axis victory, but it was a lot safer against Russia with the additionnal 8 INF on G1.
No matter if you play with NA or not, a G1 buy of an AC is HIGHLY recommended.
Yeah JWWII is right on, you should read the posts from NCS, they have a lot of good insight on how to play well. I learned a lot on how to play Japan just by reading his posts (I always do the 3 trannies build on J1 now :-) ).
NCS, regarding your US moves, I think you just didn’t stick to your initial decision of attacking Japan with the US. I think you could have done great by pushing harder in the Pacific. The Japan fleet was very weak, and a little US fleet could have easily contested the islands. Just my toughts.
In reply to JWWII, I usually start with an AC and 8 INF on G1, on G2 I go all ground units (maybe 8 INF 4 ART), on G3 I buy lots of armor and on G4 I buy my med trannies to support Caucasus drop. With this build I try to take Caucasus on G5 and I still have some defensive piece against the allies. I must say that in order to buy those trannies on G4 the allies must be either doing a KJF or they split their effort against Japan and Germany. A good US player would not allow you to build a good Med fleet that late in the game by having a large fleet in the Atlantic ready to take your Med fleet.
I agree with NCS that a 3 trannies build on G1 is not a good choice: too little defence for your fleet. I would rather do a G1 purchase of an AC and a tranny with the rest going to inf or art. With this fleet UK cannot strafe, and if you took Gibraltar on G1, on G2 you can link up in SZ 7 and threaten UK with 3 trannies.
Pushing this a little further you could also try a “coup d’éclat” and attack eastern Canada on G3 and on J3 attack West Canada and Alsaka with all of the Japs trannies ending up with 3 inf and 4 armors in West Can and 5 inf 1 art (or any other combination) in East Canada, putting a lot of preassure on the US. Call me crazy but I might try this sometimes :lol:.
My general advice for Russia is to always try to reduce the number of infantries on the German and Japan frontline. Strafe the territory until the inf is gone then retreat. Moving infantry from the production centers to the frontline takes a long time for Germany and an even longer time for Japan, and without inf, all attack cost a lot of money. There’s no greater pleasure than trading inf for tanks or fighters :).
For this reason, I always attack Bellorussia and West Russia on the first turn. Bello is easier to take (strafe) than Ukraine and it reduces the amount of inf by the same amount. Even though I agree with 88 that one less fighter on G1 is good, I think its’ not worth loosing 2 armor, 3 inf and 1 art to do so. Russia have so little offensive power that loosing 2 offensive pieces on a total of 6 (4 tanks and 2 fig) is too much.
So I always try to have a big pile in West Russia and I either trade territories with Germany with little inf like AAfiend said or I kill most infantries aproaching my the frontline then retreat to a big stack.
I don’t have my rule book with me but I believe that it doesn’t matter the movement you had with your fighter or if it fought or not, you just need to have the fighter in a territory adjacent to the sea zone you deploy your AC in.
So I believe your fighter could fight, do a movement of 4, land in WE and then be placed on the newly bought carrier.
The only point I’m not 100% sure on is if your plane needs to be in Germany or if it can be in any adjacent territory. You should be able to find it in the rule book.
I agree with you guys, having additionnal transports in the med gives you a lot of flexibility. After the first waves of infantry, it is really tedious to get newly bought infantry to the front, but with those transports it’s quite easy to go straight to caucasus in one turn (instead of three by foot).
I like to have 3 trannies in the med after 3 or 4 turns. The reason is I don’t buy anything else beside infantry and artillery (except the occasionnal fig) after turn 3. With those trannies I still have a lot of mobility and I’m able to defend against an invasion. So if the allies are about to offload on my coast, my inf stay put, but otherwise, they take a trip on the med :-).
This always depends on what the allies do. If the US goes atlantic heavy and head for the med to take my fleet out I won’t spend a dime on additionnal trannies, but otherwise I find it a sure bet.
Another problem is that Japan has a lot of good NAs to hold the Pacific. Most powerfull battleship is a nice addition to their fleet that counts two of them, kamikaze attack is a blessing against those carriers (Kill the carrier so that the defense is reduced in the following turns => -1 carrier = -2 fighters) and so is kaiten torpedo. Dug-in is not that good given the bombardment of US BB but can still make a difference.
I found that playing games with all NAs is a lot of fun and allows players to use a lot of different strategies (I’ve never seen a german player owning 8 subs except in those games :-D ).
One strategy my friend uses a lot when we play with all NAs is putting a factory in Australia with the colonial garrison NA. On the first turn he brings his India fleet to the bottom of the map but out of reach of the Jap so it can merge on UK2 with the aussy fleet. The factory being free, he can still build an AC if he wants in London, but he has now a lot of option in the south pacific. Combine this with the US island hoping, the allies can have a mighty fleet in the pacific to put some pressure on the japs without too much expanditure from the UK (maybe one fighter to full AC and some inf for the transports). Combining UK fleet and US fleet (both of which are mostly defensive given the AC, unless US spend a lot on ub or DD) make it almost impossible for the Jap to take it out without loosing all of his in return. For the final punch after increasing the size of the fleet, you can use a joint strike to attack the jappan fleet.
I guess this wouldn’t work too well without NA though.