Patience as the USA

[tom730_slith]

I have only ever played WIF and MWIF solitaire. Recently the USA has been doing poorly and I finally figured out why!
My games always feature VERY aggressive Axis play, especially now that I have added Oil rules! Because of USA reaction to various Axis moves and victories, the US typically comes in much earlier in my games, often just against Japan at first.
It turns out what I have dome before is move too fast against Japan, before building up enough naval strength. By going after the IJN too early I have frequently been trounced and had to lick my wounds as the Americans and wait until retire and new construction made up for losses.
By waiting longer and allowing Japan to have its way in SE Asia, Philippines and even India, the US can build up in Hawaii a sufficient force to face the IJN successfully.
It's funny, it goes against my grain to just let the Japs run wild, but since I can't really pull off a "Doolittle Raid" I really have to be patient.
Continuing to love this game - continuing to learn!

[Orm]

Yes, taking to huge risks with the US navy to early is a common receipt for defeat.

With that said you do not need to let the Japanese go rampant either. You should garrison what you can, and fight naval battles on your terms, when Japan attacks.

[Courtenay]

War Plan Orange, the US plan for war against Japan, formulated in 1906, and, although repeated revised to reflect new force levels and technologies (aircraft!), still in effect in 1941, foresaw a three phase war against Japan. In Phase one "Japan was expected to strike south and west, seizing the lightly defended American outposts in the Far East, and securing access to vital raw materials." [1] If the military says it can do something, well, maybe. When it says it can't do something (in this case, stopping the Japanese advance), it is very probably right. This is particularly the case when it holds that position for three-and-a-half decades. So, to the extent that WiF reflects reality, one should, I think, respect this opinion of the US Navy.

This does not mean you should let the Japanese run completely wild, as Orm says. Commit your forces *after* the Japanese have committed theirs, when you can counter-attack a divided Japanese force. I have seen games where neither side does much of anything for quite a while in the middle game, because which ever side moves first would get pounced on, or, if it stayed together, would let the opposition ravage its shipping lines. (I always use limited overseas supply, so that there will be shipping lines to ravage!) In all, the attitude to adopt is the one Nimitz ordered before the battle of Midway: "you will be governed by the principle of calculated risk, which you shall interpret to mean the avoidance of exposure of your force to attack by superior enemy forces without good prospect of inflicting, as a result of such exposure, greater damage on the enemy." [2]

[1] Richard Frank, Downfall: the End of the Imperial Japanese Empire, p 26, New York: Random House, 1999

[2] Samuel Elliot Morrison, History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, Vol.
4, Coral Sea, Midway and Submarine Actions, May 1942–August 1942, Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1949, p. 70

[TeaLeaf]

Even in Europe the USA (allies) needs to be patient.
First (1942), fight where the Axis have a hard time reinforcing the theatre (let alone provide supply for their troops). Best done in Africa. 1942 invasions of mainland Europe usually achieve nothing, or even go terribly wrong.
Then, 1943, it is time for a bigger target: Mainland Europe. Preferrably where it has a coastal line with the mediterranean, since there are already lots of troops and airunits around that sea from previous offensives in Africa (most easy to transfer from one front to the other). Don't expect to achieve more than kicking 1 minor axis power out of the war (I prefer Italy, since it has the most production potential and units on the map).

'44 is the year to go all out in Europe and expect a lot of things to happen during the two summers that are left.

Last but not least: I am a big fan of Germany first. IMHO the things Japan can do are just not going to cost victory for the allies, but Germany on the other hand, can.
Without ignoring a build up against Japan, ofc.. I try to aim at the stronger part of rough parity for the USA against Japan during '43, with superiority established during '44, not counting the CW.