Page 1 of 2

Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:30 pm
by Q-Ball
Once the SRA is cleared, the Japanese player has a large number of troops ready for action, and plenty of shipping to get them somewhere. With reinforcements and maybe a couple units from China, somewhere around 8 to 10 divisions. Prior to clearing the SRA, the Japanese Strategic priorities are obvious; clear Malaya, PI, Java, push out perimeter in SoPac to/past PM, Lunga, Tarawa, etc, and get established in Burma. After that, is when you really have a choice to make. I am curious, what do others think about or do in that 5/42 timeframe? Obviously alot of factors figure into it, assume both CV fleets are relatively intact.

Options:

1. INVADE CEYLON: Pros: Probably not well defended on the ground. Will keep RN in Bay of Bengal, and cut India/Oz supplies. Cons: Easy bombing target, easy to isolate later on.
2. INVADE INDIA: Pros: Potential Knock-out of UK Cons: Without Knock-out, a protracted land campaign; difficult to withdraw from if not successful. NOTE that in Big B, and a couple other mods, alot more troops in India than Stock.
3. INVADE N. OZ: Pros: Protects flank of SRA; N. Oz is "island". Eliminates 4E threat to southern SRA. Cons: Requires troop commitment to defend; not easy to springboard to other conquests
4. SoPAC Strategy: Pros: Slow down US counterattack later, by pushing out perimeter; lengthens US-Oz supply line. Getting NZ would sever that completely. Possible to capture many units. Cons: Difficult to defend large area; no resources, points are only for outermost islands.
5. CONCENTRATE IN BURMA: Pros: Safe, and neccessary Cons: Very conservative
6. SOMETHING ELSE

I am playing 2 games as Japan, and initially picked "3" and "4".
Would love to hear what others do

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:55 pm
by rogueusmc
If you got what you need, I'd dig in an d hold it.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:05 pm
by Mike Solli
I agree with rogueusmc.  Overexpanding is definitely counterproductive.  You have only so many troops to hold your perimeter, as well as your inner perimeter.  That doesn't mean that attacking targets of opportunity is a bad thing.  I wouldn't blunt my carrier air force on trying to pound an airfield just to deter the buildup of that airfield though.  US Seabees can repair any damage in no time at all.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:02 pm
by KDonovan
4. SoPAC Strategy: Pros: Slow down US counterattack later, by pushing out perimeter; lengthens US-Oz supply line. Getting NZ would sever that completely. Possible to capture many units. Cons: Difficult to defend large area; no resources, points are only for outermost islands.


i would choose this one....the american's are the ones the Japanese need to worry about in this game. So slowing down the american build up in Oz, and forcing the american navy to come out and play (while japanese still have the advantage), is the best option for japan

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:57 pm
by Yamato hugger
Depends on the tactical position. Remember Jap ships arent terribly good at staying afloat for long periods while burning / flooding, so get caught too far from a repair base and you risk a lot. Even a minor hit can be fatal at long ranges.

What is the allied vs Jap carrier situation? If you havent sunk any or lost any, then he is probably pretty close to your strength in carriers which gives him the advantage when his land based air can come in to play and yours cant. This should be a consideration when looking at the So Pac. If you have lost carriers this tips the balance more and more in the LBA favor even given equal carrier losses.

Are you playing on Andys map or stock? If stock, what are you going to do in north Oz? He will walk up there and throw you right back out. Most you can hope for is a few months tops. On Andys map northern Oz is a realistic objective because of the difficulty trying to walk troops up there with little to no supplies.

Ceylon is a deathtrap. He can rotate planes in India pulling back when he doesnt want to fight and coming out when he does. You are letting him choose when to fight. You are also within spitting distance of his sub bases. You will pay hell trying to keep it supplied. You either go for India, or forget it. Ceylon itself isnt worth going after.

And you lose a lot of supplies trying to walk over the mountains into India.

Whats left? [;)]

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:56 pm
by bobogoboom
Ceylon and south pac can also become large pow camps if you are not carefull.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:59 am
by saj42
6. Something else

I've read in a couple of Japanese AARs of players that attack bases/islands in SWPAC and SOPAC just to eliminate Allied ground units and rack up points. The intention is not to defend these bases when the Allied steamroller starts moving.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:23 pm
by Q-Ball
HEMAJOR, DO NOT READ!

Well, OK, I'll give you a scenario right now.....

It's 7/5/42. I just finished clearing N. Oz, and about 10 Div. are there awaiting orders, shipping nearby. Only CV losses so far are Enterprise and Ryujo. I have Zuiho in the shop, everyone else is good to go. My opponent just dropped 2 divisions on Wake and took it, I suspect backup troops to follow shortly.

I'm not convinced Wake is really that important, just a handy seaplane base more than anything, but this strikes me as an opportunity to force a CV on CV action, and capture a whole bunch of units.

Thoughts? How much will I need to take on 1 USMC, and 25 Div?

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:55 pm
by herwin
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

HEMAJOR, DO NOT READ!

Well, OK, I'll give you a scenario right now.....

It's 7/5/42. I just finished clearing N. Oz, and about 10 Div. are there awaiting orders, shipping nearby. Only CV losses so far are Enterprise and Ryujo. I have Zuiho in the shop, everyone else is good to go. My opponent just dropped 2 divisions on Wake and took it, I suspect backup troops to follow shortly.

I'm not convinced Wake is really that important, just a handy seaplane base more than anything, but this strikes me as an opportunity to force a CV on CV action, and capture a whole bunch of units.

Thoughts? How much will I need to take on 1 USMC, and 25 Div?

That should have been overkill for Wake. In reality, you couldn't deploy more than a division to attack it or more than a regiment to defend it--anything more would have been excess to requirements. I'm sure the game counts rifles, but what I would do is hit it with a supported division. Even if there were two divisions dug in, no more than a regiment could defend, and the rest would have served as artillery targets. In game terms, bombard it for a couple of weeks to wipe out the supplies and then hit it with a supported division.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:20 am
by dtravel
ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

HEMAJOR, DO NOT READ!

Well, OK, I'll give you a scenario right now.....

It's 7/5/42. I just finished clearing N. Oz, and about 10 Div. are there awaiting orders, shipping nearby. Only CV losses so far are Enterprise and Ryujo. I have Zuiho in the shop, everyone else is good to go. My opponent just dropped 2 divisions on Wake and took it, I suspect backup troops to follow shortly.

I'm not convinced Wake is really that important, just a handy seaplane base more than anything, but this strikes me as an opportunity to force a CV on CV action, and capture a whole bunch of units.

Thoughts? How much will I need to take on 1 USMC, and 25 Div?

That should have been overkill for Wake. In reality, you couldn't deploy more than a division to attack it or more than a regiment to defend it--anything more would have been excess to requirements. I'm sure the game counts rifles, but what I would do is hit it with a supported division. Even if there were two divisions dug in, no more than a regiment could defend, and the rest would have served as artillery targets. In game terms, bombard it for a couple of weeks to wipe out the supplies and then hit it with a supported division.
There are no stacking limits in this game. Sending one division to attack two defending divisions is suicide.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:23 am
by herwin
Not if the defending divisions are out of supply and have been chewed up by shore bombardment.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:11 pm
by dtravel
ORIGINAL: herwin

Not if the defending divisions are out of supply and have been chewed up by shore bombardment.
Which would require that you have an air-tight blockade of the island for long enough to know that all the supply stockpiles have been used up. I don't think a few weeks would be long enough.

*shrug* Judgement call.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:04 pm
by herwin
ORIGINAL: dtravel

ORIGINAL: herwin

Not if the defending divisions are out of supply and have been chewed up by shore bombardment.
Which would require that you have an air-tight blockade of the island for long enough to know that all the supply stockpiles have been used up. I don't think a few weeks would be long enough.

*shrug* Judgement call.

Shore bombardment is very efficient at destroying supply.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:28 pm
by Yamato hugger
Still takes a while for the units to whittle down. Not to mention you can always FLY supply in from Midway if necessary.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:23 am
by herwin
ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Still takes a while for the units to whittle down. Not to mention you can always FLY supply in from Midway if necessary.

Quantity has a quality all of its own. I've had 5000+ supply wiped out by the Japanese in a single bombardment at Darwin.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:35 pm
by anarchyintheuk
Fortunately for the IJN there's nothing in the US LBA arsenal that can really hurt bombardment tfs.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:07 pm
by rtrapasso
ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Fortunately for the IJN there's nothing in the US LBA arsenal that can really hurt bombardment tfs.


After a while, they theoretically can get 2000 lb. AP (if you make a bunch of different "dice rolls").

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:19 pm
by anarchyintheuk
He's still in 7/42. I should have been more clear.

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:39 pm
by dtravel
ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Fortunately for the IJN there's nothing in the US LBA arsenal that can really hurt bombardment tfs.


After a while, they theoretically can get 2000 lb. AP (if you make a bunch of different "dice rolls").
And I think some of those die rolls are glitched. I see a lot more AP bombs/special munitions against transport TFs than I do against combat TFs. Its a pattern that emerges from observation over time, a single save game isn't going to show it. (In large part because, as you note, the chances of using them are so low to begin with.)

RE: Japanese Strategic Choices

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:17 pm
by Yamato hugger
ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Still takes a while for the units to whittle down. Not to mention you can always FLY supply in from Midway if necessary.

Quantity has a quality all of its own. I've had 5000+ supply wiped out by the Japanese in a single bombardment at Darwin.

And? Doesnt take 5000 supply to keep a combat unit up to strength. What ever a few squadrons of transports can bring in will keep it going for that day. You can wipe out all the supplies on a base daily, and it can still be in full supply. At least for the ground units. Repairing the bases and entrenching is another matter.