So I'm starting a new Global War game in which the Germans are going to go for a Sea Lion/Sitzkreig. (My 7th game since the release of MWiF, Yay!) This means the Japanese need to deal with the Russians before they get too bored. So Japan is going to strike first.
The question is. Do they attack immediately in 1939 even though there might be poor weather, or do they wait until better weather and attack in the summer of 1940? Why?
Japan vs Russia advice
Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
Don't do it. If I remember correctly there was a compulsory peace rule which meant that either side could go for a quick attack, knowing there was a means to resolution. That iirc has not been coded.
The problems therefore are that without this mechanism:
- Soviet building capability increases (at war with another major power)
- Soviets can choose other than combineds
- The above aids the Chinese
- Japan cannot reverse this
Unless I have this wrong I would steer well clear.
The problems therefore are that without this mechanism:
- Soviet building capability increases (at war with another major power)
- Soviets can choose other than combineds
- The above aids the Chinese
- Japan cannot reverse this
Unless I have this wrong I would steer well clear.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
-
brian brian
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
That is the most difficult part of playing Global War World in Flames solitaire, trying to make such decisions.
The Soviet Production Multiple (neither case of enemy unit or enemy land attack in Home Country) should not go up during a war with Japan, that is (was?) a bug in MWiF.
The Soviet Production Multiple (neither case of enemy unit or enemy land attack in Home Country) should not go up during a war with Japan, that is (was?) a bug in MWiF.
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Don't do it. If I remember correctly there was a compulsory peace rule which meant that either side could go for a quick attack, knowing there was a means to resolution. That iirc has not been coded.
The problems therefore are that without this mechanism:
- Soviet building capability increases (at war with another major power)
- Soviets can choose other than combineds
- The above aids the Chinese
- Japan cannot reverse this
Unless I have this wrong I would steer well clear.
Since I'm playing solitaire I can simulate the affects of the compulsory peace rule. (You could do that even if you were playing a live player just by agreeing to do so.)
The biggest reason the Japanese have to do this, is otherwise they will face a bored Russian with lots of resources sometime in 41 or 42 since the Germans are going for a Sitzkreig.
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
I've tried this several times. Here's what I have come up with, given the bugs (discovered the hard way)
Do NOT attack Japan until you have dealt a significant blow to China. The optimal Chinese defense to this strategy is to create divisions and run around putting the Japanese out of supply. This will result in lost resources as well as successful attacks by the Chinese communists. China should also build planes and the USA should stack carrier planes and other units in Philippines. (subs are tasty units to have in Manilla). The Carrier planes allow for the USA to immediate send its carriers to start picking apart the Japanese conv and navy--which will have suffered because of all of the land units built.
Japan should attack right before Russia attacks GE...guessing this correctly is really helpful. It forces a reduction in the garrison as well as no increase in effective land actions as they were going to get that anyway. Japan MUST build it's armor and mech units--starting with the mech div that allows japan to blitz in China. land aircraft, as feeble as they are, are also helpful. Especially since they can be mothballed when pilots are needed for japanese carrier planes.
be sure to build 1 conv per turn so when (not if) but when the USA finally gets into the conv's in the China Sea and South China Sea your game won't be over as your production gearing is reduced to 1! when your build is about 7!
Buy carrier planes and hope you get some with ground factors. YOu'll need them for Vladivostok. The marines are also handy with the artillery as they can attack across a hex that no other units can. You'll get 4 hexes on Vlad and use your O chit. Up north, you must break the rail line. This prevents easy encirclement by USSR of manchurian forces. Bombardment on Vlad also is helpful. Check the weather...you'll want to time everything so you are attacking Vlad in July/Aug for great weather. This means you will attack in 40 or 41 (if you don't want to risk the problem with trying to time the USSR declaration on GER). The good thing about waiting to attack is that the buildup may very well force the USSR player to build up defenses which all come at a cost of firepower on the Polish border.
Beware, the great USSR bombers can strat bomb Japan very effectively. You must build the 13 range fighter for strat bomb defense. In winter months that are short, the USSR player can mothball the bombers stacked in a city, and then wait a turn and reactivate them and place them anywhere--like back on the Polish side of town! USSR should ALWAYS place its sub units in Vlad. This will also allow the USSR to get in some attempts at conv raiding. IF the USSR sinks the Japanese conv's carrier resources/bp's to USA, your game is over....so protect them and put extra CONV out there.
Overall: I would not recommend this strategy...it just doesn't work without the coding that forces a peace (permanently) between USSR and Japan. Otherwise, it would be a delightful strategy to get the Japanese player doing strategically important stuff very early in the game.
But, in the final analysis, even with brilliant luck and execution, the fury from the USA that will rain down as it comes into the war early will not be worth it...the loss of the oil makes building of synth oil mandatory, and the loss of all those bp's for synth oil (which I tend to build no matter so it is moot for me) comes at a cost of the navy (usually). And, the problem with not building the navy is that you have to plan 2 years out for naval production...This means the japanese navy will consist of all the repairs, and all of the ships in the construction pool...and that's about it...When those big red, size 5 USA carriers hit the seas, japan is screwed...
Do NOT attack Japan until you have dealt a significant blow to China. The optimal Chinese defense to this strategy is to create divisions and run around putting the Japanese out of supply. This will result in lost resources as well as successful attacks by the Chinese communists. China should also build planes and the USA should stack carrier planes and other units in Philippines. (subs are tasty units to have in Manilla). The Carrier planes allow for the USA to immediate send its carriers to start picking apart the Japanese conv and navy--which will have suffered because of all of the land units built.
Japan should attack right before Russia attacks GE...guessing this correctly is really helpful. It forces a reduction in the garrison as well as no increase in effective land actions as they were going to get that anyway. Japan MUST build it's armor and mech units--starting with the mech div that allows japan to blitz in China. land aircraft, as feeble as they are, are also helpful. Especially since they can be mothballed when pilots are needed for japanese carrier planes.
be sure to build 1 conv per turn so when (not if) but when the USA finally gets into the conv's in the China Sea and South China Sea your game won't be over as your production gearing is reduced to 1! when your build is about 7!
Buy carrier planes and hope you get some with ground factors. YOu'll need them for Vladivostok. The marines are also handy with the artillery as they can attack across a hex that no other units can. You'll get 4 hexes on Vlad and use your O chit. Up north, you must break the rail line. This prevents easy encirclement by USSR of manchurian forces. Bombardment on Vlad also is helpful. Check the weather...you'll want to time everything so you are attacking Vlad in July/Aug for great weather. This means you will attack in 40 or 41 (if you don't want to risk the problem with trying to time the USSR declaration on GER). The good thing about waiting to attack is that the buildup may very well force the USSR player to build up defenses which all come at a cost of firepower on the Polish border.
Beware, the great USSR bombers can strat bomb Japan very effectively. You must build the 13 range fighter for strat bomb defense. In winter months that are short, the USSR player can mothball the bombers stacked in a city, and then wait a turn and reactivate them and place them anywhere--like back on the Polish side of town! USSR should ALWAYS place its sub units in Vlad. This will also allow the USSR to get in some attempts at conv raiding. IF the USSR sinks the Japanese conv's carrier resources/bp's to USA, your game is over....so protect them and put extra CONV out there.
Overall: I would not recommend this strategy...it just doesn't work without the coding that forces a peace (permanently) between USSR and Japan. Otherwise, it would be a delightful strategy to get the Japanese player doing strategically important stuff very early in the game.
But, in the final analysis, even with brilliant luck and execution, the fury from the USA that will rain down as it comes into the war early will not be worth it...the loss of the oil makes building of synth oil mandatory, and the loss of all those bp's for synth oil (which I tend to build no matter so it is moot for me) comes at a cost of the navy (usually). And, the problem with not building the navy is that you have to plan 2 years out for naval production...This means the japanese navy will consist of all the repairs, and all of the ships in the construction pool...and that's about it...When those big red, size 5 USA carriers hit the seas, japan is screwed...
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
Yes the Soviet multiplier is bugged, benefitting of attacks and such in Siberia too.
I suggest Japan does not attack Soviets; and in my games we houserule that Soviets cannot attack Japanese.
China + Soviets can easily get anything they can get land-wise and Japanese production will be crippled forever. I cannot see that as a serious game / enjoyable; and the map size simply means that in MWiF the Pacific balance is screwed in "land warfare" terms.
I suggest Japan does not attack Soviets; and in my games we houserule that Soviets cannot attack Japanese.
China + Soviets can easily get anything they can get land-wise and Japanese production will be crippled forever. I cannot see that as a serious game / enjoyable; and the map size simply means that in MWiF the Pacific balance is screwed in "land warfare" terms.
-
brian brian
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
One might think Japan would be the power most in favor of the "Unlimited Divisions" option - but I think Japan should think about that very carefully.
I wouldn't run the Allies as if they know the Axis strategy in advance. If Germany lays down an AMPH + other naval-esque units on the first turn, then sure.
A reason for the Russians to wait until 1940 is which chits might be in the US Entry Pool in 1939.
The Partisan rule should already have the code working to define what is "Siberia" and what is the regular USSR Home Country for the purposes of that rule.
If the USA put a lot SUBs in Manila before war with Japan, I would probably invade the hex on the surprise impulse with the Imperial Guard, the 1st SNLF, and a strong INF off an AMPH, with much of the First Air Fleet and some land-based air in support, each rolling bonus dice on surprise ground strikes - even against MacArthur and the Philippines TERR. It would be bloody but 40% of the SUBs would likely be destroyed, something difficult for Japan to accomplish otherwise.
I wouldn't run the Allies as if they know the Axis strategy in advance. If Germany lays down an AMPH + other naval-esque units on the first turn, then sure.
A reason for the Russians to wait until 1940 is which chits might be in the US Entry Pool in 1939.
The Partisan rule should already have the code working to define what is "Siberia" and what is the regular USSR Home Country for the purposes of that rule.
If the USA put a lot SUBs in Manila before war with Japan, I would probably invade the hex on the surprise impulse with the Imperial Guard, the 1st SNLF, and a strong INF off an AMPH, with much of the First Air Fleet and some land-based air in support, each rolling bonus dice on surprise ground strikes - even against MacArthur and the Philippines TERR. It would be bloody but 40% of the SUBs would likely be destroyed, something difficult for Japan to accomplish otherwise.
-
paulderynck
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
- Location: Canada
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
I was worried about the effect of the unlimited divisions option, but they are not really "unlimited".
The way it works is the corps you breakdown is out of the game until both Divs are eliminated or the corps gets reformed. And since you must have one Motorized Div to reform, any corps broken down into two Inf Divs (usually what Japan would want) is tough to get reformed.
The way it works is the corps you breakdown is out of the game until both Divs are eliminated or the corps gets reformed. And since you must have one Motorized Div to reform, any corps broken down into two Inf Divs (usually what Japan would want) is tough to get reformed.
Paul
-
Shannon V. OKeets
- Posts: 22165
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
- Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
- Contact:
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
I fixed the Siberia attack problem gifting the USSR with a production multiple bonus. That will be available in version 2.1.4.0 - an official update for World in Flames (probably next week).ORIGINAL: Cohen
Yes the Soviet multiplier is bugged, benefitting of attacks and such in Siberia too.
I suggest Japan does not attack Soviets; and in my games we houserule that Soviets cannot attack Japanese.
China + Soviets can easily get anything they can get land-wise and Japanese production will be crippled forever. I cannot see that as a serious game / enjoyable; and the map size simply means that in MWiF the Pacific balance is screwed in "land warfare" terms.
Steve
Perfection is an elusive goal.
Perfection is an elusive goal.
-
Shannon V. OKeets
- Posts: 22165
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
- Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
- Contact:
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
That's not quite how MWIF works.ORIGINAL: paulderynck
I was worried about the effect of the unlimited divisions option, but they are not really "unlimited".
The way it works is the corps you breakdown is out of the game until both Divs are eliminated or the corps gets reformed. And since you must have one Motorized Div to reform, any corps broken down into two Inf Divs (usually what Japan would want) is tough to get reformed.
The program keeps track of what divisions were formed when a corps was broken down. Any two 'identical' divisions can be used to reform the corps. That is, the unit type, combat strength, and movement points of both divisions used to reform the corps must match the two original divisions that were placed o the map when the corps was broken down. If two infantry divisions were created, then two infantry divisions must be used to reform the corps.
Note that the program forces the player to reform a corps if the requisite divisions have been destroyed. The reformed corps then goes back into the Force Pool. This change is to prevent players from messing around to avoid having weak corps units return to the Force Pool.
Steve
Perfection is an elusive goal.
Perfection is an elusive goal.
-
brian brian
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
A digression - for Japan it sounds nice to have more divisions to take more undefended Allied locations on their surprise impulse. But they do have access to a good amount of them in their force pool already - 2 Engineer, Para, Mountain, 2 Marine, 3 Infantry; plus 2 Motorized divisions can invade off a TRS at juicy locations near Japanese bases, like the NEI oilfield hexes. Granted that set of 11 divisions would cost a little bit more than breaking down a few extra INF.
But more divisions for the Allies is hard for Japan in mainland Asia. Instead of 2 Cavalry divisions for the Chinese, they could then deploy up to 8 of them if they forgo using their regular CAV corps, which are pretty weak anyway. I know there aren't "unlimited" divisions - but the USSR could send quite a few of them into Manchuria if they chose. China could also send out more infantry divisions as raiding units as well, and with more Chinese cities on the map...
True these generally 1 factor divisions could be countered, though the Allies might back any one of them with a long-range bomber or ATR or both. But they are dangerous for Japan because what Japan is even more short of than garrison units can frequently be land moves to move those garrisons around as it begins to lose the strategic initiative and is forced to re-act to USN moves in the Pacific. China takes a land action every single impulse.
The USSR also has the nice new fantasy base of Komsomolsk (a city hacked out of the wilderness starting with prison labor in 1939 - not a Red Army recruitment center or depot in any way shape or form) to fight from as well; the Russians should be able to hold onto 1 or 2 of their 5 Siberian cities unless they are totally losing all of European Russia already. It takes Japan a long time to march to and assault all 5 locations.
Should Japan strike first in the Far East they need to basically try to capture all 5 of those cities, or else they will never have a placid Manchuria. Without some economic benefit from a negotiated Peace with Japan, the Russians have zero incentive to ever go to Peace, as Siberia is so much bigger than the Japanese Force Pool.
But more divisions for the Allies is hard for Japan in mainland Asia. Instead of 2 Cavalry divisions for the Chinese, they could then deploy up to 8 of them if they forgo using their regular CAV corps, which are pretty weak anyway. I know there aren't "unlimited" divisions - but the USSR could send quite a few of them into Manchuria if they chose. China could also send out more infantry divisions as raiding units as well, and with more Chinese cities on the map...
True these generally 1 factor divisions could be countered, though the Allies might back any one of them with a long-range bomber or ATR or both. But they are dangerous for Japan because what Japan is even more short of than garrison units can frequently be land moves to move those garrisons around as it begins to lose the strategic initiative and is forced to re-act to USN moves in the Pacific. China takes a land action every single impulse.
The USSR also has the nice new fantasy base of Komsomolsk (a city hacked out of the wilderness starting with prison labor in 1939 - not a Red Army recruitment center or depot in any way shape or form) to fight from as well; the Russians should be able to hold onto 1 or 2 of their 5 Siberian cities unless they are totally losing all of European Russia already. It takes Japan a long time to march to and assault all 5 locations.
Should Japan strike first in the Far East they need to basically try to capture all 5 of those cities, or else they will never have a placid Manchuria. Without some economic benefit from a negotiated Peace with Japan, the Russians have zero incentive to ever go to Peace, as Siberia is so much bigger than the Japanese Force Pool.
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
ORIGINAL: brian brian
A digression - for Japan it sounds nice to have more divisions to take more undefended Allied locations on their surprise impulse. But they do have access to a good amount of them in their force pool already - 2 Engineer, Para, Mountain, 2 Marine, 3 Infantry; plus 2 Motorized divisions can invade off a TRS at juicy locations near Japanese bases, like the NEI oilfield hexes. Granted that set of 11 divisions would cost a little bit more than breaking down a few extra INF.
But more divisions for the Allies is hard for Japan in mainland Asia. Instead of 2 Cavalry divisions for the Chinese, they could then deploy up to 8 of them if they forgo using their regular CAV corps, which are pretty weak anyway. I know there aren't "unlimited" divisions - but the USSR could send quite a few of them into Manchuria if they chose. China could also send out more infantry divisions as raiding units as well, and with more Chinese cities on the map...
True these generally 1 factor divisions could be countered, though the Allies might back any one of them with a long-range bomber or ATR or both. But they are dangerous for Japan because what Japan is even more short of than garrison units can frequently be land moves to move those garrisons around as it begins to lose the strategic initiative and is forced to re-act to USN moves in the Pacific. China takes a land action every single impulse.
The USSR also has the nice new fantasy base of Komsomolsk (a city hacked out of the wilderness starting with prison labor in 1939 - not a Red Army recruitment center or depot in any way shape or form) to fight from as well; the Russians should be able to hold onto 1 or 2 of their 5 Siberian cities unless they are totally losing all of European Russia already. It takes Japan a long time to march to and assault all 5 locations.
Should Japan strike first in the Far East they need to basically try to capture all 5 of those cities, or else they will never have a placid Manchuria. Without some economic benefit from a negotiated Peace with Japan, the Russians have zero incentive to ever go to Peace, as Siberia is so much bigger than the Japanese Force Pool.
With the unified map, the war in the Far East has changed from a WWI type of warfare to a tactival theater. There are to few units on both sides to be able to absorb a lot of losses.
This is particularly true for the Japanese! If they go all out for China, they get troubles with Uncle Joe and can't stop him from entering Manchuria. If they go for the USSR, they don't have enough to counter the Chinese oozing through the frontlines...
The USSR and China are somewhat linked to eachother in MWIF. If one supports the other, the Japanese hasn't got a lot of options. That's why the optional rule needs to be coded, because Vladivostok is vulnerable for a Japanese attack.
If the USSR sets up or sends the Siberians towards Persia, the Japanese have the upper hand in the region.
Which then comes back to a German Sitzkrieg. As soon as the USSR see the Germans build naval assets, they know what's going to happen and the Japanese are going to suffer from it. Which means that in MWIF: the Soviets need to set up all Siberian units around Manchuria and use build units out of Europe for the capture of Persia and Iraq.
That's quite a difference if you compare this to the board game...
Peter
-
brian brian
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
It was quite some time in the history of the game before Blagovyeschensk and Khabarovsk were added to the map. When they were, at first it was with a new, now discarded rule concept called a "Reference City" - such hexes could serve as the end point of a Rail Move, but had no use at all in the Reinforcement or Supply rules. I would like to see the game go back to there being only Chita and Vladivostok in the area for the Russians. One break in the Trans-Siberian beyond Chita and military forces beyond that break point just straight couldn't operate, in my opinion. But the game is designed to be as smooth to play as possible for the scale selected.
I do like the idea of a pre-emptive strike by the Japanese some. Vladivostok is indefensible against the IJN; after taking that the IJN can then hunt down any Russian SUBs that remain, possibly with the help of the 1940 long-range Zeroes flying escort for CV strikes until those SUBs are eliminated.
But after that Japan will have a long struggle on it's hands ... the more naval goodies Germany builds the stronger the USSR can deploy in the Far East. The 2nd resource north of Vladivostok would be a good, achievable second goal but after that the possible front lines become enormous and the Bear gets to make the decisions more than the Rising Sun does.
I'm not sure how USSR strategy really intersects with a German Sitzkrieg effort. Is it even worth it for the Russians to attempt a solid deployment in Poland to draw German forces there in an attempt to limit what the Germans can commit to Sea Lion - in 1940? In 1941? If in pre-game strategizing, the West promises the Russians a maximum Lend-Lease effort in case the full-on Italian Luftwaffe is coming in 1941, should the Russians return the theoretical favor somehow?
I don't know what year the USSR can crack the Sitzkrieg # and get into the European war either. 1942? 1943?
I do like the idea of a pre-emptive strike by the Japanese some. Vladivostok is indefensible against the IJN; after taking that the IJN can then hunt down any Russian SUBs that remain, possibly with the help of the 1940 long-range Zeroes flying escort for CV strikes until those SUBs are eliminated.
But after that Japan will have a long struggle on it's hands ... the more naval goodies Germany builds the stronger the USSR can deploy in the Far East. The 2nd resource north of Vladivostok would be a good, achievable second goal but after that the possible front lines become enormous and the Bear gets to make the decisions more than the Rising Sun does.
I'm not sure how USSR strategy really intersects with a German Sitzkrieg effort. Is it even worth it for the Russians to attempt a solid deployment in Poland to draw German forces there in an attempt to limit what the Germans can commit to Sea Lion - in 1940? In 1941? If in pre-game strategizing, the West promises the Russians a maximum Lend-Lease effort in case the full-on Italian Luftwaffe is coming in 1941, should the Russians return the theoretical favor somehow?
I don't know what year the USSR can crack the Sitzkrieg # and get into the European war either. 1942? 1943?
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
ORIGINAL: brian brian
I don't know what year the USSR can crack the Sitzkrieg # and get into the European war either. 1942? 1943?
1942: Probably not.
1943: Almost certainly.
I thought I knew how to play this game....
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
Which means that the USSR has got all the time in the world to hammer the Japanese and get control of Iraq and Persia. Those big TB-3 bombers will see a lot of action against the Japanese controlled factories in the far east...
Peter
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
Shannon,
Is it possible to fix the bug where once Japan and Russia go to war, they can not go back to peace? I think that if either side meets certain conditions, they can force a piece on the other side (2 or 4 rp's or something, I forget). This reverts the USSR back to only combined moves and allows JPN to go back to just worrying about China/USA...
Is it possible to fix the bug where once Japan and Russia go to war, they can not go back to peace? I think that if either side meets certain conditions, they can force a piece on the other side (2 or 4 rp's or something, I forget). This reverts the USSR back to only combined moves and allows JPN to go back to just worrying about China/USA...
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
@Centuur:
If I were axis, and Italy were neutral, I'd align Persia/Iraq with Italy and ship units over there to support the attack. With all those juicy mountains around I bet I could make USSR pay dearly for their adventure. And if they didn't get themselves out of involvement in Persia/Iraq, it would be very painful for Allies. If things worked out, I'd get a supplier repeater site (or 2) and a nice naval force capable of messing with UK convoys in the India.
An attack on Saudi Arabia would be on the strategic agenda. If that happened, the immediate oil problems of the Axis would be solved, and with the fall of the NEI to Japan, the UK might have some oil problems of its own.
Even better would be a chance to capture Syria and make the UK force a declaration on Italy.
If I were axis, and Italy were neutral, I'd align Persia/Iraq with Italy and ship units over there to support the attack. With all those juicy mountains around I bet I could make USSR pay dearly for their adventure. And if they didn't get themselves out of involvement in Persia/Iraq, it would be very painful for Allies. If things worked out, I'd get a supplier repeater site (or 2) and a nice naval force capable of messing with UK convoys in the India.
An attack on Saudi Arabia would be on the strategic agenda. If that happened, the immediate oil problems of the Axis would be solved, and with the fall of the NEI to Japan, the UK might have some oil problems of its own.
Even better would be a chance to capture Syria and make the UK force a declaration on Italy.
-
Shannon V. OKeets
- Posts: 22165
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
- Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
- Contact:
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
Sometime in the next couple of months - probably. I still would like to investigate all reported bugs before adding new code. Other players have other priorities too.[;)]ORIGINAL: palne
Shannon,
Is it possible to fix the bug where once Japan and Russia go to war, they can not go back to peace? I think that if either side meets certain conditions, they can force a piece on the other side (2 or 4 rp's or something, I forget). This reverts the USSR back to only combined moves and allows JPN to go back to just worrying about China/USA...
Steve
Perfection is an elusive goal.
Perfection is an elusive goal.
-
PeteGarnett
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 9:12 pm
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
ORIGINAL: Cohen
Yes the Soviet multiplier is bugged, benefitting of attacks and such in Siberia too.
I suggest Japan does not attack Soviets; and in my games we houserule that Soviets cannot attack Japanese.
China + Soviets can easily get anything they can get land-wise and Japanese production will be crippled forever. I cannot see that as a serious game / enjoyable; and the map size simply means that in MWiF the Pacific balance is screwed in "land warfare" terms.
Cohen - How does your house rule handle garrisons for Russia & Japan whilst at peace? My opponent & I are thinking of a similar house rule for our future games.
RE: Japan vs Russia advice
ORIGINAL: palne
@Centuur:
If I were axis, and Italy were neutral, I'd align Persia/Iraq with Italy and ship units over there to support the attack. With all those juicy mountains around I bet I could make USSR pay dearly for their adventure. And if they didn't get themselves out of involvement in Persia/Iraq, it would be very painful for Allies. If things worked out, I'd get a supplier repeater site (or 2) and a nice naval force capable of messing with UK convoys in the India.
An attack on Saudi Arabia would be on the strategic agenda. If that happened, the immediate oil problems of the Axis would be solved, and with the fall of the NEI to Japan, the UK might have some oil problems of its own.
Even better would be a chance to capture Syria and make the UK force a declaration on Italy.
If Italy is neutral, why should the USSR attack Persia? That would be unwise indeed, with the Suez Canal open for Italian ships. Also: never attack Persia in 1939. 1940 is early enough, especially since the USSR needs to build units for this attack if it wants to put pressure on Japan...
Peter