comments on alternative allied starting strategy

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Icedawg
Posts: 1613
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:55 pm
Location: Upstate New York

RE: comments on alternative allied starting strategy

Post by Icedawg »

ORIGINAL: camonroe

Hi all,

after playing Japan extensively against the AI and an aborted PBEM campaign, I'm going to start my first PBEM as Allies.

In setting up my first turn I am thinking of doing something very radical which goes against the common thinking in this forum. Basically I am thinking of consolidating the 2 CVTFs in the Pacific and try to meet KB head on and give battle as it returns from Pearl Harbour.

My reasoning is that at the beginning (before the 7/42 resizing) KB suffers from a lack of fighters (only 108 total) and that weakness could also be exacerbated by eventual losses in the PH attack. Moreover, after the first turn attack, KB would probably be either out or very short of torpedoes, thus lessening the potential damage that it could cause.

I have run a lot of tests to try it and the common result is that I usually (but not always) lose both Carriers while being able to damage in various degree (sometime very severely)a variable number of Japan CVs.

Given the above mentioned situation and considering that Japan CVs are very fragile and a few bomb hits could prove fatal to them, especially since KB is very far from a friendly port, do you think it is worthwhile to take the risk of losing 2 CVs for potentially strike an early blow to Japan's early expansions?

Thanks for your comments,

Carl

I would love it if an allied player did this against me! Pretty good odds that I'd have complete free reign for 12 months or so rather than the usual 5 to 6.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”