Prefered style of playing Japan

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Prefered style of playing Japan

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Prefered style of playing Japan

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Prefered style of playing Japan - 7/13/2004 6:09:48 PM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

I thought as long as we had started a thread on how you play Germany we should have one on Japan.

(1) China. How much do you commit to the ground war?
(2) The buildup for war with the Allies. Shipping or Troops?
(3) The Netherlands East Indies, Singapore, and India. It's all about Oil.
(4) The Hawaiian Islands. The sleeping giant is awakened.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Prefered style of playing Japan - 7/13/2004 7:49:55 PM

Chaplain

Posts: 133
Joined: 8/21/2003
Status: offline

Singapore is everything. It must be taken early, and fast. As Japan, an early war against the Dutch/British is my strategy - seizing oil and Singapore. Then we go for Pearl and try to keep pressure forward as long as possible, before running away and hiding behind forts and LBA. Unless your Yankee opponent is a nincompoop, he's going to batter you pretty hard. Prepare yourself psychologically.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 2

RE: Prefered style of playing Japan - 7/14/2004 1:51:13 AM

terje439

Posts: 6813
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

I prefer to declare war on the US and Commonwealth at the same time, dividing my naval units to destroy as much of the allied fleet as possible at once. This is foloowed by captiring NEI, Singapore, Burma and the Philiphines. Then I switch to defensive and try to hold on for as long as possible.

When it comes to China I like to hit them hard the first turns, if they start to crumble I try to make any remaining China VERY small, but if the dce roll against me, I do not commit very hard in China, as this will keep imortant BPs away from my wareffort against the aliied forces that I know are bound to hit me later on.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 3

RE: Prefered style of playing Japan - 7/14/2004 9:17:44 AM

macgregor

Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline

The best chance the Japanese have for winning(IMHO) is by helping Germany take out the USSR. Japanese troops should be able to cut the trans-siberian. If the Germans can put the Soviet forces on the ropes by fall '41, I'd try it . The NEI oil is of course,vital, so I'd plan for that. I'd for the most part keep my fleet within range of land-based fighters. Slower ships I'd use to protect convoys while keeping a powerful ,fast carrier fleet. After making the attack on Pearl Harbor,( if by attacking USSR they haven't already declared war on me) I would then use this carrier fleet as mainly as a deterrent, though ready to make a late impulse gamble if the opportunity should present itself. I set limited objectives for myself in China and once the resources I need from there are secure I take on a more defensive posture while chasing partisans. I miss this game.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 7/14/2004 9:47:12 PM >

(in reply to terje439)

Post #: 4

The Vladivostok gambit - 7/15/2004 2:35:30 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

A Vladivostok gambit is tricky for Japan. If it is attempted in 39/40 and fails then Japan will lose a lot of attack potential and then will have no chance for victory in China. If it is attempted in 41 (in conjunction with Germany) then Japan is severely distracted from taking out the NEI and getting up a perimeter against the USA. I've tried it a few times in 39/40 since the whole Japanese Fleet is available to contribute lots of shore bombardment and airpower but I don't see it as a sure thing. It's certainly not an option to be taken lightly.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to macgregor)

Post #: 5

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 7/30/2004 6:23:23 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

1) It is in Japan's interest to concentrate on China early. If the Chinese can be pounded, you get more resources and can concentrate on US/UK later.
Usually the Japanese player should be worried that the Russians attack early, give the Chinese an early break, kill some of the limited troops the Japanese start with, force a peace, and take resources from Japan. If you can get the Russians to attack, hold them off (especially in the mountains of Korea), they make the US angry and you get to make the German's life much easier.

Japan should build armor+inf turn 1 and ramp up inf production. Build lots of HQs. Armor should allow the Japanese to choose ASSAULT killing more Chinese and maybe getting some 7-1 blitzes. It is critical to vary your attacks by season (attack from north in summer, south in winter) to maximize good weather. You can always build navy later, and more of it if you take Chinese resources.

2) By summer 40/41 it is time to take Vlad. If the Japanese can attrition Russia, the German's have an easy time. Vlad is on the coast, so the Navy can practically double your odds. War with Japan does not increase Russian production. As Russia, I usually only can afford two units in Vlad, my biggest INF, my biggest cheap garrison by summer '41. The Japanese need to attack it, I lose max 3 pts production, and don't lose valuable units I need to face Hitler.

3) Singapore is not eveything. The Oil is #1, Rabaul #2, Philipines #3, and Singapore #4. As long as UK has India and Australia, the Japanese will be stretched thin late in the war. Taking out India is big.

4) Japanese convoys are fragile. Land based air is best convoy garrison and seazone interdiction. Keeping a fast reaction carrier force is essential (in Truk is ideal, especially if you used to play Victory in Pacific).

5) No matter what, Japan needs to worry about the US at all times. Too many Japanese get focused on China and China turns into a large POW camp for Japanese troops that wish they were stopping the US from getting to Tokyo. Put two white print units in Truk and Rabaul (I like the 5-3's because they usually are flipped when the invasion comes anyway and it makes me feel efficient).

6) Land based air is the key in the Pacific. (Watch old Black Sheep reruns if you need to verify this)

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 6

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/4/2004 10:32:40 PM

PanzerLehr

Posts: 6
Joined: 8/30/2003
From: Jarrow, South Tyneside
Status: offline

Of course, a lot of the old Japan vs China / Russia strategy will become redundant since the whole world will be modelled at the European scale. China will be a nightmare of manoeuvre and tenuous supply lines.

(in reply to meyerg)

Post #: 7

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/4/2004 11:43:06 PM

YohanTM2

Posts: 1143
Joined: 10/7/2002
From: Toronto
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PanzerLehr

Of course, a lot of the old Japan vs China / Russia strategy will become redundant since the whole world will be modelled at the European scale. China will be a nightmare of manoeuvre and tenuous supply lines.

But it will also be difficlut for China to garrison effectively unless they change the troop mix. And then they will have to change it for Japan. And then they will have to change it for the US and GB and Russia and...AAGH

(in reply to PanzerLehr)

Post #: 8

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/5/2004 3:58:01 PM

PanzerLehr

Posts: 6
Joined: 8/30/2003
From: Jarrow, South Tyneside
Status: offline

Yes. But the first side to screw up even for a moment in this theatre can expect to pay a horrible price.

Partisans too :shudder:

(in reply to YohanTM2)

Post #: 9

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/6/2004 5:54:20 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

I didn't know we were going to all European map hexes? That will probably favor the Japanese all the more. Their superior movement and ability to shift fronts at will with the navy will be even more of a factor.
Put me down for an infantry and armor the first turn as the Japanese and major problems for the Chinese Summer 40.

(in reply to PanzerLehr)

Post #: 10

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/6/2004 11:19:53 PM

gbed

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/18/2004
Status: offline

All well and good, but supply is a real bear! Don't let your HQ's stray far from a rail line or it is a very good way to lose complete armies in short order.

(in reply to meyerg)

Post #: 11

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/7/2004 6:59:27 PM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gbed

All well and good, but supply is a real bear! Don't let your HQ's stray far from a rail line or it is a very good way to lose complete armies in short order.

I send Yamamoto on a brief tour of duty in China to solve the supply problems. Its not like Japan is planning to go to war with the U.S.A. early (well lets hope they don't).

(in reply to gbed)

Post #: 12

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/8/2004 4:42:22 PM

gbed

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/18/2004
Status: offline

I do that as well, but with the increased size of China on the European scale, and with foul weather, supply will be the determining factor, IMHO. The Chinese have to play with Supply and weather in mind. If they do that, things can be made very difficult for the Japanese. All the talk about superior movement comes to a crashing halt in rain and storm impulses. I think that this scale is a blast in this theater!

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 13

Euro hexes = big trouble in not so little China - 8/11/2004 2:13:25 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

Bad weather can often favor the Japanese. I don't know how many times I have flipped two black print Chinese and attacked them as two defense because the weather was bad.
If you read my earlier suggestion, i build lots of HQs for Japan. Plus, when its bad weather on one front, it is usually good weather on the other.
The dream for the Japanese is to pound China so bad that Japan gets many resources and frees up the army. i don't know how many times i had to leave china one city until the us comes in (don't want to make the us entry roll for conquering china until the US is in the war).

(in reply to gbed)

Post #: 14

RE: Euro hexes = big trouble in not so little China - 8/11/2004 3:52:32 PM

PanzerLehr

Posts: 6
Joined: 8/30/2003
From: Jarrow, South Tyneside
Status: offline

Partisans in China will become a mortal threat too - even for those of us accustomed to limited Pacific map ZoCs, without which it was possible for Japan to shut partisans out of lowland China completely just by holding four or five second-line units behind the front.

(in reply to meyerg)

Post #: 15

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/11/2004 4:43:42 PM

MButtazoni

Posts: 1494
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Milwaukee, WI
Status: offline

quote:

will become redundant since the whole world will be modelled at the European scale.

is this a fact or rumor?

_____________________________

Maurice Buttazoni
Project Coordinator, Playtest Coordinator

(in reply to PanzerLehr)

Post #: 16

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/12/2004 2:11:58 AM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni

quote:

will become redundant since the whole world will be modelled at the European scale.

is this a fact or rumor?

In CWiF China is about 48 hexes wide at its widest point.

If European scale is used that would make China 4,800 kilometers at its widest point.
If the old scale is used that would make China 12,000 kilometers at its widest point.

The actual diameter of Earth is 12,756 kilometers.

Ps: There is no longer a U.S. minimap.

(in reply to MButtazoni)

Post #: 17

No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/13/2004 1:03:03 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

Don't tell me we have the option of moving an armor "by hand" from the west coast to the east coast if we want to. I for one am willing to make the assumption we shouldn't be fighting in the US to make the game simpler.
I will buy a complete India and Australia, but a European hex US may be going a little to far.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 18

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/13/2004 1:37:34 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln
Ps: There is no longer a U.S. minimap.

Where did this rumor come from

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 19

RE: No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/13/2004 6:32:21 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meyerg

Don't tell me we have the option of moving an armor "by hand" from the west coast to the east coast if we want to. I for one am willing to make the assumption we shouldn't be fighting in the US to make the game simpler.
I will buy a complete India and Australia, but a European hex US may be going a little to far.

Er, it's already been done

. Have you seen the beta demo?

Cheers
Neilster

(in reply to meyerg)

Post #: 20

RE: No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/13/2004 6:48:05 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

No I haven't. Where do I see it? Hopefully Neilster follows with a link to a website that doesn't ask for my credit card......

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 21

RE: No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/13/2004 7:15:04 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

It was available for free download in updated versions until Matrix took over development. It was a nearly complete and working Computer WiF but had no AI.

I think it is now available for download at the Yahoo Wifdiscussion.

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion/

You'll have to register to get it. It's excellent IMHO and apparently MWiF will be based on it. There are also some mega experienced Wiffers on their discussion and the topics are often pushing the boundaries of the board game.

This link gives you a look at a very early version.

http://www.strategy-gaming.com/previews/world_in_flames/index.shtml

Cheers
Neilster

(in reply to meyerg)

Post #: 22

RE: No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/13/2004 9:40:48 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

Many things might change between now and the release of MWiF. Just because there was no minimap in one version doesn't mean that it won't be there in the final version.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 23

RE: No US Minimap!!??!! - 8/14/2004 1:14:15 AM

meyerg

Posts: 135
Joined: 11/14/2003
Status: offline

Thanks for the links Neilster. Hopefully we are not locked into all the decisions of CWIF before Matrix took over. Hopefully we can start with a "clean sheet of paper". By the way, I have appended a disclaimer to my posts, please let me know what you think about it. (note: this is both a desire and my personal opinion and in no way reflects Matrix policy, ADG policy, or in any way the aspirations of John Kerry to be your next president).

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 24

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/14/2004 7:08:57 AM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

CWiF Version 0.7.66 (Debug)

CWiF uses a full scale map of North and South America. There is no minimap.

X & Y map cordinates are in brackets.

(73, 313) Norfolk, VA
(71, 266) San Francisco, CA

47 hexes or 4,700 kilometers or 2,920 miles.

(72, 294) Tulsa, OK (where I live)
(73, 291) Oklahoma City, OK (which I have driven to several hundred times)

3 hexes or 300 kilometers or aprox. 186 miles (just about right for hexside to hexside)

Anyone with a copy of CWiF want to say I'm wrong?

Ps: Actual distance on Turner turnpike (I-44 highway) signs is 90 miles if your headed to Oklahoma City. 101 miles if your headed to Tulsa (I've never found out why there is a diference). The Turner turnpike starts outside the city limits of both citys.

I have not posted a single rumor on these forums. I prefer to post only facts.

< Message edited by Mziln -- 8/14/2004 5:43:36 AM >

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 25

RE: The Vladivostok gambit - 8/15/2004 4:57:46 PM

gbed

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/18/2004
Status: offline

You are correct good sir! And to the person who didn't want to move their units from one side of the States to the other, there is always the strategic movement phase!