Stellar work. Thanks for the time and thought you put into this, sir! EDIT: I went to your channel from this video and was devastated to find that this is the only Global 1940 video you've made. Would love more, with gratitude.
I like how that you brought up that this strategy was originally scoffed at in the community, and in my player group, Japan almost never attacks on turn. I never employed the strategy given on the surface you lose a 10 IPC bonus and give the US its large IPC bonuses earlier in game. However, after seeing my drunk friend who tried to throw the game since he didn't want to play as Japan attack everything he could and end up winning, attacking everything on turn 1 seemed creditable. After watching you explanation of this J1 strategy, I understand why it's so broken. Thanks for explaining this strategy in such a well made video!
Two observations: 1. In case the US attacked sea zone 6 on turn 1 there's also that one fighter in Japan to scramble. 2. The US can also go after the Marianas, though that is basically an even more disastrous version of the Marshalls attack.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 For a 35 minute video is was straight to the point the entire time. Clear editing with no jarring jump cuts so as to show each move and possible problems/solutions if you get diced in an important battle or encounter some of the more effective counters.
Awesome video, Captain! And grats on the tourney win. I recently used a similar strat, at least in terms of purchases, and found it to be extremely effective. With the airbase/naval base combo you can hit Calcutta with overwhelming force very early on. I've yet to attempt a J1 though.. it just feels so risky.. and like many others my instinct has always been to keep USA out for at least one round. But you've demonstrated how Japan can quickly and reliably even the playing field economically. Again great vid, thanks for posting. I can appreciate all the edits that went into this 😆
Thanks! And, yessir, it felt risky to me as well that first game. I lost the German capital to a can opener. I guess I don't learn ;) Anyway, cake-walked a win in the Pacific regardless. Finally, omg yes the edits... this took a week to make. Hah!
Excellent video and enjoyable to watch. I especially appreciated your use of fuel gauges. As a commentary, it would be great to see you join in a little more play of global 1940 via the Bloodbath ruleset construct. BBR eliminates the flaw that you and others have discovered regarding the overwhelming impact a J1 attack in ensuring, for the most part, an axis victory. Such things as a single Destroyer blocking an entire fleet is not allowed in BBR. A single Destroyer can only block up to three warships which puts constraints on axis navel powers like the IJN. Furthermore, Fleet cores must be more well-protected as some of their core assets can be removed from combat immediately by tactical bomber and submarine Target Select.
I have played a few games using this strategy and here are my thoughts so far. Russia: Russia is able to not move its pacific infantry at all or stack in Amur turn one and this definitely slows the j1. You have to commit forces to Manchuria or Korea in order to defend this or your stuck for awhile going back and forth dealing with Russia taking either Korea or Manchuria and having to take it back. Yes Russia may activate the Manchuria rule but that’s not awful for Russia in this scenario. It’s drawing forces off of India and that’s buying the usa more time which is what they need as well as Japan is focusing its power on India not Russia. USA: turn 1 USA builds 2 aircraft carriers and a battle ship stacking the remaining fleet in Hawaii. USA turn 2 they move the whole fleet to midway and build a navel base there with their fleet that is now matching japans. USA 2 they can build bombers more sea units it really doesn’t matter because simply they can afford it and Japan can’t, turn 2 USA will have 70 IPCs to spend while Japan has not even close to that(I don’t know the exact number right now but somewhere around half). Let’s look at the options Japan has. At this point Japan can to move their whole fleet up to Japan to defend it, drawing all their forces they need for India and to take and hold the money islands. Or they can try and stack infantry in Japan and Korea and let the USA control sea zone 6 and convoy the whole thing. If that happens then yes Japan can go all out planes from indoChina kamikaze tokens blah blah blah and take out that fleet in 6. However that will use a very large amount of japans power and will cost them a decent bit in power while they are still making half of what the USA is. Another option is to just go for Hawaii but that’s a death mission in my books. This is all the while drawing forces out of Asia and to the sea and while the USA is able to replenish its resources much quicker than Japan. China: China really does not have a ton of effect but being offensive minded pairing with the rest of the pacific powers is deadly. China can take back yunnan turn 1 and stack it heavily as well as having uk send troops and fighters to yunnan as well. Yes Japan can take it back but it only has 5 land troops within reach turn 2, this provides a risk for Japanese air going into the fight yet alone China and uk just being able to take it back the following turn. China making its objective for the Burma road and getting those ipcs is deadly and they can quickly pump out more and more forces to stack yunnan and or Szechwan with the uk. UK: the uk should just pull all forces out of Malaya and into Shan state turn 1. These troops now run adjacent to several territories. If you take Malaya uk can strike and take it back creating quite the headache and I’ll explain why when I talk about Anzac. The uk will clearly see the writing on the wall and can send that destroyer and cruiser as blockers in 38 and 41 to block the attack turn 2 or 3 or whenever necessary. This uk strategy paired with the us pressure will greatly affect this j1 strategy. The uk build basically one of everything turn one cause why not mech inf, inf, art, tank they can really buy one of everything and just be prepared for whatever may happen, they also want to defend yunnan because this will make sure China is a massive thorn in japans side. All the while this is happening Japan is being distracted by a us fleet threatening Japan. The USA fleet doesn’t even have to go to sea zone 6 necessary it could sit there and prevent Japan from truly devoting those forces to India. ANZAC: build a fighter turn one and put the other three on their airbase. Once uk takes back Malaya fly all 3 there. Turn one move the destroyer to 54 and it can clean up that japanease transport off Borneo turn 2 and you might think while that’s okay I’ll just go and sweep it up but that paired with everything else going on in the pacific truly runs Japan short on power and ability to do everything. And bring that transport up to take New Guinea, this takes yet another plane away from japans combat move on turn 2 and gives you that extra IPC to play around with and build a proper fleet with ANZAC. These are my thoughts largely based off a game I played with someone I would consider very experienced in this version of the game.
12/18/23 - to follow up on this - I have until recently, felt that the J1 could be sparred off by some combination of USSR troops in conjunction with a clever USA play in the Pacific, but not anymore. I have stacked several more games against two different challengers and both fell flat on putting a dent in this thing. And that included ramping up pressure from the USA and Russia much in the manner as you describe. Since the Japanese IC is so close to the contested area of Manchuria/Korea, and there are so many surface ships and transports that Japan has at its disposal - it was/is fairly trivial to dispose of those incursions. I am even more convinced that this can and should always be the stock opener for Japan and make no change to it as of this date. Still undefeated.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I think hoodrekt has some good points, it's pretty easy to defend Yunnan with UK Pac + China after J1. Allies can have 3 AA + 1 art + 3 tanks + 2 mech + 2 fighter + 1 tac + ~15 inf on Yunnan by the end of T2. Tanks and mechs come from from India (T1 purchase) + Volgorad, with more coming from Russia by T3. China will keep fortifying that position and Russian planes can move there anytime to bolster defenses even further, or help with can openers if you're not pushing hard for Russia in Europe. I usually retreat the Pac Russian inf, but would turn the corner into Kansu T4, which would require minimal effort from China to own with your lack of troops in the north. Allies can build a factory in Persia and start purchasing fighters, tacs and tanks which can be used in either theatre. I know that Yunnan is not the VC, but the giant force in Yunnan will be unbreakable and has the ability to break out at anytime with multiple can openers, so Japan can't hold India for a full turn until they deal with Yunnan. All the while, US and ANZAC can use subs to make the money islands very annoying for Japan. I tend to focus more on EU with USA when Japan goes J1, mostly buying subs and bombers in Pac, since Japan isn't a real threat to Australia or Hawaii for a long time unless they abandon China. I think if you hold off on the early air and naval base, you'd be able to afford 2 more factories which can be very effective in breaking the Yunnan stronghold by T6, but your current build will take a long time to amass enough ground forces to threaten Yunnan. Great video!
Not surprised that you ran the house in that tournament. Even in G40, a good grip on fundamentals will get you extremely far. You also correctly deduced that G40 is a broken mess where Axis basically cannot lose.
What do you think the bid should be? And where would you place it? (Asking because I know you a bit and am/was hoping to hear more about where/what units people place.)
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Now, to actually answer your question, I have my own ideas on how to properly fix G40's balance issues but that's going a bit far off the reservation so I'll stick with the OOB rules + the bid rules you used for this tournament for my recommendation/thoughts. British BB to SZ111 British BB to SZ37 USA BB to SZ26 Now keep in mind I have minimal experience with G40 so this might not even be enough, but the idea here is that putting 2HP Battleships in these key locations accomplishes the following: 1.) Forces Germany to either take actual air/naval losses G1 or concede naval supremacy to UK immediately. 2.) Forces Japan to either not do a J1 or take heavier losses + buy actual naval units to defend SZ6 (or spend a large share of their Kamikaze tokens immediately) in order to commit to the strategy. You can see where I'm going with this hopefully. G40's appeal is at least partially supposed to be the dynamic political situation at the start of the game, which allows the Axis to pick and choose when to escalate the war. However, the optimal play is always to just go for the throat immediately (or on G2 in the USSR's case). It almost makes one question what the point of even having a dynamic political situation is if it's just going to be thrown out on turn 1 in most games.
@@superilikeeggsyo Yeah, to be honest it doesn't make the slightest bit sense. Japan attacking the Western Allies is seen as one of the biggest mistakes of the war, considering the US wasn't even close to going to war with Japan (even if Roosevelt wanted it, popular support didn't). So the idea that winning the war means attacking the US even earlier boggles the mind.
Well done! Your purchases are the best I've seen for Japan. I also play Axis exclusively simply because trying to co-ordinate more than 3 Nations is a bit trying for me. ;) Anyway, My J1 is slightly different in that I take Wake, (with units from Japan) and park my Japan fleet there except for the sub and Destroyer which with all my Carrier planes attack the USA fleet at SZ 26 along with the planes and other destroyer from SZ 33. The Carrier in 33 also joins the Japanese fleet in SZ 31 near Wake Island. After the battle in SZ 26 I land my planes on the 3 Carriers near Wake Island. I make sure that at least one destroyer remains in SZ 26 to block any desperate USA response to my fleet. China attacks pretty much mirror yours, with slightly different air commitments, other bomber to Yunnan. The other Bmbr along with Cruiser are joined by the fighter on the Island of Formosa, (lands in Siam) to attack HMR Prince of Wales in SZ 37. I really want the Cruiser to survive this battle more than anything else. Lastly, I invade Hong Kong (Kwangtung) while also invading the Philippines. Of course I take F.I.C. as well. Yes, I am throwing a lot of stones here but the more I hurt the allies I feel it is for the best. My purchase is a Carrier and a fighter. I also land the Korean Fighter on the Carrier in the place Purchase phase by leaving it in the Japan Sea,( SZ 6) on the non-combat phase. My theory is that if I can establish early Naval dominance in the Pacific I may cause the Allies to concentrate on an early European Campaign and just surrender the Pacific cause all together. This has worked for me on many occasions, dice permitting of course. Europe must stack up defensive units and grit their teeth for invasions to throw back into the sea and along the Polish /Ukraine Corridor.
Hi, thank you for the very informative and precise video! I'll try this strategy soon. Question: did you create or purchase your fuel-gauge movement markers? Any tips on how I can acquire similar? Thanks!
To anyone wondering about the Axis moves in Europe, The Good Captain explained it in a comment on another video: "Yep. I know the comment well. I haven't forgotten and I appreciate your compliment here. I likely won't be making that video for some time but until that day, here is what I do in every game without fail: On G1, I buy three fighters as this keeps sea lion open as an option but will be extremely useful anyway going forward. I hit both UK fleets with air navy, hit France and do a single round of combat in Yugoslavia using the inf/art in Greater Southern Germany and one piece in Romania and retreat to Romania after a single round of combat. I land at least one fighter in Rome and ALWAYS scramble three fighters if the Brits perform Toronto against Italy. On Italy 1, I buy one fighter and remove as many allied boats in the Med as possible. I also like to hit Southern France and/or Greece if Greece is possible. I will also usually sacrifice one transport and take Cyprus with a single infantry and deny the British their National Objective. Then on G2, so long as the UK player pays some mild form of of the "Sealion Tax" on the first turn (i.e. spends at least half or 2/3 of its initial budget on home defense), I hit Russia. I also usually like to take Yugoslavia now as Germany (I really like to have one territory under German control bordering the Med SZ, especially the Adriatic. From then on, here are the purchase plans for both powers: Germany builds mostly all mechs and maybe an armor or infantry here or there. Most of that will go into Russia but I hold a small force in Paris to counterattack any western powers attempt to land in Normandy I also help Rome out only IF it needs units for defense to get through the next turn. Germany charges into Russia and moves adjacent to the Russian capital and NEVER attacks it. This is what I call the "rope a dope". We maintain a force large enough to threaten but will never attack. Instead, we continue to reinforce this army adjacent to the capital and move behind Moscow territory by territory until we are on the opposite side. All the while we are sending small forces south and east and eating Russia alive for its IPC while its army remains pinned in the capital. The Italians should get their IPC up to about 20, buy a carrier asap and only ever buy naval units and maybe some air and pump SZ 97 full of ships and planes enough to load the carrier and airbase. If the allies threaten with navy and look like they will overwhelm this growing fleet, have Germany put an airbase in yugoslavia and put three planes on it. If it still looks like the allies might win out, have Germany build and IC on Yugo and drop a carrier in there and put planes on it. The allies will concede at some point."
Out of curiosity, did anyone in your tournament games use Global 1940's research and technology rules? Additionally, do you have an opinion about those rules? Do you think they're useful at all? Thank you!
A bit difficult to answer in a UA-cam comment but, yes the 2nd place winner did this move to me and it was fairly easily sparred off by the Japanese. Here it is J2: Caroline Islands - 2 subs, 2 DD, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 BB, 3 FTR, 1 TAC. One destroyer in SZ 16 (blocker - prevents invasion of Japan). No ships at all in Japan SZ. The remaining Japanese carrier, battleship, destroyer, and all IJN transport continue along the script I outline in the video, i.e. take borneo and malaya. USA doesnt have enough assets to remove the Japanese fleet from the Carolines. If USA removes the blocker and surrounds Japan, even better. With the airbase and air units in FIC, you will have plenty of boats from the Carolines and planes from FIC to remove the USA fleet from Japan.
About American counterattacks: There's also the option to go at Iwo Jima. 2 infantry and a cruiser bombardment certainly seems like a good enough force to take it. But even if Japan doesn't use Kamikazes (which would shred the bombardment advantage and make the battle very close) which would shred several American units, the fleet is still vulnerable to a Japanese counterattack. I guess this was just an addition to the main video for those who thought of Iwo Jima.
Note: Rewatching this video again, when you said "Marshall Islands" it looks like you were pointing at the Caroline Islands. "There's not a whole lot of strength to [succesfully attack]" also makes more sense in the context of the US attacking the Carolines. Was that a mistake? Thank you!
Really nice J1 attack setup you got going on, not something I have seen before. One thing I opted to do as the Japanese in a J1 attack is to do Pearl Harbor J1 as well with the fighters on the carriers along with a transport to come in and take Wake Island. The strategic value that goes behind this is that you're essentially giving the Americans a choice of which side to commit on. If you've been watching General Hand Grenade's videos, you'll also be familiar with his American strategy, the Floating Bridge, which calls for the United States to ground and pound on the Germans and Italians in Europe. I ultimately found a counter to GHG's Middle Earth and Floating Bridge strategy by utilizing my Pearl Harbor attack to invade Honolulu and then Sydney and with 6 victory cities, win the game in the end on the Pacific side of the board. You're also goading the Americans into a trap so that should they choose to move their fleet from San Francisco to Honolulu, you can utilize the remaining cruiser, the 2 fighters and 2 tactical bombers on the carriers, AND you can use the 4 planes you kept on Japan to attack that fleet and destroy it, ridding the Americans completely of their sphere of influence in the Pacific. Just some thoughts though.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Haven't gotten the chance to use this on an actual player yet, but I did playtest the crap out of this tactic of mine on tabletop. The starting basis on how I went about this strategy was essentially with the premise that the UK would be doing Middle Earth, the U.S would be doing Floating Bridge, and the USSR would be doing their Russian Counter Attacking strategy. All 3 of these strategies are courtesy of GHG where he claims that these 3 strategies combined cannot be beaten by the Axis. Now, I've watched all 3 of GHG's videos extensively studying every single move he makes and what purpose it has. (Granted I didn't just copy and paste every move he did, but basically followed the exact format of what he did). And the way that I beat his critically claimed "unbeatable strategy" was by winning with Japan.
@@ryanjw15 I appreciate what you’re doing here. And there may be something to your strategy, indeed. However, I would caution against the GHG videos as gospel with regards to strategy and have serious questions as to their viability - namely in the cauldron of online play. Bottom line up front, I know many current online g40 players but I don’t know any that think the Allies can win without at least a 30 IPC bid. But I have been exactly where you’ve been. If you believe you have something don’t let me or anyone else take a dump on it. When/if you’re ready, I think you should take it online. Throw out a challenge on the .org website. If it survives repeated playings online it will survive over the board.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Indeed. In all honesty, there's no true telling whether this strategy would hold it's ground in a real scenario against another player. The whole reason I kinda developed this strategy is because of the fact that General Hand Grenade could not see a viable strategy for the Axis to deploy to beat his respective strategies, nothing more. I can't even base this strategy on the responsiveness of the other Allied player since I playtested this by myself, only allowing me to make the most logical moves as the Allies in each scenario that I knew what would have been best to play. In the end, this strategy of mine isn't really universal, as I think you're catching on to. It's simply a countermeasure to a strategy that was previously seen as unbeatable. I would love at the oppurtunity to get to use this against GHG but unfortunately he's set Global 40 in his rear view mirror.
32:50 you talk about Anzac or the Brits taking one of the money islands or Dutch New Guinea. Would you spend your force to take those back immediately?
Short answer no. J2 is Borneo and Malaya. J3 is Money Islands. However, I have certainly run a fighter into the SZ to pick up the transport, absolutely do that if it can be done safely, sure.
Great video. Gives me some new ideas. Rarely ever try a J1 but I will be trying this next game. Only thing I would say though is that mechs only move two spaces when paired with armour.
Just to remind anyone who reads this, I played nine games in a tournament of G40 using the J1 and though I won every game, I don't consider myself anything close to an expert on this version. I feel I am 'expert' with Anniversary, Classic and 1914 at the time of this writing, but not G40. But since I don't feel that there are any true experts of this game on UA-cam at this moment, I will say... Given the high cost of air units and that my playing experience shows the axis is as highly favored on the Europe side almost as it is on the Pacific side (my opinion), I evaluated dark skies as an unnecessarily risk. I would entertain it if the J1 or a more conventional G strat were dismantled. That is really as deep as I've gone with it. It's sorta like, "why use a crossbow when a baseball bat will do?" type of situation. One takes some skill and fine tuning, the other is a blunt object that seems to do the job all the same.
@@solardjinn yep - Taimya primer. I have a video called “AnA Clinic - Episode 5: Improving out-of-box Pieces” that details most of this as a process using the pieces from D-Day.
Clarification: One thing that I felt wasn't clear in the video would be post-J2 movements. Specifically, if there are more than enough ground units to capture the Dutch East Indies in French-Indochina (as in after the transports took all the ground units necessary to capture the Dutch East Indies), the British withdrew their army to India and have no land units in range of Shan State, and there aren't any other islands to attack, do those ground units move west into Shan State, to continue their advance toward India? Thank you!
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Thanks for responding! I'm glad I moved correctly then (I was playing a game and was testing this strategy). The US player is going KJF, but luckily the Soviets moved out of the far east.
About an American elimination of the blocker during US Turn 2: The US only has to send two blockers into sea zones 22 and 23 and can block the IJN from reaching sea zone 16. What should the US do then?
Do you mean, “What should Japan do then?” I don’t really understand what you’re asking here. If you meant Japan, they can remove the blockers in SZ 22/23 and then are free to move during NCM.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Oh, oh! Yes, I was referring to Japan. So Japan can still move the fleet to sea zone 6 and block an American advance in that case. And if the US moved to sea zone 6 the aircraft in French Indo-China can smash it. So Japan's still safe then. Thanks for the answer!
The game is clearly in favour of the axis powers. I believe a bid of 26-34 is very reasonable for the allies. In your rules for bidding were you allowed to place a minor factory as a part of your placement? For example if I wanted to use 12 of my allies bid ipcs on a minor factory in Egypt would that be allowed by typical tournament rules?
@@hoodrekt5887 sounds right - at least for online play. Anyway, I would defer to the players in "The League" on axisandallies.org They play constantly and their best guy claims it should be +60 for the Allies.
Interesting. Every game of this I've played, the soviet player left at least 12 soldiers on the northern border. Also, I feel really confident that Calcutta needs to fall by J3 at the latest. From my experiences, any turn after that where you're getting hit from 3 sides means you get folded pretty soon
EVERY game you've played they left 12 up there? That seems odd. If it were me, I would ask myself, "how many games did I play and how many different players was that against." In this tournament, against all these opponents that move was the exception, not the rule. It did happen in one game though and was fairly trivial to spar off given the proximity of the biggest Japanese industry and many transports/aircraft. The other implication is that Moscow will be extremely light on units needed for defense. The situation on that side of the board is almost as bad as this side (imo). Regarding India: I heard a lot about the urgency of capturing it but my experience was contrary to this. In each game it was pretty easy to get the India economy down to two IPC per turn using the convoy centers. At that point, its an inert player and picked up at Japan's leisure.
I've played a million games and we've never seen calcutta fall J3 lmao that's borderline impossible if you're facing a british opponent with even half a brain
Hello! I used this strat, but ran into a rather irritating problem. Me and my friends (total 5 players), played 2 games over a weekend, and in one i played japan and opened with this J1. My german ally saw an oppurtunity to sealion, and although good odds, lost the G3 sealion, although he got it on G4. But thats not the main problem. The problem was that the soviets because of sea lion used 12 infantry i eastern russia to attack manchuria and Korea, and im uncertain what the best response to that would be, considering that i have to put preassure on India to win since Germany lost quite some units in the first failed sealion attack🤔
@@hiimrezgaming9885 I've had numerous challengers since posting the video so I've fought against the 18 Russian stack several times now. If they stack up on the first turn, here is the move adjustment I make: I leave zero troops in Korea on J1. Manchuria needs to be defended though so on J1 I use 8 inf, one mech and one AA gun in Manch with two fighters (remove one fighter from the assault against Kwangtung). The Russians will take a win at 36% with these defenses. If you don't like that, add one more infantry to make it 22% soviet win. We don't care about Korea. The Russians will not gain IPC from its capture due to the convoy zone and they will lose the Mongolia rule forever. Leave it open. Additionally, Korea is the easiest of the two zones to counterattack due to it being adjacent to the Tokyo SZ. Even if he moves all 18 infantry in there on R2, all this means is that the Japanese cant take Korea back yet and will have to wait another turn.
Excellent video as always Captain! Always enjoy your thorough analysis of strategies. Had a question for you: Why not take Borneo turn 1 in addition to Kwangtung? It does make the battles in China a tad bit dicey, but you can cripple the UK Pacific economy right off the bat. Thoughts?
Much appreciated. Great question. I feel that it’s extremely costly for the Japanese in two interrelated ways. 1) it exposes a transport to probable/potential destruction by the UK fleet off of India. 2) as you point out, it removes and (potentially) strands units that were desperately needed in China. I want assurances on J2 as Japan and, for me, that’s too risky when we’re already sitting on a winning hand. You’d have to send escorts as Japan if you wanted to have a chance for the transport to survive. As UK player, I’d happily swap a DD for a transport otherwise. Not a hard “no” from me - it’s just that in my experience it’s incredibly lethal enough without Borneo on J1.
Clarification: Playing out the game on TripleA, it seems like that without Shan State and doing everything as you said, Japan only ends turn 2 with 46 IPCs, not 47.
Just want to say, I’ve watched this video a million times and I really do love it! And playing Japan is one of my favorite things to do in this game. However, in my play-through I’m doing against myself, I think I’ve found a way to counter this strategy… 1. A must, but the US just has to dump all of its IPCs into the pacific, which does leave Germany to its own devices, however that’s somewhat of a different topic. But by turn 3/4 I have far surpassed the Japanese navy. 2. Keep at least 12 Russians on the Japanese border and even have them invade Korea or Manchuria… with a stack of 18 and 2 AA maybe even worse. But with this distraction, Japan wasn’t able to focus all on French indochina production and has to divert infantry to retake lost territory. 3. As the Chinese and British player, stack up in Yunnan with infantry and fighters and it becomes pretty much untakeable. I’ve found these to significantly slow the Japanese push, however it does leave Germany wide open. Any thoughts?
Every time I answer this type of question, UA-cam deletes my comment. You can email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com and I will email you the response if you want to hear my thoughts.
Right. Good question. The only real reason for doing this is so that your "eggs aren't all in one basket". Since a Naval Facility affects sea zones only, this will ensure naval units retain the ability to move three spaces even if French Indo-China gets captured for some reason.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Okay thanks for telling me and this makes a lot of sense because it would be only viable one to not put on French Indo China also amazing video because before I was wondering exactly how to do the J1 attack before I watched this video
Hmm, I'm a bit confused just about one thing: We might not be the best players but annoying the Japanese with an Amur stack of 12-18 inf+AA, including a capture of Manchuria or Korea happen in every other game we played. How would you adjust to that?
youtube keep taking down my response to this comment. you can email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com if you'd like to know my answer. I believe I've answered this through other comments on this video as well though.
Currently attempting this in my own game against my father. He is a tricky trickster though and sends British units into Yunan and then death stacking a bunch of troops into Burma and into Siam. I tried to fix that by having a factory in the territory West of Hong Kong, and if he takes it it’ll go to China and not the UK. He also loves to keep all the Soviet units in Amur, usually to keep me in check and possibly invade if I loosen my defenses in Manchuria. Yeah…., a tricky situation indeed
I believe your father is on to something by keeping the Russians up there. If there is a way to defeat the J1, it has something to do with the Russians (this is why you may have noticed asterisks in the top corner of my video at a couple points - these are a note to myself if/when I am the Russians). There are drawbacks to this strategy that materialize on the other side of the board though... As regards your factory in Kwangsi (the territory west of Hong Kong) being captured and going to the Chinese. This is unfortunately not possible as per the rules on page 10, "If a Japanese industrial complex is built on a Chinese territory and that territory is later recaptured by the Chinese or liberated by another Allied power, the industrial complex is removed from the game." As far as the death stacks go - when that was done to me, I launched attacks with a thin screen of ground forces out of necessity and hurled the balance of the Japanese air force at them. Losing a few planes doing this pays out dividends in the next few turns as the Allies will have little if any meaningful combat power in this vital area of the board. Good luck my dude!
Japanese transports may or may not need escorts. It will depend on the board state and what the Allied player(s) have done. I've even sacrificed a transport as Japan by sending it in unescorted just to secure the objective.
I recently played a Pacific 1940 only game using this strategy. It did not go so well for the Japanese. While they certainly made mistakes, the Allies did too. Does this strategy work as well for just Pacific 1940 when the US isn't distracted by Europe? Thank you!
Thanks for reposting this question. UA-cam deletes comments seemingly at random and I can't do anything about it. Frustrating. I have never played Pacific 1940 2nd Edition by itself. I have heard it is so badly in favor of the Japanese that its nearly unplayable. But I've never had the time or opportunity to see for myself. I'm afraid I can't offer much advice on Pacific 1940 without Europe 1940 (global). My instinct is that since USA is 100% in on Pacific - it would be tougher to pull off and perhaps a J2 makes more sense. Not sure though.
Erm I have now left 2 different comments yesterday on this video both of which seem to have just disappeared after I posted them? Any ideas on to why that’s happening?
…because UA-cam sucks sometimes and automatically deletes comments. It is so damn annoying. I have no idea why this happens. Usually I get to see the comment but this is the first I’m hearing of it regarding yours. It really pisses me off. Trust me, I didn’t do it. I’ve think I’ve deleted exactly one non-spam comment in the last three years.
My best advice is to repost? Maybe the comment was too long? You can always email me at ryanvoz at yahoo.com although then of course it wouldn’t be public. Maybe the algorithm forbids so many new posts on the same video by the same person?
When I discuss this area of the globe, UA-cam deletes my comments. It’s incredible. But if you email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com I can forward you the answer.
@@Halaways I’m always playing. If I ever don’t believe in something on this channel, I take it down or edit the video. There is an answer to your question. It is mildly upsetting for Japan but fairly easily managed.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 basically there is no more Anzac. I believe it’s combined to just us pacific. And UK goes before Japan so they have their battleship moved away before you can attack it. I think j1 may not work as well if UK can just defend first thing. Perhaps it will be situational
EDIT: After an email discussion with @thegoodcaptain1217 and playing this out some more, I believe I was wrong. I underestimated the impact of the American and British units you kill doing this. In addition to the momentum you gain in terms of capturing the money islands asap. The British are crippled a lot more quickly. The money islands makes it very difficult for the US to match your naval presence, since they start at a significant deficit. For me the issue with J1 is I felt you don’t gain enough to justify it. In terms of IPCs you don't compensate the loss of the trade NO, you give USA a ton of extra IPC (all of which I would be putting into the US Pacific fleet) and it can be annoying for the Germans. Granted the main things you gain are destroying some american units, which would otherwise probably reinforce Honolulu + the British BB. Those are less tangible benefits, but not to be ignored for sure. You also steal 3 IPC from UK but i dont think that makes much of a difference. Either way you can cripple UK on J2 by taking Borneo, Hong Kong, Malaya and a bit of strat bombing in Calcutta. Personally, I feel like if you go J1, you should go for Honolulu. But i dont like those odds much.
@@ForeverDoubting ah, okay - I understand now (wasn't trying to point out a lack of experience - in fact, I've only played the number of games of online G40 mentioned in this video at the time of this writing). My experience with this type of engagement via text communication and especially on a public forum has been entirely negative. My general recommendation is to offer to play a game via TripleA as the board is always going to be the best form of communication and provides near perfectly clarity. However, I'll go out on a limb...if you email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com, I will do my best to respond to your initial statement point by point.
Haven't played in a while, but arent you only allowed to place minor industrial complexes in territories that you owned at the beginning of the game? (Meaning French Indo-China move not allowed?) Not near my game so cant reference the rulebook
I've played this game multiple times but never enough in short term consistency to imagine this ....well done! However, it looks like ur moving ground units into combat zones in non-com which isn't possible which doesnt really affect this strat at all. Will definitely have to try this next time. I really like the synergy of the naval and air bases.
Units can move into territories that were recently taken over (except aircraft) during the NCM phase - in fact this is a key to playing better and not over committing on the CM phase.
@@guitarninjarick8179 this has been the rule in every single version since the original. Name the version and I will cite page number and reference. For Europe 1940 its on page 22, Pacific 1940 page 21 but it reads the same, "A land unit can move into any friendly or friendly neutral territory, including territories that were captured in the current turn." If its any consolation, you're not the only one who has made this error...
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Dam! Been playing this game for a long time and didnt know that. Don't even know whats real anymore, u've shattered my reality, haha! Then again I vaguley remember something along those lines maybe the people I played with and I never took advantage of it
Did you play against any UK players using a middle earth strategy? I think the UK is the biggest factor in opposing this strategy. The UK/Anzac should also have blockers ready to prevent your transports from attacking India turn 3. This is critical as it gives the US time to build and get fleet into play to threaten your fleet at the Caroline Islands and make you bring a lot of your Japanese fleet back to the Pacific and not just keep plowing ahead into the Middle East. This gives the UK the breathing room they need to setup the middle earth strategy. The UK can even step back off India to preserve those units before you attack turn 4, and then counterattack India turn 4 after you take it because you have limited ground troops. Usually GB can get 7 to 9 fighters to Iraq by turn 3 that can be used in a counter attack on you in India or used to support Moscow. The US builds turn 1 on the West coast, moves that fleet to Hawaii turn 2, and then moves to Australia turn 3. With the Anzac fleet there as well they should have enough fleet to threaten you if you don’t mass most of your starting fleet together. The US can build some bombers turn 2 to help get them enough punch to threaten your fleet turn 4 as well, but turn 2 on the US just builds in the Atlantic. Anzac can send two more infantry and fighters to Malaya as well turn 2. Its all about delaying things long enough for the US to get a fleet down to Australia in range of Malaya that Japan cannot ignore. Japans build turn 3 cannot reach Malaya turn 4 so that build will not change the threat. The key is to delay long enough that Japan gets stopped at India, and the UK middle Earth strategy is protected from Japan by the US/Anzac fleet so that the UK can send 9-11 aircraft to Russia turn 4 or 5 assuming Germany goes all out push on Moscow. This makes the game into a game of chance in whether Germany has enough to take out Russia assuming all 18 inf by Japan march back to Moscow and the UK flys 9-11 fighters to Moscow. If Germany is delayed in taking Moscow the allies are definitely in a position to threaten Germany turn 5 or 6, so even if Moscow falls the game is far from over especially if the Uk flies its. 9-11 fighters out of Moscow before it falls if Germany eventually gets enough units outside Moscow to make it inevitable.
Also a J1 takes away a lot of the threat of a sea lion since the US can start moving that way immediately, so the UK can afford to spend some of its turn 1 money in South Africa on a transport and inf. It can also do the Taranto attack on the Italian fleet as well since its low risk of a sea lion. The UK has to press the limits of what it can get away with knowing Germany does’t want to do a sea lion attack and the US is much more able to help prevent one. Also Anzac can actually setup blockers turn 2 such that you cannot take all the money islands turn 3 assuming there are 3 blcokers total between the UK and Anzac forces to close up India as well
I saw an attempted middle earth but it fizzled. I don’t think I ever took Moscow as Germany. It’s enough to move adjacent and then just send forces down south to wreck the Middle East and secure all the National Objectives. I think all but one opponent conceded over this “economic” victory. Once the Axis is making well over what the Allies are, the wind comes out of the sails pretty quickly. Yes, a J1 generally means there is no Sealion - itself too prone to whims of the dice compared to this J1 mess.
I felt/feel that if there was anyway to deflate this strategy, it was the Russians that might be able to do it. I don’t say anything in the video but I put an asterisk as an overlay when I mention the Russians. You can see it pop up in the video. That’s a note to my future self if I ever flip sides.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 If you do a Middle Earth and Russia knows it is getting help it should also be spending its money on more offensive units (fighters mostly and maybe some artillery later). This helps potentially delay the German push to begin with since they have to be more worried about counterattacks. Then Russia can always trade off its army with Germany, and even if it loses it makes it manageable for Britain to handle and or continue to defend Moscow at least with the 9-11 fighters it has there. Delaying Germany even one turn allows for more of the far east troops to get back to Moscow as well. It is important as well that America doesn't just let Japan have a field day in the Indian Ocean. They have to build fleet turn 1 and chase them to India so the UK middle earth strategy doesn't get waxed.
Is there any effective ways in your opinion to counteract the J1 as the Allies or with it employed is a Pacific victory almost guaranteed for the Axis.
I'll be as specific as I can here. With Global 1940, second edition rules and out of box setup, it appears decisive in favor of the axis. With that said, I never took the Allied side and so I must take the position that I keep an open mind on this. Against the players in the tournament, I saw no effective resistance despite numerous different strategies (not all allied responses I saw are listed in this video). Also, the bid restriction of one unit per sea zone/territory where one of your units already exists is more restrictive than most play groups. With that all out of the way, and because you asked, here is where I will/would start as the allies: there may be something to leaving at least SOME of the Russians adjacent to Korea. Next - Probably the most effective placement of a bid should be in China - can bid money be spent on Chinese artillery? (ask the play group or organizer) if so, I would dump most or all of the bid money into chinese infantry and artillery and launch counterattacks against japanese lodgements on China 1. The only moderately "soft spot" I felt as Japan was a mildly light amount of ground forces in China/SE Asia. Perhaps the allies can cause some "pain" or gum up the advance a bit in this way. But I don't know.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I haven't played a tournament, can you explain the bid restrictions? I would like to get involved in a tournament online. Any recommendations?
@@SurferJoe74 the bid restrictions depend on the tournament and its organizer. There is a league for G40 on axisandallies.org That is the only reliable place I know where there is a consistent tournament.
Currently using this strategy in global 1940 second edition. I’m done with turn 2 as Japan and so is USA. I’m setup how you have it at end of turn 2. USA has spent his 2 turns worth of IPC into his navy against Japan. He put his navy into the sea zone with midway and built a navy base, so I won’t be able to use any blockers to stop him from reaching sea zone 6. I plan on moving my navy to sea zone 6 along with most of my planes to be able to sink his fleet. I also plan on building ships on Indo China to be able to protect the transports at the money islands. Hopefully he pulls some of the income to go for Germany. I don’t know why he hasn’t since I’ve already taken London on turn 2. I feel like the best way to win is to win on the Europe side since I’m not having to face USA IPC production. Let me know what I should do to counter all his spending to go for Japan.
You took London on turn G2? Good lord, no offense to your opponent but that seems borderline negligent or shows a substantial lack of experience (but I could always be missing something). Given that, I have to first say that my advice will be from a position of not having this experience. With that out of the way - what you say sounds right/right-ish. If USA is doing that with Midway and his income, bulking up SZ6 is probably the right counter play. My advice is don't to get hung up on "killing his fleet". You are killing him by taking away his IPC down south. If it were me, I would not fight a battle I might lose. So I wouldn't move against him unless I had close t0 95% chance of success (is this game face to face? are you using battle calcs?). Also, in general, the FIC factory is for ground units. Naval units can be supplied by SZ6. Place naval units in SZ6 and just send south what you need from SZ6to the FIC sea zone. Don't forget you have the Kamikazes so if he attacks and you have a big battle in SZ6 or wherever you can use them, just use them all. Don't send more than one Kamikaze against an American ship. Put one on each American carrier if his planes are not in range of russia (so they cannot land) and then one on each cruiser/destroyer. Do not target the battleships. Take away raw attack points before the battle starts. Don't forget that the USA can hit the Caroline Islands as well. The good news for you about this is that whatever he sends down there can be hit by your navy units in the FIC sea zone (and hopefully some or most of Japanese air power). If he does move down there, you may have to engage in a big naval battle. Really don't want the USA spamming out of that sea zone. After another turn or two you should have the income to match spending with the USA in the Pacific but an equal priority is rolling through china and the middle east as Japan.
I know this has been brought up multiple times, but I just wanted to clarify since I'm sort of newer at Axis and Allies and want to make sure. But let's say Russia decides to stack everything in Amur and then come in to attack me after J2, and they end up taking both manchuria and korea....how would I react to this?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 please do! I am preparing for an upcoming game which is the tourney version, but I expect they will have Russia do the same thing. I can email you or add on discord!
Heya Slip. I don't know Karl's strategy. My inspiration for this was General Hand Grenades video that I cite in the first minute of this video. He in turn is citing a fellow named "Cow" who wrote something up on the forums about this strategy back in 2013. I never looked it up but sketched my own J1 and perfected it over the course of nine games.
@@slipcapone1466 ah, no it was not Cow's strategy. I have never seen the thread but I have it on good authority that his opener is different... and in my strong opinion, less efficient ;)
I’m always confused by excitement over Axls strategies for g40. Is there a question that a j1, j2 or j3 attack would almost every time succeed. This puzzle has been completed. The mystery solved. The sphinx s riddled is how to do the opposite. I think every tournament ought to require each side to switch sides. The bid doesn’t make the playing field level. I have a video called the Bering strait ball buster that reduces the orange bloom I think and I m willing to roll some dice.
Hey Camden - hard to answer via text. My recommendation would be based on several factors. Are you trying to get others to play with you? If you are, how experienced are they? Are you playing solitaire? How much time are you willing to commit? There are many questions like this I could ask but without knowing anything except that you have Classic, I would say Anniversary is the next rung up the ladder. Global is great for a more historical flavor and if you have the time to commit to it.
I'm not sure what you asking. With Europe and Pacific combined (global), the general consensus of the online community is that the Allies need a bid north of 50.
What stops Russia from doing this is the following: 1) Loss of the Mongolia Rule and its protections for the rest of the game 2) The fact that there is a good chance that no IPCs will be collected from that territory given the presence of the IJN and the convoy zone adjacent 3) the presence of IJN transports/fleets/armies to easily remove the interloper on Japan's turn immediately following Russia's. Bottom line up front, there's a solid chance the Russians lose an infantry, gain no IPC and wreck the protections of the Mongolia Rule. I have a harder time seeing what is gained out of this move.
All I could think of to counter this would be to have Russia throw the 18 infantry at Manchuria or Korea, have Anzac get aggressive with fighter buys and a defense of one of the Dutch East Indies islands and maybe a swipe at some Japanese naval units. Meanwhile USA goes full tilt towards Japan and buys straight battleships for a couple turns and goes 100% at Japan. India can go all tanks and retake Yunan with China. Maybe this 5vs1 scenario in the pacific could contain japan for long enough to swing the tide.
Playing a game against a fellow who is essentially executing the plan you mention above. I surmise it will have short term gains but not change the math any. Getting to eight victory cities Europe side appears a sure thing if so much attention is on Japan and so little on Germany/Italy. But we'll see...I'll post an update here (or maybe make a response video to this one in the future).
@@konstantinzavgorodniy3098 the game went three complete rounds of play. I haven’t heard from that opponent in about a month. It’s a bit early in the game to draw a conclusion but… things are going well enough as the Japanese. They’re about a turn behind where they should be and the Europe side is nearly completely neglected. Though I feel this will be an axis win, it will probably be on the Europe side, not the Pacific side. That being said, I feel confident enough to say that those Russians that start the game in the east probably should stay in the east. It is a thorn that needs to be in the side of the Japanese. I’m not sure how to keep Moscow safe without them though… but that’s a separate problem to solve.
There are four infantry in Yunnan in the video. The video is correct. The stats are correct. You think you see two pieces only bc of the angle. Correct, the second round does not include placement of Chinese forces - it doesnt change the strat.
Good question. In my experience, it’s just good habit not to commit units in the combat movement phase that aren’t needed. Battles can go sideways in other areas of the board that can alter the NCM. In the case of the first turn, this is unlikely but - still a good habit (imo).
I appreciate that. Right now my game-time focus is mostly being spent on 1914 as that is the series that will begin dropping in the next 3-4 months. What's your playing experience? Do you play much on TripleA?
US1 the US moves their entire navy to SZ7, the best J2 move would be? A) Move your entire navy back to SZ6 for the eventual J3 attack on the now retreating US navy, destroying their navy but putting you way out of position B) Just retreat some fighters to defend SZ6/Japan along with the navy already stationed in SZ6, while the Philippines navy continues on to Malaya/DEI J2/J3
I saw a little of this, ya. Just seemed to take the US navy out of position more than anything else. SZ7 is a mobility kill for defending Hawaii as US boats are now too far to get back. In contrast, SZ6 for the Japanese can both defend Japan AND threaten Hawaii …and the Carolines …and the Philippines …and FIC…. Such a ridiculously strong opening for Japan, smh…
Sired blood on UA-cam has a strategy video on USA and Russia. It’s a very effective strategy that focuses on Japan. He can capture Japan in 6 turns and on a J1 that happens even sooner. I have played a couple games with this strategy and it seems like the USA focusing Japan and going for Tokyo works almost every time especially on a J1 attack by Japan. I encourage you to watch the video however in short Russia takes Korea and builds a naval base and USA has a naval base in Alaska and basically usa is just taking sea zone 6 healing their ships because of Korea and taking Japan in 4-6 turns.
Thanks for the recommend. Just watched it. I have some comments on this. This strategy assumes Russia, including its capital, is doomed by turn six which is mostly contrary to what I saw in online play. This move however, very much increases the likelihood of dooming Russia - this is not a criticism of the strategy yet. Next, counterplay by the Japanese player is really glossed over I feel. He asserts that a J1 would only make the outcome "happen faster" but doesn't expand. My instinct based on the lack of resume and discussion of tactics is that he played this once or twice in face to face games and then cut the video. Japan can't stack in Manchuria and drop a blocker in Korea? There's no realistic way to outright defeat those 18 infantry and eliminate the threat? Goodness, if that happened then the USA/Russian ports totaling 30 IPC become dead income. This is IPC the allies can really not afford to lose. The Mongolia rule is no longer in effect for the Russians. The most damning part to me though is that with no American involvement on the Europe side, I feel like that's GG. I do feel strongly that this would end with an Axis win due to their ability to capture the cities they need including Cairo/Moscow (I can/should/will eventually get around to cutting a video for that side of the board). I have so many other questions/comment but will just end it here on a note that is more supportive of this strategy. In my video, there is an asterisk that appears in the top corner of the screen. I put this in as a note to my future self. I feel strongly that if there is a way to mess with or stop the J1, it has something to do with Russia. And in that spirit, I am supportive/like this video. Despite my misgivings, its at least novel and a bit outside of the box. So despite my criticisms, again thanks for this recommend, this was very interesting.
Sired blood is a very experienced player of 1940 and other axis and allies games. I played 3 different games with 3 different opponents face to face including people from different areas of North America(I find people play the game a little bit different everywhere). I recreated this USA-Russia strategy with my brother and yes America took Japan on turn 6 as siredblood said in the video however that was on a J4 attack. I tried this strategy against my opponent after they performed a J1 and I captured Tokyo even sooner I believe turn 5. Most people dare I say all do not see this usa-russia strategy coming which i believe is part of the reason why it was so lethal. Once Tokyo falls there is really no way the axis are recapturing it. From that point on it becomes a race for the allies to defend their remaining cities on the Europe side to hold from losing and the us can either capture all japans old cities and try and win off of that or they can try and corner Germany and force them into a forfeit as they just cannot break through and capture the final needed cities to win. Eventually yes after a few turns the USA can capture all japans old cities and win however they have to do that before Germany is able to acquire victory on the Europe side of the map. In my personal play I have found that the USA economy is simply too much for Japan to handle even with their starting power. I believe this strategy can be delayed by Japan, but I think that the USA can take Japan no matter what. However wether that is on turn 5 or turn 7 depends on the Japan player. You can not take India while being fully focused by USA and this leaves pacific UK and ANZAC to take the money islands from you as you have to defend Tokyo. If you are a savvy player you can possibly try and defend the islands a little longer without losing a ton of defence strength you need against the USA. However japans economy just crumbles and it feels as though there’s nothing the japan player can do. We could talk about this forever but I’ll leave you with this for now. I will be playing against an experienced 1940 player(30+ games) later this month and I’ll try the J1 and I will try this USA-Russia strategy and Weil see how it goes. Thanks for the response!
@@hoodrekt5887 what’s your bid for the Allies (if any)? I do believe there is only a slight adjustment needed for Japan to effect the J1 more or less normally and get by. I just gamed the first two turns a couple times to see how that would handle. Of course, this is theoretical. Much depends on bid and bid placement. I will leave an open invitation to you or anyone who would like to game this on TripleA. It looks worth looking into.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 sorry for the late response (been busy). I usually play no bid and if there is it usually is less than 10 and goes on the Europe side of the board. I would love to game this out however I don’t know if I can find the time as of now to be honest. I will keep the invitation in mind! Thank you!
In 2011 my best friend and I had the J1 attack perfected and ran over a player who was doing an all sub US strategy, plus who was doing an illegal Sino-Soviet pac move at GenCon. At that time though, the J1 attack didn't matter because Germany had a nearly unstoppable attack on Britain, with something like a 90% success rate. Britain was undefendable, so it mattered not what the Japanese were doing. Funny seeing this video 11 years later...
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I think it was first edition, we were part of the original online community posting feedback on the first edition that ultimately led to the second edition.
No, the USA navy does not have a good position to sink the IJN around the Carolines. There is something like a 1.5% chance of that battle resulting in a victory for them. If that isn't reason enough to stand down, remember that any damaged battleships and carriers would be able to repair at the top of the next Japan turn due to the port facility. Any aircraft that landed on the islands as a result of the damaged carriers can simply hop back on at that time. An attack by the USA player would be catastrophic even in the IPC exchange (value of pieces lost on either side).
Thank tou for the answer.In J2 you move your transports from Japan to FIC without any navy to protect them.If there is Anzac boats nearby or a bomber in Sydney the transports can be crushed without assistance unless you are solely depending on the scrable.How would you counter the US Navy constantly bringing capital ships to sea zone 26 or sea zone 7 and bombers to Midway threatening your Capital or even landing to Mancuria and the Russian stack protecting a possible IC there? I find the Japanese will have a hard time Contesting so many ipcs in navy and Planes to protect their navy and their capital.
@@stefgo2814sorry about the delay - just seeing this. The Japanese player can easily spar off any USA buildup using their massive at start forces and match the USA purchases. The defensive triangle is almost impossible to pierce. The Allies need a bid of approximately +50 to have a chance.
There are a couple points during this video where an asterisk appears. This is a note to my future self to play test with just such a strategy. If there is any hope of defusing the J1, it would be the Russians that did it.
If players are good then you are forced to bid like 40-50 extra IPCs of units for the allies to balance the game, a lot of it comes from the J1 attack. I think your opponents massively underestimated you and underbid. However I think you missed a key value in the J1 attack, you can actually also take Borneo on J1 with the transport on SZ 20. That's 4 extra IPCs for you and 4 less for the UKPAC why didn't you do this? The way to do it is to not do the attack on Hunan and just use the forces in Kiangsi to attack Kwangtung (taking 1 inf from Kiangsi to attack borneo) This would free up the TT on J2 to attack one of the islands in indonesia for even more money. The opening that is typically done to stop this in global is to stack yunnan with a bid of 3 RU fighters 1 Chinese artillery and push Yunnan (with 1 UK sub and a fighter in scotland to round out the bid) Or they open up full Kill japan first. With the following US1 purchase 2 Aircraft carriers + 2 fighters and go full KJF, bring the cruiser from Seazone 101 to SZ 11 and push into hawaii with your navy. This is the only strategy other than yunnan stacking that I have had any success against J1 with. The reason this works is the USA is trying to actually push on Japanese early enough to stop the flow of income from indonesia. If the japanese control indonesia the game is lost IMO. On US2 the USA should have 3 Aircraft carriers 7 fighters+1 tactical bomber 3 Cruisers 1 battleship 2 destroyers and 1 submarine in Hawaii ready to push. The Japanese are much stronger than the pacific allies but the war in Europe requires the axis to take either Cairo or London to win. so if you bolster Cairo a lot and defeat the Japanese fast enough with the USA the allies can actually win. AFAICT there is almost no way to win if you do not put 100% of the USA's focus into the pacific.
Taking Borneo J1 exposes a Japanese transport to the UK navy. The risk or assets needed to babysit it are a turn off for me based on how easy it is to pick up on J2. Most of the rest of what you say here leaves me scratching my head. I've not heard of a Russian bid allowed in China. That sounds like some extremely loose bid placement restrictions to say the least. The bit about London/Cairo on the Europe side is also unrelatable to me. Europe side was almost worse than the Japanese side in my experience. Simply moving the German army adjacent to Moscow and then sending some forces south to wreck the middle east and pick up all the National Objectives wrenched a concession from each opponent. I think I actually captured Moscow once in the tournament. Victory cities are, in my opinion, a total distraction. It's enough to simply make 30ish more IPC than the other side to have an "economic" victory and expect a concession.
I know you're focusing on 1914 but I'd be willing to play on triple A to show you these ideas, just know that you are a much better player than me so after like J3 you'd crush me through fundementals (forgot to say this but great video) (appearently youtube ate my inital comment so here it is) On J2 you can take all of indonesia and secure your NO if you take borneo J1. League plaeyrs often do that. The Bid for the RU Yunnan stack is Fighter Moscow, Fighter Volgograd fighter Caucusus Artillery Yunnan Killing Japan first obviously doesn''t work if Japan manages to hold indonesia. If that happens then the axis cruise to an easy victory. but IF you manage to beat the Japanese as the USA in the pacific, then you have a fight for Cairo. A few league games show this (and many more show Japan just crushing :D) If you want to play the game I'll start a PBF game on playboardgames in axisandallies.org and we can play there.
@@ussgordoncaptain I very much appreciate this comment. I have much respect for your (or anyone's) willingness to run a game to communicate strategy. I think its the purest form of communication in this game. To be clear, if/when we play this game I would not be playing as someone defending their ego - I would be playing in the spirit of someone who is interested in seeing this (your) strategy in its best possible interpretation. Even if you "lose" as you say - it won't matter for the point I can see you're trying to demonstrate. I'd be happy to play but you hit me at a very demanding time. I'm currently playing 5 games of 1914 at the moment and thats about all I can do at one time. Can we play in/around December-ish? I would like to play the game as you describe. In the meantime, can you link to the bid rules we would be using?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 The same bid rules as mentioned in this video! The bid would be Art Yunnan Art Szchwan Fighter Russia Fighter Caucusus's Sub SZ98 Fighter Scotland Sub SZ 91 and of course I'll wait, as I said I knew you were busy with 1914
@@ussgordoncaptain okay. that is a VERY healthy bid for the allies. This is too funny though - I posted this video on the AnA FB page and in the comments section I said, "I believe the allies need a bid that approaches 50 IPC to have a chance." I got a barrage of incredibly unintelligent and critical comments about that being "way too much" in favor of the allies.
Absolutely insane. I'm curious to see would Japan have won the war using this strategy in the real 1940, not the world where Japan has the biggest air force in the world.
I feel strongly this is a game in abstract that is in no way suited to answer the question you're pondering. I struggle to understand comments on realism in a game that is barely more complex than Risk.
I’ve partially deluded myself into believing that this is a very accurate World War 2 simulator for what ifs, soooo… But yeah, the other part of me that isn’t delusional agrees with you on that. By the way do you know any actual World War 2 what if simulators?
I’ve partially deluded myself into believing that this is a very accurate World War 2 simulator for what ifs, soooo… But yeah, the other part of me that isn’t delusional agrees with you on that. By the way do you know any actual World War 2 what if simulators?
@@AChannelThatDoesNothing Well, I feel that every war game is a 'what if simulator' by some degree. In my opinion, it just come down to how much extrapolation is built in. For Axis and Allies - there is a ton of extrapolation. On the other extreme, there is a game called Advanced Squad Leader which has a larger player base than Axis and Allies ever will and has an extraordinary amount of detail. This comes at a cost. The rule book is incredibly long and detailed.
Why not take Shan State in the first round? Second turn Japan you take it with the moved infantry from Siam. It’s a 1 IPC extra. Also, the allied player can leave the UK destroyer and cruiser. It can function as a blocker for India. It can put all of his forces into Burma. Anzac can put his 3 fighters to Burma second round. Russia can declare war on Japan and bring the russian mech and tank with the fighter and tactical to Szechwan. With the extra Chinees units put on Szechwan and the russian troops the odds are in the favour of the chinese. When UK is building in turn 2 the factory in middle east they can build the fighters for Russia.
For the rest, I am also using the J1. Its very powerfull and yes, you will win the game. Maybe we can find out a way to look at the game and prevend this. If you want we can set up a game in TrippleA. I am having some theories for the allies to give them more power. Greetings from the Netherlands, Jamay Eekhof.
@@jtheekhof4921 in order: by taking Shan State on J1, you expose the Japanese infantry to destruction on UK1 at a time when every piece on the Asian mainland is just too vital, especially since Shan is only worth 1 IPC. In my opinion, trading a 3 IPC unit in a critical area of the board at a critical moment to gain 1 IPC back is a non-starter. If the UK use their cruiser and destroyer as blockers, I'm rubbing my hands in glee as the Japanese. We have plenty of naval and especially air units on J2 to remove UK units (that the UK basically cannot replace). Whatever territories they were blocking for are not that interesting since there are so many other territories that need conquering or reinforcing. We will get to the "blocked" territories next turn or the following. The Burma play - though popular, I know - is bizarre to me. I saw this several times and simply hit other targets, captured other territories and generally ignored that space until I had enough forces in position to make them fall back to India. Moving Russian troops into China takes away from the already precarious defense of Russia itself. Also, as a general axiom of axis and allies, multinational forces in something like equal numbers are fine for defense but are dubious when it comes to offensive potential. I had several games where I placed an inferior Japanese army next to Yunnan knowing that the Russians/British/Chinese didn't have enough strength by themselves to remove me. Russia can declare war, yes. There is a rather heavy cost for Russia when doing that and you mention part of it. The UK spamming fighters trying to make up for the 18 infantry that aren't going to Moscow has its own problems (for the British as well as the Russians). But I agree that if there is a way to diffuse the J1 or to make it less lethal, it may have something to do with the Russians (that's actually why you see asterisks at a couple points in the video when I mention the Russians - they are notes to my future self).
@@jtheekhof4921 normally, I would say "hell ya" but I am stacking games of 1914 at the moment for a future series on this channel. If this is an open invitation, I would LOVE to stack a few games to see if we can break the J1 but I will need at least six month before I could start that project. I will PM you on this thread at that time if you're still interested though. Thanks for offering this. It is so hard to find people who actually PLAY.
@@jtheekhof4921 I love your country by the way. Amsterdam is wonderful. I did a battlefield tour of Arnhem (Market-Garden). I remain stunned at how kind-hearted and respectful your countrymen are. Greetings from California.
For Japan a J1 attack is great. Germany will probaly not like it as it helps the British in Europe and as it makes the rush to Moscow even more hasty before US troops comes to Europe. I think the british need a factory in Persia and maybye even a second one in Iraq to keep the japanses away from India. As the Germans will not be able to Sea Linon with US in the war turn 1 I guess that is my main response to the J1 plus leaving some Soviet units in China and/or near Manchuria/Korea as a threat.
I agree but for one or possibly two points. The first is that Germany needs to rush to Moscow. If I ever cut a video for that side of the board, the main argument will be to avoid that big fight in Moscow and instead to just move adjacent to it while concurrently sending units south to clean out the south of Russia and acquire all the National Objectives. The UK factories become overwhelmed (in my experience) trying to hold of the Germans from the North, the Japanese from the East and sending units to Moscow to keep them from falling. The other possible misconception is that sealion is off the table. The J1 seems quite powerful and so the USA player may feel the need to go entirely into the Pacific to prevent an early loss. If this happens and you have a lax UK player, I feel the G3 sealion is still viable. In fact, there is someone who left a comment on this video where he in fact did both. I think the UK should still respect that this is a possibility and make arrangements.
BOTH Germany and Japan must attack very aggressively in order to win the game. That is how the game is designed. A passive Axis player will lose over the long run. It's as simple as that really.
When I do J1 I can get all the money islands in J2 + what you've got here. I've never played bids but that should make it easier. I like the naval base on Hainan. I do that too but never seen anyone else do it. 2 turns to threaten India with JP transports!
You give up taking Malaya on T1 to take Borneo and then T2 you can take the rest. I typically lose the Caroline islands but they don't offer any economic objectives. I've debated doing the Airfield in French Indo China too but I usually keep some fighters back in JP to protect transports from any carrier launched raids in that SZ with the destroyer vs the block. USA could still move to SZ7 and launch planes to JP SZ 6. You have a faster concentration of power in the air force w/ that base though. I might try that but at like T3.
@@drewdawson7064 It's not just about economic objectives. Look at where the Caroline Islands are. Look at the strategic value they could offer to the United States. With the Caroline Islands, they can reach anywhere on the coast of the United States to include 3 out of the 4 money islands, and provide a great place to store bombers and sea units that require repairs.
Tired this on Triple A - the Americns came up through Soviet Far East and the Russians doubled back - had 18 Trrops on Amur and Americans 2 toops artillery and mech in SFE with airforce in Midway :)
@@thegoodcaptain1217 The AI was an interesting concept I thought you may investigate as I didnt see in your vid. If you push on to AUS it can be exposed perhaps
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Ha yeah, it has the option for HardAI which was fun, but still weak really, I am getting back into A&A after many years, your tactic was Amazing BTW and worked well to get Japan up the IPC charts very quickly In the end I had issues up north, but as my IPC count was high just spammed tons of destroyers in one turn to counter that I am loving Global 40 also always played classic
This appears to slow the Japanese a bit and then Moscow falls like a rock without those troops. Still, I believe that particular knock on effect might be resolved in some other way. And so I agree that Russia cannot relocate those troops and must keep them involved on the Pacific side.
I would also love a Germany/Italy strategy but no pressure I know that’s a lot of work
Stellar work. Thanks for the time and thought you put into this, sir!
EDIT: I went to your channel from this video and was devastated to find that this is the only Global 1940 video you've made. Would love more, with gratitude.
I like how that you brought up that this strategy was originally scoffed at in the community, and in my player group, Japan almost never attacks on turn. I never employed the strategy given on the surface you lose a 10 IPC bonus and give the US its large IPC bonuses earlier in game. However, after seeing my drunk friend who tried to throw the game since he didn't want to play as Japan attack everything he could and end up winning, attacking everything on turn 1 seemed creditable.
After watching you explanation of this J1 strategy, I understand why it's so broken. Thanks for explaining this strategy in such a well made video!
I very much appreciated this comment from start to finish. Thanks for sharing this and glad you liked the video.
Two observations:
1. In case the US attacked sea zone 6 on turn 1 there's also that one fighter in Japan to scramble.
2. The US can also go after the Marianas, though that is basically an even more disastrous version of the Marshalls attack.
Think iv seen most strategy videos about Axis and allies global 1940, and this one is the best by far. Hoping for more videos!
Hey thanks, that’s very flattering. What is it you like most about it if you don’t mind me asking?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 For a 35 minute video is was straight to the point the entire time. Clear editing with no jarring jump cuts so as to show each move and possible problems/solutions if you get diced in an important battle or encounter some of the more effective counters.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I would actually say that the fixed camera is the greatest advantage you have over similar videos.
Awesome video, Captain! And grats on the tourney win.
I recently used a similar strat, at least in terms of purchases, and found it to be extremely effective. With the airbase/naval base combo you can hit Calcutta with overwhelming force very early on.
I've yet to attempt a J1 though.. it just feels so risky.. and like many others my instinct has always been to keep USA out for at least one round. But you've demonstrated how Japan can quickly and reliably even the playing field economically.
Again great vid, thanks for posting. I can appreciate all the edits that went into this 😆
Thanks! And, yessir, it felt risky to me as well that first game. I lost the German capital to a can opener. I guess I don't learn ;) Anyway, cake-walked a win in the Pacific regardless. Finally, omg yes the edits... this took a week to make. Hah!
@@thegoodcaptain1217aren’t there 4 inf in yunnan?
@@joebrown7157 There are. And four are correctly depicted in the video.
Excellent work. A video showing off your Europe script would be phenomenal.
Masterclass! fantastic video thank you for sharing your thoughts
This is excellent work man. I love this kind of detail
Excellent video and enjoyable to watch. I especially appreciated your use of fuel gauges. As a commentary, it would be great to see you join in a little more play of global 1940 via the Bloodbath ruleset construct. BBR eliminates the flaw that you and others have discovered regarding the overwhelming impact a J1 attack in ensuring, for the most part, an axis victory. Such things as a single Destroyer blocking an entire fleet is not allowed in BBR. A single Destroyer can only block up to three warships which puts constraints on axis navel powers like the IJN. Furthermore, Fleet cores must be more well-protected as some of their core assets can be removed from combat immediately by tactical bomber and submarine Target Select.
I have played a few games using this strategy and here are my thoughts so far. Russia: Russia is able to not move its pacific infantry at all or stack in Amur turn one and this definitely slows the j1. You have to commit forces to Manchuria or Korea in order to defend this or your stuck for awhile going back and forth dealing with Russia taking either Korea or Manchuria and having to take it back. Yes Russia may activate the Manchuria rule but that’s not awful for Russia in this scenario. It’s drawing forces off of India and that’s buying the usa more time which is what they need as well as Japan is focusing its power on India not Russia. USA: turn 1 USA builds 2 aircraft carriers and a battle ship stacking the remaining fleet in Hawaii. USA turn 2 they move the whole fleet to midway and build a navel base there with their fleet that is now matching japans. USA 2 they can build bombers more sea units it really doesn’t matter because simply they can afford it and Japan can’t, turn 2 USA will have 70 IPCs to spend while Japan has not even close to that(I don’t know the exact number right now but somewhere around half). Let’s look at the options Japan has. At this point Japan can to move their whole fleet up to Japan to defend it, drawing all their forces they need for India and to take and hold the money islands. Or they can try and stack infantry in Japan and Korea and let the USA control sea zone 6 and convoy the whole thing. If that happens then yes Japan can go all out planes from indoChina kamikaze tokens blah blah blah and take out that fleet in 6. However that will use a very large amount of japans power and will cost them a decent bit in power while they are still making half of what the USA is. Another option is to just go for Hawaii but that’s a death mission in my books. This is all the while drawing forces out of Asia and to the sea and while the USA is able to replenish its resources much quicker than Japan. China: China really does not have a ton of effect but being offensive minded pairing with the rest of the pacific powers is deadly. China can take back yunnan turn 1 and stack it heavily as well as having uk send troops and fighters to yunnan as well. Yes Japan can take it back but it only has 5 land troops within reach turn 2, this provides a risk for Japanese air going into the fight yet alone China and uk just being able to take it back the following turn. China making its objective for the Burma road and getting those ipcs is deadly and they can quickly pump out more and more forces to stack yunnan and or Szechwan with the uk. UK: the uk should just pull all forces out of Malaya and into Shan state turn 1. These troops now run adjacent to several territories. If you take Malaya uk can strike and take it back creating quite the headache and I’ll explain why when I talk about Anzac. The uk will clearly see the writing on the wall and can send that destroyer and cruiser as blockers in 38 and 41 to block the attack turn 2 or 3 or whenever necessary. This uk strategy paired with the us pressure will greatly affect this j1 strategy. The uk build basically one of everything turn one cause why not mech inf, inf, art, tank they can really buy one of everything and just be prepared for whatever may happen, they also want to defend yunnan because this will make sure China is a massive thorn in japans side. All the while this is happening Japan is being distracted by a us fleet threatening Japan. The USA fleet doesn’t even have to go to sea zone 6 necessary it could sit there and prevent Japan from truly devoting those forces to India. ANZAC: build a fighter turn one and put the other three on their airbase. Once uk takes back Malaya fly all 3 there. Turn one move the destroyer to 54 and it can clean up that japanease transport off Borneo turn 2 and you might think while that’s okay I’ll just go and sweep it up but that paired with everything else going on in the pacific truly runs Japan short on power and ability to do everything. And bring that transport up to take New Guinea, this takes yet another plane away from japans combat move on turn 2 and gives you that extra IPC to play around with and build a proper fleet with ANZAC. These are my thoughts largely based off a game I played with someone I would consider very experienced in this version of the game.
When I clicked Read more I didn't expect for an entire essay to pop up
ua-cam.com/channels/e-e4qMu1Jq4lEVsqArDPXw.html
Is there a way to counter this? Or is this a foolproof way to taking down Japan?
12/18/23 - to follow up on this - I have until recently, felt that the J1 could be sparred off by some combination of USSR troops in conjunction with a clever USA play in the Pacific, but not anymore. I have stacked several more games against two different challengers and both fell flat on putting a dent in this thing. And that included ramping up pressure from the USA and Russia much in the manner as you describe. Since the Japanese IC is so close to the contested area of Manchuria/Korea, and there are so many surface ships and transports that Japan has at its disposal - it was/is fairly trivial to dispose of those incursions. I am even more convinced that this can and should always be the stock opener for Japan and make no change to it as of this date. Still undefeated.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I think hoodrekt has some good points, it's pretty easy to defend Yunnan with UK Pac + China after J1. Allies can have 3 AA + 1 art + 3 tanks + 2 mech + 2 fighter + 1 tac + ~15 inf on Yunnan by the end of T2. Tanks and mechs come from from India (T1 purchase) + Volgorad, with more coming from Russia by T3. China will keep fortifying that position and Russian planes can move there anytime to bolster defenses even further, or help with can openers if you're not pushing hard for Russia in Europe.
I usually retreat the Pac Russian inf, but would turn the corner into Kansu T4, which would require minimal effort from China to own with your lack of troops in the north. Allies can build a factory in Persia and start purchasing fighters, tacs and tanks which can be used in either theatre. I know that Yunnan is not the VC, but the giant force in Yunnan will be unbreakable and has the ability to break out at anytime with multiple can openers, so Japan can't hold India for a full turn until they deal with Yunnan.
All the while, US and ANZAC can use subs to make the money islands very annoying for Japan. I tend to focus more on EU with USA when Japan goes J1, mostly buying subs and bombers in Pac, since Japan isn't a real threat to Australia or Hawaii for a long time unless they abandon China.
I think if you hold off on the early air and naval base, you'd be able to afford 2 more factories which can be very effective in breaking the Yunnan stronghold by T6, but your current build will take a long time to amass enough ground forces to threaten Yunnan.
Great video!
Not surprised that you ran the house in that tournament. Even in G40, a good grip on fundamentals will get you extremely far. You also correctly deduced that G40 is a broken mess where Axis basically cannot lose.
What do you think the bid should be? And where would you place it? (Asking because I know you a bit and am/was hoping to hear more about where/what units people place.)
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Now, to actually answer your question, I have my own ideas on how to properly fix G40's balance issues but that's going a bit far off the reservation so I'll stick with the OOB rules + the bid rules you used for this tournament for my recommendation/thoughts.
British BB to SZ111
British BB to SZ37
USA BB to SZ26
Now keep in mind I have minimal experience with G40 so this might not even be enough, but the idea here is that putting 2HP Battleships in these key locations accomplishes the following:
1.) Forces Germany to either take actual air/naval losses G1 or concede naval supremacy to UK immediately.
2.) Forces Japan to either not do a J1 or take heavier losses + buy actual naval units to defend SZ6 (or spend a large share of their Kamikaze tokens immediately) in order to commit to the strategy.
You can see where I'm going with this hopefully. G40's appeal is at least partially supposed to be the dynamic political situation at the start of the game, which allows the Axis to pick and choose when to escalate the war. However, the optimal play is always to just go for the throat immediately (or on G2 in the USSR's case). It almost makes one question what the point of even having a dynamic political situation is if it's just going to be thrown out on turn 1 in most games.
@@superilikeeggsyo Yeah, to be honest it doesn't make the slightest bit sense.
Japan attacking the Western Allies is seen as one of the biggest mistakes of the war, considering the US wasn't even close to going to war with Japan (even if Roosevelt wanted it, popular support didn't).
So the idea that winning the war means attacking the US even earlier boggles the mind.
Well done! Your purchases are the best I've seen for Japan. I also play Axis exclusively simply because trying to co-ordinate more than 3 Nations is a bit trying for me. ;)
Anyway, My J1 is slightly different in that I take Wake, (with units from Japan) and park my Japan fleet there except for the sub and Destroyer which with all my Carrier planes attack the USA fleet at SZ 26 along with the planes and other destroyer from SZ 33. The Carrier in 33 also joins the Japanese fleet in SZ 31 near Wake Island.
After the battle in SZ 26 I land my planes on the 3 Carriers near Wake Island. I make sure that at least one destroyer remains in SZ 26 to block any desperate USA response to my fleet.
China attacks pretty much mirror yours, with slightly different air commitments, other bomber to Yunnan.
The other Bmbr along with Cruiser are joined by the fighter on the Island of Formosa, (lands in Siam) to attack HMR Prince of Wales in SZ 37. I really want the Cruiser to survive this battle more than anything else.
Lastly, I invade Hong Kong (Kwangtung) while also invading the Philippines. Of course I take F.I.C. as well.
Yes, I am throwing a lot of stones here but the more I hurt the allies I feel it is for the best.
My purchase is a Carrier and a fighter. I also land the Korean Fighter on the Carrier in the place Purchase phase by leaving it in the Japan Sea,( SZ 6) on the non-combat phase.
My theory is that if I can establish early Naval dominance in the Pacific I may cause the Allies to concentrate on an early European Campaign and just surrender the Pacific cause all together.
This has worked for me on many occasions, dice permitting of course.
Europe must stack up defensive units and grit their teeth for invasions to throw back into the sea and along the Polish /Ukraine Corridor.
This was great fun to read through. Very cool!
Well covered. Wow! Can't believe that GH video was so long ago.
Hi, thank you for the very informative and precise video! I'll try this strategy soon. Question: did you create or purchase your fuel-gauge movement markers? Any tips on how I can acquire similar? Thanks!
Historical board gaming has them. They are very helpful imo. I use them in every version.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Great to know, thanks!
To anyone wondering about the Axis moves in Europe, The Good Captain explained it in a comment on another video:
"Yep. I know the comment well. I haven't forgotten and I appreciate your compliment here. I likely won't be making that video for some time but until that day, here is what I do in every game without fail: On G1, I buy three fighters as this keeps sea lion open as an option but will be extremely useful anyway going forward. I hit both UK fleets with air navy, hit France and do a single round of combat in Yugoslavia using the inf/art in Greater Southern Germany and one piece in Romania and retreat to Romania after a single round of combat. I land at least one fighter in Rome and ALWAYS scramble three fighters if the Brits perform Toronto against Italy. On Italy 1, I buy one fighter and remove as many allied boats in the Med as possible. I also like to hit Southern France and/or Greece if Greece is possible. I will also usually sacrifice one transport and take Cyprus with a single infantry and deny the British their National Objective. Then on G2, so long as the UK player pays some mild form of of the "Sealion Tax" on the first turn (i.e. spends at least half or 2/3 of its initial budget on home defense), I hit Russia. I also usually like to take Yugoslavia now as Germany (I really like to have one territory under German control bordering the Med SZ, especially the Adriatic. From then on, here are the purchase plans for both powers: Germany builds mostly all mechs and maybe an armor or infantry here or there. Most of that will go into Russia but I hold a small force in Paris to counterattack any western powers attempt to land in Normandy I also help Rome out only IF it needs units for defense to get through the next turn. Germany charges into Russia and moves adjacent to the Russian capital and NEVER attacks it. This is what I call the "rope a dope". We maintain a force large enough to threaten but will never attack. Instead, we continue to reinforce this army adjacent to the capital and move behind Moscow territory by territory until we are on the opposite side. All the while we are sending small forces south and east and eating Russia alive for its IPC while its army remains pinned in the capital. The Italians should get their IPC up to about 20, buy a carrier asap and only ever buy naval units and maybe some air and pump SZ 97 full of ships and planes enough to load the carrier and airbase. If the allies threaten with navy and look like they will overwhelm this growing fleet, have Germany put an airbase in yugoslavia and put three planes on it. If it still looks like the allies might win out, have Germany build and IC on Yugo and drop a carrier in there and put planes on it. The allies will concede at some point."
Out of curiosity, did anyone in your tournament games use Global 1940's research and technology rules? Additionally, do you have an opinion about those rules? Do you think they're useful at all? Thank you!
Love to hear about that too! In my player group we reached the conclusion that tech overall favours the US and gives a moderate bonus to the allies.
16:00 what if the Americans put both fleets into sea zone 7 from the west coast and hawaii
A bit difficult to answer in a UA-cam comment but, yes the 2nd place winner did this move to me and it was fairly easily sparred off by the Japanese. Here it is J2: Caroline Islands - 2 subs, 2 DD, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 BB, 3 FTR, 1 TAC. One destroyer in SZ 16 (blocker - prevents invasion of Japan). No ships at all in Japan SZ. The remaining Japanese carrier, battleship, destroyer, and all IJN transport continue along the script I outline in the video, i.e. take borneo and malaya. USA doesnt have enough assets to remove the Japanese fleet from the Carolines. If USA removes the blocker and surrounds Japan, even better. With the airbase and air units in FIC, you will have plenty of boats from the Carolines and planes from FIC to remove the USA fleet from Japan.
About American counterattacks:
There's also the option to go at Iwo Jima. 2 infantry and a cruiser bombardment certainly seems like a good enough force to take it.
But even if Japan doesn't use Kamikazes (which would shred the bombardment advantage and make the battle very close) which would shred several American units, the fleet is still vulnerable to a Japanese counterattack.
I guess this was just an addition to the main video for those who thought of Iwo Jima.
what strategic value is Iowa Jima though
1 IPC.
Note:
Rewatching this video again, when you said "Marshall Islands" it looks like you were pointing at the Caroline Islands. "There's not a whole lot of strength to [succesfully attack]" also makes more sense in the context of the US attacking the Carolines. Was that a mistake? Thank you!
Yes, that was a mistake that UA-cam makes it very difficult to fix.
Caroline islands is the correct answer.
Really nice J1 attack setup you got going on, not something I have seen before. One thing I opted to do as the Japanese in a J1 attack is to do Pearl Harbor J1 as well with the fighters on the carriers along with a transport to come in and take Wake Island. The strategic value that goes behind this is that you're essentially giving the Americans a choice of which side to commit on. If you've been watching General Hand Grenade's videos, you'll also be familiar with his American strategy, the Floating Bridge, which calls for the United States to ground and pound on the Germans and Italians in Europe. I ultimately found a counter to GHG's Middle Earth and Floating Bridge strategy by utilizing my Pearl Harbor attack to invade Honolulu and then Sydney and with 6 victory cities, win the game in the end on the Pacific side of the board. You're also goading the Americans into a trap so that should they choose to move their fleet from San Francisco to Honolulu, you can utilize the remaining cruiser, the 2 fighters and 2 tactical bombers on the carriers, AND you can use the 4 planes you kept on Japan to attack that fleet and destroy it, ridding the Americans completely of their sphere of influence in the Pacific. Just some thoughts though.
I feel compelled to ask how many games you have played with this strategy. And in what format.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Haven't gotten the chance to use this on an actual player yet, but I did playtest the crap out of this tactic of mine on tabletop. The starting basis on how I went about this strategy was essentially with the premise that the UK would be doing Middle Earth, the U.S would be doing Floating Bridge, and the USSR would be doing their Russian Counter Attacking strategy. All 3 of these strategies are courtesy of GHG where he claims that these 3 strategies combined cannot be beaten by the Axis. Now, I've watched all 3 of GHG's videos extensively studying every single move he makes and what purpose it has. (Granted I didn't just copy and paste every move he did, but basically followed the exact format of what he did). And the way that I beat his critically claimed "unbeatable strategy" was by winning with Japan.
@@ryanjw15 I appreciate what you’re doing here. And there may be something to your strategy, indeed. However, I would caution against the GHG videos as gospel with regards to strategy and have serious questions as to their viability - namely in the cauldron of online play. Bottom line up front, I know many current online g40 players but I don’t know any that think the Allies can win without at least a 30 IPC bid.
But I have been exactly where you’ve been. If you believe you have something don’t let me or anyone else take a dump on it. When/if you’re ready, I think you should take it online. Throw out a challenge on the .org website. If it survives repeated playings online it will survive over the board.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Indeed. In all honesty, there's no true telling whether this strategy would hold it's ground in a real scenario against another player. The whole reason I kinda developed this strategy is because of the fact that General Hand Grenade could not see a viable strategy for the Axis to deploy to beat his respective strategies, nothing more. I can't even base this strategy on the responsiveness of the other Allied player since I playtested this by myself, only allowing me to make the most logical moves as the Allies in each scenario that I knew what would have been best to play. In the end, this strategy of mine isn't really universal, as I think you're catching on to. It's simply a countermeasure to a strategy that was previously seen as unbeatable. I would love at the oppurtunity to get to use this against GHG but unfortunately he's set Global 40 in his rear view mirror.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I didn't think to ask, but what exactly is your opinion on a Pearl Harbor variant for the J1 opener?
32:50 you talk about Anzac or the Brits taking one of the money islands or Dutch New Guinea. Would you spend your force to take those back immediately?
Short answer no. J2 is Borneo and Malaya. J3 is Money Islands. However, I have certainly run a fighter into the SZ to pick up the transport, absolutely do that if it can be done safely, sure.
Great video
Great video. Gives me some new ideas. Rarely ever try a J1 but I will be trying this next game. Only thing I would say though is that mechs only move two spaces when paired with armour.
Mechs move two spaces without armor. You’re confused in that they cannot blitz without armor.
Thoughts on dark skies paired with this J1 strategy?
Just to remind anyone who reads this, I played nine games in a tournament of G40 using the J1 and though I won every game, I don't consider myself anything close to an expert on this version. I feel I am 'expert' with Anniversary, Classic and 1914 at the time of this writing, but not G40. But since I don't feel that there are any true experts of this game on UA-cam at this moment, I will say... Given the high cost of air units and that my playing experience shows the axis is as highly favored on the Europe side almost as it is on the Pacific side (my opinion), I evaluated dark skies as an unnecessarily risk. I would entertain it if the J1 or a more conventional G strat were dismantled. That is really as deep as I've gone with it. It's sorta like, "why use a crossbow when a baseball bat will do?" type of situation. One takes some skill and fine tuning, the other is a blunt object that seems to do the job all the same.
What matte paint did you use on your minis? Im thinking about doing something like this in the near future. Cheers!
All was done with Tamiya scale modelling paints. The only color I didn't buy canned was the Japanese - I had to mix that one.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 primed then those colors?
@@solardjinn yep - Taimya primer. I have a video called “AnA Clinic - Episode 5: Improving out-of-box Pieces” that details most of this as a process using the pieces from D-Day.
Clarification:
One thing that I felt wasn't clear in the video would be post-J2 movements.
Specifically, if there are more than enough ground units to capture the Dutch East Indies in French-Indochina (as in after the transports took all the ground units necessary to capture the Dutch East Indies), the British withdrew their army to India and have no land units in range of Shan State, and there aren't any other islands to attack, do those ground units move west into Shan State, to continue their advance toward India? Thank you!
Yeah, sounds right. Get the money islands then get the troops moving west. The navy generally keeps the US at bay.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Thanks for responding!
I'm glad I moved correctly then (I was playing a game and was testing this strategy). The US player is going KJF, but luckily the Soviets moved out of the far east.
About an American elimination of the blocker during US Turn 2:
The US only has to send two blockers into sea zones 22 and 23 and can block the IJN from reaching sea zone 16. What should the US do then?
Do you mean, “What should Japan do then?” I don’t really understand what you’re asking here. If you meant Japan, they can remove the blockers in SZ 22/23 and then are free to move during NCM.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Oh, oh!
Yes, I was referring to Japan.
So Japan can still move the fleet to sea zone 6 and block an American advance in that case.
And if the US moved to sea zone 6 the aircraft in French Indo-China can smash it.
So Japan's still safe then.
Thanks for the answer!
The game is clearly in favour of the axis powers. I believe a bid of 26-34 is very reasonable for the allies. In your rules for bidding were you allowed to place a minor factory as a part of your placement? For example if I wanted to use 12 of my allies bid ipcs on a minor factory in Egypt would that be allowed by typical tournament rules?
@@hoodrekt5887 just units, not infrastructure. The online community uses a bid north of 50.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 north of 50? What’s your opinion on the matter?
@@hoodrekt5887 sounds right - at least for online play. Anyway, I would defer to the players in "The League" on axisandallies.org They play constantly and their best guy claims it should be +60 for the Allies.
Interesting. Every game of this I've played, the soviet player left at least 12 soldiers on the northern border.
Also, I feel really confident that Calcutta needs to fall by J3 at the latest. From my experiences, any turn after that where you're getting hit from 3 sides means you get folded pretty soon
EVERY game you've played they left 12 up there? That seems odd. If it were me, I would ask myself, "how many games did I play and how many different players was that against." In this tournament, against all these opponents that move was the exception, not the rule. It did happen in one game though and was fairly trivial to spar off given the proximity of the biggest Japanese industry and many transports/aircraft. The other implication is that Moscow will be extremely light on units needed for defense. The situation on that side of the board is almost as bad as this side (imo). Regarding India: I heard a lot about the urgency of capturing it but my experience was contrary to this. In each game it was pretty easy to get the India economy down to two IPC per turn using the convoy centers. At that point, its an inert player and picked up at Japan's leisure.
I've played a million games and we've never seen calcutta fall J3 lmao that's borderline impossible if you're facing a british opponent with even half a brain
Hello! I used this strat, but ran into a rather irritating problem. Me and my friends (total 5 players), played 2 games over a weekend, and in one i played japan and opened with this J1. My german ally saw an oppurtunity to sealion, and although good odds, lost the G3 sealion, although he got it on G4. But thats not the main problem. The problem was that the soviets because of sea lion used 12 infantry i eastern russia to attack manchuria and Korea, and im uncertain what the best response to that would be, considering that i have to put preassure on India to win since Germany lost quite some units in the first failed sealion attack🤔
@@hiimrezgaming9885 I've had numerous challengers since posting the video so I've fought against the 18 Russian stack several times now. If they stack up on the first turn, here is the move adjustment I make:
I leave zero troops in Korea on J1. Manchuria needs to be defended though so on J1 I use 8 inf, one mech and one AA gun in Manch with two fighters (remove one fighter from the assault against Kwangtung). The Russians will take a win at 36% with these defenses. If you don't like that, add one more infantry to make it 22% soviet win.
We don't care about Korea. The Russians will not gain IPC from its capture due to the convoy zone and they will lose the Mongolia rule forever. Leave it open. Additionally, Korea is the easiest of the two zones to counterattack due to it being adjacent to the Tokyo SZ. Even if he moves all 18 infantry in there on R2, all this means is that the Japanese cant take Korea back yet and will have to wait another turn.
Excellent video as always Captain! Always enjoy your thorough analysis of strategies.
Had a question for you: Why not take Borneo turn 1 in addition to Kwangtung? It does make the battles in China a tad bit dicey, but you can cripple the UK Pacific economy right off the bat. Thoughts?
Much appreciated. Great question. I feel that it’s extremely costly for the Japanese in two interrelated ways. 1) it exposes a transport to probable/potential destruction by the UK fleet off of India. 2) as you point out, it removes and (potentially) strands units that were desperately needed in China. I want assurances on J2 as Japan and, for me, that’s too risky when we’re already sitting on a winning hand.
You’d have to send escorts as Japan if you wanted to have a chance for the transport to survive. As UK player, I’d happily swap a DD for a transport otherwise.
Not a hard “no” from me - it’s just that in my experience it’s incredibly lethal enough without Borneo on J1.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Appreciate the reply! I see where you're coming from. Too high of risk for the reward. Looking forward to your next video!
Thanks for the video... what is the purpose of the Naval base purchase on Hainan?
Nevermind, answered.
Clarification:
Playing out the game on TripleA, it seems like that without Shan State and doing everything as you said, Japan only ends turn 2 with 46 IPCs, not 47.
without Shan State, 46 looks right - yep
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Thanks for clarifying!
Just want to say, I’ve watched this video a million times and I really do love it! And playing Japan is one of my favorite things to do in this game. However, in my play-through I’m doing against myself, I think I’ve found a way to counter this strategy…
1. A must, but the US just has to dump all of its IPCs into the pacific, which does leave Germany to its own devices, however that’s somewhat of a different topic. But by turn 3/4 I have far surpassed the Japanese navy.
2. Keep at least 12 Russians on the Japanese border and even have them invade Korea or Manchuria… with a stack of 18 and 2 AA maybe even worse. But with this distraction, Japan wasn’t able to focus all on French indochina production and has to divert infantry to retake lost territory.
3. As the Chinese and British player, stack up in Yunnan with infantry and fighters and it becomes pretty much untakeable.
I’ve found these to significantly slow the Japanese push, however it does leave Germany wide open. Any thoughts?
Every time I answer this type of question, UA-cam deletes my comment. You can email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com and I will email you the response if you want to hear my thoughts.
So I'm only confused about 1 thing why do you place the naval base on Hainan instead of French Indo China?
Right. Good question. The only real reason for doing this is so that your "eggs aren't all in one basket". Since a Naval Facility affects sea zones only, this will ensure naval units retain the ability to move three spaces even if French Indo-China gets captured for some reason.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Okay thanks for telling me and this makes a lot of sense because it would be only viable one to not put on French Indo China also amazing video because before I was wondering exactly how to do the J1 attack before I watched this video
Hmm, I'm a bit confused just about one thing: We might not be the best players but annoying the Japanese with an Amur stack of 12-18 inf+AA, including a capture of Manchuria or Korea happen in every other game we played.
How would you adjust to that?
youtube keep taking down my response to this comment. you can email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com if you'd like to know my answer. I believe I've answered this through other comments on this video as well though.
Currently attempting this in my own game against my father. He is a tricky trickster though and sends British units into Yunan and then death stacking a bunch of troops into Burma and into Siam. I tried to fix that by having a factory in the territory West of Hong Kong, and if he takes it it’ll go to China and not the UK. He also loves to keep all the Soviet units in Amur, usually to keep me in check and possibly invade if I loosen my defenses in Manchuria. Yeah…., a tricky situation indeed
I believe your father is on to something by keeping the Russians up there. If there is a way to defeat the J1, it has something to do with the Russians (this is why you may have noticed asterisks in the top corner of my video at a couple points - these are a note to myself if/when I am the Russians). There are drawbacks to this strategy that materialize on the other side of the board though... As regards your factory in Kwangsi (the territory west of Hong Kong) being captured and going to the Chinese. This is unfortunately not possible as per the rules on page 10, "If a Japanese industrial complex is built on a Chinese territory and that territory is later recaptured by the Chinese or liberated by another Allied power, the industrial complex is removed from the game." As far as the death stacks go - when that was done to me, I launched attacks with a thin screen of ground forces out of necessity and hurled the balance of the Japanese air force at them. Losing a few planes doing this pays out dividends in the next few turns as the Allies will have little if any meaningful combat power in this vital area of the board. Good luck my dude!
How do you secure the money islands with this strategy? Do you reinforce your transports with Malaya naval fleet or Caroline Islands. Or a mixture?
Japanese transports may or may not need escorts. It will depend on the board state and what the Allied player(s) have done. I've even sacrificed a transport as Japan by sending it in unescorted just to secure the objective.
I recently played a Pacific 1940 only game using this strategy. It did not go so well for the Japanese. While they certainly made mistakes, the Allies did too.
Does this strategy work as well for just Pacific 1940 when the US isn't distracted by Europe? Thank you!
Thanks for reposting this question. UA-cam deletes comments seemingly at random and I can't do anything about it. Frustrating. I have never played Pacific 1940 2nd Edition by itself. I have heard it is so badly in favor of the Japanese that its nearly unplayable. But I've never had the time or opportunity to see for myself. I'm afraid I can't offer much advice on Pacific 1940 without Europe 1940 (global). My instinct is that since USA is 100% in on Pacific - it would be tougher to pull off and perhaps a J2 makes more sense. Not sure though.
Erm I have now left 2 different comments yesterday on this video both of which seem to have just disappeared after I posted them? Any ideas on to why that’s happening?
…because UA-cam sucks sometimes and automatically deletes comments. It is so damn annoying. I have no idea why this happens. Usually I get to see the comment but this is the first I’m hearing of it regarding yours. It really pisses me off. Trust me, I didn’t do it. I’ve think I’ve deleted exactly one non-spam comment in the last three years.
My best advice is to repost? Maybe the comment was too long? You can always email me at ryanvoz at yahoo.com although then of course it wouldn’t be public. Maybe the algorithm forbids so many new posts on the same video by the same person?
Sent you an email- luckily I typed it out on notes cause it was a really long comment so I was able to just copy and paste it
Does the naval yard give an extra movement to the transport in Japan
yes
How would this strategy change if the soviets use all their units to push into Manchuria?
When I discuss this area of the globe, UA-cam deletes my comments. It’s incredible. But if you email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com I can forward you the answer.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I'm surprised that you answered this quickly to my comment on a year old video but thanks a lot
@@Halaways I’m always playing. If I ever don’t believe in something on this channel, I take it down or edit the video.
There is an answer to your question. It is mildly upsetting for Japan but fairly easily managed.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Yes, I send you an e-mail with my questions. Again, big fan of your strategy and thank you
@@Halaways responded =)
Any idea if this J1 attack could be adjusted to be used in the g40 YG Tournament edition? UK goes before Japan for that one.
Not sure. Never played that variant
@@thegoodcaptain1217 basically there is no more Anzac. I believe it’s combined to just us pacific. And UK goes before Japan so they have their battleship moved away before you can attack it. I think j1 may not work as well if UK can just defend first thing. Perhaps it will be situational
EDIT: After an email discussion with @thegoodcaptain1217 and playing this out some more, I believe I was wrong.
I underestimated the impact of the American and British units you kill doing this. In addition to the momentum you gain in terms of capturing the money islands asap. The British are crippled a lot more quickly.
The money islands makes it very difficult for the US to match your naval presence, since they start at a significant deficit.
For me the issue with J1 is I felt you don’t gain enough to justify it.
In terms of IPCs you don't compensate the loss of the trade NO, you give USA a ton of extra IPC (all of which I would be putting into the US Pacific fleet) and it can be annoying for the Germans.
Granted the main things you gain are destroying some american units, which would otherwise probably reinforce Honolulu + the British BB.
Those are less tangible benefits, but not to be ignored for sure. You also steal 3 IPC from UK but i dont think that makes much of a difference.
Either way you can cripple UK on J2 by taking Borneo, Hong Kong, Malaya and a bit of strat bombing in Calcutta.
Personally, I feel like if you go J1, you should go for Honolulu. But i dont like those odds much.
After reading this, I feel like you’ve never faced a J1 or tried one yourself.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I don't doubt you have much more experience than me, was hoping you'd share some.
@@ForeverDoubting this video is me sharing my experience and since I open by stating that, I have to ask what you mean by this?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I meant if you could elaborate on what I'm missing/getting wrong instead of pointing out my lack of experience :D
@@ForeverDoubting ah, okay - I understand now (wasn't trying to point out a lack of experience - in fact, I've only played the number of games of online G40 mentioned in this video at the time of this writing). My experience with this type of engagement via text communication and especially on a public forum has been entirely negative. My general recommendation is to offer to play a game via TripleA as the board is always going to be the best form of communication and provides near perfectly clarity. However, I'll go out on a limb...if you email me at ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com, I will do my best to respond to your initial statement point by point.
Haven't played in a while, but arent you only allowed to place minor industrial complexes in territories that you owned at the beginning of the game? (Meaning French Indo-China move not allowed?)
Not near my game so cant reference the rulebook
Correct. What you’re seeing the video in fact is a minor I.C. being placed in French Info-China.
I've played this game multiple times but never enough in short term consistency to imagine this ....well done! However, it looks like ur moving ground units into combat zones in non-com which isn't possible which doesnt really affect this strat at all. Will definitely have to try this next time. I really like the synergy of the naval and air bases.
Units can move into territories that were recently taken over (except aircraft) during the NCM phase - in fact this is a key to playing better and not over committing on the CM phase.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Some new rule I don't know about? Since when has that been a rule in ANY ANA game????
@@guitarninjarick8179 this has been the rule in every single version since the original. Name the version and I will cite page number and reference. For Europe 1940 its on page 22, Pacific 1940 page 21 but it reads the same, "A land unit can move into any friendly or friendly neutral territory, including territories that were captured in the current turn." If its any consolation, you're not the only one who has made this error...
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Dam! Been playing this game for a long time and didnt know that. Don't even know whats real anymore, u've shattered my reality, haha! Then again I vaguley remember something along those lines maybe the people I played with and I never took advantage of it
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Hey got another question for u. Can tanks blitz from an amphibious assault???
Did you play against any UK players using a middle earth strategy? I think the UK is the biggest factor in opposing this strategy. The UK/Anzac should also have blockers ready to prevent your transports from attacking India turn 3. This is critical as it gives the US time to build and get fleet into play to threaten your fleet at the Caroline Islands and make you bring a lot of your Japanese fleet back to the Pacific and not just keep plowing ahead into the Middle East.
This gives the UK the breathing room they need to setup the middle earth strategy. The UK can even step back off India to preserve those units before you attack turn 4, and then counterattack India turn 4 after you take it because you have limited ground troops. Usually GB can get 7 to 9 fighters to Iraq by turn 3 that can be used in a counter attack on you in India or used to support Moscow.
The US builds turn 1 on the West coast, moves that fleet to Hawaii turn 2, and then moves to Australia turn 3. With the Anzac fleet there as well they should have enough fleet to threaten you if you don’t mass most of your starting fleet together.
The US can build some bombers turn 2 to help get them enough punch to threaten your fleet turn 4 as well, but turn 2 on the US just builds in the Atlantic.
Anzac can send two more infantry and fighters to Malaya as well turn 2. Its all about delaying things long enough for the US to get a fleet down to Australia in range of Malaya that Japan cannot ignore. Japans build turn 3 cannot reach Malaya turn 4 so that build will not change the threat.
The key is to delay long enough that Japan gets stopped at India, and the UK middle Earth strategy is protected from Japan by the US/Anzac fleet so that the UK can send 9-11 aircraft to Russia turn 4 or 5 assuming Germany goes all out push on Moscow.
This makes the game into a game of chance in whether Germany has enough to take out Russia assuming all 18 inf by Japan march back to Moscow and the UK flys 9-11 fighters to Moscow.
If Germany is delayed in taking Moscow the allies are definitely in a position to threaten Germany turn 5 or 6, so even if Moscow falls the game is far from over especially if the Uk flies its. 9-11 fighters out of Moscow before it falls if Germany eventually gets enough units outside Moscow to make it inevitable.
Also a J1 takes away a lot of the threat of a sea lion since the US can start moving that way immediately, so the UK can afford to spend some of its turn 1 money in South Africa on a transport and inf.
It can also do the Taranto attack on the Italian fleet as well since its low risk of a sea lion.
The UK has to press the limits of what it can get away with knowing Germany does’t want to do a sea lion attack and the US is much more able to help prevent one.
Also Anzac can actually setup blockers turn 2 such that you cannot take all the money islands turn 3 assuming there are 3 blcokers total between the UK and Anzac forces to close up India as well
I saw an attempted middle earth but it fizzled. I don’t think I ever took Moscow as Germany. It’s enough to move adjacent and then just send forces down south to wreck the Middle East and secure all the National Objectives. I think all but one opponent conceded over this “economic” victory. Once the Axis is making well over what the Allies are, the wind comes out of the sails pretty quickly. Yes, a J1 generally means there is no Sealion - itself too prone to whims of the dice compared to this J1 mess.
I felt/feel that if there was anyway to deflate this strategy, it was the Russians that might be able to do it. I don’t say anything in the video but I put an asterisk as an overlay when I mention the Russians. You can see it pop up in the video. That’s a note to my future self if I ever flip sides.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 If you do a Middle Earth and Russia knows it is getting help it should also be spending its money on more offensive units (fighters mostly and maybe some artillery later). This helps potentially delay the German push to begin with since they have to be more worried about counterattacks. Then Russia can always trade off its army with Germany, and even if it loses it makes it manageable for Britain to handle and or continue to defend Moscow at least with the 9-11 fighters it has there. Delaying Germany even one turn allows for more of the far east troops to get back to Moscow as well.
It is important as well that America doesn't just let Japan have a field day in the Indian Ocean. They have to build fleet turn 1 and chase them to India so the UK middle earth strategy doesn't get waxed.
Is there any effective ways in your opinion to counteract the J1 as the Allies or with it employed is a Pacific victory almost guaranteed for the Axis.
I'll be as specific as I can here. With Global 1940, second edition rules and out of box setup, it appears decisive in favor of the axis. With that said, I never took the Allied side and so I must take the position that I keep an open mind on this. Against the players in the tournament, I saw no effective resistance despite numerous different strategies (not all allied responses I saw are listed in this video). Also, the bid restriction of one unit per sea zone/territory where one of your units already exists is more restrictive than most play groups. With that all out of the way, and because you asked, here is where I will/would start as the allies: there may be something to leaving at least SOME of the Russians adjacent to Korea. Next - Probably the most effective placement of a bid should be in China - can bid money be spent on Chinese artillery? (ask the play group or organizer) if so, I would dump most or all of the bid money into chinese infantry and artillery and launch counterattacks against japanese lodgements on China 1. The only moderately "soft spot" I felt as Japan was a mildly light amount of ground forces in China/SE Asia. Perhaps the allies can cause some "pain" or gum up the advance a bit in this way. But I don't know.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I haven't played a tournament, can you explain the bid restrictions? I would like to get involved in a tournament online. Any recommendations?
@@SurferJoe74 the bid restrictions depend on the tournament and its organizer. There is a league for G40 on axisandallies.org That is the only reliable place I know where there is a consistent tournament.
Currently using this strategy in global 1940 second edition. I’m done with turn 2 as Japan and so is USA. I’m setup how you have it at end of turn 2. USA has spent his 2 turns worth of IPC into his navy against Japan. He put his navy into the sea zone with midway and built a navy base, so I won’t be able to use any blockers to stop him from reaching sea zone 6. I plan on moving my navy to sea zone 6 along with most of my planes to be able to sink his fleet. I also plan on building ships on Indo China to be able to protect the transports at the money islands. Hopefully he pulls some of the income to go for Germany. I don’t know why he hasn’t since I’ve already taken London on turn 2. I feel like the best way to win is to win on the Europe side since I’m not having to face USA IPC production. Let me know what I should do to counter all his spending to go for Japan.
You took London on turn G2? Good lord, no offense to your opponent but that seems borderline negligent or shows a substantial lack of experience (but I could always be missing something). Given that, I have to first say that my advice will be from a position of not having this experience. With that out of the way - what you say sounds right/right-ish. If USA is doing that with Midway and his income, bulking up SZ6 is probably the right counter play. My advice is don't to get hung up on "killing his fleet". You are killing him by taking away his IPC down south. If it were me, I would not fight a battle I might lose. So I wouldn't move against him unless I had close t0 95% chance of success (is this game face to face? are you using battle calcs?). Also, in general, the FIC factory is for ground units. Naval units can be supplied by SZ6. Place naval units in SZ6 and just send south what you need from SZ6to the FIC sea zone. Don't forget you have the Kamikazes so if he attacks and you have a big battle in SZ6 or wherever you can use them, just use them all. Don't send more than one Kamikaze against an American ship. Put one on each American carrier if his planes are not in range of russia (so they cannot land) and then one on each cruiser/destroyer. Do not target the battleships. Take away raw attack points before the battle starts. Don't forget that the USA can hit the Caroline Islands as well. The good news for you about this is that whatever he sends down there can be hit by your navy units in the FIC sea zone (and hopefully some or most of Japanese air power). If he does move down there, you may have to engage in a big naval battle. Really don't want the USA spamming out of that sea zone. After another turn or two you should have the income to match spending with the USA in the Pacific but an equal priority is rolling through china and the middle east as Japan.
Attack, speed is the key
I know this has been brought up multiple times, but I just wanted to clarify since I'm sort of newer at Axis and Allies and want to make sure. But let's say Russia decides to stack everything in Amur and then come in to attack me after J2, and they end up taking both manchuria and korea....how would I react to this?
I can't reply to your comment - youtube keeps deleting it.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Sounds like a weird bug. Hopefully it’s resolved. I appreciate the answer to this if so!
@@maysenpai5645 I can share a TripleA file with you of an actual game where my allied opponent did this so you can see it.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 please do! I am preparing for an upcoming game which is the tourney version, but I expect they will have Russia do the same thing. I can email you or add on discord!
@@maysenpai5645 ryanvoz(at)yahoo.com
The good captain #5625
Hey mate, was this Karl’s strategy or did you take the attack everything sentiment and perfect it?
Heya Slip. I don't know Karl's strategy. My inspiration for this was General Hand Grenades video that I cite in the first minute of this video. He in turn is citing a fellow named "Cow" who wrote something up on the forums about this strategy back in 2013. I never looked it up but sketched my own J1 and perfected it over the course of nine games.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 O I though he said Karl not cow.
@@slipcapone1466 ah, no it was not Cow's strategy. I have never seen the thread but I have it on good authority that his opener is different... and in my strong opinion, less efficient ;)
I’m always confused by excitement over Axls strategies for g40. Is there a question that a j1, j2 or j3 attack would almost every time succeed. This puzzle has been completed. The mystery solved.
The sphinx s riddled is how to do the opposite. I think every tournament ought to require each side to switch sides. The bid doesn’t make the playing field level.
I have a video called the Bering strait ball buster that reduces the orange bloom I think and I m willing to roll some dice.
Hey I currently only have axis and Allies classic and I’m looking to get either anniversary edition or 1940 global which one do you recommend?
Hey Camden - hard to answer via text. My recommendation would be based on several factors. Are you trying to get others to play with you? If you are, how experienced are they? Are you playing solitaire? How much time are you willing to commit? There are many questions like this I could ask but without knowing anything except that you have Classic, I would say Anniversary is the next rung up the ladder. Global is great for a more historical flavor and if you have the time to commit to it.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 ok thank you
@@camden_raab9875 you can email me at ryanvoz at yahoo.com or skype me at ryan.voznick
I thought Kamikaze is only active after at least 1 island with the token has been captured or liberated from the Japanese?
The Kamikaze rules are two paragraphs on page 16 of the Pacific rulebook and there is no mention of this at all. So, no.
How is this balanced? How long take a game?
I'm not sure what you asking. With Europe and Pacific combined (global), the general consensus of the online community is that the Allies need a bid north of 50.
Question: what is stopping Russia from sending one infantry into Korea and what will you do?
What stops Russia from doing this is the following: 1) Loss of the Mongolia Rule and its protections for the rest of the game 2) The fact that there is a good chance that no IPCs will be collected from that territory given the presence of the IJN and the convoy zone adjacent 3) the presence of IJN transports/fleets/armies to easily remove the interloper on Japan's turn immediately following Russia's. Bottom line up front, there's a solid chance the Russians lose an infantry, gain no IPC and wreck the protections of the Mongolia Rule. I have a harder time seeing what is gained out of this move.
I think the real question is, what's stopping Russia from keeping all 18 infantry to include the 2 AAA?
@@ryanjw15 the fall of their capital to Germany.
Bold to assume the Germans will even make it there
@@ryanjw15 not with experience
All I could think of to counter this would be to have Russia throw the 18 infantry at Manchuria or Korea, have Anzac get aggressive with fighter buys and a defense of one of the Dutch East Indies islands and maybe a swipe at some Japanese naval units. Meanwhile USA goes full tilt towards Japan and buys straight battleships for a couple turns and goes 100% at Japan. India can go all tanks and retake Yunan with China. Maybe this 5vs1 scenario in the pacific could contain japan for long enough to swing the tide.
Playing a game against a fellow who is essentially executing the plan you mention above. I surmise it will have short term gains but not change the math any. Getting to eight victory cities Europe side appears a sure thing if so much attention is on Japan and so little on Germany/Italy. But we'll see...I'll post an update here (or maybe make a response video to this one in the future).
@@thegoodcaptain1217 So how did it go?
Any update on this
@@konstantinzavgorodniy3098 the game went three complete rounds of play. I haven’t heard from that opponent in about a month. It’s a bit early in the game to draw a conclusion but… things are going well enough as the Japanese. They’re about a turn behind where they should be and the Europe side is nearly completely neglected. Though I feel this will be an axis win, it will probably be on the Europe side, not the Pacific side. That being said, I feel confident enough to say that those Russians that start the game in the east probably should stay in the east. It is a thorn that needs to be in the side of the Japanese. I’m not sure how to keep Moscow safe without them though… but that’s a separate problem to solve.
There are 4 not 2 Chinese infantry to start in yunnan. Also your second round does not include placement of Chinese forces after their turn.
There are four infantry in Yunnan in the video. The video is correct. The stats are correct. You think you see two pieces only bc of the angle. Correct, the second round does not include placement of Chinese forces - it doesnt change the strat.
Why did you not use all of the Japan troops in China into the Chinese battles? You moved them in in the non combat, why not send them in?
Good question. In my experience, it’s just good habit not to commit units in the combat movement phase that aren’t needed. Battles can go sideways in other areas of the board that can alter the NCM. In the case of the first turn, this is unlikely but - still a good habit (imo).
Looks like he converted a fighter to TB. That isn't how the R&D chart works.
@@jaredcook8145 huh?
I would love to play
I appreciate that. Right now my game-time focus is mostly being spent on 1914 as that is the series that will begin dropping in the next 3-4 months. What's your playing experience? Do you play much on TripleA?
US1 the US moves their entire navy to SZ7, the best J2 move would be?
A) Move your entire navy back to SZ6 for the eventual J3 attack on the now retreating US navy, destroying their navy but putting you way out of position
B) Just retreat some fighters to defend SZ6/Japan along with the navy already stationed in SZ6, while the Philippines navy continues on to Malaya/DEI J2/J3
I saw a little of this, ya. Just seemed to take the US navy out of position more than anything else. SZ7 is a mobility kill for defending Hawaii as US boats are now too far to get back. In contrast, SZ6 for the Japanese can both defend Japan AND threaten Hawaii …and the Carolines …and the Philippines …and FIC….
Such a ridiculously strong opening for Japan, smh…
Sired blood on UA-cam has a strategy video on USA and Russia. It’s a very effective strategy that focuses on Japan. He can capture Japan in 6 turns and on a J1 that happens even sooner. I have played a couple games with this strategy and it seems like the USA focusing Japan and going for Tokyo works almost every time especially on a J1 attack by Japan. I encourage you to watch the video however in short Russia takes Korea and builds a naval base and USA has a naval base in Alaska and basically usa is just taking sea zone 6 healing their ships because of Korea and taking Japan in 4-6 turns.
Thanks for the recommend. Just watched it. I have some comments on this. This strategy assumes Russia, including its capital, is doomed by turn six which is mostly contrary to what I saw in online play. This move however, very much increases the likelihood of dooming Russia - this is not a criticism of the strategy yet. Next, counterplay by the Japanese player is really glossed over I feel. He asserts that a J1 would only make the outcome "happen faster" but doesn't expand. My instinct based on the lack of resume and discussion of tactics is that he played this once or twice in face to face games and then cut the video. Japan can't stack in Manchuria and drop a blocker in Korea? There's no realistic way to outright defeat those 18 infantry and eliminate the threat? Goodness, if that happened then the USA/Russian ports totaling 30 IPC become dead income. This is IPC the allies can really not afford to lose. The Mongolia rule is no longer in effect for the Russians. The most damning part to me though is that with no American involvement on the Europe side, I feel like that's GG. I do feel strongly that this would end with an Axis win due to their ability to capture the cities they need including Cairo/Moscow (I can/should/will eventually get around to cutting a video for that side of the board). I have so many other questions/comment but will just end it here on a note that is more supportive of this strategy. In my video, there is an asterisk that appears in the top corner of the screen. I put this in as a note to my future self. I feel strongly that if there is a way to mess with or stop the J1, it has something to do with Russia. And in that spirit, I am supportive/like this video. Despite my misgivings, its at least novel and a bit outside of the box. So despite my criticisms, again thanks for this recommend, this was very interesting.
What are your thoughts? How many games did you play with this strat? Online/F2F? Interested to hear more about your experience.
Sired blood is a very experienced player of 1940 and other axis and allies games. I played 3 different games with 3 different opponents face to face including people from different areas of North America(I find people play the game a little bit different everywhere). I recreated this USA-Russia strategy with my brother and yes America took Japan on turn 6 as siredblood said in the video however that was on a J4 attack. I tried this strategy against my opponent after they performed a J1 and I captured Tokyo even sooner I believe turn 5. Most people dare I say all do not see this usa-russia strategy coming which i believe is part of the reason why it was so lethal. Once Tokyo falls there is really no way the axis are recapturing it. From that point on it becomes a race for the allies to defend their remaining cities on the Europe side to hold from losing and the us can either capture all japans old cities and try and win off of that or they can try and corner Germany and force them into a forfeit as they just cannot break through and capture the final needed cities to win. Eventually yes after a few turns the USA can capture all japans old cities and win however they have to do that before Germany is able to acquire victory on the Europe side of the map. In my personal play I have found that the USA economy is simply too much for Japan to handle even with their starting power. I believe this strategy can be delayed by Japan, but I think that the USA can take Japan no matter what. However wether that is on turn 5 or turn 7 depends on the Japan player. You can not take India while being fully focused by USA and this leaves pacific UK and ANZAC to take the money islands from you as you have to defend Tokyo. If you are a savvy player you can possibly try and defend the islands a little longer without losing a ton of defence strength you need against the USA. However japans economy just crumbles and it feels as though there’s nothing the japan player can do. We could talk about this forever but I’ll leave you with this for now. I will be playing against an experienced 1940 player(30+ games) later this month and I’ll try the J1 and I will try this USA-Russia strategy and Weil see how it goes. Thanks for the response!
@@hoodrekt5887 what’s your bid for the Allies (if any)? I do believe there is only a slight adjustment needed for Japan to effect the J1 more or less normally and get by. I just gamed the first two turns a couple times to see how that would handle. Of course, this is theoretical. Much depends on bid and bid placement. I will leave an open invitation to you or anyone who would like to game this on TripleA. It looks worth looking into.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 sorry for the late response (been busy). I usually play no bid and if there is it usually is less than 10 and goes on the Europe side of the board. I would love to game this out however I don’t know if I can find the time as of now to be honest. I will keep the invitation in mind! Thank you!
In 2011 my best friend and I had the J1 attack perfected and ran over a player who was doing an all sub US strategy, plus who was doing an illegal Sino-Soviet pac move at GenCon. At that time though, the J1 attack didn't matter because Germany had a nearly unstoppable attack on Britain, with something like a 90% success rate. Britain was undefendable, so it mattered not what the Japanese were doing. Funny seeing this video 11 years later...
Was this played with some variant of the 1st edition ruleset?
@@thegoodcaptain1217
I think it was first edition, we were part of the original online community posting feedback on the first edition that ultimately led to the second edition.
@@robertmoffitt1336 Right. It might play a bit differently now that its played 2E.
Isn't the Us Navy in a very good position to sink your Navy in the Carolines Islands?
No, the USA navy does not have a good position to sink the IJN around the Carolines. There is something like a 1.5% chance of that battle resulting in a victory for them. If that isn't reason enough to stand down, remember that any damaged battleships and carriers would be able to repair at the top of the next Japan turn due to the port facility. Any aircraft that landed on the islands as a result of the damaged carriers can simply hop back on at that time. An attack by the USA player would be catastrophic even in the IPC exchange (value of pieces lost on either side).
Thank tou for the answer.In J2 you move your transports from Japan to FIC without any navy to protect them.If there is Anzac boats nearby or a bomber in Sydney the transports can be crushed without assistance unless you are solely depending on the scrable.How would you counter the US Navy constantly bringing capital ships to sea zone 26 or sea zone 7 and bombers to Midway threatening your Capital or even landing to Mancuria and the Russian stack protecting a possible IC there? I find the Japanese will have a hard time Contesting so many ipcs in navy and Planes to protect their navy and their capital.
@@stefgo2814sorry about the delay - just seeing this. The Japanese player can easily spar off any USA buildup using their massive at start forces and match the USA purchases. The defensive triangle is almost impossible to pierce. The Allies need a bid of approximately +50 to have a chance.
Russians moving all 18 men up would put a big slow to that strategy. In ur 9 wins no one moved all
There are a couple points during this video where an asterisk appears. This is a note to my future self to play test with just such a strategy. If there is any hope of defusing the J1, it would be the Russians that did it.
If players are good then you are forced to bid like 40-50 extra IPCs of units for the allies to balance the game, a lot of it comes from the J1 attack. I think your opponents massively underestimated you and underbid.
However I think you missed a key value in the J1 attack, you can actually also take Borneo on J1 with the transport on SZ 20. That's 4 extra IPCs for you and 4 less for the UKPAC
why didn't you do this? The way to do it is to not do the attack on Hunan and just use the forces in Kiangsi to attack Kwangtung (taking 1 inf from Kiangsi to attack borneo)
This would free up the TT on J2 to attack one of the islands in indonesia for even more money.
The opening that is typically done to stop this in global is to stack yunnan with a bid of 3 RU fighters 1 Chinese artillery and push Yunnan (with 1 UK sub and a fighter in scotland to round out the bid) Or they open up full Kill japan first. With the following US1 purchase
2 Aircraft carriers + 2 fighters and go full KJF, bring the cruiser from Seazone 101 to SZ 11 and push into hawaii with your navy. This is the only strategy other than yunnan stacking that I have had any success against J1 with. The reason this works is the USA is trying to actually push on Japanese early enough to stop the flow of income from indonesia. If the japanese control indonesia the game is lost IMO. On US2 the USA should have 3 Aircraft carriers 7 fighters+1 tactical bomber 3 Cruisers 1 battleship 2 destroyers and 1 submarine in Hawaii ready to push.
The Japanese are much stronger than the pacific allies but the war in Europe requires the axis to take either Cairo or London to win. so if you bolster Cairo a lot and defeat the Japanese fast enough with the USA the allies can actually win.
AFAICT there is almost no way to win if you do not put 100% of the USA's focus into the pacific.
Taking Borneo J1 exposes a Japanese transport to the UK navy. The risk or assets needed to babysit it are a turn off for me based on how easy it is to pick up on J2. Most of the rest of what you say here leaves me scratching my head. I've not heard of a Russian bid allowed in China. That sounds like some extremely loose bid placement restrictions to say the least. The bit about London/Cairo on the Europe side is also unrelatable to me. Europe side was almost worse than the Japanese side in my experience. Simply moving the German army adjacent to Moscow and then sending some forces south to wreck the middle east and pick up all the National Objectives wrenched a concession from each opponent. I think I actually captured Moscow once in the tournament. Victory cities are, in my opinion, a total distraction. It's enough to simply make 30ish more IPC than the other side to have an "economic" victory and expect a concession.
I know you're focusing on 1914 but I'd be willing to play on triple A to show you these ideas, just know that you are a much better player than me so after like J3 you'd crush me through fundementals (forgot to say this but great video)
(appearently youtube ate my inital comment so here it is)
On J2 you can take all of indonesia and secure your NO if you take borneo J1. League plaeyrs often do that.
The Bid for the RU Yunnan stack is Fighter Moscow, Fighter Volgograd fighter Caucusus Artillery Yunnan
Killing Japan first obviously doesn''t work if Japan manages to hold indonesia. If that happens then the axis cruise to an easy victory. but IF you manage to beat the Japanese as the USA in the pacific, then you have a fight for Cairo. A few league games show this (and many more show Japan just crushing :D)
If you want to play the game I'll start a PBF game on playboardgames in axisandallies.org and we can play there.
@@ussgordoncaptain I very much appreciate this comment. I have much respect for your (or anyone's) willingness to run a game to communicate strategy. I think its the purest form of communication in this game. To be clear, if/when we play this game I would not be playing as someone defending their ego - I would be playing in the spirit of someone who is interested in seeing this (your) strategy in its best possible interpretation. Even if you "lose" as you say - it won't matter for the point I can see you're trying to demonstrate. I'd be happy to play but you hit me at a very demanding time. I'm currently playing 5 games of 1914 at the moment and thats about all I can do at one time. Can we play in/around December-ish? I would like to play the game as you describe. In the meantime, can you link to the bid rules we would be using?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 The same bid rules as mentioned in this video! The bid would be
Art Yunnan
Art Szchwan
Fighter Russia
Fighter Caucusus's
Sub SZ98
Fighter Scotland
Sub SZ 91
and of course I'll wait, as I said I knew you were busy with 1914
@@ussgordoncaptain okay. that is a VERY healthy bid for the allies. This is too funny though - I posted this video on the AnA FB page and in the comments section I said, "I believe the allies need a bid that approaches 50 IPC to have a chance." I got a barrage of incredibly unintelligent and critical comments about that being "way too much" in favor of the allies.
Absolutely insane.
I'm curious to see would Japan have won the war using this strategy in the real 1940, not the world where Japan has the biggest air force in the world.
I feel strongly this is a game in abstract that is in no way suited to answer the question you're pondering. I struggle to understand comments on realism in a game that is barely more complex than Risk.
I’ve partially deluded myself into believing that this is a very accurate World War 2 simulator for what ifs, soooo…
But yeah, the other part of me that isn’t delusional agrees with you on that.
By the way do you know any actual World War 2 what if simulators?
I’ve partially deluded myself into believing that this is a very accurate World War 2 simulator for what ifs, soooo…
But yeah, the other part of me that isn’t delusional agrees with you on that.
By the way do you know any actual World War 2 what if simulators?
@@AChannelThatDoesNothing Well, I feel that every war game is a 'what if simulator' by some degree. In my opinion, it just come down to how much extrapolation is built in. For Axis and Allies - there is a ton of extrapolation. On the other extreme, there is a game called Advanced Squad Leader which has a larger player base than Axis and Allies ever will and has an extraordinary amount of detail. This comes at a cost. The rule book is incredibly long and detailed.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Thanks for the tip! I'll go check it out.
I am all for heretics :-) Goog job.
Why not take Shan State in the first round? Second turn Japan you take it with the moved infantry from Siam. It’s a 1 IPC extra.
Also, the allied player can leave the UK destroyer and cruiser. It can function as a blocker for India. It can put all of his forces into Burma. Anzac can put his 3 fighters to Burma second round. Russia can declare war on Japan and bring the russian mech and tank with the fighter and tactical to Szechwan. With the extra Chinees units put on Szechwan and the russian troops the odds are in the favour of the chinese.
When UK is building in turn 2 the factory in middle east they can build the fighters for Russia.
For the rest, I am also using the J1. Its very powerfull and yes, you will win the game.
Maybe we can find out a way to look at the game and prevend this.
If you want we can set up a game in TrippleA. I am having some theories for the allies to give them more power.
Greetings from the Netherlands,
Jamay Eekhof.
@@jtheekhof4921 in order: by taking Shan State on J1, you expose the Japanese infantry to destruction on UK1 at a time when every piece on the Asian mainland is just too vital, especially since Shan is only worth 1 IPC. In my opinion, trading a 3 IPC unit in a critical area of the board at a critical moment to gain 1 IPC back is a non-starter. If the UK use their cruiser and destroyer as blockers, I'm rubbing my hands in glee as the Japanese. We have plenty of naval and especially air units on J2 to remove UK units (that the UK basically cannot replace). Whatever territories they were blocking for are not that interesting since there are so many other territories that need conquering or reinforcing. We will get to the "blocked" territories next turn or the following.
The Burma play - though popular, I know - is bizarre to me. I saw this several times and simply hit other targets, captured other territories and generally ignored that space until I had enough forces in position to make them fall back to India. Moving Russian troops into China takes away from the already precarious defense of Russia itself. Also, as a general axiom of axis and allies, multinational forces in something like equal numbers are fine for defense but are dubious when it comes to offensive potential. I had several games where I placed an inferior Japanese army next to Yunnan knowing that the Russians/British/Chinese didn't have enough strength by themselves to remove me. Russia can declare war, yes. There is a rather heavy cost for Russia when doing that and you mention part of it. The UK spamming fighters trying to make up for the 18 infantry that aren't going to Moscow has its own problems (for the British as well as the Russians). But I agree that if there is a way to diffuse the J1 or to make it less lethal, it may have something to do with the Russians (that's actually why you see asterisks at a couple points in the video when I mention the Russians - they are notes to my future self).
@@jtheekhof4921 normally, I would say "hell ya" but I am stacking games of 1914 at the moment for a future series on this channel. If this is an open invitation, I would LOVE to stack a few games to see if we can break the J1 but I will need at least six month before I could start that project. I will PM you on this thread at that time if you're still interested though. Thanks for offering this. It is so hard to find people who actually PLAY.
@@jtheekhof4921 I love your country by the way. Amsterdam is wonderful. I did a battlefield tour of Arnhem (Market-Garden). I remain stunned at how kind-hearted and respectful your countrymen are. Greetings from California.
For Japan a J1 attack is great. Germany will probaly not like it as it helps the British in Europe and as it makes the rush to Moscow even more hasty before US troops comes to Europe.
I think the british need a factory in Persia and maybye even a second one in Iraq to keep the japanses away from India. As the Germans will not be able to Sea Linon with US in the war turn 1 I guess that is my main response to the J1 plus leaving some Soviet units in China and/or near Manchuria/Korea as a threat.
I agree but for one or possibly two points. The first is that Germany needs to rush to Moscow. If I ever cut a video for that side of the board, the main argument will be to avoid that big fight in Moscow and instead to just move adjacent to it while concurrently sending units south to clean out the south of Russia and acquire all the National Objectives. The UK factories become overwhelmed (in my experience) trying to hold of the Germans from the North, the Japanese from the East and sending units to Moscow to keep them from falling. The other possible misconception is that sealion is off the table. The J1 seems quite powerful and so the USA player may feel the need to go entirely into the Pacific to prevent an early loss. If this happens and you have a lax UK player, I feel the G3 sealion is still viable. In fact, there is someone who left a comment on this video where he in fact did both. I think the UK should still respect that this is a possibility and make arrangements.
BOTH Germany and Japan must attack very aggressively in order to win the game. That is how the game is designed. A passive Axis player will lose over the long run. It's as simple as that really.
I feel this game is extraordinarily imbalanced in favor of the Axis - although, in general, I can agree with you.
When I do J1 I can get all the money islands in J2 + what you've got here. I've never played bids but that should make it easier. I like the naval base on Hainan. I do that too but never seen anyone else do it. 2 turns to threaten India with JP transports!
You give up taking Malaya on T1 to take Borneo and then T2 you can take the rest. I typically lose the Caroline islands but they don't offer any economic objectives. I've debated doing the Airfield in French Indo China too but I usually keep some fighters back in JP to protect transports from any carrier launched raids in that SZ with the destroyer vs the block. USA could still move to SZ7 and launch planes to JP SZ 6. You have a faster concentration of power in the air force w/ that base though. I might try that but at like T3.
@@drewdawson7064 It's not just about economic objectives. Look at where the Caroline Islands are. Look at the strategic value they could offer to the United States. With the Caroline Islands, they can reach anywhere on the coast of the United States to include 3 out of the 4 money islands, and provide a great place to store bombers and sea units that require repairs.
Lmao I tried this …yunnan was the worst I only had a fighter and infantry left 😂 others tho were sound esp the UK battle ship got wiped clean
Tired this on Triple A - the Americns came up through Soviet Far East and the Russians doubled back - had 18 Trrops on Amur and Americans 2 toops artillery and mech in SFE with airforce in Midway :)
@@IanWarnerUK against a human opponent this happened?
@@thegoodcaptain1217 The AI was an interesting concept I thought you may investigate as I didnt see in your vid. If you push on to AUS it can be exposed perhaps
@@IanWarnerUK gotcha. I heard the AI was atrocious - i stick with human opponents.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Ha yeah, it has the option for HardAI which was fun, but still weak really, I am getting back into A&A after many years, your tactic was Amazing BTW and worked well to get Japan up the IPC charts very quickly
In the end I had issues up north, but as my IPC count was high just spammed tons of destroyers in one turn to counter that
I am loving Global 40 also always played classic
And if Russia attacks Manchuria with 18 infantry? that's what any good player will do lol.
This appears to slow the Japanese a bit and then Moscow falls like a rock without those troops.
Still, I believe that particular knock on effect might be resolved in some other way. And so I agree that Russia cannot relocate those troops and must keep them involved on the Pacific side.