"Japan + British" vs USA?

[the Elf of the Orient]

Just thinking about something crazy. Is it possible to play "Japan + British" vs USA? Balanced?

[Zero Pilot]

In this scenario, taking the US capitol would still be far fetched. Which leaves a VP win. But there wouldn't be as many IPC's available for Japan to take/hold with the UK on their side either.

This severely limits the playout. Japan would take the Phillipines J1, probably wouldn't touch Hawaii all game... which would give them 2 VPs/turn. But that would be pretty much it offensively.

The game is then basically reduced to skirmishing with the US while trying to hold on to the orig. Japanese territories and the Phillipines for 11 (!) rounds. It would be extremely static and boring for Japan/UK, they'd be in defensive mode after J1.

If the US takes 1 Japanese (IPC valued) territory it would reduce them to 1 VP and double the number of defensive rounds Japan/UK would have to hold out. So at first glance it seems like this should well be an easy win against the US. But considering it's now a VP game (with nothing much left for Japan to take) ironically it may favor the US.

So all things considered, I think this scenario would require major changes in the rules/setup/victory conditions to be useable. ~ZP

[RuHurt]

I don't know... Seems to me that with Australia and Japan working together, they could take Hawaii, and bring the fight right to the U.S. You're right, it would become more of a VP battle, but it could be worth trying....

[Zero Pilot]

True, but just a single round of US cash could plunk 20-some infantry on the west coast. Consider the forces needed to be brought amphibious for a capitol win against just 1 such round of defensive purchase. The US would see it coming well in advance and with no further encroachment possible on their cash flow they would always have the IPC's to defend easily.

If Japan/UK went after Hawaii, a wise US player would not take it back. They'd just start buying bombers and promptly SBR Japan below 1 VP.

So without alterations I don't think you could really take the fight to the US, but agree it might be a novel VP game at that. And I'm sure it could be balanced with significant changes, but it seems a large portion of the map would be kinda moot.~ZP

[Frog]

Crazy idea, what if you made the Chineese territories worth IPC's so Japan could get more income?? Then it would be Japan & British vs. U.S. & china. ???

What do you think??

[Zero Pilot]

Good idea. Take some of the US income and give it to the Chinese territories which would put Asia back into the game. I considered that too. Ideally it should be possible for Japan to get 3-4 VPs/turn (4 if they hold most everything they can). 12 Chinese territories at 2 IPC ea. would do it. Shave those 24 IPC's right off the US income.

But you wouldn't want China to be too powerful. Assming they still only build infantry, that's 8 per turn. Hmm... but again it gives India a purpose, and you have Japan coming from the other end. You would actually want to track a larger (combined) VP balance from both Japan and the UK, to give the US incentive to go after/take UK ground. (VP victory conditions adjusted accordingly of course).

I think it could work, obviously the key to success with this scenario would be determining the starting set-up and territory/IPC balance. ~ZP