♥♥♥ Attack Hawaii Turn 1 or No?

[Duke of Zork]

Should the Japanese attack Hawaii on Turn 1, or is it better to consolidate their Fleet?

Also, does the answer depend on whether or not the Brits attack Sea Zone 37 on Turn 1?

[Duke of Zork]

Funny that censorbot considers it obscene to abbreviate "Japanese", but not obscene to abbreviate "British". That makes absolutely no sense.

[King Richard III]

If UK is successful in sea zone 37 and he has boats left over including the C, S and T that start in sea zone 39 (southern coast Australia). Then I think you gotta go for UK boats and leave hawaii alone. It's really hard to spread out and get everything on round 1. Guaranteed one of those "strong" or "favorable" battles will go horribly wrong for you.

Most of the time. UK doesn't attack sea zone 37. It's not a good battle for them.

And on a side note. I've noticed that if Germany takes out the destroyer sitting adjacent to Trans-Jordan and lands units into Trans-jordan (on round 1), then the UK will focus on taking that out, using the fighter (egypt), bomber (uk) and fighter from AC off of India. Thus leaving Japan navy alone in sea zone 37.

[jackson.brookins]

It's because the abbreviated form of Japanese is an ethnic slur. And to answer your question yes it depends entirely on what happened leading up to J1. A UK strike on SZ37 is a strong KJF indicator and clearing out the Hawaiian fleet can help slow that down. Personally I never do it unless I have to. I'd rather have the fighter that starts on Japan pressuring India and helping snag income from USA/China and Russia. Depends on what you send to SZ53 but most games if it attacks Hawaii it's guaranteed to go down.

[Duke of Zork]

引用自 jackson.brookins：

It's because the abbreviated form of Japanese is an ethnic slur.

No, it isn't. If it were, if abbreviations really did constitute slurs, then Brit would also be a slur, and it isn't.

And to answer your question yes it depends entirely on what happened leading up to J1. A UK strike on SZ37 is a strong KJF indicator and clearing out the Hawaiian fleet can help slow that down. Personally I never do it unless I have to. I'd rather have the fighter that starts on Japan pressuring India and helping snag income from USA/China and Russia. Depends on what you send to SZ53 but most games if it attacks Hawaii it's guaranteed to go down.

Okay, let's say that a Brit attack on SZ 37 means a KJF strategy. The attack on SZ 37 is likely to decimate a lot of your fleet. And if you attack Hawaii, you'll lose a lot more either in the attack or the counter-attack, or both.

So, if the Allies are pursuing a KJF strategy, you probably shouldn't help them by engaging in a battle of attrition in Hawaii.

The question mark is that even if the Allies aren't pursuing a KJF strategy, the attack on SZ 37 makes some sense. The alternative is trying to take out the transport in SZ 61 and taking out Borneo, and losing all your ships in the counter-attack.

I usually try a Brit attack on SZ 37 even if I'm not pursuing a KJF strategy, UNLESS the Germans take out the Fighter in Egypt on T1, in which case it's not worth it.

[We're Needed]

No. No. No.
The slur version of "Japanese" is offensive because of its history, not because it's an abbreviation.
And Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but the people there would not care to be called "Brits".

[Jonny B God]

Well, if UK does attack SZ37, they prob used their transports smart, maybe borney, maybe new guinea, or saving it for east indies UK2. I even saw UK take East indies UK1.! Point is for hawai attack to be smart, you need strong enough attack, and ability to counter attack the us counterattack on J2, meaning BS+destroyer within range. of hawai.. and that not possible with uk roaming south pacific...

[Duke of Zork]

引用自 We're Needed：

No. No. No.
The slur version of "Japanese" is offensive because of its history, not because it's an abbreviation.

No, it isn't. If it were, you'd be able to explain how. Sounds like you're just repeating something you heard, but didn't understand.

And Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but the people there would not care to be called "Brits".

Right, because that's a different nationality than the one they want, not an abbreviation of the same one. You're making my point for me.

[Juggernaut]

Pearl Harbour is a bad battle for axis in almost every situation. If it is KGF, your fighters are needed to secure german positioning and should be threatening a german stack on Ukraine from Kwangtung on G2. If it is KJF, losing a japanese plane OR naval HP is unacceptable against competent US play because you cannot replace it as fast as they can. Your goal should be to attack inland to secure income as efficiently and profitably as possible.

Pearl Harbour is an average profit of around 7 IPC and slows the US by practically nothing, kills no transports, does not stop them from trading borneo on US3, removes pressure from india and china, and means your inland threat multiplication is missing 3 essential air attacking pieces for both J1 and J2.

If the enemy SZ37s you, air is needed to clear the remnants or UKs turn 1 fleet buy in India. If no UK fleet is left, see above.

[Ris Dnalor]

引用自 We're Needed：

No. No. No.
The slur version of "Japanese" is offensive because of its history, not because it's an abbreviation.
And Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but the people there would not care to be called "Brits".

We all know this is correct.

Duke of York is just either being willfully oblivious, and choosing to substitute reality with their own version of things, or is trying to bait some people with nonsense.

[Sergeant_Pepper]

"♥♥♥ is an English abbreviation of the word "Japanese". Today, it is generally regarded as an ethnic slur, although English-speaking countries differ in the degree to which they consider the term offensive." wikipedia

Oxford dictionary labels it "offensive" before describing the word as an abbreviation.

[simon_hibbs]

Honestly Pearl harbour is a coin flip as to whether it's advisable or not. I almost always do PH Lite, which is where you don't send in the carrier, but do send in the fighter and bomber from the mainland. The mainland fighter is expendable in this scenario, as saving it endangers the carrier. I used to not do it, but I've found it doesn't really slow me down on the mainland and I almost always get a fighter and bomber back. Japan is navy and fighter-heavy and losing the cruiser and sub, and even a fighter, barely slows them down. If you don't kill that AC, DD and fighter, and US goes KGF, Germany will be facing those units in a few turns anyway if you let them survive.

A successful UK SZ37 attack, or even just a sacrificial transport attack that takes Borneo, is annoying. The first few times I had to deal with it, I got thrown for a loop and didn't know how to react, but recently it's not been an issue. You just have to take it on methodically, plan things well in advance and adapt to the situation as there are so many variables. Here are some options.

Retaking Borneo J1 can be a stretch. It can slow you down too much on the mainland. Maybe focus on destroying any supporting air/sea around the island J1, then use a transport to retake J2 using the land units on Phillippines.

If you are in a KJF and US builds a Pacific fleet you can either Build 2 ICs on the mainland (Manchuria and Kwantung) and stack Japan with troops, or maybe go for a Philippines IC. Focus on surviving and draining Allied resources.

As always the temptation is to sacrifice units in desperate attacks to try and beat the clock. This is almost always a mistake, unless you have a truly golden opportunity, usually because your opponent made a serious error. Even then, think it through and have a backup plan.

[Juggernaut]

引用自 simon_hibbs：

Honestly Pearl harbour is a coin flip as to whether it's advisable or not. I almost always do PH Lite, which is where you don't send in the carrier, but do send in the fighter and bomber from the mainland. The mainland fighter is expendable in this scenario, as saving it endangers the carrier. I used to not do it, but I've found it doesn't really slow me down on the mainland and I almost always get a fighter and bomber back. Japan is navy and fighter-heavy and losing the cruiser and sub, and even a fighter, barely slows them down. If you don't kill that AC, DD and fighter, and US goes KGF, Germany will be facing those units in a few turns anyway if you let them survive.

A successful UK SZ37 attack, or even just a sacrificial transport attack that takes Borneo, is annoying. The first few times I had to deal with it, I got thrown for a loop and didn't know how to react, but recently it's not been an issue. You just have to take it on methodically, plan things well in advance and adapt to the situation as there are so many variables. Here are some options.

Retaking Borneo J1 can be a stretch. It can slow you down too much on the mainland. Maybe focus on destroying any supporting air/sea around the island J1, then use a transport to retake J2 using the land units on Phillippines.

If you are in a KJF and US builds a Pacific fleet you can either Build 2 ICs on the mainland (Manchuria and Kwantung) and stack Japan with troops, or maybe go for a Philippines IC. Focus on surviving and draining Allied resources.

As always the temptation is to sacrifice units in desperate attacks to try and beat the clock. This is almost always a mistake, unless you have a truly golden opportunity, usually because your opponent made a serious error. Even then, think it through and have a backup plan.

I think your assessment is quite reasonable, but Germany facing more ships doesnt change too much usually. As germany I am usually extremely reluctant to trade air for navy, especially against a med shuck where I am getting at most 2 transports, and that is the greatest threat of the pearl fleet.

I agree that the loss does barely slow them down in most cases, but I think for the sake of efficiency it is just a suboptimal use of pieces. You can get much more value out of your air preserving Japan's starting units by taking overwhelmingly favourable battles in the early rounds.

[Clionerd]

The only British-connected language the game flags is if the letter f comes right before UK. It wouldn't let me say "if UK builds..." because it thinks eff space you kay is a swear word.

In the U.S., using the word spelled jay ay pee while assaulting someone would be a hate crime. See also John Dower's book on the Pacific War, _War Without Mercy_, for how the word has been used in racialized ways.

[Tomaster]

引用自 Clionerd：

The only British-connected language the game flags is if the letter f comes right before UK. It wouldn't let me say "if UK builds..." because it thinks eff space you kay is a swear word.

In the U.S., using the word spelled jay ay pee while assaulting someone would be a hate crime. See also John Dower's book on the Pacific War, _War Without Mercy_, for how the word has been used in racialized ways.

Oh my God! Go away! Hate crime smate crime. So sick of that bs.

[Juggernaut]

This is an A&A forum, politics/religion, disputes about whether or not language is derogatory even if there is no intent have no place here. Take it to dms please.