Liam

Stalin, it is true that it would be hard for the Royal navy to fully counter the U-boat threat with all the other threats at sea to her Empire. Though she managed just barely to survive. U-boat UnterseeBoat, which must translate into UnderSeaBoat? But I have bad understanding of German. From WIKI I've heard their casualty rate was 28,000, 75%. I think that I would volunteer to be a Forward Observer Instead and surrender! That is almost like serving on the Eastern Front! SO the cost of killing whatever the Germans killed, was not free. I'm certian unrestricted U-boat warfare on Capitol ships would've faired no better than on Convoys. Of course many of their casualties happened long after their cover was blown and they should've been retired. When the Allies had Proper Escorts, Airpower with Range to spot,ASW the U-boat was dead end weapon. A deathtrap for the Kriegsmarine. They needed to totally rethink their strategies and doctrine, it just didn't happen in time. As for U-boat vs BB, CV or Destroyer. to Make it more realistic to cut down the damage inflicted upon the BB, perhaps we'd simulate history a bit better. Though perhaps adding a percentage chance of a torpedo hitting a vital portion of the Ship? Like 1 in 5 chance that a BB is totally sunk by 1 Sub contact and reduce the damage a Sub can inflict to 1 that to me is history From what I understand Japan, USA, Italy, UK and France all had Subs too, all not represented in the game as they were. All effecting various Theatres. IN SC2 many of these are Abstractions, like Malta Effect. P.S. U-47 that sank the Royal Oak would disappear March 7 1941 for good and 45 of her crew P.S.S. 28,000 men, what did the average BB hold 2,000, 3,000 men. Naval Men are hard to train and replace. That is almost equal to 10 German BBs in manpower

I know this may be hypocritical Minty for me to say, but please refrain from the references below. It's a pixel game not real. That is why there is no Swatika flying over the German Capitol. As for the fortification speeds, really shouldn't matter too too much. Historically in WW2 I think we all found out that Forts were overrated for the most part. None prevented any army group from accomplishing it's goal. In that SC fortifications may be a bit overpowered

Precisely, those Bombers get ignored once placed, they may strike once or twice in a game. The Original Atlantic War consisted of the Long Range combination of Air-Sea Power to close the net so small on U-boats they had a narrow strip of ocean that was not patrolled in the Atlantic. Once the USA came in, it was a matter of #s, and the losses were of no great significance anymore... Previous to that, Female Britishers were promoted to not smoke so that British Servicemen could U-boats at least now have "some survivability" in most Strategic Games they're not direct Naval Pieces but rather delegated to purely Commerce raiding and only interact with Destroyers or Convoy Escorts. Now I do understand they were also used well against Fleets, the MiniSub Frogman attack on Port Alexandria... Very decisive, and the the near threat on Tirpitz far greater than the aerial Bombing on her that missed initially. Considering the grand scope of SC2 we take into consideration that a Sub is all these things, that you can if you wish alter it's original use and tactical objective. U-boats are torpedo armed miniships though, and we should never forget that ultimately they had the worst casualties of the War. So the fact a Sub dies the minute it tries to break out is fact. It would if any effort went into it. The Bismark was no different. If you have the resources you can kill anything! Before their tech they had to run surface quite a bit and were extremely vulnerable. Even with Tech, the Counter Tech lead to their ultimate Destruction. Watch the Movies Engima-ASW-Air-More AntiSub Ships nothing could've saved the U-boat past the US entry into the War.

Stalin, I disagree. Historically in WW2 there is little BB-Sub interaction. Were there, I'm certain that the casualties on both sides would be fairly bad if the sub was used properly to sneak attack the BB. The Destroyer is supposed to hunt and destroy, the BB is supposed to provide fire Support on the beachhead, it's supposed to sink other Heavy Ships. Really, a Submarine sinking a BB is a chance encounter or a lucky one. There should be dozens of ships of the line screening her protecting this valuable asset. That is the way it worked then anyway. You have to consider only 2 major ships dying during the height of the War in the Atlantic that were BBs to Subs means likely that those ships may have been caught offguard only... and relatively in SC2, or WAW I'm certian that 5 or 6 BBs could die in 1 week due to Subs is a little bit of a stretch

Stalin, It's a point. Though 2 or 3 Battleships is hardly much to consider, when Carrier born aircraft, land based Anti-Shipping Units sunk/damaged dozens of BBs, CVs, etc... Who really needs subs for this job when they're much better commerce hunters. The Most Mighty Western BB of the War was destroyed by a biplane off a Carrier! That and thousands of BB CV shells

Yes indeed, some Major BBs were sunk by Subs, but I refer to some info I picked up on a site: WellsBrothers ATT 1. Submarines vs Battleship in WWI Submarines proved to be a significant threat to battleships during World War I. Submarines torpedoed and sank at least seven British and French pre-dreadnought battleships, while an eighth (the Russian Peresviet) was sunk in a minefield layed by a submarine. The faster and more heavily protected dreadnoughts fared considerably better. The only dreadnought sunk by a submarine was the British Audacious, which foundered after striking a mine that had been laid by a submarine. None were sunk by torpedoes, though several were hit. While battleships were never intended for anti-submarine warfare, curiously enough, one submarine was actually sunk by a battleship! HMS Dreadnought rammed and sank the German U-29 on 18 March 1915 off Morray Firth. 2.The Inter-War Era (1919-1938) It should not be surprising that battleships did not see any combat in the Inter-War era. It is therefore hard to judge their effectiveness or their vulnerability given the lack of actual combat data. Nevertheless, political authorities considered them enough of a threat to feel that their numbers should be limited by treaty. Technology advanced in this era, as it usually does, and naval weapons technology was no exception. Aircraft carriers were actually developed during World War I, but between the wars they started to become more of a threat to surface ships. Additionally, submarines and torpedos continued to advance. Battleships of course responded to these technological threats. Antiaircaft guns were developed, and older battleships were fitted with anti-torpedo bulges. Most new battleships built between the wars had anti-torpedo protection included in their hull designs. 3. Submarines vs. Battleships in World War II Submarines had less success against battleships than they did in World War I. While submarines and torpedes improved between the wars, anti-submarine sensors, weapons, and tactics improved even more rapidly. As a result, HMS Royal Oak and HMS Barham were the only battleships sunk by submarines during World War II. The Japanese battlecruiser Kongo was also sunk by a submarine near the end of the war. Perhaps as notable as these submarine successes were the failures. For example, the Japanese submarine I-19 torpedoed the American battleship USS North Carolina (BB-55) in September 1942, yet she not only remained afloat, but was able to continue operations. The same attack sank the carrier USS Wasp (CV-7). There were numerous other instances where submarines fired torpedoes against battleships, and missed completely. History books seldom record such unremarkable failures, but we've found numerous instances. Doesn't Seem accurate that a Sub is a BB Killer does it? Of the dozens if not nearly 100plus BBs of WW2? That'd be somewhere like a 1 or 2% death rate to Subs My Resource: http://home.att.net/~wellsbrothers/Battleships/obsolete.html Since only what 2 BBs so many, and so many were obsolete WW1, Battlecruisers, etc.. I think my point is proven [ November 22, 2007, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Liam ]

FuChu, how many Minors surrendered previously to this Leap in Morale? If 3 or 4 all did within 2 game turns it's understandable, it's blitzkrieg and a part of the game engine. At Supply 10, with that many surrendering Minors that is not impossible, or more Minors... HotSeat it and see with that many Minors surrendering what your Morale is, it'll probably show up with those given conditions the same every time.

Nearing that time myself Johnny, I looked for you late tonight, but no Enchilada, we'll get a game up and going some time if I can find you. Or finish and old one just to get the feel of War Happy 5 year Anniversary Nearly, and I hate to say it I still feel like an amatuer at this game.

Historically, Submarine Raiders weren't used against BBs. Now, some can correct me if they're Naval Historians or laymen. Though from what I understand Torpedo boats in mass would've been used for this function along with other Ships of the fleet to fire big guns. Along with Naval Bombs-Torpedoes. Most Sub-BB interaction would've been midget subs used on a more or less suicidal mission in harbour. You see BBs are big-well armored-fast and are usually carrying a ton of destroyers in tow with them. Which means a Sub will not challenge one, unless to finish off a crippled one left behind. I'm certian there was the occassional interaction here, but for the most part I'm guessing that the Sub Master over BB is completely wrong. A better way to simulate a BB killer would be to increase Carrier strike capability on BBs, and Land based Bombers. Also, it could be possible if you could have a setting for Subs, Hunt-BB that if they do engage they have a probability of destroying it at a high cost of dying themselves, thus adding realism to it all. As for Subs diving and hiding and what not, Subs would rarely be found all at once! In the War usually it took awhile for all the Allied Efforts to hunt down what we consider a Sub-Unit in the game. I know that it's hard to simulate but most subs with little difficulty could escape destruction, especially when they hear about their pals being sunk or that there is enemy ships in the vicinity. They'd lay low, keeping surfaced at night to charge up and breath then dive out during the Light when they could be spotted and destroyed, not engaging the enemy. In this Subs should be HIGHLY elusive. Though if actively seeking Enemies, and with high ASW they should be a lot easier to destroy...

Alright, some things to add: USSR must have a strong Western Allied Intervention to take off the heat by '42-'43 or else she's toast. All of the Axis can destroy USSR easy! As the USSR, focus your Investments into 1 area at a time, so you maximize the percentage that you hit something. Take away from any non-essential investments and move them to essential, like IT and IW-AT...Then Mobility, Production, etc... Build Forts behind Rivers so you get a double edge defense, retreat-retreat-retreat. And attack what the Axis cannot possibly defend, like MidEast-Finland or where-ever she is weak. If she not, then just run, until he runs out of supply and you get your Siberians As for Germany having so much money, it's because you played a weak game previously. You need to make the UK and French bleed German Resources pre-Barby. Come up with some distractions to draw on German MPPs, like Egyptian Defense-Coastal Traps, drag him into a Naval War with the UK, which if you're supplied he probably shouldn't have much of a chance to win. Other than that the longer you can delay his early conquests the more MPPs and readiness the Russians get = Stronger Russia. Big important Factor here is USSR with her Allies are stronger Economically, and in the end that will equal military. Bide your time and remeber Axis fight worths squat 2000 Kilometers inside of USSR with supply 5 which hurts their overall performance, where you supply should be around 8-9 Stay away from Axis Air, that means open terrain in the middle of Summer in the range of them. Your a sitting duck

at 300 MPPs I'm not sure what the gripe is? Who could even afford it.... Sure you might get them against an opponent whose weak, but against a player who has an army I think you're talking about a wonderweapon like Rockets again from SC2 Vanilla. Personally Fighter-Bombers were bunkerbusting, tankbusters, attrittion warfare, trenchwarfare busters. All that and more. Stukas were diving Death and lead to many of the early German victories! Though Spitfires Shredded them to pieces

We'll come up to upgrade, I think we're waiting for some of the rest of you to get HardCore at WAW so we can attempt to beat you! I've lost to almost 0 games in patch 1.6 to Rambo, but he lost his edge against me since I've started taking some notes...Terif, dozens of times, real tough to fight this guy, he's very experienced! and 1 game to Taojah, who got a lucky jump on German Capitols. in the past 6 months really noone else I can think of, that I was able to finish or put my full time into. So any guy can win, any time... Those who takes notes and try new things will have a lead, I know I'm going to get my butt kicked with this patch. Noone rushes SC2 or WAW it's because it'll be around and fun for years

Arado, and the rest....... I think we're missing the point, look at the MPP cost to spit out a Mark.V Panzer. You pay out the rear to get those Mobile upgrades as well... PLUS, we're missing the fact, 500 Panthers, is equivelant of 2500 Mark IVs at least! So you don't need to spend the extra 2 months cranking out thousands, a few hundred does the same job. You're saying that it's not relative, a Level1 SC Tank, or a level4 SC Tank. Quality and Quantity, and you pay much more for the Lesser tanks which don't fight as well, dreadfully in fact! If Germany had focused only on tank Production they'd of been mauled, there are many techs that they couldn't afford to neglect and when they did, such as Long Range Fighters for Battle of Britian, Improved Encryption for the Strategic War, etc... they lost thousands and thousands of troops, tanks and AC because of it!!! Because of the WonderWeapon... A nation as modest industrially, should've gambled in the right area, and aicraft and Tank prototypes can be a gamble... Often with Bugs and issues a tank or AC may be delayed for years until full Production can commence. Though the Germans were highly efficient without Ford or anyone else.

ROFL Good quote about Hitler regarding Stalin's Birthday I never knew the two bothered with one another, but you never know what really is transpiring in one or the other's head at one time or another. As for the Game, doesn't matter what you start with, both are in their own right a full game. Certainly cheaper to buy the bundle! Best thing to do is get the AI and get Multi Player, get past learning, it's all mouse click interface, you'll be in like flynn in a month

Well, I think when discussing wonder weapons, we mean Rockets-Battleships-AirCraft Carriers, Subs, etc... Which can be debated if they made a difference. Fighter Interceptors, Good Quality tanks, etc... are just fine, minus the Largest Artillery in the World-Massive Tiger Tanks that were given to breaking down, etc... The Glory Equipment! The Allies had their fair share of Secret Weapons that didn't work, Minus the A-Bomb I think that was one that did hit the spot. The Axis went on so long because they were determined. There was also a lot of territory to retake, and once Blitzkrieg and the Quality factor of Allied equipment was up to par, it was a slow moving Juggernaut, but it was a forgone conclusion. Axis equipment really did lag, the FW190 is almost on par with the P51, but not all Axis Aces wanted it, due to their preference for a more dogfighter, which is the doctrine of their Airforce, not just the inferiority of their equipment. I highly doubt they had much in inferior equipment by choice, just not the #s the US/UK/USSR had. Plus we have to remeber, any US-UK Service man would've jumped outta of a Sherman to get a Tiger or a Panther. Life expectancy wasn't too good there. Though the Germans had no protection against TankBusters, so add it up... Production would favor the Allies, I think the USA more than anyone. the USSR did have a massive amount of Production also, of a lot of inferior equipment, but it was rugged for their Doctrine of war. Rugged and in a place where human life is less important than say the tank they're in. If the USA/UK would've not minded losing 30% or %40, I think the war would've been over by '43-'44 range. As for Production, the name sorta loosely implies both Speed and price... Though Strategic Abstraction means that MPPs translate into 2 tanks built in Summer of '40 instead of 1, that is Speed as well... Either way, whatever makes it a useable tech that is not unbalanced it's irrelevent to tweak it if it's working... Is it? What do you really get now??? I hate to say it but to roll the dice and get 5% off for Germany is still not worth it......but if it's better who knows

It's all about what is game balancing... If it unbalances the game then NO way! If It balances the game, then by all means. Assembly Lines were for Vehicles, Aircraft and Ships for WW2, it speed up production a great deal! No matter how advanced the unit is, it's only as advanced as the current "times"... Relatively... Training Programs during the Mobilization period did increase.. War Preparedness would've meant the Manpower would've been trained on Obsolete equipment to get out there and do their job before the Equipment was even available! That's why a lot of Spitfires Pilots learned in Biplanes and some even running around with Paper Kites Producing More units with decreased Cost does in a round about way reflect Cheaper and Faster... Though Not for the Germany pre-Barby.. UK Pre-Sea Lion. The USA Pre War Entry. I'd rather have 5 Fighters than 5 cheaper fighters, as ASAP! Kick some Butt rather quicker

This does sound about right now SeaMonkey, High Altitude bombing unless bombing a Port Protected Unit would probably not cause much damage. I think originally they considered Naval Bombers part of the fold which might drop torpedoes and would be vulnerable to Low ACK fire

Neutral blockading is a bit gamey. It's something that is a house rule in many games. Plus people can use say a US Transport to scout U-boats... A neat idea is this... a 30%-%40 chance if a US transport meets a U-boat it's mistaken for a English one and is sunk! I highly doubt US Ships would be prowling around the Atlantic in U-boat infested waters anyways! heheheh, talk about a penalty

Well, there are several reasons here. Mud means minimized movement, poor range for your air. Plus I see Spanish Troops, so you must've DOWed them or he must've got them in some how. The way these troops are arranged is dreadful, you can cut through them like swiss cheese. You need to cut holes with 2-3 army attacks with "clear" weather as during bad weather your limited movement takes your edge...in #s With 3 or 4 strikes from a superior mobile army you can clear holes all over this bottleneck! Then fill in the gaps with armor, even if you sacrifice them... Though with all the Spanish troops and French if they're behind there you may have a very difficult time taking your objective no reason you shouldn't take France by slow grinding attacks by Late Summer of '40 With 3 units deep a defense can be hell to crush, with entrenchment even in open terrain. You will need a Greater amount of patience and have to be cautious not to loose any units... it just takes time, there are no rivers so it's very doable, Axis have 2 HQs, 3 Air so the campaign is in the bag, along with 2 armor You can't expect much more... P.S. this particular campaign gives the Allies some defending units, but they appear to be spread thin in a linear defense, focus on Punching Holes... I didn't notice that at first. [ November 07, 2007, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: Liam ]

The European Map makes ships a big liability in SC2. Too expensive and more annoying than dominating. Ships get sunk very easily. 1 ship out venturing around will die in a heartbeat. Ships away from Port are easily mauled. Subs are overpowered vs Surface ships. I do not recall ever building a ship in SC2 as the Axis aside subs. Only as the Allies to protect transports. If I could disband my Navy as the Axis player and buy HQs, Air fleets and Tech I probably would. There are a few places and instances where they're very useful however... I think I could survive as Axis with 2 subs and 1 cruiser for Germany and 2 Cruisers and a sub for Italy. Navy's only compliment Land units in SC that is their purpose as hunting transports is not practical, with the new WAW I hear though Subs are much better raiders which may add a dimension to the game. I'll have to see it BTW: You should have no issues killing 1 sub with so many ships, just surround it and let it bump your fleets, it has very poor visibility and cannot elude damage by bumping other vessels.

I think we all know the Quality vs Quantity argument. There are places and situations where quantity will reign supreme, like a Russian Winter or Massive Tundra... A land war in Asia i.e. Japan vs China WW2 The Axis had an excellent Jump on WW2 but we all know they were being outclassed as the war went on not by superior #s alone, but by superior foes. Think of the Tiny little French Border with Belgium, the Limited Space between Paris and all the Germans pouring into a tiny little opening in the Ardenne and then breaking out in all directions with a new style of warfare. British had a Wall of Ocean to get across Battle of Britian was a different war. British nearly lost, it is by blunders that the Axis lost, it was not predestined in any way the British could have won that. Though I'm sure they could've made it pricey for the Axis either way. British lost what nearly 1000 AC for well over 2Xs that #... I would have Fired Goering [ November 06, 2007, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: Liam ]

Mirror Match... Axis Liam, vs Allied Terif 1939-1941 My Axis conquest Poland, Benelux, Denmark turn 2. Allies move into Norway before Snowfall and my U-Boat is killed without raiding once due to late Canadian Entry. France falls with haste and my Panzers roll over all opposition, even jumping into Norway to Liberate it from the Allied Oppressors. Allies with Auckineck Conquest North Africa, and Italians flee rather than fight a doomed fight... The Italian Navy dies a valiant death defending the Boot, as it is apparent Churchill has Designs on Fascist Italia... Germans, introduce a Wonder weapon in 1940-41, Longe Range Bombers... Hammering the Entire Island of England, reducing it's Industrial output 50% per turn. The only answer to the aggressive North African and Med Conquests by the billigerent Island Nation. This lasts awhile until Adanced Spitfires remove that threat and Barbarossa opens up... In Short Order the MiddleEast is conquested by the Russians along with the British. The Germans have a late start so the Reds are pretty awesome on the ground. Though Luftwaffe dominates in the Air. Finland nearly falls along with Sweden, but both are saved awhile from the Red Giant. Axis forces penetrate the first 4 cities into USSR, and meet stiff opposition, losing half dozen units or so... Very bloody in the first year... The Following Year the Ultimate Goal for the Axis is Leningrad and with the USA joining in the West, the Axis conquest all the Minors on the Mainland except Greece and Spain.. It's too late to get those last two minors. Industrial output is pitiful and the The Axis War Machine rages on nearly another year and half before they're outproduced 3 to 1... The Final battles in the East are ferocious regardless, thousands of Russian tanks in the East pour into Prussia...Russian Infantry pour into Romania... And in Italy after years of freezing in the Boot, British troops finally capture Taranto-and push onward to Rome! In the West, Millions of Fresh Doughboys land and nomatter how many Rommel sends home in bodybags, there are many to take their place. The RAF USAF crush the Axis when they come out of their foxholes, and the stalemate is over, 3 frontwar noone can manage long as Axis... Game over almost hitting '44

Even if the French had a lot of Aircraft they obviously weren't used to effectiveness. The Luftwaffe would've dominated the French. A very experienced Fighter Force with a great Fighter, the 109. Close range, anyways... I doubt the French had a Champion to this and I doubt they had preparedness. Given a couple of years, who knows! I cannot understand why the French were caught so much with their pants down, much like Italy with the coming of WW2. Even the British made some preparations as far as the Air force. Democracies were hit a lot harder by the Depression than the more repressive nations. Fighters don't win wars. The Germans had A LOT of understanding on how to combine Air-Armies to maximized effect, I doubt the French possessed this aspect. Blitzkrieg relies on the use of it. You have to remove yourself from the #s game and ask yourself, how many experienced pilots are flying. How many of them are fueled and ready for combat. In the Strategic Abstract what the French had may represent what it given to the "T"

'39 Weiss, SC2 Vanilla... Terif As Axis Tyranny, Liam as The Allied Justice Pen All Typical Opening Conquests Britian opened up the War with a Suicidal Naval Doctrine, Conquoring Norway and abandoning Egypt, but leaving behind a strong Naval TaskForce to Fight the Italians in the Med. The German U-30 was never found in the Atlantic until much later raiding near the loop off Africa and was damaged but escaped! The Royal Navy hunted aimlessly for it and was hammered continually by the Luftwaffe-Kriegsmarine into a weakened state. Fighting off Morocco For Control of West Africa, cost the Brits an Army-Tank-2 Corps. Meanwhile the Small Miniature Naval Taskforce left behind by my RN in North Atlantic was overcome by the Kriegsmarine and they dove to conquor the Seas... Plus the Liberation of Norway by the Axis and sinking of British Amphibious units really hurt the Morale of their future prospects in Northern Europe. Unfettered Churchill pushed for Investment in Advanced air! LR2-Advanced Air was achieved in '40 and used Mercilessly against the Axis, but they never chose to fight! Except 1 encounter, the Luck there navy came to field any results! The Royal Navy so battered by Undersupplied fights retreated to Canada and rebuilt, costing tons of Cash..US Money helped but at a cost... It however took the Axis ages to Conquor Egypt and in the end, when Barbarossa kicks of late in '41 the Russians pour into Iraq... With 0 tech in battlefield. all fields but Level1 Armor Regardless 7 Russian Tanks overcome Iraq, but much to their demise, a well planed encounter with Erwin Rommel, soons makes haste with their destruction, Planning a defensive broke BirdWing Strategy, Axis forces strike out from-Jordan-Kuwait and Syria in a 3 Pronge assualt, nearly encircling and destroying a far superior Russian Force.. Though they've the Air and very experienced Advanced units, that's the end of all Russian Offensives In Russia Proper, Germans destroy and plunder the nation, finding some resistance outside Stalingrad, where the Russians surrender, and a week later the British Mail in their terms of surrender. Despite the RN and American Navy having overcome the vast U-boat and Raider Campaign the Germans set out to use in this game, the cost was too much and there was not enough fighting equipment left in the West to overcome any defenses the Axis have... Massive Bomber Formations Reign Down Fire all over England... Isolating the Island like a Oasis of Low Income Great Game.. Very brilliant counterstrategies, could've been better if I'd of hit the tech lotto, as vs Terif you almost need to be luckier than him to give him a decent fun match

Sombra, true, the amphibious range is unbelievable. There was massive Amphibious Operations in WW2, but they were expensive and failure was not an option! Germany never invaded the UK because what you stated, without Air Supremacy they feared being destroyed in the air and in makeshift craft. Which they were counting on, tons of Gliders carrying commandos to capture ports and Airfields to ferry thousands of Axis troops in a Norway like Operation. It was very very possible for the Axis to have mowed down the British. However, if the RN and Royal Air force were in gear for it, I'm not sure what sort of price! England was as well prepared with their own home guard, that wouldn't have stood a chance vs the Elite German Army. It's just no one knows the outcome because it's impossible to speculate. For game balance terms England can defend itself but must sacrifice to do it. English Industry could in no way be replaced by Egyptian Industry, which was nonexistant. I think that Hundreds of thousands of British would have still fought on, and still would've had Oil for their Navy! Which could've been supplied from their vast Empire. England would've been a Partisan Nightmare as well... Requiring 200-400 thousand Germans, with casualties the Russian Threat... all very pricey for a little Island. As for the Japanese, they never managed to defeat China, they really didn't have much of an interest in the Far East because it wasn't Rich. The Dutch East Indies, the British & French Colonies in the East were much more lucrative a deal. They needed Rubber, Oil, etc... Their best bet was Non Aggression with USSR... Though you're right they should be forced to wait till after Pearl until they get their Siberians. With the Fall of France and Netherlands, there was no reason to bother with the Russians. I think on the the whole the Japanese were so divided in their military ideology, their best man didn't want a war with the USA. As for the USA, Invading it would've been extremely painful. I cannot reiterate the the Spirit of Americans. Most of them have guns, and in those days, all of them... Large Rural Populations, very Patriotic. Any regions seized would've been a Yugoslavian Situation indeed. And the Supply Issues and sending a Fleet that far in the early 40s would've been impossible! It would've required more technology and a powerhouse, beyond WW2 Germany or Japan. Of course the homeguard just like the Egyptian Capitol swap for the UK is just a balance measure. Can you imagine Stalingrad in St. Louis... It would take months for the Axis to consolidate portions of the Eastern USA let alone the whole!