Yea, KAF is the sole reason people started building infantry in W. USA and walking to E. Canada. Slower assault into Europe, but Japan has no real ability to do anything to N. America.
KJF etc.
-
And there is the rub Jen…
That is NOT a KJF move, that is a SJF opening for a wholesale KGF.
-
Works for KJF, just not as well as the IC in India + SZ 30 fleet consolidation.
I know, I’ve worked just about every KJF angle in the game by this point, to the point, I think I could almost beat you with my KJF now, Switch. It’d be a race with a little luck thrown in for joy between whether you could get Moscow with Germany alone, or I could crush Japan like a can at 30,000 fathoms below the sea.
-
@ncscswitch:
That is NOT a KJF move, that is a SJF opening for a wholesale KGF.
I have tried something of similar. I am doubtful on the following, of this SJF-KGF startegy.
Do you thing that USA should go heavy on Germany and only after two or three turns focus on the Pacific for reinforcing the fleet and attack?
Or it is better to constantly build up some ships in the Pacific in order to keep the pressure on the Japanese? -
I’ve found that America cannot effectively fight a war on two fronts.
Your best bet is to use your destroyer, 2 transports for raiding operations in the Atlantic and focus your attentions on the Pacific making yourself a complete nuisance.
Since England has an IC in India in an optimal KJF game, I recommend augmenting it with two ICs in Sinkiang and China. That allows you to put 7 units right on the Japanese boarder, more then enough to push them off the mainland if they are matching your fleet builds and if they are not matching your American fleet builds, then you can move in faster and sink their fleet, cutting off reinforcements to their land based units while you mop up islands.
-
@ncscswitch:
That is NOT a KJF move, that is a SJF opening for a wholesale KGF.
I have tried something of similar. I am doubtful on the following, of this SJF-KGF startegy.
Do you thing that USA should go heavy on Germany and only after two or three turns focus on the Pacific for reinforcing the fleet and attack?
Or it is better to constantly build up some ships in the Pacific in order to keep the pressure on the Japanese?Actually, to date the US has abandoned the Pacific after the US1 Pearl Counter in the game I am playing.
-
Only because you don’t believe in KJF, Switch.
However, I have very rarely seen KJF end in an Allied loss. When it does it’s because the allies were either niave of some of the more optimal plays or because they had some misfortune with the dice. But I’ve never seen Japan successfully defend itself against a concerted Allied offensive on Japan with Allied player(s) that really knew what they were doing.
It’s probably possible. But I’ve never seen it. Japan, with 30 income, just cannot take out Russia and fight off England and America (72 Income). Or just America at 42 Income. They usually end up picking one or the other, defending their islands or defending the mainland. And once that happens, it’s only a matter of time before they are reduced to Japan itself. (Which in effect is dead. Can’t get your aircraft out to help Germany, can’t sink the American fleet. I don’t care if you sit there until doomsday building 2 artillery a round, it’s over.)
-
Engineering your enemy into a position where luck becomes a more significant factor in their results is an element of skill.
Good point and well done in your game. I don’t think that Japan’s response was correct, so definitely you have more skill than the other team.
I think the best response to switch’s SJF is indeed to abandon an attack. I think it must be Pearl.
The reason why is that taking Pearl early requires a ton of equipment, and pretty much doesn’t allow you to build any transports safely. Let’s go over this:
The safe way to take out a reinforced Pearl, assuming you lost the sub in Solomons, is to hit it with everything within range - 3 fighters, 1 car, 1 dest, 1 bb, 1 tran, 1 bomb. The order of loss is bb, tran, bomb, fig, then past that you’re screwed because the Americans will attack. But it’s quite likey you won’t lose that many units, and it’s likely will instantly knock out Pearl in one strike. If you don’t, you will take between a total of 2-4 hits in which case you’re ok, you’ll still have a loaded car + bb + dest, which is unfavorable to the Americans (they will very likely not touch the Japanese BB).
Although Pearl is safe, that sucked up a ton of equipment. 2 units not landed in Asia, 3 figs out to sea instead of being able to defend, no ships to protect a tran build from Japan. (even in inner seazone the Russians have a fig that can strike from Bury)
China you can still attack with mass inf + 2 fighters, but the Kwang navy is down to attacking with bb/fig/car, might lose car/bb in a bad situation.
And now, UK/Russia can push in (might be able to prevent UK pushing in if you have 3 figs land in F. Indo), and you have no safe transports. Ugly…
My response would to ignore Pearl. Attack China with 7 inf 3 fighters 1 bomb, knock out Kwang navy with 2 car + 3 figs + bb. Land 1 inf 1 tank into Manchuria, land 6 fighters there. Guard inner seazone with the other bb, deploy 3 tran in inner seazone and 2 inf on Japan.
This exposes 2 Japanese weaknesses - now the Pearl navy is active (along with mini uk navy), and F. Indo is completely undefended. But we’re not in a terrible situation. Japanese losses have been minimal since now we’re pretty much consolidated. F. Indo is open, but it’s indefensible if the Allies try to hold it due to the 5’ish inf in China and 4 tran + 2 bb ready to overpower it. The Russian inf + fighter in Bury are stuck for the moment since there’s 1 inf 1 arm 6 figs in Manchuria; the Russians might be able to jilt a fighter but at cost of everything there (not worth it). Japan is slowed for sure, and maybe that is enough in itself, but the point I’m making here is a better response than the one used in switch’s game. Japan is pushing in slightly and should at no point be dipping below their starting income. (the axis really can’t afford to lose territory if they want to have a shot at winning)
When the Americans send their navy out, it will be annoying. They will take an island or even 2 or 3 with the UK interdicting with their tran/2 inf + the fighter off the American car, depending on where your navy needs to be to overpower the remaining Allied ground forces. But they need to spend some cash to make a lasting impression (due to most of the Japanese navy being quite active), which takes away from their ability to deal with Germany. The Japanese navy + airforce will make the Americans think twice about where they’re landing.
However, I have very rarely seen KJF end in an Allied loss.
Yea, KJF is stronger than it may look at first. There’s probably no conclusion after 10 rounds if played properly. Germany may have Moscow, but Japan will have 2 of their VCs taken away as well and most of their income.
-
Actually, I usually see Russia and England successfully keep Germany at bay in a KJF/SJF campaign. Sure, Germany has Africa and Caucasus, but England has E. Indies, FIC, Borneo and New Guinea and USA has Philippines, Okinawa, Kwangtung and Manchuria.
But that’s just the way I see it and I only know about 5 people who know how to do a KJF successfully. So my exposure isn’t very extensive.
Anyway, I disagree. Pearl cannot be abandoned. America is the greater Satan and must take priority then the lesser Satan (England.) The English fleet, lacking the core of a battleship, can be slaughtered at your convenience. Meanwhile a massive strike on Pearl can be done without loss, or with minimal losses and put direct threat on any American builds in SZ 55. (Actually, you COULD fire your two fighters off on SZ 20 and hope to sink the Battleship and Transport if they try to run as well. You only have a 17% chance to win, but that’s pretty close to 1 in 5, might be worth it if you think it’s a KJF game. AKA: This might be your best shot in a long time.)
Dunno. I personally have NEVER attacked the SZ 20 fleet with 2 fighters from SZ 52. But I have thought about it!
-
Anyway, I disagree. Pearl cannot be abandoned.
What is your proposal then? Build a destroyer + 2 tran in the inner seazone of Japan? Still attack both China and the Kwang navy? You have 3 fighters to split between China/British fleet, and you will very likely allow both F. Indo and Manchuria to fall hard on round 2.
-
@Cmdr:
Pearl cannot be abandoned.
Yes, I’ve done it several times, and also seen many games with no pearl J1, the only difference is that US would not buy AC US1,
or buy only 1 AC.
A few times US lands in SFE.
Actually I cannot recall games that this have had significant importance.
Then again, a big majority of all games I’ve seen and played, Jap does pearl J1. -
Anyway, I disagree. Pearl cannot be abandoned.
What is your proposal then? Build a destroyer + 2 tran in the inner seazone of Japan? Still attack both China and the Kwang navy? You have 3 fighters to split between China/British fleet, and you will very likely allow both F. Indo and Manchuria to fall hard on round 2.
I think I posted my idea.
But to clarify, if I am going to ignore any naval units, it’s going to be the British because they are less able to augment it.
-
But to clarify, if I am going to ignore any naval units, it’s going to be the British because they are less able to augment it.
That leaves the problem of trying to build any transports on J1. They will be threatened by 1 dest 1 car 1 tran 1 bomb (Persia, or whatever it is to the left of India) on UK2.
-
More likely threatened by 1 destroyer, 1 aircraft carrier and 1 bomber. Odds are that transport went to liberate Egypt and is out of range
Meanwhile, I have a battleship and a number of transports. You want to sink yourself to get a transport, go for it.
-
Meanwhile, I have a battleship and a number of transports. You want to sink yourself to get a transport, go for it.
Where did your battleship come from? I thought it was in Pearl, because if it ain’t, you got a problem of an American response to overpower Pearl. Light Pearl is no longer an option (assuming solomons sub dead and UK fighter in Pearl), and if you don’t have a super heavy defense in Pearl, you’re asking for it. The other bb is too far to reinforce the Japanese seazones.
And I’m too lazy to look around for whatever you posted earlier about a Japanese counter; I don’t even know where it is in this thread or if it is there. Could you respost real fast?
Edit: I think I see your response, it’s in the crash course thread. I see how you account for your bb to defend.
The solomon subs is not there twice as often as it is there, so it’s probably a good idea to think also if you don’t have it. In that case Pearl becomes an 80% affair, with the average result as losing 2 fighters 1 dest. I don’t know if I like to sacrifice Japanese fighters like that. Do you feel it is worth it?
-
If UK get lucky in UK1, they got Borneo and New Guinea, Jap sub killed, Jap trans killed.
6 Russian inf in Bury.
Then the pacific map is looking like it is probably not a good alternative to do pearl, at least
not always. -
@Cmdr:
Pearl cannot be abandoned.
Yes, I’ve done it several times, and also seen many games with no pearl J1, the only difference is that US would not buy AC US1,
or buy only 1 AC.
A few times US lands in SFE.
Actually I cannot recall games that this have had significant importance.
Then again, a big majority of all games I’ve seen and played, Jap does pearl J1.I can see skipping Pearl if the allies are not set up well in Asia to do a good KJF, or are set up to do a KGF (as much as you can tell from R1 and UK1….)
US versus Japan can be a losing proposition for the allies. In fact, I know of a very solid Japanese player that skips Pearl all the time to entice US to build a fleet since he feels he can win the pacific battle and to keep Germany from getting triple teamed.
-
Trihero:
That’s a very bad assumption. There’s almost a 70% Chance that your submarine will survive in SZ 45. It’s much better to assume it lived instead of died.
As for the British Fighter, that’s usually sent to Egypt to liberate Egypt and stop Germany from blitzing Africa and getting massive income, so it too is a poor assumption to have in Pearl.
Odds are Pearl has Fighter, Aircraft Carrier, Submarine.
Japan hits it with 3 Fighters, Destroyer, Submarine, Bomber (or 4 fighters, depending on how many attacks you need to do.) This conserves your battleship to defend your transports in SZ 60, as I have previously stated.
-
@Cmdr:
Trihero:
That’s a very bad assumption. There’s almost a 70% Chance that your submarine will survive in SZ 45. It’s much better to assume it lived instead of died.
Naw, he said that UK fighter at Pearl. That probably means UK sub and UK fighter against Jap sub at Solomons. That’s a 33.3% chance that Jap sub is alive, not 70%.
As for the British Fighter, that’s usually sent to Egypt to liberate Egypt and stop Germany from blitzing Africa and getting massive income, so it too is a poor assumption to have in Pearl.
So you DID read what Trihero wrote about the fighter . . . almost like you’re deliberately ignoring it . . . anyways, UK always has the UK bomber to use against Anglo-Egypt, assuming it even needs it; the UK can usually bring the Trans-Jordan infantry and two infantry transported from India.
Odds are Pearl has Fighter, Aircraft Carrier, Submarine.
Not if the UK deliberately sent the fighter there, as Trihero wrote. If you’re going to reply to Trihero, you ought to at least reply to the post he wrote, instead of “replying” to a post that you’re writing on your own. Tsk tsk.
Japan hits it with 3 Fighters, Destroyer, Submarine, Bomber (or 4 fighters, depending on how many attacks you need to do.) This conserves your battleship to defend your transports in SZ 60, as I have previously stated.
And as Trihero previously stated, the Jap sub is probably dead and Pearl has a UK fighter.
now, Jen . . . the crack pipe isn’t for everyone . . . you have to use it responsibly . . .
-
Okay, so you are going to send 3 Infantry and a Bomber against an Infantry, Artillery and 2 Armor in Egypt?
Who’s smoking on the crack pipe?
-
@Cmdr:
Okay, so you are going to send 3 Infantry and a Bomber against an Infantry, Artillery and 2 Armor in Egypt?
Who’s smoking on the crack pipe?
Somehow, you always have a legion or two in your pocket, jen. But I have learned from your examplez0rz, and now I prezent . . .
DESERT FIGHTERS
so ur in Anglo-Egypt with ur infantry artillery and 2 armor, which somehow materialized out of an Africa bid that you placed not putting them in Ukraine as you say you normally do last I heard. BUT SUDDENLY WAT IS THAT ON THE HORIZON, IT IS THE DESERT FIGHTERS YAY!
“Charging out of the Sahara desert, the Fremen of Muad-Dib rode their giant sand-worms to victory over the soldiers of the Third Reich. And there was much rejoicing.”
There is only ONE tank left in Anglo-Egypt, and it’s out of gas. The heroic British will EASILY kill that single tankz0rz.
–
I use my crack pipe RESPONSIBLY! :-D . . . usually . . . :lol:
No, seriously, Jen, you can’t switch your bid and moves to retroactively respond to what the other person’s move is. UK built fighters? Oh, then you built tanks with Germany and already charged forwards, killing the overly aggressive Russian units that attacked three German territories. UK built transports? You just happened to build four fighters last turn with Germany, how lucky!
. . . lol.
Suggested Topics
