• 2007 AAR League

    ill try your new kriegs strat. I need another win =]


  • I’ll take that game Ezto…

    Last time I Outlasted your USA KJF… let’s see if i can pull of a second win…

  • 2007 AAR League

    Ive grown  :-o ahahahahha


  • And we are off topic in this thread.

    I have set up the game thread and will post R1 shortly…

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I’ve begun to like using Egypt as a staging ground for Germany to push into the middle east, especially when the allies are going for a kill japan first strategy.

    This allows Germany to bring pressure to bear on India early. (BB, Trn + 2 units as well as those you have walked to Persia from Egypt) and allows Germany to hit S. Africa with Transport power if need be.

    I’ve also found that an investment in a second transport in the Med once you have Russia in a defensive posture, can really pay off in annoying the allies or keeping Africa yours for the duration.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    I would never, ever, use this strategy again.  But in this game, against competent opponents, it did work.

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10548.0

    A german battleship on G1 with a transport.

    I’m not so sure it was superior german tactics or anything, as much as it was the Allies not quite thinking through exactly what the best options would be.

    Near the end of the game I explain my lapse in judgement with good reason, and I have used the same theories for Japan to defeat KJF and so far it has worked 100% of the time.

    I like the theory of German navy, Probably the best build for buck is 2 trannies in the baltic, and then use your BB and tranny to invade gibraltar.  4 Transports, 4 or 5 Fighters, and a bomber, can then hit England.

    However the Best german naval strategy lies in the possibility of finding a way to afford a Complex in WE on G1.  That way any future naval maneuvers are not restricted by your inability to move your navy then build into it.

    I have a few more games and theories I can post as examples if anyone cares?


  • One fundamentally flawed assumption though that greatly helped that game was the Russian sub didn’t move. It should always move to SZ2. Without it they couldn’t defend or block as efficiently.

    I do like German navy right now. I find it funny how Csub is always right about the general idea. They were right about linking navy serving Germany better than getting screwed in Africa, they were right about KJF being very hard, and they were even right about how to do KJF if you do try it.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I need to see CSub’s KJF. Most CSub Articles, I’ve been told, aren’t worth the electronic paper they’re written on.

    Anyway, I’ve been toying around with a two round, navy only Germany purchase.

    Assumptions are:  Karelia was taken, Ukraine was liberated and W. Russia is owned by Russia.  Pretty safe assumptions for Germany 2.

    Round 1 - Carrier, 3 Submarines in SZ 5 *(No attack on SZ 15 or Egypt!  Just reinforce Libya from Algeria)
    Round 2 - Carrier, 3 Submarines in SZ 14 *(No attack on Egypt or the combined British fleet in SZ 15, just move the BB/Trn back to SZ 14)  Also move the German fleet to SZ 7.

    From here, on Germany 3, you should be able to close the canal if England leaves, or you can crush England’s fleet and reinforce Libya some more.  You can also converge in SZ 12 with the fleets from SZ 7 and SZ 14.  8 Submarines, 2 Transports, Battleship, Destroyer, 2 Carriers, 4 Fighters.  That’s enough to make the Allies sit tight for a few rounds at least, maybe more, leaving Russial Solo.


  • @Cmdr:

    I need to see CSub’s KJF. Most CSub Articles, I’ve been told, aren’t worth the electronic paper they’re written on.

    Well, one craaazy option would be to actually read them instead of inappropriately slandering them without knowlege.

    Then you could at least inappropriately slander them WITH knowlege.

    :-D

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Mazer:

    @Cmdr:

    I need to see CSub’s KJF. Most CSub Articles, I’ve been told, aren’t worth the electronic paper they’re written on.

    Well, one craaazy option would be to actually read them instead of inappropriately slandering them without knowlege.

    Then you could at least inappropriately slander them WITH knowlege.

    :-D

    Hey, I gave the disclaimer that I was repeating gossip.  You take it as you will. :P


  • I’ve read the CSub KJF paper. I don’t believe that this strat is better to win more games than the ordinary KGF.

    CSub has the definition right, KJF is about building in WUS from rnd 1 and use units against Japan not Germany.

    How’s the KJF if Jap skips pearl? I would do that if Russia moved 6 inf to Bury.


  • It’s not better than KGF, but they know how to KJF.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    If Japan skips Pearl, I’d almost definitely skip KJF.  It smacks of a “plan” and I don’t like playing by the axis “plan.”


  • @Cmdr:

    Most CSub Articles, I’ve been told, aren’t worth the electronic paper they’re written on.

    So now that you’ve been reading the papers, do you feel that “they aren’t worth the electronic paper that they are printed on”?

    Just curious  :-D

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Most of them, unfortunately, yes.

    Some of them have interesting points.  but some of them, like the one on National Advantages, really aren’t even worth a read.  It was so obviously written just after the game came out and before strategies and tactics were designed around the National Advantages that it’s totally off the mark on just about everything.

    Some of the others are okay.  And hey, only ONE of the tactical papers loses consistently to the TripleA AI! j/k!  It only lost once.


  • @Cmdr:

    Most of them, unfortunately, yes.

    Well, I’ll remain agnostic as to whether or not you have read “most” of them, but at least you’ve made a solid step toward objectivity.

    I’m sure you have many other sources of strategy that you find to be far superior; May they serve you well.

    8-)


  • I read most papers and the starting papers are good enough. It’s for players who are new to revised and so
    they do the job. No one can teach someone to play just by theory.
    Also every game from rnd 2-3 is different so there’s only overall strats like KGF/KJF that are valid in all games.


  • The strategy mentions that the axis player should get his battleship and transport out of the Mediteranean. Now if the strategy was about building a german fleet in the baltic and merging the fleet with the med fleet then getting it out of the med makes sense. However the strategy is one which talks about building a land army to send to Russia. Therefore to get back to issue, where does the person who posted the strategy intend to send the med fleet. Out into the Atlantic and into the jaws of the allied fleet, a quick get away taking Brazil in the process before disapearing around the cape horn, or opening up the suez canal before reaching the safety Japan’s  bosom which is it’s fleet?

    If you have no intention or bother of reading the official strategy I refer to, and can make no sense of what I mean above. Then consider this, what should Germany do with its Med fleet, is it a lost cause, or is there a potential to save it and use it to fight another day?

  • Moderator

    By “getting it out of the Med”, I mean eventually sending it through the canal and into the Indian Ocean, usually around round 3 or 4.  Anything later then that and you’ll probably be sunk before fleeing.

    I delibrately left off naval purchases, and potential unification strats b/c
    1)  I think they are a bit more complicated to pull off, and
    2)  I didn’t want the first post to be too long and running through potential naval buys (and the NCM follow-ups) as well as land buys probably would have at least tripled the length of my first post if not more.

    Back to the BB/trn fleeing, with a land focused Germany (I made the assumption of bid to Lib) you can have Egy and TJ by G2.  The Allies have landed in Alg and are starting to move on Egy (as early as UK3 via the Alg landing).  If you stick around much longer you’ll be sunk, so I like to take two troops and pick my spots elsewhere.

    Option 1:  Japan left India for Ger to take on G3.  Then you take Mad (or Aus if UK left only 2 inf).  Then proceed to Aus (if possible after you took Mad), then NZ, then HI.  This all keeps the German income pretty high with no additional IPC spent on troops, since you are only using 1 inf/1 rt (or arm), and a BB shot, your bom is also helpful if you can spare it.

    Option 2:  India is taken by J, so Germany takes Mad, then proceeds to Aus, NZ, and HI, if available.

    Option 3:  Take Mad, and then just bounce back and forth in Afr picking off empty spots recently vacated by the Allies, but never land if UK or US can kill your troops on a counter.  Eventually you land in Egy, TJ, or Per followed up by a J Naval landing and proceed to Cauc.  The BB/trn then provide extra firepower in protecting the J trns, so Japan is free to have her heavy hitters either annoying Ala/Wcan, S Afr, or sailing into the South Atlantic after taking NZ.

    Essentially you can pick up roughly 4-8 ipc that are uncapturable by the Allies and don’t need to be defended by Ger, so once Ger is booted from Afr they can still have a base income of 39-43 where Germany only holds the core of Europe, trades Kar, Belo, Ukr and then adds in the 4-8 they were able to pick up from the following:  Ind, Mad, Aus, NZ, HI.


  • Thanks Darth, I like that idea :)

Suggested Topics

  • 10
  • 1
  • 1
  • 8
  • 11
  • 2
  • 4
  • 44
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

54

Online

17.8k

Users

40.4k

Topics

1.8m

Posts