@krieghund Your answer and the FAQ are super helpful – thank you!
Crazy George!
-
:-o
For me, A@A is all about the opening game turn. Mid game, ( or, how to keep my stategy intact turns) starts on turn two and lasts untill I can see the light at the end of the tunnel, then that is the end game, ( for one of us). :|
Tactics, my favorite part, supports my overall strategy, which I am constantly trying to keep secret,( so much so I sometimes forget what I’m trying to do). The joy of the game for me, other than winning, is when I can surpise my opponent with an unforseen manuvere that even they respect. 8-)
C.I. -
KJF again…… :roll:
KJF generally do not work against decent axis players, and also if u play with no tech, no NA’s, no VC’s.
Pure domination, no tech, TTL. Low luck or dice doesn’t matter as long as dices are average, or else u would lose
to a 5 year old…
With somewhat even players, KJF will fail to win games. Maybe it could work 1 of 10 times.
KJF (imo) means building every US unit from LA. -
Tech is about the only way the Axis can win against KJF in my experience. Tech doesn’t help the allies as much as the axis in most games. (Mainly cause America is the only ally that normally can afford tech. Japan and Germany can each afford it and should go for it, IMHO.)
-
Umm - if KJF was so effective, wouldn’t we see a lot more of it?
-
@Ender:
Umm - if KJF was so effective, wouldn’t we see a lot more of it?
No. KJF requires you to have a fluid strategy. You have to be able to change course here and there to make up for bad attacks, or unexpected maneuvers. It also requires you to finance ships and armies. In other words, KJF requires more brainpower then KGF which is very formulaic. You build more infantry then your opponent, you try to get him to trade more then you lose, etc. KGF becomes who can stack infantry the fastest and then push forward. KJF becomes who can stack transports, submarines, carriers, position themselves to out maneuver the other fleet and land in the right order to win.
KJF is also easier, financially on the allies because Japan starts as one of the weakest nations IPC for IPC against her opponents. That’s not to mean its “easier then KGF” it’s easier for the allies to win if they work on it then KGF. Germany’s probably earning 42-55 IPC a round. Japan’s earning 30-35 IPC a round. Which is going to be easier to attack? Which nation is spread out making it hard to reinforce and which can walk around at will, throwing tanks around for defense and offense and which had to buy transports to go get their land back?
-
KJF is also easier, financially on the allies because Japan starts as one of the weakest nations IPC for IPC against her opponents. That’s not to mean its “easier then KGF” it’s easier for the allies to win if they work on it then KGF. Germany’s probably earning 42-55 IPC a round. Japan’s earning 30-35 IPC a round. Which is going to be easier to attack? Which nation is spread out making it hard to reinforce and which can walk around at will, throwing tanks around for defense and offense and which had to buy transports to go get their land back?
I just want to add a couple things which is that while Japan makes less money, that they are also harder to get to because only one nation can produce significant amount of units to contest them, and also that while Japan makes less money, this means the Allies also have less to gain when pushing in.
So far my favorite argument for KJF is the “wtf” factor which some people respond to badly because they haven’t seen it before, plus bad dice in naval situations will really put your butt in the frying pan because it’s way too expensive to climb back up.
-
Japan makes less money, yes. But, they have 2 advantages in that they have a ton of ground units easily transportable from zero or low-income islands and all of their heavy purchases are already out of the way. Their navy+air support outclasses anything on the board and will continue to do so for 2 turns at least. Their income may be low, but they can use it flexibly because US units built in sz55/W US take time to reach them so they have leeway in purchasing to counter what they feel is the most immediate threat.
And I think that KJF is easier on the Axis in that while you need both good German and Japanese players against KGF, you only need a good Japanese player in KJF. Against KJF, the German player could be Banjo the clown puppet for all it matters because Germany’s strategy is a virtual no-brainer.
-
Is Germany’s strategy a no-brainer? I haven’t really faced a KJF (except for DM’s mid-game special) so I’m not sure what I’d do. I think it might involve buying TRNs in the Med to take Caucasus and the Suez quickly, to both take Russia or support Japan.
-
I thought that a good German counter for KJF could be building a lot of land units to advance against Moscow as soon as possible.
At the same time, grabbing of Africa IPC could be also a worthy help for the Japan.May be this a viable strategy for Germany or may be more useful to build a string fleet and then try to invade UK?
-
Germany’s only response to a KJF is to press Russia at the expense of all else. There’s no time or resources for flamboyancy.
BTW, I’d say it’s a bit of an over statement to say “they have a ton of ground units easily transportable from zero or low-income islands and all of their heavy purchases are already out of the way.” 505.
A ton means 5 infantry? (Solomons, Carolines, Wake, New Guinea and Okinawa.) Because the 2 on Philippines, the two on E. Indies and the 1 on Borneo arn’t exactly “low-income” in my mind.
And just how easy is it to get some of those? 2 turns out and 2 turns back, that’s 4 turns. Not exactly simple, especially with America coming at you all hot and heavy like a 16 year old boy on his first real date!
Some of their major purchases are out of the way. But you are tying up 6 fighters, 2 aircraft carriers, 2 battleships instead of letting them go free and probably forcing them to buy a 3rd carrier just to survive. That’s significantly less punch available to put pressure on Russia’s heartland.
Meanwhile, you have America + Carrier, Fighter, Destroyer, Submarine, 2 Transports from England. Yes, they cannot both attack at the same time, but that doesn’t mean they cannot defend at the same time.
-
@Cmdr:
Germany’s only response to a KJF is to press Russia at the expense of all else. There’s no time or resources for flamboyancy.
No.
Germany must respond to the Allied moves. If the Allies support Russia even a teeny bit, Germany gets held up, and that can be a real disaster, particularly if Germany does not have Africa.
Transports in S. Europe around G3-G4 can make a big difference.
-
@Cmdr:
Germany’s only response to a KJF is to press Russia at the expense of all else. There’s no time or resources for flamboyancy.
No.
Germany must respond to the Allied moves. If the Allies support Russia even a teeny bit, Germany gets held up, and that can be a real disaster, particularly if Germany does not have Africa.
Uh, my point exactly. Germany has to pounce all over Russia like a girl who’s been seperated from her man while he’s off at war just as he gets back off the boat!
Africa is nice, but in this situation, Germany cannot afford any more units in Africa then what it put there in bid + round 1. Everything, and I mean everything, has to be pounding on Russia as fast as possible. I might even consider giving W. Europe back to France just so I don’t have to protect it anymore. Notice, I said CONSIDER.
-
ok the super agressiv german strat is.
I usal play LL 9 bid for the axis.
the bid goes 1 inf bele, ukarine, west russia.then round 1 u stack kar. if ukraine is not atackt consider to atack west russia round 1.
Whith a litle luck russia cant hold westrussia.
U hold west europe round 1 whith 2 inf and 4 fighters. And 2 subs and 1 dest at sea zone 7. Rest of the game u trade westeurope. The navy in sea zone also dose that if uk uses fighters to atack it they cant reach west europa.Also the stacking of kar, means that a uk landing over 1 units in norway is gonner get strafet.
Most plp that see that opning dont dare to go KJF. And if they do it takes about 5 ore 6 rounds of takning moskva.
I have never meat a KJF whith ic for india. but if they do i think its gonner go faster, because that means that uk can do less i europe.
Thats why i dont see a KJF work.
i may work if germany plays more defensiv round 1. But germany is meant to be played aggresiv ore else the axis lose.
-
Well, part of your problem is you seem to be assuming a KJF on Russia 1. KJF cannot really be assumed until UK 1 since nothing Russia does would change in either KGF or KJF.
However, I think if the allies let you get 9 IPC and you put it all in Europe, they might just decide to crush Germany since now they don’t have to worry so much about protecting Africa. That means England’s +9 IPC and Germany’s down 11 IPC they would otherwise have. (9 for Africa they take + 1 Algeria +1 Libya.) Actually, they’re also down Norway most likely so down another 3 for that and W. Russia would be a wash with Karelia.
40 - 5 = 35 to face against Russia earning 23-26 and England earning 30-33 and America it just makes KGF so simple there’s no point in going for the KJF.
If Germany, on the other hand, had +3 Infantry in Africa making the liberation of Egypt impossible, then an IC in India round 1 and going for the KJF almost seems like a watson moment "Elementary my dear Watson, elementary.)
People like to say that Japan can easily swat the British and the Americans. Look at their fleet. Okay. I’m looking, I’m not terribly impressed!
Of Japan’s forces, only 17 out of 22 Infantry/Armor/Artillery are in reasonable range of hitting Asia. The other 5 would require fleet investment to retreive, investment Japan can hardly afford against a determined KJF strategy.
Of the 17 in range, only 7 are actually on the front lines.
Fleet wise Japan is pretty well off, especially if Pearl goes well. But with a massed British fleet in SZ 30 and the Americans massing in SZ 55, that’s not going to last forever.
Now, Japan can get a quick boost to defensive power by building a carrier and landing all 6 fighters at sea. Assuming none were lost in engagements. But that’s their last quick boost. And, as they will be facing an IC in Sinkiang and India (and later in China) it’s safe to assume they’ll be reduced to 21 IPC income really fast (Turn 3, maybe Turn 4.) America will be at 45 IPC and England down at 20-24 depending on how things play out.
Russia, of course, will be in the upper 20’s throughout now since they will have no need to protect their eastern flanks.
What does Japan do? They can cower in SZ 60/61 and hope to land enough troops to distract the allies until Russia falls. They can advance and try to protect their major island investments but pull their transports away from SZ 60 so they can be used as fodder to stop the allies from unification. They can try all of the above. But none of that will really help in the long run. By turn 7 or 8, even with the best Japanese strategy, Japan will crumble navally and be reduced to an island worth 8 IPC.
Okay, so they have 8 IPC a round and can get 2 or 3 infantry. Who cares? The American and British (if it lives) fleets will be surrounding it while all three nations shift focus on Germany. Yes, Germany literally dies first, but Japan has been reduced to a waking coma, as good as dead, if not legally dead yet.
How does Japan survive? Luck and lots of it! They’re going to have to hope they can inflict serious damage to the combined fleets (because you know they will be forced to attack, America doesn’t care if Hawaii or Alaska is taken, why should they? They have Kwangtung, Manchuria, E. Indies, and/or some other assets) so attacking the Japanese fleet, at least for a long time, is not their job. Their job is to trade islands and position the Japanese into compromising situations.
-
I think Japan has more staying power than you may think Jen; 21 IPCs by round 3 or 4 sounds suspicious unless Russia has committed starting from R1, and even then the Japanese should be able to at least trade their original territories for 30 IPC income. Actually by round 3 or 4 India should fall hard unless the Russians heavily reinforced it. And if they heavily reinforce India, then the Japanese should go for sinkiang instead. If both were reinforced somehow, then the Russians should be weak on the German front.
-
IMO a KJF, if Jap does pearl, is even less likely to be a good strat, then if Jap skips pearl, which in most games
i’ve seen seems to be standard J1. Some do pearl light, others attack pearl heavy, but I regard it as a standard opneing move J1. Maybe because the US might cause problems, I’m saying it cannot.
But without the US pearl fleet, US have to build more pure naval assets for 1 more rnd than if Jap skips pearl.
And with or without J1 pearl attack, I still don’t see US go island hopping if not for some strange reason the J players let US do want it wants… -
This is my standart opning.
i forgot to mention u can only put 1 unit a area. then u can only make the liberation of Egypt impossible 50 % of the time
And this strat have never lost to KJF.
first of all if uk is going to afrika that is 1 more round that they cant help russia.
If russia sends troops against japan they will fall faster.
and germany isent only getting like 35 icp it is more like 44 to 48 the first couple of rounds. As long as the stack is in kar u can trade arc norway, and 1 point west russia. And when u move your stack to west russia u will trade caus insted of norway.
The usa can start taking the island from turn 3, but they will usal waith to turn 4 if no japan navy is purcaset, and then maybe later.
If they purcase a sink ic then it will take some more rounds to be dominat in the pasific.japan will focus on the mainland for the 3 first rounds. then when the usa gets close to the island, the japan can decide if they want to defent them. Becuse russia will fall prety fast.
it comes down to how much dmg uk/us can do to japan before moskva falls.
And under these rulses, i will say that KJF dosent work, and i dont think i will change that before i lose to it, ore i see a top player do it.
i guess Cmdr Jennifer we just have to agree to disagree :-)
when it comes down to it, it just a game
-
Jennifer, I can’t remember ever have seen a game where Jap has crumbled by rnd. 7-8.
And I’m not the most experienced player here, but 100% of games lost as axis, Germany is reduced and cannot
threat anyone, Jap cannot take moscow, (even with 42-45 ipc) Russia’s too strong so axis lost…
If someone tried your KJF strat against me I’m afraid that I might beat players who are generally better than me.By no disrespect, I think you like to tell fairytales.
-
@Cmdr:
What does Japan do?
How does Japan survive?
occupy California
and same as usallul after you have the bay of cali under your control. I would only do KJF if peaal went horribly bad ro didn’t happen. but you don’t know that till after Russia and UK1 so it would be more of island hopping.( not ti destoy Japan just to annoy them) -
If someone let me (as axis) have moscow, then u can have all the islands u want. I don’t need them if
G or J got caucus and moscow.
And I ask again, why have I not seen this strat tried and succed in the lobby, is it because all lobby players are
inferior?
Suggested Topics
