Crazy George!

[frood]

@Cmdr:

It is a far safer assumption to presume that once Japan has been completely kicked off the mainland and facing a major fleet investment that they will not be able to recover sufficiently and that this would almost force Germany to take some risks in an effort to distract the allies or to over throw Russia and thus relieve pressure from Japan.

Never assume…

It might CHANGE how Germany plays, but I don’t think you can assume that it will start making risky (ie. bad) moves. It could just as easily make Germany be more cautious, more exact, more focused.

[Jennifer]

I said risky, not bad. :)

Risky: attacking 2 defending infantry with 2 infantry, fighter.
Bad: attacking 2 defending infantry with infantry, 2 fighters.

With all the leisure time Berlin has in a normal KGF game (because it takes 4 or 5 rounds for the Allies to get fully functional) they have no need to make a risky move.  Instead they can do a good move:

Good: attacking 2 defending infantry with 3 infantry and 1 or 2 fighters as available

[Lucifer]

It takes longer time for allies to get fully functional for KJF.
And KGF is not easy by any means. Not if the axis player is as good as the allie player.

A couple of days ago I actually witnessed a real KJF in the lobby!!!

Tokyo was captured and held before Berlin. I think the allie player was better, and ppl told me that allies had a big lead, but then he switched to KJF, and Germany had all of caucus moscow etc. Game went on for about 12-13 rnds and I only saw the last few rnds. I call it freak show…  :mrgreen:
That KJF player is not a top player in the lobby, but he is among the better ones.
And he readily admitted that he didnt use this strat often, and when he faced good opponents they wouldn’t “let him” do a KJF.
The KJF strat is inferior to KGF by efficiancy, but I it can be more fun when it succeds.

The KJF only works when the allie player is way better, or dice favorable for the allies.

[Jennifer]

I think it’s easier to mobilize against Japan then Germany.

Against Japan you already have the majority of your fleet in theater.  To go against Germany, you need 3 rounds to move it into theater, 4 to employ it.

Against Japan you out number him in ground forces from the start. (7 Infantry for Japan on the mainland, vs 14 Infantry (6 USSR, 4 USA, 4 UK before Japan’s first move.)  Germany vastly out numbers the allies before her first turn on her front, and on her second turn, and third turn - usually.

Against Japan you vastly out number them in income.  Germany can quickly eclipse England and Russia combined given slightly above average dice.  Japan cannot.  Actually, against a KJF, Japan can’t even catch up to America.

Germany just seems like an easier kill because two allied capitols are right there.  (USA doesn’t count since it does, in effect, have two capitols.  East and West USA.  Since West USA has an IC and a build capacity of 10, 2 more then 3 other capitols, and equal to the 4th.)

[cyan]

BUt Japan’s navy is so much better than the allies. If Japan buys 3 trn for 24 ipc round 1. that is 2 ACs( 4 or 6 figs) 2 BB, 1 des, 1 sub, 4 trn. and possibly 1 bomber
thats a defense punch of 39 and 2 free hits. for offense thats 39 and 2 free hits. so Japan is getting 6-7 hits in battle round 1. Lets say america buys 1 ac, 1 fig, 1 sub, 1 trn. FOr america’s navy thats 1 battleship, 2 ac, 4 figs, 2 trn, 1 des, 1 sub and 1 bomber thats a offensive punch of 27, defense 33. Thats about 5 hits for punch and 1 freebie hit.

Even with all of the forces america could POSSIBLY muster to sz 55 on rd 1. its still dwarfed by Japan and they didn’t even have to go out of the way. and then when AMerica starts to sail west and are closing in, they can just plop down an round of like 5 subs for a punch of 10(not to mention 1st strike). Im not even counting the english navy because it should be rendered completely useless before america even has its first turn.  SO in other words Japan’s navy can easily protect it and allow Japan to land in asia business as usual.

[Guest]

The problem with a KJF strat is the reliance on TRNs by the Allies.

Without TRNs, the entire point of a KJF is moot… No TRNs, no land taken.

And that means STRAFES by the Imperial Navy…  Move in with lots of FIGs, SUBs, and BB’s, unleash an ass of damage sinking the Allied TRN’s, then retreat.

The Allies then have to send the surviving capital ships back to get more TRNs, and bring more forces forward.  And get strafed AGAIN.

I have played the Axis against a KJF before on more than one occasion.

One that does stick in my memory though had 10 USA divisions (5 INF, 5 ARM) stranded in Solomons.  They took Solomons, lost the majority of their fleet, and were NEVER able to get back to do anything with those units.

That was a HUGE bonus for Japan.  Not only the destruction of the US Fleet, but also the complete neutralization of $40 (an entire build) worth of US units that were completely impotent to do ANYTHING accept occupy a zero value island.

KJF is VERY dice sensitive… every single unit variation, plus or minus, has MASSIVE implications for the game.  And since it is more dice sensitive than is KGF, it is more risky.

[Jennifer]

The problem with most people’s KJF is they think they need transport trains.

America needs 1 transport, which, coincidentally, it starts with. :P  1 Transport + 4 Fighters + 1 Battleship can get enough troops to just about any island in the Pacific and win.  After attrition hits you, then you might have to go back, but by then, hopefully, you have Japan pretty well boxed in.

Also, please note that the allies do not ever have to attack the Japanese fleet.  Japan has to attack the allies, or suffer letting them take islands with impunity and then be forced, themselves, to take them back.  And believe me, if I get E. Indies or Borneo with America, I’m parking my fleet there, putting up an IC and then building next door to Japan.

The only place the Allies pretty much have to attack is Manchuria, Kwangtung and FIC.  But those are relatively easy attacks when the allies are mustered there.

[cyan]

@Cmdr:

The problem with most people’s KJF is they think they need transport trains.

America needs 1 transport, which, coincidentally, it starts with. :P  1 Transport + 4 Fighters + 1 Battleship can get enough troops to just about any island in the Pacific and win.

I personally like 2 trns for america ( hence me saying before to buy 1 ac, 1 trn ,1 sub ) that way you have slightly more units and a little more prepered. but I already said Japan can just crush america’s navy whenever it comes close to Japan.

[Guest]

And when Japan attacks your fleet en masse with what ends up being a hell of a strafe after your lose the TRNs, what do you use to keep advancing?

[DarthMaximus]

I’m not sure what type of scenerio we are up to (meaning what went on on the previous turns), but it should be extremely costly for Japan to even attempt a strafe.  Not that they won’t do it, but that they lose a lot of high powered units in the effort.

I agree with Jen that you don’t need large amount of trns but I would also say I like more than 1 for my initial thrust or the turn right after that.

I like that because as Switch points out you can get stranded if Japan does have the numbers to attack/strafe.  Plus, I think it is unrealistict to move 5 inf/5 arm to Sol and expect Japan to leave Tokyo open and you don’t need 5/5 to take the other islands.  You only need 2 inf as long as you have ftrs and a BB.

For me, once I move to Sol, my follow-up builds will always contain a trn, so should Japan attack/strafe I have a trn ready to pick up the 2 inf the following turn.  At most I risk stranding 2 inf (6 ipc) for one turn instead of 40 ipc worth of units.  Japan will also not be able to continually get to strafe off the one trn, they’ll get one shot (maybe 2) and that is about it.

This is why I like the AC/ftr method.  With only 1 trn, 1 dd, 1 bb, 3 acs, 6 ftrs (not hard to get as the US), Japan is already looking at taking ~7 hits just to strafe off one lousy trn.  I’m not sure if Japan is spending the first 2-3 turns buying subs to absorb the hits which means they are either using trns or ftrs and both are good for the Allies.

Now this is strickly dependent on the game but If the US can move with 1-2 subs as additional fodder and get the 4th AC with 2 ftrs, Japan again is looking at taking massive losses just to kill one trn.

Typically the US can take the losses much more easily than Japan.  (cheaper to defend then attack)  Use those ACs and ftrs as 3’s and 4’s.

This is why I like the Sz 30 unification by the UK.  Japan just lost 3-4 ftrs (possibly a capital ship) if they chose to attack and now if the US does indeed drop an AC (or 2) or BB (or both) in Sz 55 on US 1, it can be a real pain in the neck to even come close to trying to prevent a move to the Sol on say US 3, where the US can already have 3 acs and 6 ftrs plus the DD and BB for defense.

And this would of course depend on Germany and if they bought an AC/ships and can threaten a pretty good unification move to the Atlantic since the US forces may be needed to help prevent that.

[newpaintbrush]

@DarthMaximus:

I’m not sure what type of scenerio we are up to (meaning what went on on the previous turns), but it should be extremely costly for Japan to even attempt a strafe.  Not that they won’t do it, but that they lose a lot of high powered units in the effort.

If Japan “strafes”, it can take up to 2 hits on its battleships.  Japan will lose high powered units, but so will the US.  Would you agree that after the US1 turn that indicates a KJF, a 1 fighter per turn build with Japan is reasonable?

I agree with Jen that you don’t need large amount of trns but I would also say I like more than 1 for my initial thrust or the turn right after that.

I like that because as Switch points out you can get stranded if Japan does have the numbers to attack/strafe.  Plus, I think it is unrealistict to move 5 inf/5 arm to Sol and expect Japan to leave Tokyo open and you don’t need 5/5 to take the other islands.  You only need 2 inf as long as you have ftrs and a BB.

2 transports is absolute minimum pretty soon after you start taking islands.  The US can’t rely on its battleship bombardment to kill every Japanese infantry.  The Japs WILL knock out some US infantry, and the US will want cheap replacements.  So if you only have 1 transport, that transport has to go back to pick up more infantry.  Better to have another transport that ferries infantry to a halfway point like Midway, Hawaii, or Solomons.  Of course, if Japan did a heavy air/naval buildup, then US can’t necessarily afford more transports because it won’t be moving into the islands any time soon.

For me, once I move to Sol, my follow-up builds will always contain a trn, so should Japan attack/strafe I have a trn ready to pick up the 2 inf the following turn.  At most I risk stranding 2 inf (6 ipc) for one turn instead of 40 ipc worth of units.  Japan will also not be able to continually get to strafe off the one trn, they’ll get one shot (maybe 2) and that is about it.

This is why I like the AC/ftr method.  With only 1 trn, 1 dd, 1 bb, 3 acs, 6 ftrs (not hard to get as the US), Japan is already looking at taking ~7 hits just to strafe off one lousy trn.  I’m not sure if Japan is spending the first 2-3 turns buying subs to absorb the hits which means they are either using trns or ftrs and both are good for the Allies.

…

[DarthMaximus]

Yeah, I agree about the 1 ftr per turn, and right again about the 2 J BBs.

But the UK also has 2 trns, 1 sub, 1 dd, 1 ac/ftr in the neighborhood.

The US can always land its ftrs on the UK AC (I think by rd 3).

IMO, this is a good dilemma to present Japan with the Unified fleet in Sz 30.  If Japan kills it, they lose ftrs and may or may not have that BB in range of Sol in the next two turns.  They will need some sort of cover for Fic sz in rd 2 if they intend to get troops there.

If they leave the sz 30 UK fleet it can eventually reinforce Sol sz with extra fodder, even if it is just the AC/DD, while the trns head to Afr.

Also with the ftr buys that still means losing trns or ftrs in any attack even if the BBs absorb the first two hits.  I just think it is easier for the US to replace those losses then Japan.  Also depending on Japans fleet size and attack, the US could sack the AC’s after any trns/subs, land the ftrs on Sol then counter attack the J fleet with the remaining Sol ftrs, the ftrs placed in Sz 55, a bom which could be nearby, maybe a dd, and a BB as well.

You could end up with a mutual destruction, which should be better for the Allies in the long run, since the US can continue to devote 38 ipc to the Pac while Japan (at this point) probably can’t match ship for ship or aircraft for aircraft without neglecting the Aisa push from that point on.

And you’re right again about not sending the “one” trn back and forth etc. 
That’s why I like to follow up all US buys with 1 trn.  You don’t have to be in a rush once you get to Sol, IMO, it is more important just to get to Sol first and hold.  Once you are there, wait a turn (or 2) if you must for your 2nd (or 3rd) trn to arrive THEN attack a 4 ipc island with 3 inf, 1 arm.  Now Japan can’t really counter cause that leaves Sz 60 open or US could possibly smash one part of a split J fleet.  Also once you own an island later in the game it becomes much more difficult to reclaim it since each side has had several turns of build up and preparation.  And if you calculate Japan can’t reclaim EI (for example), you drop an IC there move your fleet and set up any blockers for safety.  Now you can drop 4 naval units right off SE Asia.  Once there with an IC it is big big trouble for Japan.

[Jennifer]

I do believe I said America only NEEDS one transport.  That’s not to say extras are not helpful.  But to be perfectly honest, you only NEED one, you can (and should) have plenty of submarines to take as fodder to keep your transport alive.  Transports defend for crud and they attack for nothing, to top it off, they only cost the same as a submarine.

2 Aircraft Carriers
Battleship
2-3 destroyers
6-10 submarines
1-2 transports
4-6 fighters
+
England

Plenty to keep Japan at bay, and should be plenty attainable in the game.  Not very late, either.

However, your initial probe, if nothing more then to rescue the British, can be nothing more then BB, TRN, DD, 2 AC, 4 FIG, 2 INF.  You are not attacking Japan with it and if they attack you, then they’ll lose even more assets and leave the remaining units in range of the ships you just bought in SZ 55!

[cyan]

@Cmdr:

I do believe I said America only NEEDS one transport.  That’s not to say extras are not helpful.  But to be perfectly honest, you only NEED one, you can (and should) have plenty of submarines to take as fodder to keep your transport alive.  Transports defend for crud and they attack for nothing, to top it off, they only cost the same as a submarine.

2 Aircraft Carriers
Battleship
2-3 destroyers
6-10 submarines
1-2 transports
4-6 fighters
+
England

Plenty to keep Japan at bay, and should be plenty attainable in the game.  Not very late, either.

However, your initial probe, if nothing more then to rescue the British, can be nothing more then BB, TRN, DD, 2 AC, 4 FIG, 2 INF.  You are not attacking Japan with it and if they attack you, then they’ll lose even more assets and leave the remaining units in range of the ships you just bought in SZ 55!

england shouldn;t have a navy after round 1 or else Japan doesn’t know what  its doing.

[U-505]

@Cmdr:

I do believe I said America only NEEDS one transport.  That’s not to say extras are not helpful.  But to be perfectly honest, you only NEED one, you can (and should) have plenty of submarines to take as fodder to keep your transport alive.  Transports defend for crud and they attack for nothing, to top it off, they only cost the same as a submarine.

2 Aircraft Carriers
Battleship
2-3 destroyers
6-10 submarines
1-2 transports
4-6 fighters
+
England

Plenty to keep Japan at bay, and should be plenty attainable in the game.  Not very late, either.

That adds up to 114-186 IPC’s since the US is likely to have only 1 BB, 1 TP, 3 fig in the Pacific to start with after J1. When you add in 15 IPC’s for the Sink IC and minimum 6 IPC’s worth of units produced there every turn, even the minimum amount you suggested will take at least 4 turns to produce and 1 more to get to the Solomans. That’s a long time unless you’re assuming that Japan isn’t building anything while they are waiting for you to show up.

[Jennifer]

@cyan:

@Cmdr:

I do believe I said America only NEEDS one transport.  That’s not to say extras are not helpful.  But to be perfectly honest, you only NEED one, you can (and should) have plenty of submarines to take as fodder to keep your transport alive.  Transports defend for crud and they attack for nothing, to top it off, they only cost the same as a submarine.

2 Aircraft Carriers
Battleship
2-3 destroyers
6-10 submarines
1-2 transports
4-6 fighters
+
England

Plenty to keep Japan at bay, and should be plenty attainable in the game.  Not very late, either.

However, your initial probe, if nothing more then to rescue the British, can be nothing more then BB, TRN, DD, 2 AC, 4 FIG, 2 INF.  You are not attacking Japan with it and if they attack you, then they’ll lose even more assets and leave the remaining units in range of the ships you just bought in SZ 55!

england shouldn;t have a navy after round 1 or else Japan doesn’t know what  its doing.

I said + England because I don’t know if Japan will attack the combined British fleet in SZ 30.  If they do, splendid!!!  I sank a capitol ship and 4 fighter squadrons and didn’t lose a single American unit to do it!  If they don’t then I have a large fleet with England to defend my American fleet!

Anyway, 42 IPC for USA in round 1 for 2 Carriers, Fighter giving America 2 Carriers, Battleship, Destroyer, Transport, 4 Fighters in SZ 55 which can immediately attack Solomons.

Round 2: IC, 2 Submarines, 1 Transport + DD from SZ 10.  39 IPC, 1 saved for rainy day

Round 3: 4 submarines, 2 infantry, 3 saved (since you had +1 from round 2)

Round 4: 2 destroyers, 2 submarines, infantry, none saved

Note, this entire time you are taking islands or forcing the Japanese navy to bounce around defending various areas, or give up their defensive superiority attacking your fleets, which net in your favor as America.  You might lose the naval battle, but you’ll win the war because Japan cannot keep up.

[Jennifer]

@U-505:

@Cmdr:

I do believe I said America only NEEDS one transport.  That’s not to say extras are not helpful.  But to be perfectly honest, you only NEED one, you can (and should) have plenty of submarines to take as fodder to keep your transport alive.  Transports defend for crud and they attack for nothing, to top it off, they only cost the same as a submarine.

2 Aircraft Carriers
Battleship
2-3 destroyers
6-10 submarines
1-2 transports
4-6 fighters
+
England

Plenty to keep Japan at bay, and should be plenty attainable in the game.  Not very late, either.

That adds up to 114-186 IPC’s since the US is likely to have only 1 BB, 1 TP, 3 fig in the Pacific to start with after J1. When you add in 15 IPC’s for the Sink IC and minimum 6 IPC’s worth of units produced there every turn, even the minimum amount you suggested will take at least 4 turns to produce and 1 more to get to the Solomans. That’s a long time unless you’re assuming that Japan isn’t building anything while they are waiting for you to show up.

That adds up to:

2 Carriers = 32 IPC
1 Fighter = 10 IPC
6 Submarines = 48 IPC

Total: 90 IPC, less then 3 full rounds of purchases, btw.

That’s for minimal, which is all you’d need when you attack the Japanese.  To be really well off, go with maximum (which you’ll be using around turn 8 or so, when you move to clear SZ 60/61)

2 Aircraft Carriers = 32 IPC
1 Battleship = 0 IPC (Starting Unit)
2-3 destroyers = 12 IPC (2 Starting Units)
10 submarines = 80 IPC
2 transports = 8 IPC (1 Starting Unit)
6 fighters = 30 IPC (3 Starting Units)
+1 Bomber = 0 IPC (Starting Unit)

Total: 162 IPC.  4 rounds of purchases, because you are only down China starting with round 2’s cash.  (Lost on round 1, but you start with the money for it.)  42 + 40 + 40 + 40 = 162 and, as I said, you’d need this just to sink the Japanese fleet, which is going to be around Round 8, so you have 8 rounds meaning a mere 20 IPC investment a round after the first round.

America cannot afford a 20 IPC investment???  In your fantasy you are down what with America???  E. USA + W. USA + C. USA is 28 IPC!!!  That’s your 20 IPC investment + Infantry/Armor in China and that doesn’t even count your income for China!!!  Even if you somehow lost Alaska, Brazil and Hawaii as well as Sinkiang, you can afford that!

[U-505]

Actually it’s 102 IPC’s minimum. I forgot about the sz20 DD, but you can’t fool me into thinking that you will be sending the sz10 DD to the Pacific. Nice try. You might as well just send the whole sz10 fleet to the Pacific because those 2 undefended TP’s aren’t going to escape Germany’s attention.

And which one of us is fantasizing, again? You aren’t at all factoring in the cost of the Sink IC or it’s production every turn. Didn’t you also say that you would be sending troops to Africa, as well? I believe that you had said earlier that the US would only have to invest 80% of it’s income into Asia and the Pacific. With your minimum build there, Japan doesn’t need much to match or exceed that fleet even if it never goes above it’s starting income for the turns you’re preparing your naval buildup. And it will still have plenty left over to build troops for landing.

@Cmdr:

America cannot afford a 20 IPC investment???  In your fantasy you are down what with America???  E. USA + W. USA + C. USA is 28 IPC!!!  That’s your 20 IPC investment + Infantry/Armor in China and that doesn’t even count your income for China!!!  Even if you somehow lost Alaska, Brazil and Hawaii as well as Sinkiang, you can afford that!

You’re right. I’m sorry. I was assuming that the Axis owned everything but Eastern and Western US. What was I thinking?!  :roll:

[Jennifer]

But the SZ 10 transports are not unprotected.  England is protecting them.  Why should America spend the destroyer there when they can easily take it to SZ 55 and beyond???

Admittedly, England might have to focus more on Africa and less on Norway for the short term, with American transports as help/fodder if they get attacked.  But that really isn’t too bad, in the grand scheme of things.

[U-505]

Well, as with any thread that goes this long it has turned into an endless cycle of “If you do that, then I’ll do this”. I’m extremely skeptical of any new strategy or, like this one, a variation of an old strategy. It’s just going to have to be tested against multiple opponents, preferably high-caliber, before I give it any value. I think I’m done here until you start posting results for us to discuss.