Another KJF topic..

Usually I leave 1 inf in Manchuria, if Russia stack Buryatia, and attack China with 6 inf and 2 fig. IN NCM move two inf in FIC.

If Russia retreat to Yakut, I attack china with 6inf and 2 fig and leave 1 inf in FIC, landing there 1 inf and 1 tank and 2 fig.

I will just say that there can be no Bombers or Aircraft Carriers with out advanced flight.

And I prefer to use “boat anchor” place of “cat”

@U-505:

@newpaintbrush:

@U-505:

Well, Switch, the reason the Commander wants to play Low Luck is that she wants a narrower baseline with which to judge the viability of the strategy. Low Luck gives her that. If the majority of the results fall within the limits LL provides or the Allies win decisively, then it becomes a viable strategy. If the Axis can win most of the games decisively in LL, then it requires favorable dice in ADS and should be abandoned. What’s the point of playing 10 games of ADS when you can play 5 games of LL and get the same general idea about the strategy?

You can hate LL for whatever reasons, but all you’re doing is limiting yourself. All LL does is eliminate wild dice swings. This game is primarily about outmanouvering your opponent and it is required just as much in LL as in ADS. ADS just provides more variability which is why I prefer it to LL, but I still enjoy my LL games just as much and if I lose, I will have a harder time complaining that I was screwed by the dice.

If you have the MOST COMMON RESULT happening 5% of the time, and ninety-five variants happening 1% of the time, then it logically follows that you should expect to see the MOST COMMON RESULT every time.

Never mind that something else happens 95% of the time.

All I’m saying is that you are limiting yourself. You don’t have to justify your dislike for LL to me.

My bad.  :wink:

AC UK1 is standard for me, maybe UK2 but even if Germany don’t buy ftrs the UK fleet can be easily sunk.

IC in Ssinkiang, IC in India, USSR reinforcements.  US builds craploads of fighters.

I think Japan must attack the US at Pearl.  It is far more dangerous to leave the US fleet in Pearl than the UK fleet in Sz 30.

Some players will sink both, but there are pros and cons for that on both sides.

If I’m Japan, I’ll usually leave that merged fleet and deal with it later if I have to with the full J Navy/airforce.  I could run into trouble if the Allies do go Pac strat, but I prefer to limit my J1 attacks and attack heavy (such as sending everything I can to Pearl and everything else to China).

I usually build on J1 and J2. Quicker you get tanks on the mainland the better!

how bout this to slow down japan; r1      6inf, 1 fig in bury.
                                                uk1    sub on sub in salomon(even fight, for 1 rnd then submerge)
                                                          trns to sz west of salomon (new guniea i think)
                                                          ac, des, fig to kill tranny off kwangtung( fighter land in bury)
                                                          tranny to block east indies fleet in boreo(or philipienes which ever im not in front of aboard)
                                                          2 figs west can
                                                          bom to sinkiang or west can(different ranges, both spots have advantages)

the purchases will be dependent on need(uk might need a big stack of inf to prevent losing london)                     
                              so jap now has slow down issues( icant wait to hear what is said about this one)