Was KJF really that bad?

I start with a purchase of 3 CVs for the US.  You can get planes to fill them up later on.  It is nice to stack a bunch of fighters in Midway.  If the Japanese are careless, your planes can hit SZ 6 and then land on the carrier group in CZ7.  It doesn’t happen often, but is beautiful when you can pull off that raid.

On turn 2, I transition to subs and fighters as the primary way to damage their fleet.  You can also convoy raid their economy to bits if you can get a few subs into the appropriate sea locations.

Afterwards, I do mostly subs plus a destroyer.  Depending on the Japanese spending and success against China, I transition to the European side.

Well said on everything. The only thing I might disagree on are the Russian units in the east. In a KJF game you need those 20 units to defend Moscow, otherwise Moscow just rolls over and dies way too easily.

With a 22 bid have you seen anyone bid a carrier sub with UK? This would allow UK to stack 92 depending on what Germany buys.

@techroll42:

Got both for $70 each.

Well some of us get to school late via the shortbus :P

@Spendo02:

I don’t see much value in the 70 IPC of Trn once you take London and get your offensive units back on mainland Europe.Â

Spending resources to address their protection seems less efficient than boots on the ground pushing back the Russian advance.

5 Transports and the fleet stay in the Baltic Sea - now you can ferry your infantry/artillery builds directly into Novgorod each round (+13 units a round in Novgorod - there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell Russia is getting it back - ever.)
5 Transports go down to Gibraltar - land in Morocco and join with large Italian fleet - which will probably exist unless England went no defense for England - and take Brazil, Africa, W. Indies and then slide the rest down around the Cape for Madagascar.

There’s a lot of things you can use the transports for.  You could use them to set up a train service to Arkhangelsk through the Arctic Ocean and the other half to shuttle troops from Berlin.

@knp7765:

In one game I played a few months back, I think it was Alpha+2, both Germany and Italy failed to take France round 1.  Then UK sent some stuff in to back up the units France was able to purchase and believe it or not, Germany failed a second time.  This time Italy managed to finish off France though.  Very weird.  Axis lost that game by the way.

I’ve seen this happen. Makes for an exciting couple French turns.

@knp7765:

<snip>However, if we end up forcing USA to split their involvement over both theaters, which seems to me to be a losing proposition nearly every time, aren’t you then imbalancing the game toward the Axis?</snip>

I don’t think it is a loosing proposition nearly every time, so I disagree with your premise.
It’s a game opener more than anything else. Remember originally - the stand alone games were balanced with a half USA in each. If you then combine the boards and throw the USA into one side of the conflict, you’re effectively putting two countries into one side. And the other allies basically just need to avoid loosing, and the game is won. India doesn’t need to win the game, they just need to not loose. Russia doesn’t need to win, they just need to slow down the axis enough. And so on.

I don’t see many other viable choices to a balancing act upon USA to be frank.
By buffing/nerfing the other axis/allies you’re effectively removing strategy and closing options by making alternatives too easy. If it becomes easier to take Russia by Germany/Italy for example - nobody will go Sealion. Strategy removed and game made more narrow.
By giving USA a clear incentive to split attention somewhat (I’m not saying 50/50 product limit or something) you open up the game and provide the chance for more strategies. If the USA can’t dump 2 battleships, 1 crusier and plans into the Pacific each round at war without loosing something on the Atlantic side - it will provide more possible strategies for the game overall.
A clear benefit as I see it.

Tweaking the USA is a win/win in my opinion. It makes the game more balanced and it will provide more choice for how to play. All other options as I see it might balance the game, but will remove choices.

@kcdzim:

@SalothSar:

USA kills it

Are you even paying attention, or just mass spamming/trolling?

We’re talking about UK1.  Not US6.

i do not think he is purposefully spamming, but he is spamming. i have just read many salothsar responses that are one word or less than a full sentence. his posts do not add anything to most threads. he posts opinions as if his are superior to others and has made personal attacks.

salothsar, i recommend you be less negative towards others.

I posted my reply in the other thread ( http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=20063.0 ) so it’s a bit easier to follow. No use having two threads about the same confusing the discussion!

8-)