What I also find contradictory about doing a KJF is when you say Jen that it’s 300% easier to defend than to attack, but then you try to make the US attack Japan when Japan has a great defense and more IPCs. I’d rather send the US off to Germany to defend/contain it faster, then defend Moscow. Defense is easier than offense, no?
It’s not contradictory. No defense in the world will save you from losing. That’s because you cannot conquer if you never attack.
And, btw, if a44 insists on stacking up SZ 12, I may not get around to building the carrier, 3 submarines in SZ 14. :P
In fact, is Japan who must attack at the begining, or UK/USA’s fleet will conquer those tasty IPCs islands at Indonesia/Philippines.
Japan must also attack the India and Sinkiang’s ICs, Siberia … :-P
In fact, is Japan who must attack at the begining, or UK/USA’s fleet will conquer those tasty IPCs islands at Indonesia/Philippines.
Japan must also attack the India and Sinkiang’s ICs, Siberia … :-P
You commonly build IC with US+UK in Asia?
In fact, is Japan who must attack at the begining, or UK/USA’s fleet will conquer those tasty IPCs islands at Indonesia/Philippines.
Well so far Jen delays her fleet build up, so it is not I who have to attack, but she. Liberation of Hawaii on Round 5 at which point I’m already contesting Novo and have a near 50 IPC income.
I would like to fight an early KJF in which case Japan would have to significantly alter strategy, but that is not the case - as of yet.
@Cmdr:
It’s not contradictory. No defense in the world will save you from losing. That’s because you cannot conquer if you never attack.
And, btw, if a44 insists on stacking up SZ 12, I may not get around to building the carrier, 3 submarines in SZ 14. :P
Link to game? What’s he doing by stacking SZ12? =p
You commonly build IC with US+UK in Asia?
If I’m going for Pacific islands, yes. USA simply cannot take by alone if Japaneses are rampaging across Asia without opposition (40+ipcs, more income than USA)
And If I want defend India and China, I suppose that island chasing is needed too. Both things should be joint :-D
Bean:
It’s your standard Allied Fleet link in SZ 12.
Battleship (UK)
4 Transports (2 UK/2 US)
Submarine (Russia)
Destroyer (UK)
Easily hit by Battleship, Submarine, Transport, 6 Fighters, Bomber.
Meanwhile, I’ve gone away from the Industrials in SE Asia. Right now I’m playin with ICs in S. Africa, working out strategies for that. I’ll probably go away from that too, soon. (IC in E. Canada/Brazil might be workable though.)
I guess I don’t HAVE to hold off on the American incursion into the Pacific. It’s just a matter of sacrificial submarines. I don’t like using them until I’m almost indominable anyway. But I could just buy up a bunch of submarines on R1, then use 2 DD, BB, TRN to invade while I built more ships. That would at least allow the US/UK forces to meet faster.
Funcioneta, how often do you use that KJF strat, building IC in India UK1/UK2 + IC in Sink, and also then you
build most US units in WUS?
You may want to try a game against me with your KJF strat. TripleA, no tech, preferably LL 8-)
IC in India is great for Colonial Garrison NA. Then you could buy an American IC in Sinkiang, since Japan has to focus 100% on India to get it.
Otherwise, once the Indian IC goes down, the American one is automatically in jeapordy without major Russian help.
Much better to go with an IC in Australia if you must get one. Or S. Africa (since that lets you take and defend 11 IPC in land, almost the value of the IC itself.)
You don’t need ICs to slow down Japan anyway. Japan’s navy is a push over, America can sink it with minimal investments and strategic positioning.
I’m planning try the Australia IC, in the future, Jen. It seems interesting. About sinking Japan’s navy, it’s not so easy. I’d rather prefer good old island hoping
And Luci, no TripleA nor Low Luck. Triple A not working on my stupid Vista laptop :-P, and I don’t like LL. Too busy with AA: Europe game, 5 players game and that low speed leage game with Peruri anyway. Next time maybe :lol:
It’s not as hard as people try to make it seem.
Defending the American fleet is much harder then attacking the Japanese fleet since Japan can bring bombers and a whole host of fighters that would not be defending to come sink you. The converse is true when attacking Japan’s fleet.
Just go after the islands, wait for Japan to get in range, and pummel it. Even if you lose, you’ll recover faster since you have the islands and no one attacking your mainland holdings.
The counter is really easy - build 1 carrier and land 6 fighters when the Americans are becoming threatening (sets them back another few rounds to build up) and just offload into Asia as much as you can. When the Americans become too threatening, just run the fleet away and complex up in Sinkiang/China. You will have about 4 complexes on the mainland with the Americans now having to create a shuck system after creating a massive anti-navy navy. Just make sure the Americans can’t take your capital or land anywhere in Asia. If your combined massive forces from Germany and Japan can’t take Moscow, then you’re doomed anyways.
The worst thing to do is try to fight the Americans for islands, it’s spending too much effort for too little. It’s also a very bad idea to start building subs to stall the Americans; that’s exactly what they want you to do and doesn’t advance your effort anywhere. Eventually you’ll have about 350-400 IPCs of land units in Asia while the Americans maybe have like 18-30 IPCs in their little shuckports….
The islands cost 13 ipcs (from japanese ones) plus 3 ipcs (from Australia and N Zel) plus 1 ipc (from Hawai). 16 ipcs is hardly too little, and Japan will get all of these in a KGF :-P Japan can be at 25 ipcs if they ignore the islands …
The islands cost 13 ipcs (from japanese ones) plus 3 ipcs (from Australia and N Zel) plus 1 ipc (from Hawai). 16 ipcs is hardly too little, and Japan will get all of these in a KGF :-P Japan can be at 25 ipcs if they ignore the islands …
I have only seen this happen maybe 1 out of 20 games, Jap islands taken by US and allies still wins the game.
The islands cost 13 ipcs (from japanese ones) plus 3 ipcs (from Australia and N Zel) plus 1 ipc (from Hawai). 16 ipcs is hardly too little, and Japan will get all of these in a KGF tongue Japan can be at 25 ipcs if they ignore the islands …
You can’t fight a 2 front war. Spending on navy to counter US naval purchases just means you lose Asia - in addition to the islands. If you get Asia you more than make up for those 13 IPCs.
If you lose the islands, USA can put an IC at Borneo/East Indies or both and invade Asia or even Japan. Ignoring any nation is not a good idea. I’m surprised how people says ignoring Japan at Asia or USA at Pacific is the best strategy.
If you lose the islands, USA can put an IC at Borneo/East Indies or both and invade Asia or even Japan. Ignoring any nation is not a good idea. I’m surprised how people says ignoring Japan at Asia or USA at Pacific is the best strategy.
Me too.
I actually like a Japan that ignores America. My new strat for dealing with that is to make Russia chase after Japan to keep them out of Kazakh/Novosibirsk while England keeps Africa and keeps Karelia/Archangelsk open.
By the time Germany gets Caucasus, Japan should be pretty much out of it.
@Cmdr:
As for TripleA, Kill America First works in TripleA, not a stellar program if you ask me.
By “works in TripleA” do you mean works against the Artificial Intelligence in TripleA? Is that how you judge if some of your harebrained strategies “work” or not, by trying them against that AI? The TripleA AI is known to be not very good, even the maker of it acknowledges that. Its really just there as a placeholder until someone has the time and skill to create a good AI. It should NEVER be used to test strategy. Pretty much ANY strategy should work against it.
And you should really stop knocking the TripleA program in general just because you can’t seem to get it to work right. It is a great program that hundreds of people have used to play thousands of games on the TripleA WarClub Ladder. Plus I’m sure many, many more non Ladder games have been played using it.
In summary:
TripleA AI for playing the game solo - not great (or even good)
TripleA program itself, for playing other people - GREAT
Yea, TripleA is about as good as the original Hasbro CD-Rom! Oh wait, the Hasbro AI was smarter!
