KJF Round 1

India IC can work if:

Soviets didn’t attack Ukranie and stack in wru to threaten Karelia UK builds saf IC to defend Africa without need of a fleet UK must kill z59 trannie USA builds Sinkiang IC and Pacific fleet Soviets send siberian forces to Sinkiang Soviets support suffling tanks back and forth from Caucasus

In this strat, I would not sacrifice valuable UK fleets against Japan 1st round. Indian and Australian navies can join with USA’s Pacific fleet mid game

Now, extra German planes in the mid-game can be a good investment against a balanced, slow KGF if Allies don’t have excess escorts. They already defend where they are almost like 2 more inf (6 IPC), also threaten 1-2 fleets that will need extra escorts, and swap easier on land. Combined with the Japanese fleet coming throught the Med, they can paralyze the Allied moves sandwiched between each of them.
But, that’s not ships, but anti-ship build…

@Croggyl:

@timerover51:

Short of keeping some sort of paper record, how would you differentiate between the two AA guns for Rocket use?

Put a country marker under that AA gun?

We have a winner!  This should be done any time that an ally’s AA gun moves into one of your territories, as he/she still owns it.  The only way that ownership of an AA gun can change is through the capture of a territory.

I was victorious. The UK’s navy was destroyed very early in the game, and my Japanese counterpart did very well. Moscow was taken!!!

As I said above I’m not that keen on sea lion myself. and if the conditions are unfavorable (like Russia took Ukr) than to hell with it.

Additionally I want to remind you that I would spend only 1 die on tech so germany can build new troops on G1 for 35 ipc.

@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:

@Frood:

I look forward to it! Let me know if I can help.

Yes, I have to work in this field, and it sould be really great if I can join the utility with the fun!

We have strayed into House Rules.  Further discussion along those lines needs to be moved to the House Rules area.