Axis and Allies Dice?

I think the strategy is there and works well i win more than i loose against good axis players.  Wondering if maybe we could setup a team to test and get the timings down.  Figure out how many fighters Russia needs to survive Japanese and German non stop Blitz on Russia.  Also how many bombers are optimal to avoid purchasing too many.  I am not sure if you can have too many bombers they have dual roles to industrial bomb and to support attacking\landing infantry in Western Europe.  Figure out what turn USA needs to quit buying bombers and switch to Naval.

Add more colors, use multiple maps, or express things in terms of formulas.

Know what I m=-qals+An?

I have tried KJF with some succes. How I play it is that I never decide to go KJF until J1 has passed. That means I will usually not devote any Russian or British forces to fight Japan in the first round. Instead I will focus on the European theater and Africa first, building a UK navy and trying to sink the Med Fleet ASAP. The reasoning is that even with a KJF, you can’t let Germany just run rampant. KJF often means a long game, so keeping the African IPCs out of German hands is very important. With UK that will always be my number one priority, so it’s safe to say that I will never build an Indian IC on UK1. Of course, the Japanese transport will still be sunk in 99% of the games.

For me, the most important KJF triggers happen on J1 and can be summarized as Japan failing to take a critical objective (China, Pearl) or losing a lot of air and naval forces across multiple battles. If Japan does ‘big Pearl’ and takes heavy losses, exposing a battleship and carrier to a promising US counterattack, I will often go KJF. Same goes for ‘small Pearl’ and losing that battle. For losing China it’s a bit less clear-cut, since Allies often don’t have the units in that area to press on an advantage. In other occasions Japan could lose a BB in SZ59, or fighters in any battle, giving enough incentive for US to build a Pacific fleet.

After round 1, even if US went Pacific, I will mostly use UK to fight Germany and assist in the defense of Russia.

The sad thing about this form of KJF is that it is contingent on bad dice for Axis, and not used as a general strategy. The question is whether in those scenarios where Japan has bad dice, KJF might be viable but KGF could still be strictly better.

And I’ll have to say that I played about a dozen of games with Axis where my opponent played the double IC strategy, they ALL went the way I said in the previous post (except I usually don’t lose the islands, I’m quite good dealing with naval fights).

you need to 1) stay defensive for 3 rounds, then go offensive

@MrMalachiCrunch:

Dan, did the Russian build of a bomber on R1 cause you not to attack Sz2 in G1 for some reason?  If so, was the reason because it could hit Norway and perhaps the german fighter would be lost as you used those troops against Kar in G1 there would have been no defense for the surviving bomber?

No, it wasn’t the bomber build that stopped the attack on z2. For other readers, here’s the situation. R1 build is 4 inf, bomber. Russia takes West Russia with 7 inf, art, tank and takes Ukraine with art, 3 tanks. For the precise move: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=19028.0
In short, I wanted a Karelia stack on G1. Germany couldn’t afford to defend Norway if I did this. I would be more afraid of surviving German planes on Norway being attacked by the UK’s potential inf, tank, 2 fighters, and bomber. Realistically, if the German planes are naked, the Allies don’t need to commit so much. Also, the German destroyer to z3 could force the UK to peal off a plane from the ground attack. Any time a Russian plane dogfights an Axis plane on fairly even odds is a good day for the Axis. I’d invite that bomber versus fighter battle.

@habs4life9:

But how would you define “the start of the game”?

I would limit it to those territories that are under Russian control at the time of set-up.  It would not apply to territories that Russia conquers and then loses (recognizing that the rationale of the rule should apply to territories like the Ukraine–but when was the last time the British or Americans captured the Ukraine anyway?).  As a practical matter, the rule tweaking I suggest is intended from preventing the British (primarily) from bailing the Russians out in Karelia.