Posts made by trihero

Again, I assume lose 1 INF and take posession of WR with all other land forces?

Yes.

2 hits, above average dice

I assume you will lose INF?

Yeah I lose 2 inf. I press the attack in Belorussia.

I roll

Infantry: 5
Fighters: 1, 3

2 hits.

It’s not precisely 3rd party; those set of rules I linked too were sanctioned by the game designer himself (Larry Harris) and is used in many official tournaments.

The basic changes to the box rules are these:

1. There is now a total combined bombing limit per turn that is the territory value. The box rules wording makes it a bombing limit per bomber, which was stupid since it allowed you, if you had enough bombers, to bomb someone’s economy all the way to zero.

2. Techs now apply at the end of your turn, not immediately. Besides the lameness of a turn one long range aircraft sea lion, the designer didn’t like the sneak attack feel of techs.

3. Heavy bombers are no longer so good. You roll two but pick the better of the two rolls, so you can only inflict a maximum of 1 casualty instead of 2. For SBRs, you pick the better of the two and add 1 to it for IPC damage.

4. Super submarines are slightly improved. It raises the defense of subs to 3 as well as the attack.

5. AA guns no longer fire at planes moving during the noncombat phase.

And of course the typo corrections like saying “lesser” instead of “greater” of the two for bombing, etc.

I’ll try not to edit anymore; I just fixed up my post to introduce myself and include the West Russian combat. 6:00 PM eastern is 3:00 western correct? I work part time tomorrow from 5-9 PM western but anyways we’ll just work it out whenever we have time.

I’m game. Before we get started, my real name is Wes, and I live in California of the United States. I’m really glad to meet a player who seems to have his logistics down =)

Russia Turn 1

Purchase: 4 infantry and 3 artillery, 0 IPCs leftover.

3 infantry + 1 fighter from karelia, as well as the fighter from moscow, attack Belorussia.

3 infantry + tank from Archangel, 3 infantry + 2 tanks + 1 art from moscow, 3 infantry + 1 tank + 1 art, attack West Russia.

I choose to resolve the Belorussia attack first.

The 3 infantry roll 2, 4, 6 (no hits).
The fighters roll 1, 3 (2 hits).

Total hits: 2

West Russia combat goes like this:

7 unupgraded infanty roll 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4 (3 hits)
2 upgraded infantry + 2 art roll 3, 4, 6, 6, (zero hits)
4 tanks roll 1, 2, 5, 5 (2 hits)

Total hits: 5

I’d love to, except I’m only familiar with Triple A. How do we determine dice rolls? I’m ready to get started once you explain how this is going to work.

Your concept of timing is very much off. You speak with no experience in the revised verion at all; have you even completed one game? I speak with half a years of experience and many actual games played. Russia will not fall in 4 rounds, unless the Allies are the complete idiots that you make them out to be.

In Classic I have been an advocate of NOT doing Pearl.  So the US masses it’s fleet to send against Japan.  After killing UK’s fleet I do the same.  Massive naval battle, that Japan wins being on the defensive with better fighter/carrier numbers.

The US players suck if they’re running straight into you. If I’m amassing a fleet against Japan, I go down to Solomon Islands. Suddenly Japan can’t afford to play defense since 4 islands are in jeapordy - the mainland, boreno, phillippines, and east indies. If Japan defends one of them, you can be sure the US will go elsewhere and nail the IPCs from you. So Japan has to attack before the US takes islands…

I know this sounds weird, but I do not use many of the strategies that I’ve been discussing usually. I mainly talk about them to show you that Japan cannot do everything if the Allies make a few maneuvers (pearl harbor, china, india, buryatia, protect transports). One of those has to be given up. In your case, it is Pearl Harbor.

My usual Allied strategy is to completeley abandon India and Buryatia on turn one. And I still win about 50% of the time. This isn’t against idiot Japan players either; they are constantly loading troops onto the mainland and making complexes to churn out mass tanks when they reach production limits on the mainland. You just have no clue about what’s going on in the Atlantic, as your suicide against the turn 2 combined allied navy shows.

I really wish I could agree with you ncc. I started as a very pro-axis player like you and they’re still my favorite. But your entire view of the game is distorted if you think you can win the game in 3-4 rounds.

And I told you that I TAKE Bury in J1, using Manchuria forces, plus forces trannied in.  No place to land that bomber for US1.

That is entirely true, but let’s take a look at the big picture.

3 inf + 1 arm isn’t going to win against 6 infantry. You have to bring in 2 fighters against a stacked Buryatia to make the battle a 60% chance for you to win. That isn’t even that good of a chance. Perhaps now you have to bring in a bomber from Japan which otherwise would have been used Pearl Harbor?

Consequently, those 2 fighters used against Buryatia had to come from somewhere. You will now be unable to take China efficiently unless you bring 2 fighters from the Indies fleet.

Now that you don’t have those 2 fighters from the east indies fleet, it is foolhardy to try kill the suicidal UK fleet sitting in Kwantung, unless you choose to use fleets otherwise needed to kill Pearl Harbor. Then Pearl Harbor survives

I think my overall point is that with a couple of maneuvers, you force Japan to make decisions that slows him down some. Your individual counters are correct but you cannot cover everything. And you still haven’t addressed how you plan to take Pearl Harbor if I sunk the solomon islands sub and landed the british fighter on the carrier, also in relation to my stacking 6 infantry in buryatia and the UK bomber in sinkiang.

No, actually it means you have those forces there DEPENDENT on those transports.  Lose the transports, and you lose the ability to even REACH Europe with those forces without either building new trannies, or fighting your way to Europe via North Africa and the Middle East.

Ohhh man. If you’d like to trade probably most of your fighter fleet for some transports……

Let’s base this on your attack in the Atlantic where you lost 1 figher and 1 bomber and I have lost 1 transport:

Your attack is 1 battleship + 1 transport + 5 fighters (3 hits on average)

My defense is:

1 fully loaded carrier, 1 half loaded carrier, 1 battleship, 2 destroyers, and 6 transports (close to 6 hits on average).

So in the first round you lost 1 transport + all your fighters, and at this point I might not even choose to lose transports; I might just lose destroyers because I know your attack force has completely run out of gas. You’re mathematically committing suicide.

And it’s like you don’t think that the US/UK are still building this entire time. They will have more transports and equipment coming in.

Oh, and the US bomber actually needs TWO turns to get to where it can reach SZ60, if Japan takes Bury and China in either J1 or J2.  Can;t reach from Hawaii or Midway.  Unless of course you take Wake, then it can reach.  But alas, even if you took Wake in US 1, the bomber can;t land there until US2, which means US 3 before you can use it against SZ60.

You should get your facts straight. The bomber goes:

1 –> up to eastern canada
2 --> to western canada
3 --> to sz63
4 --> to sz62
5 --> attack sz60
6 --> land in buryatia

As little as 1 Destroyer with a 50/50 chance per round of shoointg down an encroaching bomber (plus the 16% chance for a hit per tranny) should be more than adequate to discourage use of the UK and US bombers in this manner.

If I force you to buy a destroyer, than I have accomplished more than I ever intended. I didn’t even have to attack, and I cost you 12 IPCs. Of course I’m not going to attack you if you built some defense, but you missed the point - I made you buy something that’s absolutely worthless to your cause just because I made a ghost threat!

I can move the UK bomber to sinkiang on UK1. I admit I don’t always do this because sometimes I’ll try to sink the Baltic fleet if it hasn’t been beefed up, but certainly it’s worth the extra logistics problems that it gives on J1 rather than strategically bombing on UK1.

You drop an IC there and I will take it, even if I have to put off a move against some of the Allied navy to do it.  Making UK lose 15 IPC’s  of their UK1 build is worth it.

If I’m dropping an IC there (which I already said I usually won’t), I will defend it. I’ll have 4 infantry and 1 fighter there. Your force will consist of 2 infantry + 4 fighters + 1 bomber. You will win, but at probably high cost to your fighters since you’re preserving the infantry to invade the territory. The worst problem is that you have now left the suicide UK navy to live. How in heck you’ll defend a J1 transport buy is well beyond me when you’re facing 1 dest + 1 carrier + 1 trans + 1 bomber, unless you skip Pearl Harbor. If you skipped Harbor, thanks for giving the US 34 IPC in equipment! You may have taken the complex, but you gave the US a huge boost and also extremely likely spent 2+ fighters doing it.

What?  I routinely have 6 trannies by end of J3 in Classic, and in revised I have even more income, and higher tranny capacity.  Yes it does take 4 turns to get to Russia, taking IPC’s from Russia all the way, and pulling their forces off the German front the whole time to try to slow that advance.  Add in a few forces on a central Asia vector, and then some southern asia forces just for good measure.

I really don’t think Russia will pull up troops to stop you until perhaps you’re at novosibirsk/kazakh, and usually not even then. Russia is certainly not pulling forces off Germany “the whole time” until it becomes necessary. And by then, Germany is certain in dire straits.

You also need to realize that those “advanced” bomber forces, the ones that can reach SZ60 and SZ 61 arte vulnerable to that Japan advance.  By J3, you won’t have any allied territory in Asia where a bomber can land and reach SZ60.  And all I need is ONE capital ship to protect my trannies.  Sure, you will probably sink 1 of them, but then your bomber is gone.  Want to buy a bomber a round to send to East Asia just so I can shoot it down after it sinks 1 8 IPC tranny?

I understand that. The whole point is to delay Japan for 1 turn in the beginning. I don’t expect to have allied territory in Asia by J3. I also would not attack you if you had a capital ship for protection, but isn’t that the point? I made you buy one or have one sit behind on the first turn just by threat, not even action. I don’t have to use the bomber, do I? I just made you do something suboptimal though!

You mean that there is no difference between Classic and Revised for Russia, eventhough now they are a 24 IPC nation sandwiched between a 40 and a 30 IPC enemy instead of 32 and 25 IPC enemies?

Fortress Europe, Japan tranny fleet with a 3 prong westward push, 3 Japan fleets to chase down and kill 1 US fleet, 1 UK fleet, and some straglers.

You forget that the Russian eastern rim is now worth less, so it takes more time to bite into Russia’s paycheck. And again, I really don’t think you have any experience with the timing of the game. You seem to take a massive jump to conclusions that the Japanese will always crush Russia with this slow, 3 prong attack, before Germany falls?

No, not much money at all, only 20% of UK’s income.  Leaves them with 24 IPC’s, same as Russia.  That is 1 tranny not being filled each round.

You again, forget that the UK can make money elsewhere. Take Norway, Algeria, and Libya and you’re up 5 IPCs. And you again forget that you have to use a tranny and probably 2 battleships + 2 fighters + 1 carrier to be sure you nail the australian/zealand IPCs in time to make a difference. You spend a lot of effort to make a little dent.

And what does the UK have left?  The BB?  How many forces can a BB carry to Europe?  UK will have their Eastern Canada tranny left in the Atlantic.  A whopping 2 units heading for Europe or Africa on UK1.  Wow.  I am crushed.  And the US fleet can get to Africa on US 1, but not Europe.  And if the US does go for Africa, there is a fair chance I might still have a Baltic sub alive after submerging off France, still have compenents of my Med navy, and of course some German Air Force, especially if US did not actually TAKE algeria (you see, I am not hell-bent on Egypt in G1 and I think G2 might be the better time for that offensive, but give me some more time to work out the numbers).

I don’t think you have any clue what you’re talking about yet. You have sacrificed a fighter and a bomber and a sub to take out essentially one transport which I will replace (the russian sub is a suicide unit so who cares about it?). Please, I would love to trade that! I don’t go for Africa on UK1 (and I never said I did!) because usually the Germany player lands about 4 fighters in Western Europe to deter that. I go for Africa on UK2/US2 when I’m much better prepared.

So I am back to having 3 rounds as Germany to pound on Russia without much concern for Germany, with Japan coming in from the back side.  Let’s see… 8 tanks vs. 8 INF, 3 rounds…  oops, forgot, Russia will be losing IPC’s the whole time, so make that more like 6 INF…

I don’t think you’re even looking at the gameboard, this comment is so off. At the end of turn 2 I have

UK –> 2 transports (3 quite usually since people don’t take that chance that you do with the atlantic navy) that have 2 inf 2 tank in them + 1 or more fighters

US --> 4 transports with 4 infantry + 3 tank + 1 artillery + 3 fighters + 1 bomber

All in Algeria. Which means I can strike at Western Europe and Southern Europe with my transports. Germany has had 2 full rounds of free time against Russia, but suddenly that’s the end of it. If you do not immediatley pull back the troops you built on G2 to protect southern/western europe, you’re screwed! That means you only had the first round of purchases to use freely against Russia since the second round of purchases has to fend off a third round attack.

I may not OWN Russia by the end of T3, but I will have German and Japan forces adjacent to it.

Oh please. You even agree that it takes 4 turns for the Japanese infantry to get to Russia. And you needed at least what J2 or J3 to start that flow of infantry? That’s hardly T3 when you’re close enough to threaten Russia. You may have German forces next to Russia, but they are suddenly cut off from reinforcements because Germany is forced on defense. A quick turn or so and Russia has enough forces to bounce Germany straight back.

email them at customer service and tell them that you are running out of chips in gameplay and need more…

Nope didn’t work. They emailed me back in about half an hour and told me they have no way to get replacements to customers but they’re “looking into it.”

I suggest not wasting time on the box rules. There are many mistakes and imbalances there. The LHTR (larry harris tournament rules) are what a majority of people use.

if you ever run out of chips, you can get teh for free from wizards of teh west coast =]. I did, so can you!!!

What the hell how? I tried looking on their site but it says they do not offer replacement parts o_O

Bury was in control of Japan after J1.  No US forces landing there.

Consolidate 6 infantry in buryatia. So again I ask  you, where do you deploy your naked transports?

I am saying that if the game provided for an IC at START for UK in India, it would be a better fight.  Without one at start, UK can;t build in India before UK2, and in that case, what is the point?  Japan will OWN India before that IC can be used.

How does Japan own the IC before the UK can use it? Do you attack the IC on J1? I’m always able to reinforce the complex with 5 Russian infantry on R2. I don’t see how you could attack India on J1 and still do China/Pearl/kill UK fleet/buryatia. I think it would help us discuss this if you fully elaborate on the exact movement of your troops on J1.

Not to mention that even with a strong UK strike against Japan in UK1, Japan simply has too much fleet and too much AF for the UK forces to live past J1.  They may have a few straglers around, but their main forces are TOAST, especially if you gather them together at Borneo where I can hit them with a consolidated blast from my East Indies forces.  And I still have the Caroline fleet and the Japan fleet for use at Pearl to spank down the US in the Pacific.

Uh…so what did you expect the fleet to do exactly? Overwhelm the Japanese? Why would you want it that way? If you really wanted to consolidate your navy, you should move the Indian/Australian fleet to that seazone two spaces off the left coast of Australia.

The one thing you’ve stumbled across is that a complex in India is not worth it usually in a KGF strategy. That is a pretty broadly felt opinion. I usually use the Indian transport to go attack Anglo-Egypt with some infantry + fighter/bomber to retake it and stop the Germans from expanding in Africa.

The second element, and what makes the Russian force shift deadly is that UK is comitting it’s resources to build an India IC on UK1.  May not sound too dreadful, but UK happens to be sitting there without a fleet in the Atlantic on UK1 if Germany played well at all.  Committing 15 of 30 IPC’s to India on UK 1 means that UK will not be rebuilding their fleet in UK1.  No UK fleet means Germany can focus exclusively on Russia in G2.  And I am sorry but if you give Germany 2 full rounds of uncontested time to focus on Russia, 40 IPC’s against 24… Germany could TANK build at the same rate that Russia INF builds if it wanted to.

I think you actually need to try these strategies out. On UK2 I drop 3 inf + 2 tank + 1 art in Algeria. On US2 I drop 4 inf 3 tank 1 art in Algeria (there’s also 2 carriers + 3 fighters + 2 destroyers guarding this fleet). Can Germany afford to ignore the fact that Western and Southern Europe are both being threatened by a pretty sizeable force? Germany doesn’t start with very sizeable defenses on the west coast, even with all the fighters landing there. You need to build a lot of infantry, which a full tank build doesn’t allow.The full tank build that you built on G2 are suddenly going to be put in defensive positions. Germany does not nearly have 3 full rounds of free time; he will be forced to consider that his western europe and perhaps more are being threatened with forces he doesn’t have defenses for since he’s according to your strategy sending all his troops eastward.

Add in a J1 tranny build with INF and Artillery to land in J2, then start flowing tanks onto the contient in J3 and

Oh I encourage you, try this! It’s not that fast. The best you do is like 3 inf 3 tanks per turn? The infantry are extremely slow in getting anywhere; it takes FOUR turns to get to moscow from the coastline. Like I said of course India is toast but wasn’t this the same in classic?

I think you severely underestimate what the Allies can do, and overestimate what they should be able to do. Revised gives the Japanese a better chacne at cracking Moscow at roughly the same time that the Allies crack Germany, but I seriously doubt that you will find that the Japanese have been overpowered to the point where they will always win the Axis the game.

No, but it does a hell of a job of making sure that Japan forces make it to the continent, protect those trannies, and of course taking money away from UK.

India is 3 IPCs, New Zealand is 1 IPC, and Australia is 2 IPCs. 6 IPCs isn’t a lot of money to be taken away from the UK, and the island zones take quite some time to sail out to and take, not to mention the transport(s).

The second element, and what makes the Russian force shift deadly is that UK is comitting it’s resources to build an India IC on UK1.  May not sound too dreadful, but UK happens to be sitting there without a fleet in the Atlantic on UK1 if Germany played well at all.

What exactly do you mean by this? You attack the UK’s Atlantic navy? The mediterranean navy is likely to be gone, but how do you propose to attack the Atlantic navy? The best you can  bring against it is 1 fighter + 1 bomber + 1 sub against 1 transport, 1 sub, and 1 battleship. The ratios are 50% for the defender to win, 37% for the attacker to win, and 13% chance of a tie.

No one does this. Did you read the link I offered you? The revised rules recommend that you play with a 9 victory condition.

And to be honest, anyone who thinks that the Axis is still underpowered needs their freakin head examined!

I agree with this statement. I have not seen conclusive evidence that the Allies still have a clear upper hand. But I wouldn’t say that the Axis has the clear upper hand either.

On my first test of my traditional Japan strategies in the new game, Japan undid ALL of the increases in Allied power in Asia, and was poised to play havoc with UK and Russia.  The UK navy in the Indian Ocean was toast; I executed Pearl, and still landed troops to take China and Bury HEAVY.  With their build, Japan had poised 2 new trannies both with artillery and INF to land to maintian the assault on the mainland, and had all of their original trannies available along with a lot of AF and 2 BB’s for support shots.

Looks like you need to sit back and take a good look at what the allies can do. First, if you want to build and keep an Indian complex, it is imperative that you send Russian infantry to help hold it. Second, it sounds like you’re not using the Indian ocean navy correctly in the least. It is not there to help you defend; it is there to help you attack. Sink the Kwangtung transport with the destroyer + transport + carrier. No, it’s not going to survive a counterattack but there’s a decent chance it will take down a fighter if you inflict 2 hits, and you need to sink that transport to slow Japan down a bit. Third, what did you do with the Indian fighter? It can be sent against the Solomon Islands sub (along with the Australian sub), and you have a good chance of sinking that sub before it submerges (2/3 chance). Then that fighter lands on the hawaiin carrier.

Uh oh, Pearl Harbor suddenly isn’t so weak. If you examine the setup closely, Pearl Harbor can be counterattacked by 1 trans, 1 battleship, 2 fighters, and 1 bomber from eastern US. If Japan sends a force of 1 dest + 1 battleship + 2 fighters + 1 carrier + 1 bomber (remember the sub is dead usually), the remaining force will be a fully loaded carrier + 1 battleship. If you do the math, the US counterattack will destroy this force 65% of the time (with the battleship intact) and will tie another 7% of the time.

Japan’s navy may be strong, but it is easy to inflict losses on it early if Japan is careless.

Also where do you plan to deploy those transports you build? I hope not in sz60, because it can be hit by the hawaiin fighter and the east US bomber who will both land in buryatia. And the Uk can send their bomber to sinkiang on the first round, thereby threatening transports in the inner seazone of Japan. You will be forced to buy a suboptimal defensive piece to protect your transports from the threat or hold back some of your navy at the beginning.

On my first test of my traditional Japan strategies in the new game, Japan undid ALL of the increases in Allied power in Asia, and was poised to play havoc with UK and Russia.

Wait so how is this different than classic? The problem is that Japan has to apply a strong enough force in sufficient time to free Germany from all 3 allied powers. It takes a fair amount of time for infantry/artillery to walk from the coastal zones to Moscow, and it takes a fair amount of land grabbing to support enough tanks to matter.

Hell by J2, I would already have “minor” victory conditions with Calcutta and Leningrad (which fell to Germany easilly in G1).

How do plan to hold Leningrad vs all 3 allied powers? How do you mean to achieve the 9th/10th victory city? A minor victory means nothing and is never used in serious play. Victory cities mean nothing, really.

Japan is not going to be countered by anything less than a full scale US onslaught, and even then it is going to be touch and go for the Allies for a LONG time.

You seem to have a very distorted view of the game. So you think that a half-assed attempt by 1 complex from the UK should stall the Japan player indefinitely? Of course it’s going to require good effort the US to stop Japan from expanding. It’s the only country that can produce enough close enough to Japan to make a dent in the navy and threaten the islands.

Of course the Axis is overwhelming in the first few rounds. But you will find that Japan takes a considerable amount of time to properly threaten the Russian capital, and that in the same amount of time Germany will likely have been thrown out of Africa and down perhaps 10 IPCs or so (2 from africa, 3 from norway, 2 from west russia, 3 from ukraine). It is a race to who kills whose capital first. And Russia can still be reinforced by the Allies with fighters and timely shipping if Japan is growing large.

The Japanese navy is big, but ultimately it is useless in threatening Russia since you can’t bombard the capital.

US aid, while massive due to increased US IPC’s is now even slower to arrive, so a few quick strikes by Germany and it is all over.  Germany can still take out the UK fleet in G1, etc. to allow them to focus on Russia.

I suggest increasing your Allied skill then. It’s impossible for Germany to apply enough pressure to kill Russia on his own in a “few quick strikes” unless the Russian and UK player are doing nothing while waiting for the US. Germany has a hard time balancing defense on the western coast and the baltic navy, as well as goin offensive against Russia in which the distance has widened considerably.

to avoid the Axis from getting to an economic position the Allies will never recover from.

It’s like you think the Allies can’t get IPCs elsewhere. They’re going to jack a lot of IPCs away from Germany to compensate for Japan’s landgrabs. Not to mention that Japan’s invasions are very spread out; you can take 4 from the US, 4 from Russia, 4 from UK…while it adds up well, it is not that devastating to any individual power while they’re landing troops and harrassing Germany from so many angles.

Whoops I’m sorry, I was looking at the revised map not the old one. The panama canal is directly connected to the Eastern US in revised so it’s extremely easy to deflate this strategy in revised.

Um I actually really like the colors. To me it gives a sophisticated look with the darker colors as opposed to the brash colors of the old map. I agree that the wording about “bold” is odd, since the colors aren’t bold per se; I think of bold as flashy and light rather than dark.

I have no problems with storing the pieces in separate plastic ziploc bags in the box. I have a bag for each nationality, a bag for control markers/complex/AA guns, and a bag for the grey/red pieces. It works fine and fits inside the game box as long as I squeeze the air out of the bags reasonably.

I sorta agree with the tackiness of the cut-board thing, but just live with it and treat the game with respect =)

To me the main annoyance is not having enough chips and Japanese tanks. I run out of those extremely quickly….

Weapons development is a viable option now since you can choose what you get instead of spending a lot of $ and getting super subs.

Even though it’s six times as easy to get the tech you want, the risk associated with it doesn’t translate well into consistent strategies. If you roll 9 die of tech (45 IPCs) you have an almost 20% chance of NOT achieving the tech. That sounds pretty bad, doesn’t it? Ironically super subs is the only tech that I try for, and only if I’m the US and gunning after Japan. Rockets are pretty good for Germany but I really can’t find space in my economy to throw away 30+ IPCs for an uncertain tech. If you’re a habitual gambler or feel like you’re playing against  superior player so you need to take your chances, then I would say tech. Otherwise, it isn’t going to win you a whole lot of games unless you are already winning.

One part of the game that I have not explored is the option of the US going into the pacific in a big way.  Of course, the pressure off Germany is a huge reason not to do it, and it was hardly ever done in the old game.  But the increased value of the islands make it more attractive.

This is pretty fun to do if you have all the Allies cooperating against Japan. You can really make Japan squirm if the US is dumping all cash into a navy while Russia/UK swipe the Asian territories away. If the US smartly maneuvers the navy and researches super subs right before a big battle, likely Japan is going to be staring at an 8 IPC paycheck and squatting on his capital for the rest of the game. But yeah, taking pressure off Germany is a pretty big no-no. You’re leaving 10 IPCs in Africa alone to Germany (couple more in trans-jordan/persia as well) and letting him hammer Russia with full strength, which is much harder to defend against than a Japanese attempt. I admit I’m not an expert though; I haven’t taken that many games to conclusion in a real bonafide KJF strategy. It’s hard to say if the Allies can recover or not once Germany kills Russia; perhaps taking the Japanese mainland gives the Allies too good of a position to retake, but then again maybe Germany takes too many IPCs and can overrun the UK in short order and then the US.