I think it’s complicated because if you place the Aussie IC then Japan knows a KJF is in the mix (there’s no point in building an Aussie IC if USA isn’t going Pacific) and will play extra conservative in the Pacific on J1.
Maybe a better idea is place it on UK2 to support the USA in situations where Japan gets diced in the Pacific. But in that context if you can place it on Borneo or East Indies that would be much better.
@Cmdr:
Why don’t you need them?
1 Transport and 1 Infantry is usually enough to take every island in the Pacific. Even if your BBs miss their bombardments, and the enemy scores a hit (both happening is slim) you can always take a fighter as a loss. Fighters from W. USA can get almost anywhere you would put your fleet anyway, and hell, 7 defending fighters is usually plenty to keep Japan away until you can fly the 8th out to meet you.
I can see the logic but I would think that a 2nd tranny is useful as a way to grab another money island if Japan fails to block you.
Good stuff. Agreed that statistically speaking, subs provide the best bang for your buck on offense…. nonetheless I prefer the mobility and flexibility of air units. The only time I ever build subs as Japan is if my back is to the wall…that is, I’m not strong enough to attack the USA fleet (either at Solomons or already at E. Indies) so I need to buy subs for fodder and increased punch (typically at the FICO factory).
Generally if the United States is coming at me I want to attack the fleet as soon as I can with my superior air force (if nothing else I get the transports and potentially slow the offense down). But if the USA player is playing super conservative and isn’t giving me a chance to attack, it’s the right play to keep up the fleet as a deterrent to landing at the major islands AND take up the USA’s full attention while Germany is hopefully on the offensive.
I wouldn’t advise buying aircraft carriers on both fronts. You can’t afford to go Pacific against a good Axis opponent unless you are willing to spend 90-95% of USA’s income on Pacific fleet in the first 2 or even 3 turns. The reason is USA has to move quick–it doesn’t have time to build up more than a few rounds. So if I’m going Pacific I’ll just use the existing 2 transports and the destroyer to help United Kingdom in the Atlantic. Every other resource is going to the Pacific except for 2-4 land units for my Atlantic trannies.
Naturally once you defeat Japan’s fleet you can start putting more resources into destroying Germany.
If you don’t feel like you can make this sort of commitment then IMHO you should go all Atlantic–focusing on destroying Germany is a safer strategy in general. Japan’s starting advantage in the Pacific battle means Pacific wars frequently favor Axis…but if Japan leaves itself open that’s another matter.
Just carriers and fighters alone aren’t going to get the job done.
That said aircraft carriers and fighters were decisive technologies in World War II (next to tanks, subs, and bombers). And at only 10$, fighters are a bargain. Only tanks and inf are bigger bargains in AA Revised. Subs and destroyers are useless in land battles; battleships are too expensive. Fighters on the other hand are a sound and flexible investment.
So yeah, getting 3 ACs for the Pacific battle is highly recommended. It’s also a decent precaution to get a carrier USA1 if you are going with an Atlantic strat (though sometimes you can do without it). But I wouldn’t go to far with it–don’t buy more than 1 AC per turn. Ultimately the game is won by land units so dont forget to buy transports and men. Keep in mind that you want 2 subs, 2 trannies, 1 destroyer, 6 fighters, 1 BB, and 3 CVs as your baseline USA Pacific fleet–if the Japs build subs or air then you’ll have to build more (and by that i mean subs, 1 more carrier, and 2 more fighters…and then bombers when you are ready to go on the offensive). This fleet will be ready to go USA3 if there’s no Pearl attack…otherwise you have to wait till USA4. The nice thing with going with a heavy air strat is at 10$ fighters are cheap to replace and since they can move 4 spaces they can get to their destinations quicker than normal naval units.
My first IC typically goes on FIC, but in KGF games not until J3 or J4. In some cases I might build the IC J1 if I feel like I can’t protect new transports.
India is preferable and my 2nd IC will hopefully go there but caution is warranted–a strong Russian move to take and India IC can be a game winner for the Allies. So for that reason I usually place on Fic first.
As far as loosing the Carrier off Borneo, a good Japanese player should attack the UK fleet that is in seazone 34 following a liberation of Egypt.
Forgive me a44, but I need clarification on this. Is this UK counter of Egypt on UK 1? If so how do you pull it off? This is something I have never tried before.
Usually Germany has at least 2 units on Egypt after G1, with another inf and art in Libya with any planes that helped attack. Even if you do take back Egypt on UK 1, Germany just takes it back, right? Or is there something I am missing? Thanks.
The idea is United Kingdom keeps control of Africa another turn. You use the fighter from the ac to help in the attack, or sometimes the bomber.
As far as loosing the Carrier off Borneo, a good Japanese player should attack the UK fleet that is in seazone 34 following a liberation of Egypt. Pearl can be done without any of those naval units.
True this can be done if you devote the battleship and three fighters. But what do you use to kill the destroyer in 59? Sending half the fleet to SZ 36 seems like a big step for J1, and potentially risky if Pearl goes awry.
3. Make a break for Med
This seemes the best option at first, until I started using it in games. Here is how it usually pans out:
The UK will attack me with a TNS, BB, BMR, and 2x FTR. They usually avg 2 or 3 hits which I take on non-subs first, and I avg 2 hits which they take 1 on BB and 1 on TNS.
The attacking BB (and TNS if it is still alive) retreats, and I am left with 1-2 subs that immediately submerge. On US1 their BMR gets a shot at the sub(s) en route to Britian.
This leaves me with possibly one or two subs in sz 7, which move to sz 13 on Ger2.
This is not very helpful, considering they have no protection from another round of attacks from the two BMRs parked in Britian b/c the BB + TNS were used to secure Anglo.Therefore I can usually expect a total loss of the fleet, with possibly one UK TNS to show for it.
I used to just let the fleet sit, but now I go to SZ 7. If the UK attacks you with their fleet, then that means they aren’t landing in Algeria or Norway. That alone makes the SZ7 move worthwhile. Plus, I’m usually able to kill a transpo or fighter and still submerge a sub (or you can not submerge and hope UK continues and u get another transport or fighter).
One game, the United Kingdom got 4 hits there and couldn’t retreat. Since they didn’t buy a carrier, I was able to take down the UK fleet with air.
Generally I still have 1-2 subs left that can hit any naval units that try to land in either Algeria or Norway. Occasionally United Kingdom will stay in SZ 2 allowing me to make a fleet combine at Gibraltar.
If Spain had joined Germany, then Portugal would had joined the Allies, and then the Allies would have attacked and utterly destroyed Spain. And even if Germany had won the battle, what was the benefit ? No oil in Spain. No oil in UK. In 1940 UK was a little island short of resources, actually the brits was dependet on convoys to survive. So if Germany did conquer UK, they would only get 50 000 000 more hungry mouths to feed, and a poor island with a lot of fog. Only USA would benefit from a weak UK. So what would be the big idea ?
I doubt Portugal would have joined the the Allies. If you recall, Salazar, the right-wing dictator was in power there and had sent over 10,000 troops to fight with the Nationalists in the Spanish Civil War. He would have certainly followed Franco’s lead and either joined as well, looking for some tempting colonial exploits in Africa or at the very least remained a fairly hostile neutral to the Allies.
While I see your point that Salazar might have been tempted by fascist block overtures, it’s hard to imagine Portugal waging war on Great Britain, its ally for centuries. Portugal had fought against the Germans in World War One.
Hard to say for sure but I think if Spain joins the Axis and UK invades Spain then Portugal either insists on neutrality or joins the Allies.
The only way Portugal joins the Axis is if they declared neutrality but Great Britain seizes the military assets anyway, giving Salazar an excuse to throw in with the Axis.
In any case it would have been a challenge to drum up popular support in either Spain or Portugal for the Axis war of conquest. If the Allies gained control of a large portion of the peninsula, Franco’s regime could easily collapse.
Instead of attempting to liberate Egypt use the Indian Ocean fleet and other assets in that area to annoy Japan.
Take 2 infantry from India and invade Borneo.
Use the Destroyer to attack the SZ59 transport
Use the SZ40 Transport and 2 infantry from Australia 2 attack New Guinea.
Use the SZ40 sub to attack the Japanese sub in SZ45
The fighter from the Indian Ocean can go to Borneo, SZ59, or SZ45 and land on the US carrier.I prefer to use it in Borneo which means the Indian Ocean carrier must join that transport for the fighter to land on. All of this presents numerous targets for Japan to have to deal with. Yes Germany will make some headway in Africa but it can be liberated for good from the west. Also consider building a US Pacific fleet to fight the Japanese with. It is very hard for the Japanese to cover all of their money islands, the coastal territories, and its homeland. I find a lot of players cannot fight in the Pacific with either the Japanese or the US because they so rarely do so.
I agree with your attack plan (its what i use) except in a no-bid game not countering Egypt seems so risky to me–that gives Germany Africa for 2-3 turns! Plus I have a hard time sacrificing an AC.
Of course, I know the Borneo move throws Japan off of its rhythm so I respect it a lot. In a bid situation where Germany takes Egypt with 4-5 units then Borneo seems potentially the best available move.
Perhaps the problems in my game stem from focusing on keeping Germany weak, so when I lose it’s typically to the monster Japan.
I’m going to try to work a more aggressive USA Pacific into my game. Tell me, if Japan decides to not attack Pearl, do you always go aggressive on Japan or do you take the carrier to the Atlantic?
How many players are you playing with? Are you using a bid for the axis?
I’m talking about no-bid 1-1 games where as allies I’m pursuing a KGF strategy. Against an equally skilled opponent I should typically win such games. But there are scenarios where I experience bad luck equivalent to a bid or more–like say United Kingdom can’t or fails to retake Egypt, Russia gets bad rolls in either Ukraine or West Russia, or failing to kill the 59 tranny and then getting drubbed in Buryatia, or some combo of these events.
Bad luck happens and the KGF gets stalled, resulting in Japan getting too strong.
I’m really just fishing for useful ways to divert Jap energy without giving the Germans too much breathing room.
In several recent games as Allies against expert opponents I find my KGF strategy foiled mid-game by a monster Japan whose income eventually exceeds 55 IPCs.
I have tried mainland strategies for stopping Japan. A Sink factory seems extremely risky especially if the Germans are pressuring the Russians. An India factory seems to fatally limit United Kingdom’s ability to challenge Germany and ties down too much valuable Allied hardware before eventually being lost.
One strategy I like is to push with Russia on an India factory if Japan builds one.
Another is to go heavy into Africa with the United States and then eventually force the Japanese fleet to leave the Suez, granting the Allies control of the Africa and the
Med. But this requires a lot of transport discipline and air purchases and the US won’t be able to do much in Europe….meaning Russia still has to bear the bront of both Germany and Japan.
Pacific fleet? It’s a hard risk for me to take unless the Japanese sub and destroyer died at Pearl. But perhaps this is the only sure way to divert Japan?
I like 8 VC games as a fun challenge as Allies. I agree KJF is the best strat since the game revolves around India in the 1st turns, and Japan is easier to take down.
That said you still need either Karelia or a German VC to win the game, unless you take Tokoyo itself, which is tough.
Yeah i agree with your conclusions on dice rolling. More than 1-2 dice rolls are not good policy imho.
I’d say the problems with a Brazil factory are similar to the problems with a South Africa buy. If I’m in a multi and UK builds in South Africa, I’ll ask them why, and they’ll say to secure Africa. Well, it’s true a factory in SA will make it hard for Germany to take Africa. But of course there are better ways to accomplish this that don’t involve buying a 15 ipc factory far far away from the front.
It’s pretty much the same thing with Brazil. It does help secure Africa and/or get men to Western faster. But there are better ways to accomplish these objectives.
Hello all,
I am an Axis and Allies player from years ago and was recently gifted the revised version. This has reawakened my interest in the game and it’s nice to see some others who still enjoy it. I read about the triplea client and have also been using that to brush up on my skills.
I was thinking about joining some online games but a lot don’t seem that friendly to people who don’t know acronyms or have different expansion sets. Are there only really experienced players online? Also, does anyone know how to host a game? I tried to but it said there was something up with my router or firewall. I have no idea what that means :)
It’s great to see that there is still a lot of love for the game out there.
I like GameTableOnline. The design aesthetics and ease of game play are superior to TripleA. Plus there’s a nice variety of novices and experts.
But in TripleA’s favor, it offers save/edit and bidding, which are great features for a highly competitive game.
Btw you can’t host on TripleA if you haven’t enabled port forwarding for TripleA. GameTableOnline doesn’t have this issue–anyone can host.
I had always operated under the assumption that 3 dice rolls would equal a 50% chance of getting the tech. Is that correct?
Unfortunately an India factory is not an ideal strat in Revised against an expert opponent. It ties down too much British and Russian hardware in a defensive posture and keeps England from challenging effectively in the North Sea. But if you start with the factory…well that changes things.
On the plus side an India factory provides the option of aggressively attacking Japan if the opportunity arises. A KJF can be a lot of fun to play. You just have to be prepared to lose if the Axis responds effectively.
@Fabius:
Hello everybody this is my first message, I’m an Italian player of A&A and I would like to know your impressions on this KJF strategy.
First Round:
UK: purchase 2 transport 1 Inf 1 Arm and attacks Norway with 2 Inf 1 Arm 1 Artillery (assuming Germany uses his Atlantic Submarine with the fighters to destroy the Brits Battelship in Med). Uk destroyer goes from India to S59 and destroy the Jap transport. Uk moves his South African Inf to Kenya (assuming Germany destroyed Brits in Angloegypt) and Persian Inf to India.
Uk also moves the Indian Fleet in S30 and also the Australian Fleet.
Uk also moves one armor from East Canada to Alaska, and one Inf from West Canada to Alaska.What do you think?
I think I’m either going to take London or destroy your North Sea fleet on G2.
Also, an IC in Alaska doesn’t seem a good use of ipcs–-why not buy an extra AC with that cash or consider a Sink IC? In the strat you describe Japan is going to get rich on mainland ICs which will allow them to buy air to resist the dual fleet threat.
It’s a good strategy. The main benefit is it prevents the Allies from landing Algeria on Turn 1-2. Another thing to like about it is you’re credibly harassing the Allies without losing any IPCs on naval units.
I’d probably attack the fleet with the RAF and probably also with the BS and trannies (which I’ll retreat to 8). If Germany submerges, I take a shot with the American bomber. So odds are there’s only 1-3 subs left over to go to the Med. Meanwhile the combined fleet is in 8 (UK buys an AC and a fighter), and I put my Russian sub in 12.
At that point, if Germany moves to the Med I can go to Norway with the combined fleet, while the United States builds up air power to knock out the Med fleet. If the Med fleet moves to Egypt or the Black sea I can land Algeria, which signals the beginning of the end for the Med fleet unless Germany invests in an AC.
Possibly the better move for Germany if 2-3 subs survive in SZ7 is to attack the combined fleet in sz 8 with 5 figs, 2 bombs, and 2-3 subs. However, this is a good battle for the Allies unless Germany has 3 subs. Nonetheless if Germany has 2 subs it might still be Germany’s best option to attack and hope for good dice.
I think this opening has enormous chances of success against non-experts. Against experts I’d prefer to go to Egypt strong and get 5 infantry instead of a bomber.