To Funcioneta- No offense, but I don’t think your gaming experiences are representative of the norm. Japan rarely has any control over which strategy the Allies adopt, and certainly nothing that can halt a concerted KGF strat. If you’re seeing more KJF games than KGF, I suspect that you’re just not playing against very skilled opponents. Either that, or they’re just so bored of ‘business as usual’, that they are intentionally adopting the weaker strat just for the change of pace.
To Constantinople- Everyone here understands and appreciates that the game is a lot of fun to play with newbies, and people who have not yet learned how to break the set up. That’s not a problem as far as I’m concerned, because the game will always be essentially the same/entertaining for the uninitiated. The problem is with those of us who have played this game to death, worked through all the major strategies, and understand how the underlying mechanics work. Among that crowd, once you’ve been shown how to exploit the set up, you will understand why KGF turns the game on its head. The reason why we get frustrated is because the same basic problems have been with this game since Classic: and, everytime a new version comes out, we make the same sort of recommendations, only to be ignored again. There are core issues with the Classic and Revised games that are not being addressed in AA50. At least not according to the information we have right now. Its a bummer for people who have remained loyal fans of the game for all these years, because the issues have been discussed at length by different people from different groups, and given enough time they all end up arriving at the same conclusion: basically that the game does not do enough to encourage a fight in the Pacific.
As a casual player, you might not have seen before just how busted the Revised game can be using the Out of Box rules, but, once you’ve seen the optimal openings, its hard forget them. It might not be an issue in your players group, but for many of us, this horse has been beat to death a hundred times over already. Something major needs to be done (either with the unit set up, or the IPC distribution, or the rules for Victory/Capitals) and its not clear at this point whether the AA50 game is going to deliver. Joe’s views are fairly typical for those of us who went through this process when Revised was first released. If we seem skeptical now its just because many of the issues we raised then still have not been taken care of.
To Funcioneta- No offense, but I don’t think your gaming experiences are representative of the norm. Japan rarely has any control over which strategy the Allies adopt, and certainly nothing that can halt a concerted KGF strat. If you’re seeing more KJF games than KGF, I suspect that you’re just not playing against very skilled opponents. Either that, or they’re just so bored of ‘business as usual’, that they are intentionally adopting the weaker strat just for the change of pace.
I think you should re-read his posts and try again.
I disagree with cousinjoe. With BGG setup, a KGF is not possible if Japan don’t want.
Funcioneta,
Have you ever played games by e-mail? With all due respect, give me Allies and I will absolutely DESTROY you with a KGF!
I played tons of games by e-mail :-) I think my score in league this year is 9-4, 10 with allies (all of them KJF, score 8 wins, 2 loses if I’m not wrong). In fact, I’m worst at face to face, there is less time to think.
In Revised, I’ll simply don’t let you make a KGF. I have discovered a counter for KGF in Revised a couple of weeks ago. It’s new, and I have to polish still, so probably you would have a 50/50 chance.
In Anniversary, with BGG setup, with this counter, I think there is about no chance for allies if they try KGF. I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California
So what’s this strategy? If you don’t want it public before playing CJ, can you just PM it to me? I’m curious.
I think you should re-read his posts and try again.
:|
I read it the first time man.
I don’t usually spend 15 minutes typing a response to a post without first considering what it says.
I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California
You are playing a rather different game than the rest of us, if you think that the only chance the Allies have of winning the game is to build a fleet at California. Sorry, it just makes it hard for me to follow the rest of what you’re saying when I hear suggestions like that.
I think my score in league this year is 9-4, 10 with allies (all of them KJF, score 8 wins, 2 loses if I’m not wrong). In fact, I’m worst at face to face, there is less time to think.
In Revised, I’ll simply don’t let you make a KGF. I have discovered a counter for KGF in Revised a couple of weeks ago.
The point I tried to make is that it is always up to the Allies to determine which kind of game is played (KGF/KJF). There is simply nothing you can do to change this as the Axis player. I find it hard to believe that Funcioneta, or anyone else for that matter, has hit upon on a Japanese strategy in the last two weeks, that has somehow eluded the rest of us for the past 4 years now.
So what’s this strategy? If you don’t want it public before playing CJ, can you just PM it to me? I’m curious
The strategy Joe refers to is common knowledge. We all call it the “KGF” game for general reference, because there are a number of different variations on the same basic concept. All of them involve ignoring Japan (within reason), and concentrating all attention on Moscow/Berlin. Its the easiest way to win as the Allies, and impossible to counter as the Axis without either considerable luck in the first round, or a pre-placement bid. That’s why almost everyone gives the Axis player at least 8 ipcs to make things fair.
Well, most of your post was talking about how he must not be playing good players because he’s playing vs. KJFs, which has nothing to do with anything he ever said at all. He said that he, as Allies, plays KJFs and wins, that’s it. Also, he never said Japan controls the Allies’ strategy, or that the KGF counter is even mainly dependent on Japan, or that the KGF counter forces the Allies to go KJF.
As for your point in this post about him suddenly discovering a KGF-counter, yeah, I am both curious about what he might have found and aware that the chances of him making some miraculous discovery like that aren’t great. /shrug
And yes, I know I come off blunt and sarcastic, don’t take it personally.
AA50 will be a masterpiece and i know it. I dont listen to people who are negatif about it.
I agree with this. Its a new evolution The new prices and rules will work. leave out the technology until you play it a bunch of times.
The new ideas are more historical and have finally foreseen and removed some of the glitches that made you scratch your head.
Only thing is they missed the battle of atlantic dynamic, subs should take off UK’s income or return convoy boxes. I already made them anyway.
The other huge thing is the map is finally a correct size and the noob team can play Italy. I which they had some fog of war so they can eliminate the bean counter types who have to calculate everything. I was hoping marshaling cards would be used as fog of war tokens to hide your forces.
The strategy Joe refers to is common knowledge. We all call it the “KGF” game for general reference, because there are a number of different variations on the same basic concept. All of them involve ignoring Japan (within reason), and concentrating all attention on Moscow/Berlin. Its the easiest way to win as the Allies, and impossible to counter as the Axis without either considerable luck in the first round, or a pre-placement bid. That’s why almost everyone gives the Axis player at least 8 ipcs to make things fair.
You misunderstood my post, I was asking that guy what his “counter” to KGF is, not what KGF is :-P
I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California
You are playing a rather different game than the rest of us, if you think that the only chance the Allies have of winning the game is to build a fleet at California. Sorry, it just makes it hard for me to follow the rest of what you’re saying when I hear suggestions like that.
You and your edits. :P
You know he’s talking about AA50 here, right? Not saying he’s right or wrong, just trying to clarify.
I wonder if the release date was extended because something we posted here may have been overlooked by play testing requiring a change in the setup? I know they have wiseguys looking around here for how people are receiving the game and possibly somebody has made some comment that has opened discussion on some flaw in the opening moves based on the set up. This site does have the best minds working and thinking on AA50 as well as the other games. I think its probable, considering they already said the game was completed months ago and larry had a copy. They don’t make final games and then say we need more time, unless something needed a change.
The only other possibility is WOTC is a bunch of idiots who forgot to do something like add the rules or map to the game before shipping.
Its all gravy :-D
You know he’s talking about AA50 here, right? Not saying he’s right or wrong, just trying to clarify.
Perhaps I latched onto something that wasn’t really there. But I agree with most of what Joe said, so I wanted to lend some extra weight to his arguments. It seemed to me that Funcioneta was bringing Japan into the discussion, as some sort of counter point to the things Joe said, which I don’t understand at all. I know he started out talking about AA50, but the conversation appeared to drift back to the big dilema, which we’ve been dealing with since Revised/Classic. We don’t even know for sure what AA50 is going to look like yet, so I’m not sure whether we can trust anything having to do with strategy at this point. Japan has no relevance to the KGF game in Revised though, that’s the whole point, and the reason for all our frustrations.
I don’t believe that there is an effective counter to the KGF opening in Revised, and I’ll be surprised if we hear anything new on the subject at this late stage. By all means though, do enlighten us. What is this counter to the KGF game that you haven’t finished polishing yet?
:-)
If we’re talking about AA50, then that’s a different story. Are we even sure that abattlemap is 100%? I noticed that Larry has not yet responded to Blue’s post about the 41 set up. Maybe its true what Funcioneta suggested elsewhere, that the current speculations based on the Gen Con photos are not accurate.
ps. I’m no stranger to internet sarcasm myself, and I sometimes come off the same way. I almost never take it personally though, especially when its a game we’re talking about. Hence the excessive use of smilies
:-D
pps.
You and your edits. :-P
I’m constantly editing. Haven’t you noticed that yet?
I usually post first and then edit for grammar/clarity. I try to not to make any substantive changes after someone responds, but I think I was still editing while you were posting. Bad habit, but its the way I operate.
Sorry for the confusion
You misunderstood my post, I was asking that guy what his “counter” to KGF is, not what KGF is :-P
My bad. When you said “before playing CJ”, I read the emphasis incorrectly. I thought you were speaking to him rather than Funcioneta. Seems 03321’s criticism about careful reading tonight is more on point than I wanted to admit. I should have payed more attention to who was asking the question. :wink:
I wonder if the release date was extended because something we posted here may have been overlooked by play testing requiring a change in the setup?
That would be really encouraging actually. I would happily accept a delay on the release, if they’re really using this as an opportunity to fix something that is busted with the rules/setup.
@Craig:
Stuck in customs …
That figures, I told Larry it was a bad idea to use that swastika on the box
If you think that they pay any attention to what goes on over here, your simply fooling yourself.
Thats not correct. Larry takes in what we post and it colors the final product. He has asked repeatedly for his fans to come up with out of the box ideas. The map itself is a influence of all the people asking him for a topographical map over many years. Its clear VERY CLEAR that its a dramatic change from revised map based on all the comments from various key people. The Anti-Black ocean finally won the day.
Also, ideas in the game have some measure of influence to historical facts like the transport rules, adding Italy, etc.
WOTC does not visit these forums. They most likely don’t know how to wash both hands at the same time. But people like Larry does and thats what counts.
First, I’m not offended :-)
Now, I’ll try explain my counter to KGF
First thing I have to say is that the counter is still in test phase. I must polish it and is not a unbeatable strat. That for sure. It kills KGF strat, but don’t mean that allies are doomed, simply they (mainly USA) cannot ignore Japan, and they must cancel KGF strat (or USA is doomed). That is for Revised. In Anniversary, with a 60-65 IPCs Japan, I simply think there is too much advantage for Japan trying this strat, simply because of bonus and IPC distribution.
This is the reasoning: when I strated to play in this forums (about a year ago), I saw that all guys here played KGF. In fact I have still to face a KJF playing with axis. Many here think that KJF is not a good strat and that is inferior and such, but playing face to face I always played and faced a KJF strat, so I think “good, I’ll try my old strat here. If fails, I’ll shift to KGF, If not, I’ll stick to KJF”. And KJF worked well. I had to adapt it to forum rules with bid and no tech, and usually I’m near of defeat (and I didn’t win all the games), but KJF works.
All here think that the only choice axis have to win against KGF is Japan attacking Moscow and I also thought that.
Then, a month ago, tired of playing axis against KGF and tired of playing allied KJF I though “hey, If KJF works even when many think that not, maybe I’m also wrong and tank dash to Moscow is not the only counter to KGF. I’ll try this other”
So I started a league game having in mind this new strat. I wanted a weak rival because the strat was totally new, but when Uffish offered playing against me, I thought that maybe the better way of try this was against one of the best players.
You should check my last league game against Uffishbongo. He is a very good player (go Uffish!), he got crappy dices more times than I and still he is alive, but in general I think that this new strat is playable, can win (and lose) and, the last is for sure, is funnier than the old tank dash for Moscow. In fact, is the funnier game I played as axis and I have luck playing a player as good as Uffish. Go Uffish! I hope you win the league and the tourney :-)
To Funcioneta- No offense, but I don’t think your gaming experiences are representative of the norm. Japan rarely has any control over which strategy the Allies adopt, and certainly nothing that can halt a concerted KGF strat. If you’re seeing more KJF games than KGF, I suspect that you’re just not playing against very skilled opponents. Either that, or they’re just so bored of ‘business as usual’, that they are intentionally adopting the weaker strat just for the change of pace.
As a noted KJF player I find the above statement absolutely untrue. Its this condescending attitude that reflects poorly upon the game.
The point I tried to make is that it is always up to the Allies to determine which kind of game is played (KGF/KJF).
This too is wrong. The axis can indeed determine whether the allies go KGF or KJF.
:?
Well I don’t see why my attitude (condescending or otherwise) should have any influence on the game set up. Its not like my bad attitude is going to determine whether a basic strategy is optimal or not.
I might not be a noted KJF player, but I certainly enjoy a good pacific game as much as the next guy. I’m sure I’ve played just as many KJF games as you have, and I’m familiar with the standard openings. If you want to convince me that I’m totally mistaken in my assessment of KGF v KJF/CJF, then you’re going to have to do a little better than just telling me my statements are ‘absolutely untrue’. Why should I trust your judgment? Where are the arguments and counter points?
:)
Most of the statements I made are old news by now, and accepted as the conventional wisdom by many of the best players around. Now that doesn’t mean you can’t play an effective KJF game, or that if you play a KJF game that you’re not a skilled player. It might be the more entertaining of the two basic strategies, but among the most cutthroat of expert players, it simply cannot compete with the straight up KGF game.
The axis can indeed determine whether the allies go KGF or KJF.
How?
Seriously, you’re going to have to back that up with something, if you expect it to have any traction with me. :)
I apologize if my tone seems curt or condescending, that’s not what I was going for; but also try to appreciate that I’m not exactly green with this thing either. I’ve been playing Revised A&A to death for 4 years now, against some of the best players in the world. I’m talking about cats like AllWeNeedIsLove (who I credit with developing the first serious, publicly discussed KJF strategy) and other Revised luminaries, who teased out many of the KJF openings, which others have since adopted. I know all about landing the Bomber in Novosibirsk, and the fighter to Bury or Pearl. I know about sending the carrier to block at Philippines, and when to bounce back to Africa instead. I understand when its wise to buy an IC and when it isn’t, and what the Russians have to do in order to make either situation work out properly. I’ve seen the KJF endgame many many times, and I’ve also seen how it differs from the KGF endgame. I’m not just talking out of my a** when I make blanket statements like the ones quoted above, they come from a lot experience and serious consideration.
Believe me man, I get what you’re trying to say in response here, and I really do wish that there was a KJF game as strong as the triple team on Germany (that would make me very happy), but I just don’t believe that there is, at least not in the standard Revised set up. If you adopt a KJF gameplan, you are taking on more risks than you would by adopting a KGF gameplan. That’s why I say its the weaker strategy; not because weaker players are the ones using it (some of the most skilled players I know, have worked very hard for a long time to develop competitive KJF strats) but because those guys also realize that the KGF game is dominant for a reason.
That’s why we always seem so grumpy and opinionated whenever the issue comes up again, because this really is a critical problem (the pacific imbalance I mean), and something that desperately needs to be corrected. That’s why I speak with such forceful language on the subject, because as far as I’m concerned, the jury is already out on this one. To suggest that the KJF game is truly on par with the triple team of G, is just misleading, and it does little to encourage the designers to fix the underlying problem. See what I mean?
Again, I’m sorry if I come off sounding brash or stubborn sometimes. It’s really not my style to denegrate a player’s abilities (if you ever play a game with me, I think you’ll find I’m rather easy going) and I try to make more constructive contributions than destructive ones, when I weigh in on an issue like this. I just sometimes get frustrated, that more people don’t understand why Joe is so frustrated, because to me it seems very clear at this point.
That’s all I wanted to convey really.
I’ll go crawl back under my rock now.
Funcioneta, maybe we can try a game, I can host triplea. I’m not a top player, but I think I’m decent/average.
This is not a game to see who is best, this would be a game for me to learn new strats, b/c I think that any allied strat other than KGF is suboptimal, also as axis, the best thing to do to win the game is to send most units towards Moscow.
If you discovered some new strats then I’m sure that many of us would want to see it with our own eyes. I know that its possible to put more pressure against Japan than in most KGF games, put more than that I have a hard time to believe until I see it.
As for strats which will make allies NOT choose KGF even if the players wants to do KGF, I’m very curious about how to make it possible.
I just don’t see what possible move you could make in the first round with Germany or Japan that would deter an allied player from going after Germany, if that’s what they want to do. Even if you’re sending all your Jap fighters to Berlin and bouncing around the globe like a straight pro with the Emperor… Even if you bid a sub in sz 8, or do some crazy naval build scheme with G, I just don’t see what you can do to take the initiative away from the Allies like that. I’m skeptical, and will likely remain so until someone actual explains this Axis ploy that forces the KJF game.
I’m all ears.
:)
No tripleA, sorry. Only AABattlemap, in-house dices. KJF works well and it’s far of being suboptimal. Not best than KGF, just alternative. For anti-KGF, the strat don’t forces to classical KJF, simply forces USA to fight against Japan, thus canceling KGF. The thing is: I play axis round 1 almost as usual, just with a slim twist. Then, if you do KJF, OK, let’s KJF. If you try KGF, I’ll force USA to not ignore Japan. Then, allies can win or not, but not by a classical KGF. And still I need polish it, remember.
I would like read that KJF article. Where is it? :-) Anyway, I think AC block on Philippines is too costly, even if you take Borneo. That AC is too valuable for Pacific strat for a one-turn move
Maybe we should start a new thread. We are out of topic, I fear.
This thread has served its purpose and its time has come to an end.
