Having problems going KJF

@The-Mink

Hi Mink

It’s a puzzle and even when you figure it out, the dice says otherwise :)

I’d suggest giving Anniversary and Global a try when you get time.

@Panther

Thanks for the reply.

Thanks again to @Krieghund too. :)

@PrivateerPuffin said in Rules question about Fighters in Sea battles:

1st question: Does the word may in excerpt #2 allow for fighters to be presumed as casualties?

No, but it allows for carriers to be.

2nd question: Does excerpt #3 mean that there can never be more fighters in a battle than you have spots on carriers (if there are no other islands or territories to land in).

Yes.

An example if my question is nonsensical.
Japan took Midway, Alaska, and Western Canada last turn. On the US turn. 4 US fighters from two carriers in SZ 56 used 2 movement to attack a fleet in SZ 64. 1 fighter from Western US then uses 3 of its movement to also attack the fleet. The Japan player says that isn’t allowed because the 4 fighters will need the carriers to land. The US player disagrees and says that they could take a fighter as a casualty, allowing for there to be an open spot on the carrier which the fighter from Western US can land on.

The Japan player is correct.

During combat movement, you must be able to demonstrate possible safe landing zones for all attacking fighters. Once the combat starts, you may take carriers as casualties so that these safe landing zones are not maintained, usually in order to maximize the effectiveness of the attacking force. Once combat is over, all fighters that can still be landed must be (attacker’s choice of exactly which fighters, if there is a choice), and any that cannot are lost.

@Mursilis

All the best to you. Maybe a good suggestion would be to have copies of 42.2, AA50 and Global and then set up the board that fits with the time, players and space you have. Many people can’t leave a big board set up over multi sessions and so a shorter, lighter game would be appropriate for new players or shorter meetups.

I still keep my playbook for this version in mind, as it is consistently the best attended and largest tournament at Gencon–you get to play 3-5 games in just over 2 days so its alot like a chess/bridge/cribbage tournament…busy and having fun all day with a variety of opponents.

It seems I am the only one here who has a different opinion than everybody else  :-D the thing with japan is that if you have good navy positioning, you’re starting navy should be enough to hold off the us for a couple of turns without you having to buy anything. During these precious turns, grab as much money as you can in Asia, and then use this income to have an arms race with the US.

If you start purchasing navy right off the bat, the India will wipe you off off Asia. This doesn’t even take into account russian pressure from the north. So in my opinion, only make navy buys when you have the income to afford it.
(P.S If you dont do pearl harbor, the us can pretty much put pressure on you without buying anything at all, let alone going 100% pacific.

Its really critical, if you’re going to try to pursue a KJF strategy, to contain and then destroy the IJN. Total naval superiority is necessary to defeat the Germans out of Eurasia in the 4 man endgame. Basically the goal in that sort of endgame is to take over Japan’s “shucking into Asia” role, but just doing it with USA instead!
:-D

I think your best repeating purchase with UK is likely 1 fighter 1 bomber 3 infantry.

The 3 infantry fulfills your requirement to max place ground in Calcutta each round, but the bomber (as opposed to 2 fighters and artillery standard) will give you a more potent threat versus the Japanese fleet.

UK is in a position where they are usually collecting the same 31 ipcs for a while. If you make that Bomber+Fighter build 3 times in a row, (provided you don’t lose a bunch of aircraft initially) that gives you a really strong royal air force to keep the Japanese away from Suez by the 4th round. You’ll still have some fighter cover for the Russian capital, but the bombers can also move deeper out of UK, and cover a broader range from their positions behind the Russian lines.

A fun play is to keep that Australian sub active vs Japan on UK1, floating it around somewhere in the Indian ocean, to eventually join with this British air armada that you’ll be buying in subsequent rounds. Basically  you use this sub and your bombers to keep Japan fearful of British airstrike capabilities out of South Asia. During the endgamge these strategic bombers will help bomb Tokyo in the critical rounds when USA is really stepping up, but in the meantime, the British bomber presence can also make it much harder for Japan to profitably engage the USN. They’ll be fearful of what UK might do in the aftermath of any naval battle, like say one that occurs near the money islands, and may chose to avoid sailing out beyond their comfort zones.

I suggested earlier today in another thread, the “sz37 Dive to Survive” move with your Aussie sub, which can work well with this type of build strategy. A single sub (sneak striking or absorbing a hit in place of a fighter or bomber) can make the threat of an airstrike too scary, and Japan might just decide to stay home instead of bringing their fleet too far from Tokyo.

The board is not setup to do KJF well and to make matters worse USA and Japan income are relatively similar so unless you get some lucky dice early, it is pretty sad.

@Petebu:

So at this time who do think has the advantage? I have not played yet and it looks like the Axis has an advantage. Can you also give me some good advice as I will be playing the Axis? Thanks.

i would agree axis are a bit strong but not ridiculously so.