Once America becomes allied with Britain, this strategy usually involves shifting American ground and naval forces from the East Coast to New Brunswick to use the naval base to shuttle the three spaces back and forth to London. About what turn though do most people invade Fortress Europe? It seems like America can’t make any significant contribution until Turn 5 and once they commit their transports, the movement of troops between the UK and North America is disrupted. Just looking for ways to more effectively concentrate American firepower on Europe.
USA requires skill to play well because you need to plan ahead carefully to get the most efficient use out of your transports. In other words, logistics and economics are paramount.
The map seems to favor a shuck from eusa to Gib and then from gib to Norm/Holland or Germany/Norway/Denmark. So it’s useful for allies to hold 91 and the Gib naval base. If Allies can’t hold 91, you can consider shucking from east canada to uk. This way you keep up two fleets, with the larger in 110 or 112 and the other in 109. With 15 transports, you can build up a shuck where you’re landing 10 units per turn on average.
It’s also important for USA to buy efficient, modern naval units to protect the fleet. And that depends on the German/Italian buys and strategy. ACs and fighters give better defense and are more versatile than battleships and cruisers.
As for the Soviets, given that Germany has not invaded Britain and has focused mostly on the Eastern Front, is a tactical withdrawal best until you can mobilize enough units to offer any real counter-attack? Is a counter-attack and the investment in any offensive units really worth it as the Soviets considering that the Germans can bring to bare a force that, if it links up somewhere like Eastern Poland, could have 30 inf, a handful of artillery, and a dozen or more tanks in one territory even?
In my experience, no. If Western Axis is doing everything right, they can pre-empt your potential counterattacks by consolidating their forces or by taking territories with Italy and then flying in additional German fighters.
Of course, it’s always fun when opportunities for Russian counters come up…I just wouldn’t count on that as my strategy.
The US should focus on Italy or Norway. Build the Norway factory and relieve Leningrad.
Bad person! Bad bad! This is Axis and Allies, not Chess! You “shouldn’t” have to do anything!
If my person has seen nothing but Kill Germany/Italy first games, I will virtually always go heavy on Japan with America, figuring (and usually rightly so) that they have no concept on how to stop it and I can make quick work of the Japanese and send in reinforcements to Africa/Asia via India.
BTW, for the record, making short work of the Japanese almost NEVER means taking Tokyo. Some weirdos have oft made the assumption I mean to take Tokyo, but (especially in 1940) why bother? Deball them, and move on.
If my opponent seems to have a strong understanding of the game, I usually see how Germany/Japan play out. I have 4 rounds dang it, and it’s almost a surety I am spending one of those on warships for the Pacific anyway, regardless of where I go.
I prefer to build up a US landingforce outside gibraltar, shipping some landforces over, but mostly keeping them there, with transports.
If you have 8 transports outside gibraltar, they have 16 landunits and possibly 8 planes for support a landing. Then the axis need to protect w germany, rome, north italy with about 25 units on each place. and they need to be able to counterattack a landingforce of 16 US landunits + 12-18 british landunits + all british planes. this means (depending on turn) that germany need to be able to kill 34-40 units in normandy. otherwise US can start production.
the strength of a transport with load standing outside of gibraltar is that the axis need at least 4 lanunits to hold the vital spots, and 6-8 to defend all the important things.
I found that an effective Soviet strategy against Barbarossa is to build 1 Tactical Bomber on R1 combined with 2 Armour and 3 Infantry. Thereafter I try to build 2-3 Armour per turn and fill the rest out with Infantry or Mech.
General approach is then to make lots of little counter attacks out of Leningrad and Moscow with the aim of killing off the infantry screening the German Panzers. Once all the infantry are dead I take stock, if it looks like I can kill his tanks without too many losses then I will but otherwise I’ll fall back knowing that he won’t attack me with only tanks and so I’ll refill my own stacks while the Germans get back into position.
tell me again how this work when germany build 8 art on round 1, 18 mechs on round 2, round 3 he stacks east poland with 30 mechs, 10 pz 15 inf (didn’t bother to count it out) and builds 10 mechs and a ftr. round 4 he moves these now 70 units ish units to west ukraine, round 5 he moves them to belo, and round 6 he attacks moscow with 70 landunits + 15-20 planes. (he probably has more landunits by then, I bet cow can tell me exactly what he has.
anyways, when you build so few units, you will be screwed, he only need to take moscow, and his stack is stacked as one force, there are exacaxtly 0 of these small counterattacks
This depends on you as a player what you prefer to do.
Some prefer balanced strategies in which they do some europe and some pacific. Then you have the Europe centric and Pacific centric strategies.
Generally speaking I like USA providing some or most of the naval required for UK. Once the Brits start shoring men to Normandy/Omaha beach it takes pressure away from Russia. The USA drops themselves are not as critical as they seem… takes too long to get transports back to reload.
Even theater centric strategies have some kind of plan for the other half of the board. Going pacific hard does not work when Russia is dead on round 6 and Europe gets the VC win on round 9-10. Japan can pull of a win in under 10 rounds as well.
I prefer to build up a US landingforce outside gibraltar, shipping some landforces over, but mostly keeping them there, with transports.
If you have 8 transports outside gibraltar, they have 16 landunits and possibly 8 planes for support a landing. Then the axis need to protect w germany, rome, north italy with about 25 units on each place. and they need to be able to counterattack a landingforce of 16 US landunits + 12-18 british landunits + all british planes. this means (depending on turn) that germany need to be able to kill 34-40 units in normandy. otherwise US can start production.
the strength of a transport with load standing outside of gibraltar is that the axis need at least 4 lanunits to hold the vital spots, and 6-8 to defend all the important things.
Or just have a counter force located in France to reclaim W. France, S. France, or Holland (perhaps N. Italy too, assuming they cant block a landing there.) Requires 18 ground units and planes, who who doesnt have planes around the map?
Personaly, Kill Japan First has LONG been a favorite strategy of mine. It got a whole HELLUVA lot easier in Axis and Allies revised, then I think Larry (game creator) had a heart attack or something and made it a lot harder in Anniversary (my opinion) and then balanced it out a little in 1940. Course, for a while there, before such things as Alpha 2, 2nd Edition etc, it was still a lot easier than going for Germany! The risk of Sea Lion being the only thing from making Kill Japan the ONLY road to take and doing it in 8 or 9 rounds. (After all, you had to liberate London!)
Yes the previous editions sucked, thanks for reminding all of us lab rats. Anyway…
Jenn do you provide london with carriers/dd/figs so london can deploy units to Europe? I tend to do this.
@Cmdr:
Or just have a counter force located in France to reclaim W. France, S. France, or Holland (perhaps N. Italy too, assuming they cant block a landing there.) Requires 18 ground units and planes, who who doesnt have planes around the map?
I was assuming very few units in france, with the counterattackforce located in w germany. You need to have 20-30 units in w germany anyways, why not make them mechs instead of infs, that way they can hit any terr in france, with the 10-15 planes in range. (number ofc depends on which turn)
but the point still stands, germany have to match the power of the landingforce in both italy and w germany
This is in line with my thinking, defend by counterattacking and attack by moving an unassailable stack into the terr you want (especially if you have canopeners).
I dont like to use Germans there, I prefer Italians. I’ll very often have a couple dozen infantry and a few armor located in France (Italian units.) German controlled France. Then I’ll build in W. Germany and have the transports shuttle into Karelia.
The combination does wonders on an American or British/American landings in Gibraltar. Yes, they are still a threat, I still have to protect S. Italy and that ties up a LOT of troops, but it’s no longer a worry about a French Liberation Invasion.
(PS: I find 5 infantry, 1 artillery, 2 armor from Italy plenty to establish a beach head in Russia. Since you can land German planes on Itallian territories, anything more than that is a luxury, one I gladly have, but one I can do without if necessary.)
@Cmdr:
I prefer to build up a US landingforce outside gibraltar, shipping some landforces over, but mostly keeping them there, with transports.
If you have 8 transports outside gibraltar, they have 16 landunits and possibly 8 planes for support a landing. Then the axis need to protect w germany, rome, north italy with about 25 units on each place. and they need to be able to counterattack a landingforce of 16 US landunits + 12-18 british landunits + all british planes. this means (depending on turn) that germany need to be able to kill 34-40 units in normandy. otherwise US can start production.
the strength of a transport with load standing outside of gibraltar is that the axis need at least 4 lanunits to hold the vital spots, and 6-8 to defend all the important things.
Or just have a counter force located in France to reclaim W. France, S. France, or Holland (perhaps N. Italy too, assuming they cant block a landing there.)Â Requires 18 ground units and planes, who who doesnt have planes around the map?
Personaly, Kill Japan First has LONG been a favorite strategy of mine. It got a whole HELLUVA lot easier in Axis and Allies revised, then I think Larry (game creator) had a heart attack or something and made it a lot harder in Anniversary (my opinion) and then balanced it out a little in 1940. Course, for a while there, before such things as Alpha 2, 2nd Edition etc, it was still a lot easier than going for Germany! The risk of Sea Lion being the only thing from making Kill Japan the ONLY road to take and doing it in 8 or 9 rounds. (After all, you had to liberate London!)
KJF might have become easier in revised, but it doesn’t mean it was a good strategy. A good Axis player would just stall America for far too long and then have Germany become 70+ IPC monster.
It is pretty easy for Germany to hit 70, can do it in 3-4 rounds
@Cow:
It is pretty easy for Germany to hit 70, can do it in 3-4 rounds
In revised there aren’t NO’s and Germany starts with 40. I wouldn’t say it is easy for Germany to get to 70 since that is all of russia and 6 IPC’s from other places also.
@Cow:
It is pretty easy for Germany to hit 70, can do it in 3-4 rounds
In revised there aren’t NO’s and Germany starts with 40. I wouldn’t say it is easy for Germany to get to 70 since that is all of russia and 6 IPC’s from other places also.
No one ever stopped my KJF in AAR. But then, I had a lot of experience with KJF in Classic that I brought over. Anniversary is when it got really hard and now it’s sorta viable again.
I started working on my own version of KJF when someone here told me it was impossible and that the Allies would always lose in a KJF game. (I later beat the ever living CR@P out of him on the boards to the point he tried a vendetta and then left when no one cared about his nonsense. - but that drama is for another day!)
Anyway, the whole thing is outlined on the boards somewhere. If you can’t find it, I can type it up again. But in AAR, Japan had NO ability to stop it and within 4 rounds, SHOULD be castrated with 5 rounds being landings in Russia to liberate, or landings in SE Asia (depending on where you decided to set up your transports.)
In classic it was a lot harder, due to the prices and the fragility of your ships.
In anniversary it was darn near impossible due to the strength of the Japanese fleet and the ready deployment of massive quantities of fodder. It just took too darn long for America to overcome the odds.
In 1940 the problems with KJF are thus: (A) no industrial complexes on islands anymore. A MAJOR tenant of KJF is the rapid deployment of reinforcements through island bases. (B) the nearly double or triple (depending on avenue of travel) of sea zones on the board. Again, a MAJOR tenant of KJF is the rapid deployment of reinforcements! © the introduction of aircraft carrier (aka Kamikazee magnets) Kamikazee attacks that can, in theory, cost you up to 12 fighters (one at each of 6 carriers damaging each with no valid landing zone left.) (D) Cover air patrol from local islands making the initial attacks more difficult. And (E) being able to cover the entire South/Souteast Pacific with a ridiculous amount of air cover with Japan - and that being a traditional spot for the planes anyway!
None of those impediments exist in Classic or Revised. Which is why KJF works so bloody well in both those games!
Ok the reason KJF doesn’t work in revised is the amount of money US has vs Japans money. Sure after your first buy with US you are going to have 2 carriers 4 fighters a battleship 3 transports (2 from europe) and 2 DD’s (one also from europe), but Japans fleet is going to consit of 2 carriers 6 fighters 2 battleships 4 transports and possibly a destroyer. Japan makes 33 on his first turn. On his second turn as Japan I’d just buy 5 subs and an inf with Japan if I saw a KJF. US buys his 5 subs destroyer. Now US has a lead in ships, but you have to remember that US is still two turns away from the money islands, while Japan is just 1 for the most part. As long as Japan stalls US for 5 rounds before US takes East Indies (and can hold it and build a factory the next turn). Then the axis are golden. Russia will be dead by the time the East Indies factory first starts pumping out units, and you can’t just stop putting ships into pacific as US. Japan still should have a huge Navy at this point since she was spending her 40 dollar IPC’s on all ships. That is the problem. You can’t just do as you say and switch to landing in europe. No way africa hasn’t been overrun by germany, and no way Moscow isn’t taken. I’d love to play against you as the axis with a 9 bid and show you what I mean.
Re. KJF/KGF in 1940. Thanks to the victory conditions, it’s moot :-D Every game is ‘realistic’. Eventually, playing this way will get tiresome and we’ll want to play some other way….but for now it’s great!
Re. KJF in Revised it’s nowhere near as easy as Comm Jen paints. But it’s far from impossible. The current experts in Revised KJF play over at Game Table Online in the Revised Champion’s League. For info on KJF read anything by bmaster (eumais in these forums) and see my KJF Basics article. I’m not an expert in KJF; but I have good experience against KJF as Axis so I have ideas on what works and what doesn’t. KJF is a dice strategy and perhaps not viable in low luck.
Imho KJF is about as viable in aa50:41 as it is in revised…possibly even more so. Ie risky but doable (provided you have sufficient skill) in dice games. In aa50:42, Japan is easier to defeat, but KJF is probably less viable because Germany is such a beast.
Re. KJF in Revised it’s nowhere near as easy as Comm Jen paints. Â But it’s far from impossible. Â The current experts in Revised KJF play over at Game Table Online in the Revised Champion’s League. Â For info on KJF read anything by bmaster (eumais in these forums) and see my KJF Basics article. Â I’m not an expert in KJF; but I have good experience against KJF as Axis so I have ideas on what works and what doesn’t. Â KJF is a dice strategy and perhaps not viable in low luck.
I am an expert in KJF. Personally, it is easier for me to neuter Japan than it is to take Berlin. This is a PERSONAL opinion and I am not trying to force it down anyone else’s throat for two reasons: (1) I may be wrong. (2) I don’t know your experience level or how you play the game.
That said, you need zero transports for KJF. Not a single one. As I said, KJF has nothing to do with taking Tokyo. If you can, great, but it’s not a part of the strategy. The strategy, in the largeset possible terms is thus:
A) Prevent Japan from being able to sink the Allied fleet.
B) Be able to sink the Japanese fleet.
C) Move the Japanese fleet out of position, or sink the Japanese fleet. (remember, a fleet that has moved to the Med or is in the Indian ocean is useless to the Axis. Well, virtually so.)
D. Prevent the Japanese from being able to build or reinforce their fleet (if their fleet is out of position, this is virtually assured anyway.)
E) Invade Asia Minor and Asia Proper and start sending in reinforcements to Russia via the far east/China.
You should take distinct notice of the lack of any mention of invading Japan itself. Screw them. You don’t have to take the island, you don’t have to bomb the island, you literally need to do nothing too them. Once you own the Japanese Sea you can leave a carrier or two or whatever you need for shuttling troops from Alaska into SFE without risk. Park the fleet where the US Marines are located now, and Japan is done. They get a turn, they guy to build, they may even have a few combat rounds left, but they are through as a power on the game board.
This was the ONE major aspect that got a certain someone pissed off. He thought I had to take Tokyo, and I never did, instead I crippled Japan and sent massive amount of arms and armor through Russia via the back door. He got Moscow, until America liberated and Russia reinforced again.
Essentially, that is how it is in Revised/Classic. Anniversary is a different animal altogther. Personally, I dont like Anniversary because it is unrealistic in the Pacific. (My opinion.) I like G40 since I can go back to my Japanese strategy - not as much as Revised/Classic, and thus it is more realistic to the real war, but still I can do some.
Lastly, let me point out, THIS IS A GAME, if you want realistic, then you have to forbid the axis to win no matter what.
Thanks for not trying to force it down any ones throat.
@Cmdr:
Re. KJF in Revised it’s nowhere near as easy as Comm Jen paints. � But it’s far from impossible. � The current experts in Revised KJF play over at Game Table Online in the Revised Champion’s League. � For info on KJF read anything by bmaster (eumais in these forums) and see my KJF Basics article. � I’m not an expert in KJF; but I have good experience against KJF as Axis so I have ideas on what works and what doesn’t. � KJF is a dice strategy and perhaps not viable in low luck.
I am an expert in KJF. Personally, it is easier for me to neuter Japan than it is to take Berlin. This is a PERSONAL opinion and I am not trying to force it down anyone else’s throat for two reasons: (1) I may be wrong. (2) I don’t know your experience level or how you play the game.
That said, you need zero transports for KJF. Not a single one. As I said, KJF has nothing to do with taking Tokyo. If you can, great, but it’s not a part of the strategy. The strategy, in the largeset possible terms is thus:
A) Prevent Japan from being able to sink the Allied fleet.Â
B) Be able to sink the Japanese fleet.
C) Move the Japanese fleet out of position, or sink the Japanese fleet. (remember, a fleet that has moved to the Med or is in the Indian ocean is useless to the Axis. Well, virtually so.)
D. Prevent the Japanese from being able to build or reinforce their fleet (if their fleet is out of position, this is virtually assured anyway.)
E) Invade Asia Minor and Asia Proper and start sending in reinforcements to Russia via the far east/China.You should take distinct notice of the lack of any mention of invading Japan itself. Screw them. You don’t have to take the island, you don’t have to bomb the island, you literally need to do nothing too them. Once you own the Japanese Sea you can leave a carrier or two or whatever you need for shuttling troops from Alaska into SFE without risk. Park the fleet where the US Marines are located now, and Japan is done. They get a turn, they guy to build, they may even have a few combat rounds left, but they are through as a power on the game board.
This was the ONE major aspect that got a certain someone pissed off. He thought I had to take Tokyo, and I never did, instead I crippled Japan and sent massive amount of arms and armor through Russia via the back door. He got Moscow, until America liberated and Russia reinforced again.Â
Essentially, that is how it is in Revised/Classic. Anniversary is a different animal altogther. Personally, I dont like Anniversary because it is unrealistic in the Pacific. (My opinion.) I like G40 since I can go back to my Japanese strategy - not as much as Revised/Classic, and thus it is more realistic to the real war, but still I can do some.Â
Lastly, let me point out, THIS IS A GAME, if you want realistic, then you have to forbid the axis to win no matter what.
Not trying to be mean, but it is obvious that a KJF doesn’t take Japan itself. You take the money islands and build factories there from which you offload troops onto the mainland. This will essentially cripple Japan into making 8 dollars a turn. Then you just worry about Germany, but what I am saying is that Russia will be long dead and Germany all over Asia by the time you are able to do all of these things VS an expert player.
you can’t make factos on islands… but I see your point.
