Do you think Axis is overpowered?

Axis do have a decent edge, but nothing a 10-16 allied bid cant handle.

@Dark_Destroyer:

Wait, ghr2, you’re telling me that we went through 3 Alpha’s to get to a 10-16 ally bid???  :|

What rock were you living under?

So your face to face group favors a G1 Barbarossa and Japan waiting till J4?  That’s certainly a good axis strategy, but the UK player should be able to hammer Italy due to no credible Sea Lion threat and India along with ANZAC should be pulling in all the money from Dutch East Indies.  What has the UK player been doing?
Naval attacks in sea zone 97?
Land attacks in Tobruk?   
Early DOW by UK on Japan?
India and ANZAC taking DEI and DNG?
Bombing Rome or Northern Italy?
Reinforcing Gibraltar since no Sea Lion threat?
Grabbing Brazil?
Minor IC in Egypt?

It seems that you play the Europe side much like you would in like revised or something.  As UK, you would rarely build new fleet until the US is in the war.  You should have most of your focus be on egypt/middle east.  If you got a bid, try to have at least a sub in 98, and an art in sudan at minimum.  UK1 Europe generally boils down to 1 of 2 major moves: 97 attack, or 92 stack.  These both depend greatly on what germany does and maybe even what japan does round 1.

If you feel fairly safe from sealion, then usually 97 is the best.  This helps if you can easily bring canadians over and if the cruiser in 91 still lives.  Build 1 fighter and 6 infantry.  Send eveything from 98 (except transport), malta fighter, london bomber and maybe 1 fighter to 97.  If germany has air in south italy, bring the fighter, if not, then you should be fine.  Try to sink as much of the german navy as possible with your surviving navy in the Atlantic.  Sink 96 with your gib fighter and 91 cruiser.  Ethe is also a major target,  try to send the 98 transport with 1 tank 1 inf from alex, 1 mech from egypt, and the sudan units.  The cruiser off India can bombard if you desire.  If you really want to hurt him, you can use the india transport.

Try to preserve any planes if possible.  Land surviving planes on malta (they can move to egypt next round).  Stack london with air and scotland units (maybe take eire with the mech).  Stack atlantic transports off canada if possible.  Place all of build in london.

Now for 92 stack.  This works best if you are either scared about holding london, or if you have surviving fleet in 110.  This also keeps pressure on italy.  The biggest worry is the german airforce. This REALLY depends on what survived germany turn 1 and where the german air is positioned.  92 stack usually entails either airbase in gib round 1, or algeria stack.  Since italy will need to claim a landing spot for german air, you can either deny that landing spot, or have so much in 92 that germany cant kill it.  This involves UK build an airbase in gib, and the rest being for london defense from a turn 2 sealion (really depends on the transports germany has).  All navy that reaches in 92 while having the tac form 98 and the malta fig kill 96.  Then, the transport in 98 can either take persia, or pick up the malta garrison and land on gib.  If germany has no navy in range of gib, go for the persia option.  Land as much of the london air in gib as you can afford to.  This move preserves your fleet, threatens italian navy, and allows you the option to send everything home to stop sealion.  Make sure you have a blocker so the italians dont attack your navy.

If the german air is too strong, make sure you hold algeria.  Forget the Airbase and buy the 6 inf 1 fig.  Land as much in algeria as possible without making UK too vulnerable.  Stack fleet as normal.

If germany is going to hammer russia, Russia needs to by nearly all infantry(maybe some art).  Russia will also need to retreat back to moscow.  You can usually sit in bryansk for a little bit, but eventually you will be in moscow.  Only counter attack when you can make it cost effective.  You should have 60-70+ units in moscow by the end of russia turn 5 if germany is stacking bryansk.  The UK needs to quickly contain italy, and start sending planes to persia.  A factory in persia and/or egypt helps alot for this.  3-5 fighters turn 4 into persia can allow uk to reinforce moscow turn 5 if it looks like germany will hit moscow turn 6.  Try to have russia get Iraq if at all possible.  Watch our for sealion, make sure you dont leave UK naked too early.

If Japan is delaying his attack on UK/ANZ  UK should be stacking burma unless he is worried about japan hitting india or killing his stack.  Anzac should be able to fly his planes to java turn1, then india turn 2.  This depends on the japanese position at the end of his first turn.  The US should be focusing most of his cash on Japan for the first 1-2 turns with a little bit in the atlantic if you desire.  Battleships and cruisers are virtually a waste of money they are good, just not as cost effective as the other naval vessels.  You are much better off with subs, destroyers, and loaded carriers.  Try to stack hawaii US turn 1 if possible, turn 2 at the latest(2 carrier 2 sub 1 destroyer buy works best for this).  Retreat phil fleet to make queensland and fighter to guam.  Turn 2-3 your fleet should of moved to queens with anzac ready to block if needed.  Try to brign at least 1 loaded transport a turn down to queens so that you can more easily contest the dutch islands.

Anzac’s first turn buy varies.  Usually its transport with infantry.  But of Japan has a strong caroline fleet, try a fighter or a sub.  When US is sitting in queens, try to supplement it with destroyers/subs for block and fodder.  US can open the japan blocks for your subs/destroyers to kill transports in the dutch islands.  If you can spare it, make sure you have enough air to scramble in queens n such.  In some cases, Anzac can buy a carrier, but this is up to you.  If you can put your 3 starting planes in java turn 1 safely, do it.  This helps india A TON!  And it can be 3 more planes in moscow if needed.

Try to have at least 1 loaded carrier in the Atlantic for US before u would stack gib.  Take brazil, and try to have enough land units to prevent italy from taking gib or morocco if germany threatens your fleet.  When the US moves to gib, have UK buy an airbase and land fighters on gib with the new airbase.  1 cruiser, loaded carrier, scramble, 2-3 destroyers and maybe a few subs can makes your fleet very hard to crack.

Switch from playing Victory Cities to Global Domination and you’ll find it a far more balanced game. My group don’t do a bid and Allies win probably 65-70% of the time.

Yes, we went through 3 alphas to have insane bids still.  Hey, it’s not like Larry took all of MY suggestions to balance things out, though to be fair, he has commented on SOME of them so…lol.

Ah, good old Alpha 2 when America could whip Japan by itself every time and do so in a timely manner…oh well.  Gone now thankfully, but fun while it was there!  (Fine it wasn’t BY itself, Australia helped…whoopee!  Still did it everytime I could!)

Sea Lion too is gone (another Alpha 2 remnant destroyed that was created BY alpha 2.)

As for the Axis being overpowered.  I agree, it’s the proximity and lack of victory cities.  I said it a few times, but Larry didn’t want to change the map on the board I think.  I wanted Egypt to be a VC, S. Africa to be a VC, and Sikang to be a VC and to raise the number required to win for the Axis by +1 on both boards.  To lower the dmg done by adding the VCs I wanted that stoopid US NO for having all it’s continental states being unconquered toast!  (Sorry, but it’s too hard to take therefore, it’s not really at risk and if it isn’t at risk, why do you get bonuses for having it?  Does Germany get a bonus because West Germany isn’t conquered?  Does Italy get one for not having N. Italy conquered?  No.  So why does the US get one?  Both West Germany and North Italy are insanely easy to conquer compared to taking C. USA or W. USA.)  Woulda been happy if it changed so that America got it if NO American territory was conquered, woulda been FAR superior to me.

But those changes weren’t implemented and people figured out a formula for quickly snatching up VCs on one board or the other to which, the only correction is bidding units.  (Yes I’ve been going through the games, but I kinda had that figured out before release of Second Edition, since it’s essentially what we did in Revised: Enhanced as well!)  The difference is, how many units do YOU need to stop the Axis from winning?  I don’t know what I need yet, but then, I am happy to take the allies without a bid because I am that crazy.

What was so different about Alpha 2 than 3 for Japan and USA? I never understood the love for alpha 2… it was not that different in comparison to other editions.

I never got my Russia bomber. :X That was all I asked for.

Bid yourself a bomber, Cow.

And as for differences in the Pacific, not a whole helluva lot.  I wanted to see a starting Chinese artillery unit tossed in.  However, what did change were the AA Guns which arnt a HUGE deal, but they do add more complexity and KJF was always complex enough anyway.

I’m sure a minor tweak here or there could recover the KJF game, I just don’t feel like doing it right now.  lol.

For those that don’t know, KJF was never about taking Japan, it’s always a method of neutralizing Japan to pull the heat off Russia/England.  You’ll NEVER really get a chance to invade Japan, not if the defender is aware of the situation, what you CAN do is sink the Japanese fleet and park enough boats around Japan to permanently end them as a threat.

I only ever played OOB once or twice with Functionetta.  Most of my experience is with Alpha 2 and Alpha 3.

IMHO, Alpha 2 was far superior to Alpha 3.  As for SE, I don’t really see much of a use between it and Alpha 3.  But that’s just me.

ghr2 did a good job covering it DD - in general the UK/US doesn’t have the old Revised/Anniversary role of pounding on the Atlantic Wall. It’s surprising how easy it is for Germany/Italy to repel and retake even the largest continuous landings while still waging war against Russia. And if Russia has fallen, forget about it.

UK/US need to concentrate on the Med and Middle East, and getting material into Moscow. I’m just getting my eyes opened to the amazing flexibility of large quantities of US bombers… Hank and Allweneedislove have taught me the hard way  :-)

Getting rooted into the Middle East with the UK, and producing lots of infantry is a good move as well.

In the Pacific, you have to be able to move your Allied fleet forward and be able to defend your position. That means carriers and fighters. Battle for the DEI. Again, US bombers can be the icing on the cake once you’ve built a foundational fleet. I haven’t done it yet, but I’ve seen it done to me, and it’s very effective.

Jenn you did KJF to Japan players who were weak.

1. It was before my guides came out.
2. India J3 was no longer “standard” in A2 I believe. Just OOB and A1 I think.
3. I cannot think of any notable players who were remotely good at that time. Not to mention these players had to adapt to a change of strategy when they are already bad.

I mean I will admit I was pretty bad the first couple of goes I had.

They still needed to fix a huge number of things. You were really bad at that time, playing really bad people. A2 was pretty good for the axis. The AA gun changes were primarily to benefit London and India early on.

It effectively gave london 4 more hits before falling, which is super good against sea lion. Opened up more attack options for UK on round 1.
~

You can still do KJF as the allies. It is super effective and the recommended allies strategy. The AA guns actually do not benefit Japan as much as it does the allies. Cannon fodder factor for India is extremely useful especially when the allies fly in additional fighters from ANZAC etc.

Bid yourself a bomber, Cow.

Wise ass.

Rather have the bomber already on the map and players bid lower in the 6-8 range than 10-12.

I wish we still had signatures so mine could be “did KJF before it was cool!”

My KJF was always good. :P  Yes, at times there would be a flaw, something simple to correct like forgetting a sea zone to block with a destroyer, or sometimes something big like having the fleet in the wrong sea zone to counter a possible move, when one existed that met the requirement of the strategy while still countering the move.  As for “bad” playing “bad” well, doesn’t that mean the odds were pretty even, Cow?  Just a thought. Sorry, sitting here smiling, not trying to be mean, just well, defending my Alpha 2 “KJF” which, as I’ve pointed out, and people seem to be realizing, has nothing to do with taking Tokyo!  Holding the Sea of Japan (SZ 6) has and always will be a major goal of MY KJFs.

Anyway, love to hear more of this American strategic bomber strategy for Russia.  I assume it’s a matter of building small amounts over time and working them over so that they can run strategic missions and later be fodder for Russia?

I never said anything about taking Tokyo.

The sz 6 thing is situational, but very effective when it works out. It is a good spot to choo choo fighters to Russia to make it hold while convoying Japan hard.

I do buy carriers one round and the fighters the next just to surge that zone at times. However if Japan has a naval base and airbase in the FIC area, holding that seazone is rough.

I have seen Japan turtle hard enough to prevent the the US from being able to contain it for a while.

@ghr2:

I have seen Japan turtle hard enough to prevent the the US from being able to contain it for a while.

I really have trouble understanding this sentence

turtle = sitting building -> no need for containing

do you mean building subs and DDs and sitting outside vietnam, controlling DEI?

or do you mean building infs for tokyo?

or do you mean something else?