How do you stop kgf??? any new ideas?

@domanmacgee said in Stopping the Allies?:

@thedesertfox Are you playing with NOs on or off? As @OLA mentioned, which side is favored in the 41 setup swings based on whether NOs are being used. Off = Allied-favored, On = Axis-favored. It boils down to the starting income gap being easier to mitigate when Axis have access to their NOs.

Not sure if German navy is the right way of going about things. In higher level games it’s usually Japan that ends up winning the game for the Axis while Germany/Italy hold the line.

I’ll add the following rule-of-thumb.

Assuming every other option is off,

no options on: slight Allies advantage interceptors on: balanced National Objectives on: marked Axis advantage

Using Low Luck (a popular house rule) possibly balances the game when played with no options on or else gives an additional slight advantage to the Axis.

As my opinion:

The US has to harass Japan as fast as possible, while Germany has its weak times, just in the first three rounds. germany usually lacks infantery on turn 2 to push their offense against the USSR.
So the US builds up a medium sized fleet in the Pacific. (including at least 2 loaded transport). Keep the fleet slightly out of range of the main japanese airforce/fleet but position to take a money island or two, remove a national objective from Japan, etc. Force them to defend a lot of places (eventually leaving one vulnerable for an attack) or force them to try to come after your fleet (1 turn the japanese fleet/airforce moves out of position) and fall back. Therefore you do not need a decesive victroy, but distract Japan from its main objectives. Maybe you have to sacrifice your pacific navy to an combined airforce and naval attack by Japan, as major distraction.
The difficult seems to be, when to turn your attention to the atlantic. If its too late then its game over.

The main point is the following:
You are forced to react on the Japanese opening round. Is Japan going straight after India, is Japan trying to take the islands first or is japan going for Russia?
UK and China should try to whittle down the japanese ground forces, while the US needs to build up some fleet, to force Japan to invest into expensive and not too useful warships.

Agains a KGF the key to win is to be aggressive with Japan. UK should not have more then 25 IPC in round 3.

For Japan to go via China is not a good idea. A threat against Caucasus is the counterattack.

Factory in French Indochina, Burma, India. Take Australia with a small fleet and deny US NO in Pacific. Factory on East Indies or Borneo is to far away. With 60 ICP+ Japan should have 5 factories on main land. Ftr to Europe and SBR Russia.

KGF is normally not a good move for allied. Axis has ha 60-65% chance to win. Japan can easily get 80 IPC and quickly take Russia. Logistics with inf from Japan is a bad strategy in almost any situation. You need factories on main land.

French Indochina is the best one to build turn 1. Burma and Manchuria turn 2 and India turn 3 if Japan doesn’t have any resistance from US.

What do do with G and I. Mix of troops (more then 8 ftr/brb is not good. Inf-tanks is important and always produce maximum HP in G) is important with G. Fleet (will normally not be possible) and HP is important with I. If UK is poor due to Japan SBR UK is good. If possible both with G and J ( yes you read right, J and not I).

@ww2freak:

I don’t quite follow why Persia is so strategic…does no one build a facility in India for UK anymore?  just have the Russkies (with support) defend Persia??

Allot depends on what Germany has done on G1.

Did they buy all tanks?  Did they attack Egypt?  Are any UK units left alive there?

If Germany gives the allies some time by buying inf, and/or not attacking Egypt, then the allies might consider an IC for UK in India.  USA would most likely need to come hard after Japan then to keep Japan from being able to focus all her might on taking the UK Indian IC.

This can be a very fine balance for the allies to employ.  but if you can pull it off, it does seem to be a pretty strong game plan.  Hope the russians defend well enough, they need to hold out until UK/USA assistance arrives

Let the Italians Hold France, and Keep Germany in a Position to fight Russia and be able to push the Allies off of France if Italy Fails to Hold.  Italy, if they lose france should be able to Weaken the Invasion forces enough to the opoint where GE can easily take it back without spending to much of their Resources on it. Then Keep pusshing the Italians back In for the Defence

Keep in mind that SUM can be used for naval and acft builds…. no transports needed.

@bugoo:

‘The problem is this sets up a deadly dance.’

:-o

@Subotai:

Another fact is that with a global war game which takes 3-9 hours to finish, it can never be even semi-realistic, or else it would be a very boring game which no one would want to play, and then only the balance could be realistic. The other option is to do this in a sophisticated computer game.

I think we should rather complain about the gameplay issues, rather than AA50 being to a-historical.

But there are some exceptions, as some rule changes are both easy and historical, as closing of the Dardanelles, but then all the other straits should have the same rules, as according to history.

I think you may be referring to the scope of the realism of the game.  All the AA games are semi-realistic to begin with as they ‘abstractions’ of the war.

What is complained about though is how so many people seem to go after Europe first as the Allies.  The fact that they did this historically is true.  But when it happens in the game, it’s what is derided.  That’s all I was saying.  We don’t like how the Axis win by a-historically sandwiching Russia but we also don’t like how the Allies historically win by surrounding Germany/Italy.  We live in a funky world of ideas, and possibly not sure which side is up.

What’s strange is that it is considered that the Axis have the advantage in '41 and it takes the Allies working together to win so when we ask, ‘why has the game turned into KGIF?’ it’s possibly because it’s the only way to win, it’s desperation.  KGIF is more viable because of the proximity of the Allied powers to the Euro theater of the game.  If Germany/Italy had the ability to stalemate the Allies on their income alone the game is way out of whack, but generally speaking in my experience, they don’t and have to use their advantage early to win before the Allies get into full swing.