Am I the only one pissed that this has turned into a KGF?

Japan can forgo the invasion of the Philippines as you describe, but I think they must at least sink the Philippines DD and transport with their BB. If I’m Japan I can’t send that BB to India, no matter what’s happening there.

Well, Japan can either attack that DD+trs with ftr from Formosa + DD from Carolines or divert 2 ftrs from the Midway force and forgo sinking the DD+trs off West Coast. But sending that BB to India is probably still very risky since it’s a big part of the Japanese naval dominance in the beginning-> USA will have a field day if only 2 CV+4ftr will be left vs. the entire USA Pacific fleet!

The more I play, the more convinced I am that the reason people are thinking the Axis have an advantage in the '41 scenario is because they are trying the same old KGF strategy. A US Pacific strategy is not only possible, but IMO, necessary. Japan makes entirely too much money, too quickly, for the Allies to allow her to translate that into pounding the Russians and the Brit holdings with impunity.

A US Pacific strategy basically forces the Japanese to respond in kind or else risk losing her high value islands and bonus money. Japan starts with an advantage in fleet strength (considerable after J1), but she has to split her attention (and income) between China, pressuring Russia, conquering the British holdings, and countering a US Pacific build. If you remove the threat of a US Pacific fleet, Japan can go hog wild on the other goals.

Conversely I do not believe that the US and Britain coordinate as well in the Atlantic as they did in AAR. Maybe it more perception than reality but it seems far easier for Germany/Italy to defend against US/Britain than it did in AAR. My guess is that that is intentional.

It will be interesting to see how this shapes up in the future, but my instinct is that the game is actually quite well balanced in '41… ;)

@Uncle_Joe:

Maybe it more perception than reality but it seems far easier for Germany/Italy to defend against US/Britain than it did in AAR. My guess is that that is intentional.

really? i felt that by splitting Finland and Norway up into 2 seperate territories, and doing the same with France and Northern Europe, that this forces Germany to defend on even more fronts

still, i enjoy the challenge

Thats true, there is more territory to defend, but its the turn sequence that messes with the coordination. Those additional territories are probably necessary to give the Allies a chance, given the new mechanics. The order of play makes it harder for the US/UK to coordinate because the Axis get a small reaction (Italy) in between the US and UK’s turns (unlike in AAR). Also, that same sequence allows for a 1-2 punch from Italy followed up by a knock out from the German Fighters/Bombers if Allies leave their fleet at all exposed.

Also keep in mind that all of the transports that the US/UK have to buy now are no longer ‘armor’. That means they have to invest a lot more to protect them than ever before. Couple that with Bombers being cheaper and it makes it harder to keep the fleet safe (and the ‘auto-dead’ transports mean more payoff for the Axis if they win a battle).

I’m ont saying its impossible to coordinate the US/UK into a KGF strategy, but its certainly not the no-brainer it was in prior editions.

@Uncle_Joe:

Also, that same sequence allows for a 1-2 punch from Italy followed up by a knock out from the German Fighters/Bombers if Allies leave their fleet at all exposed.

Very true, but even more deadly on land (against Russia).

I’ve noticed this in my first two games so far, that you have to be extremely careful in how you defend Moscow/Cauc because Italy can tank blitz to take out one of the territories to the west of Mos or Cauc and Germany can then Blitz right in.  You have to be very careful of a German stack in Epl (I think that is the space), b/c 1-2 Ita armor with 1 ftr can wipe out 1-2 blocking inf and Germany might be able to blitz right to Mos.  The US is usually not in postion to be able to block this in the first 5-6 rounds.

JTDTM wont work in AA50–'41 or '42. That strat is dead now, IMHO. Not enough time for Japan to build an army capable of threatening the Russian backdoor.

Well no one ever said the Jap tank drive has to go along the Northern route. Even in Revised the Northern route was usually the least effective, with most players pushing South or Center rather than North. All I can see is that there are still 5 Russian IPCs to be had up North, and not much to deter the Japs from going after them.

The Axis still don’t have a real way to win that doesn’t involve Moscow/Caucasus, so I don’t see the JTDTM strategy going anywhere anytime soon. It might take on a more India focused dimension, but the Japs will still be hurling tanks at Russia and pressuring the back door. Its pretty much unavoidable, given the way the game is set up.

We’d need a much more substantive change than a few extra territories between Moscow and Manchuria, to prevent this from happening. Also, if you unload into Soviet Far East directly from sz 63 instead of through Bury, its still only 5 moves to Moscow via the Northern Route (same as the South or Center) so it wouldn’t surprise me at all to see a regular Jap stack in Evenki, even if it is a little smaller this time around.

I think the only way Russia really has to worry about a massive Japanese attack is if the USA allows it by committing to KGF. Even at 50+ IPCs a turn, Japan does not have enough money to effectively fight a major US effort in the Pacific AND pressure Russia AND finish off the British in Asia (at least not without a lot of luck…).

Personally I think more frightening to Russia is the spectre of 5-6 Japanese bombers flying in and wrecking Russia’s factories turn after turn. And that can happen a LOT faster than any Japanese ground assault if they are left unmolested in the Pacific. Even if a few Japanese bombers go down to AA fire, Russia simply cannot afford to be rebuilding her factories when she is fighting for her life against Germany. And Japan can begin doing that in force on J4 (at the outside) if the US ignores them.

As powerful as bombers are in this edition, their lack of defense still makes them a luxury (especially in the Pacific). If Japan is being pressured by the US, she cant heavily build them and even if she does, they cant be used inland without falling behind at sea. And Japan’s income is pretty much a house of cards. If the US can take back just 2 of those islands, the IPC swing is massive. The Allies start gaining bonus money and Japan is in danger of losing it. If Japan doesnt match the US, her whole econ can unravel fairly quickly.

If you havent tried a US Pacific strat, I highly recommend trying it, especially if you are currently of the opinion that the Axis have an advantage in 41. Our experience is that its a very well balanced game and that honestly the pressure is on the Axis more than the Allies. And the key to that is to NOT do KGF with the US and keep Japan in check instead.

@Uncle_Joe:

If you havent tried a US Pacific strat, I highly recommend trying it, especially if you are currently of the opinion that the Axis have an advantage in 41. Our experience is that its a very well balanced game and that honestly the pressure is on the Axis more than the Allies. And the key to that is to NOT do KGF with the US and keep Japan in check instead.

Without the NO’s, I think a pacific strat is very doable as Germany does not become too big too fast.

Subs are cheap and very offensive minded.  Just don’t base any sort of ‘fleet’ mainly on them.

Lately its been working for me as allies to invade north africa with Patton on turn 1 and use my airpower and some newly built naval forces in the atlantic to destroy Italy’s pitiful little navy.  You will need english support in this and it can all go afoul if germans get airpower techs.

Its not Japan killing russia you need to worry about, it germany killing them that is the worry.  Whenever the germans are making 50+ IPC after turn 2, russia’s 30 cant keep up.  And yes the UK can annoy germany, but then italy gets africa and theres 20 IPCs coming at russia from them. (and dont underestimate the royal pain it is when there is a stack of germany tanks on East Poland with 2 italian tanks, and Italy has two transports and three shore shots at the caucaus).

When playing with NOs on you get 4 turns to seriously pressure germany, if you dont russia will fall to german tanks.

It seems the allies have a choice, let germany get huge, or let japan get huge.  There is no way to keep them from getting all 3 of there NOs by turn 3, and keeping them, without ignoring one of them.  I personally feel while NOs are an interesting idea, there current implementation is flawed.  Getting all 3 NOs should happen mid to late game for all nations, not turn 2.

I don’t see why you would be pissed… there are many mechanics in A&A, since the beginning, that have made KGF the best strategy.  As long as these mechanics remain, so will KGF.  Amazingly, Enhanced completely cured KGF  :-D Too bad the official game can’t do it right.  The only thing that pissed me off was when I found out what victory cities were chosen, saw one in Canada, and facepalmed hard  :-P

As there are 4 types of playing (1941 w/ NO, 1942 w/ NO, both without) it will be hard to make a definite assessment of balance, but I still can’t wait for TripleA to get AA50.  If you doubt the power of KGF, I’ll see you online and show you a thing or two  :lol:

@Rakeman:

I don’t see why you would be pissed… there are many mechanics in A&A, since the beginning, that have made KGF the best strategy.  As long as these mechanics remain, so will KGF.  Amazingly, Enhanced completely cured KGF  :-D Too bad the official game can’t do it right.  The only thing that pissed me off was when I found out what victory cities were chosen, saw one in Canada, and facepalmed hard  :-P

As there are 4 types of playing (1941 w/ NO, 1942 w/ NO, both without) it will be hard to make a definite assessment of balance, but I still can’t wait for TripleA to get AA50.  If you doubt the power of KGF, I’ll see you online and show you a thing or two  :lol:

Triple A already has AA:50. Granted, it’s an unstable version, but it works perfect. Just some minor bugs in really complex battle situations, but nothing that can’t overcome the -edit-function.

@Woodstock:

@Rakeman:

I don’t see why you would be pissed… there are many mechanics in A&A, since the beginning, that have made KGF the best strategy.  As long as these mechanics remain, so will KGF.  Amazingly, Enhanced completely cured KGF  :-D Too bad the official game can’t do it right.  The only thing that pissed me off was when I found out what victory cities were chosen, saw one in Canada, and facepalmed hard  :-P

As there are 4 types of playing (1941 w/ NO, 1942 w/ NO, both without) it will be hard to make a definite assessment of balance, but I still can’t wait for TripleA to get AA50.  If you doubt the power of KGF, I’ll see you online and show you a thing or two  :lol:

Triple A already has AA:50. Granted, it’s an unstable version, but it works perfect. Just some minor bugs in really complex battle situations, but nothing that can’t overcome the -edit-function.

Oh that’s good to know… I did read they are working on a more stable version to be released soon.

I hate to say it but I feel KGF is alive and well especially with NOs.  The reason is Russia.  In a proper KGF Russia should have an income of atleast 40 IPC if not more. (+5 for fin/nor / +15 NOs).  This allows Russia to survive against Japan for a good amount of time.  Whereas in a KJF game, Russia is usually reduced to around 20-25 IPCs, even less once you start landing UK/US figs in moscow to keep it alive, while germany is making 50-60+ and italy 10-20+.

Also, while on paper it looks easier to defend against KGF with Italy, that is just not true!  It is even more difficult esp with the value of France.  It is easy for the US to threaten Italy and retake africa / meeting the japs in egypt while the UK trades france or poland or wherever they want to be.  Then you can threaten to do a double drop on France to take and hold, or threaten Italy, or threaten germany forcing the germans to pull back from russia.  Add in some SBR for good measure and Europe is yours.  It just takes some skilled Russian play in pushing Germany back by T3-4.

On top of that, Japan makes more money than the US by the end of turn 3 no matter what you do and there is absolutely no way to defend southern asia or keep china in the game.  Well I suppose you could abandon moscow, but yeah bad idea.  Oh and good luck defending Russia from 70 IPCs of Germany/Italy with can openers and all that Jazz.

Add in the fact that most German openings leave a portion of the UK fleet alive, try to threaten Karelia with overwhelming force, and only leave token troops on France and why wouldn’t you go after them?  Add to that the fact that Japan’s opening moves typically pose absolutely no threat to anyone (other than IPCs you cant defend anyway!) until J3 at the earliest, usually not until J4, and why wouldn’t you ignore them?

I really think the key to stopping KGF is to rethink typical G/J turn 1 moves.  To what I don’t know, but right now Germany screams “kill me or I kill russia” and Japan screams “i’m huge but can’t reach just yet”.  I’m also speaking of when NOs are being used.

@bugoo:

I hate to say it but I feel KGF is alive and well especially with NOs.  The reason is Russia.  In a proper KGF Russia should have an income of atleast 40 IPC if not more. (+5 for fin/nor / +15 NOs).  This allows Russia to survive against Japan for a good amount of time.  Whereas in a KJF game, Russia is usually reduced to around 20-25 IPCs, even less once you start landing UK/US figs in moscow to keep it alive, while germany is making 50-60+ and italy 10-20+.

Also, while on paper it looks easier to defend against KGF with Italy, that is just not true!  It is even more difficult esp with the value of France.  It is easy for the US to threaten Italy and retake africa / meeting the japs in egypt while the UK trades france or poland or wherever they want to be.  Then you can threaten to do a double drop on France to take and hold, or threaten Italy, or threaten germany forcing the germans to pull back from russia.  Add in some SBR for good measure and Europe is yours.  It just takes some skilled Russian play in pushing Germany back by T3-4.

On top of that, Japan makes more money than the US by the end of turn 3 no matter what you do and there is absolutely no way to defend southern asia or keep china in the game.  Well I suppose you could abandon moscow, but yeah bad idea.  Oh and good luck defending Russia from 70 IPCs of Germany/Italy with can openers and all that Jazz.

Add in the fact that most German openings leave a portion of the UK fleet alive, try to threaten Karelia with overwhelming force, and only leave token troops on France and why wouldn’t you go after them?  Add to that the fact that Japan’s opening moves typically pose absolutely no threat to anyone (other than IPCs you cant defend anyway!) until J3 at the earliest, usually not until J4, and why wouldn’t you ignore them?

I really think the key to stopping KGF is to rethink typical G/J turn 1 moves.  To what I don’t know, but right now Germany screams “kill me or I kill russia” and Japan screams “i’m huge but can’t reach just yet”.  I’m also speaking of when NOs are being used.

KGF certainly isn’t dead, but to my liking, it depends too much on the dice.
Here’s what I mean:

In a KGF game, Japan is totally ignored. Japan will grow huge, and be knocking on Moscow’s door at turn 6,7 with enormous force, and then it’s Game Over.

So this means, that in any KGF game, the Allies MUST have taken Berlin by turn 6.
And to my knowledge and experience, that’s not an easy task, especially against some decent Axis players.

My games always go as follows when I am Axis, and the Allies are going KGF.
I open agressive on Russia with all land units, and all air and sea units are used to set GB 1 step back. I even invest in some Baltic navy to hold UK back a bit more.

Sure, Russia is now in a luxury position, with no German reinforcements available untill G3. But Russia will soon be stretched thin, and the German/Russian front will fall into a back and forth game.
At the mean time the UK and USA are prepping for an invasion, being pestered by German and Italian navy and air.

At around turn 4, Japan is annoying USA through the Pacific, next to slowly creeping up on Moscow.
By the time Germany slowly gets into trouble because all it’s navy and air is gone, and Russia finally is getting it’s big bonuses etc…they have to turn around to face the Japanese threat.

And thus…as the Allies…I will never go for a KGF, and I am frantically looking for other ways to deal with the Axis.
I do know, that when I am faced with a UK and USA threat as Japan in the Pacific…things definitely don’t go as smoothly as I hoped they would…

in 1942 KJF is possible, with and without NO’s
biggest problem with KJF isn’t japanese navy, but german panzerwaffe
if they take moscow, allies are pretty fucked
UK should fix on germany, and be in the baltic sea

The main reason it is KGF is because G is harder to ignore.  If the allies were to go KJF then Germany would become much to hard to kill.  A godzilla japan is easier to kill with a compined allied effort.  Sure once Germany falls then the allies go after Japan it is not going to go well for the allies for a few rounds untill they liberate/take high value terrirtories and reduce the japanese inductrial might.  While germany is harder to ignore because the allies would lose Russia and a german monster would have pretty much killed UK off.  You would basically end up with with a fight between USA, Germany, and Italy. From there on it would only be a matter of time before the US then falls because it would be nearly impossible to liberate either the UK or Russia with a huge German tank/ air force on land and a large navy.  The best option is to go KGF.

Nope. KGF is NOT a option if Japan goes Polar Express. Japan only can be ignored if Japan also wants ignore USA, a bad option for Japan

by the time japan has an effective enough force to really threaten the US (maybe 4 turns while they expand in the south pacific) the combined forces of both the US and Britian have nearly killed germany.  At this point the US can now ignore europe and fight the Japanese back while Britian and the USSR finish off Germany/Italy in a couple turns or two.  Then even if the US is weaken to such an extent that it can bearly defend the EUS, the UK can help defend while the USSR and small/medium sized UK task force economically cripples Japan.

with all the complaints about AA games being so unbalanced and ahistorical, why is it when it comes to that the historical example of KGF  or KIGF that it is then spat upon when played ingame?  But then when all the Axis gang up on Russia it is derided because it’s ahistorical?  WTF?  It’s a game, once you start playing it, you’ve changed history!

from a strategic view who wouldn’t want to gang up 3 on 1 (or 2, sorry Italy) rather than fight everywhere and spread yourself thin?  It may have been a world war in the fact that war happened everywhere around the world…just not at the same time.

Don’t play LL and be alert to the weaknesses of the enemy. Japan probably is in a better position in AA50 than earlier versions to legitimately make the Allies pay attention to them the whole time.  And if that’s not enough, I’m in favor of switching and having someone else play the Axis.  (insert mischievous laughter)

EDIT-may have to swing over and see how the balance thread is going…