Allied Strategy Discussion

[Dago]

Pretty solid Veqryn. Something to consider though on slowing down the Japanese surge –

This is no way a KJF strategy because nearly all funds will be for the eastern US. 1-2 cruisers (depending on how well your subs did) for the pacific should be sufficient.

Keep the US pacific fleet in tact and eventually combine it with the SZ20 destroyer, UK SZ35 carrier/fighter (US Hawaii fighter lands on carrier later), and the SZ40 sub as strictly a defensive move. Strategic bomb Southern Europe with US bomber Rd2 and land it in the Caucasus.

For this strategy to be effective you have to capture a coastal Japanese island (preferably the Philippine Islands). First UK move, assault Borneo with 2 men. This disrupts a complex being built in French Indo-China because it puts Caucasus US bombers in range. But depending on where the Japanese build a complex later, the same strategy of taking the coastal island applies just move the bomber respectively after Japanese bombing run… Cruiser takes out the transport, and the carrier retreats to south africa.

Take the UK carrier through the bottom SZs staying out of range of being attacked by Japanese air power and combine with the US fleet as early as New Guinea (or the backside of Australia depending on where the Japanese fleet/bomber is). The UK carrier and sub will shadow all US assaults providing much needed defense. With the threat of US bombers hitting the Japanese fleet it creates a stalemate in the south pacific/indian oceans. If the Japanese attacks your fleet you’re going to lose but possibly be left with an open shot at Japanese transports. But if the US attacks the Japanese with everything you’re going to win.

As soon as you know you can’t hold off the Japanese off in Sinkiang or with your fleet anymore, get reserve vessels from the Mediterranean and take initiative.

Pros:
Nostalgia (it’s a good enough reason for me)
The starting allied forces get involved in the war quicker.
IPCs… It’s a nice bonus.
Effective at manipulating where the Japanese can use assaults in the indian ocean.

Cons:
US has to build an Atlantic fleet to compensate.
UK is low on Persian/Indian infantry. (Japanese battleships assaulting the coast theyre dead men walking anyway)

Everything else has worked for me. Although I stress the importance of the Russians going after Norway rd1 because getting that German fighter out of the game is pretty big.

[Veqryn]

Here is what has to happen for me to decide to try a Pacific USA strategy (don’t call it KJF because Japan will never die):

Russia has to do pretty well on the Eastern Front during their turn and during Germany’s turn.
UK has to do really well in Africa, since they will not be getting your support there.
UK has to move their Indian fleet West.
Japan has to lose at least 1 boat and 1 fighter during their turn
Japan has to move their East Indies fleet 2 moves West.  This usually means they crush the British fleet off of the Sinai Peninsula and horn of africa, but it really does not matter where, so long as it is 2 moves West.
Japan has to move their Battleship or Carrier to Hawaii, along with their Cruiser too (though if they move all 3 plus the sub, they might be too powerful to destroy if you don’t roll well, which would cancel this strat).
Japan has to not purchase any navy first turn.

I would then purchase as America either: 1 Carrier 3 Subs 1 Fighter, or 2 Carriers 1 Sub 1 Destroyer, or 1 BB 1 Carrier 1 Destroyer, or something like this
Then, I would attack Japan’s BB/Carrier plus Cruiser plus sub if it is there with your 2 fighter, 1 bomber, 1 BB, 1 Sub (assuming you submerged it)
If Japan has 1 BB, 1 Cruiser, 1 Sub at Hawaii, you have a 94-98% chance of winning depending on if you have the sub still.
If Japan has 1 BB, 1 Carrier, 1 Fighter, 1 Cruiser, 1 Sub, you have only a 56% chance of winning assuming you have the sub.  I would still attack.  If it goes well, then you do Pac strat, if you fail, you place purchase in Atl.
If Japan has 2 Fighter, 1 BB, 1 CV, 1 CC, 1 Sub, you are screwed and only have a 20% chance of winning, so I would not take it.

If you lose any more than your Submarine and a fighter, I would go ahead and abandon this strategy and place your purchase in the Atlantic, unless you destroyed a BB and Carrier in the process.
If you you only the Submarine, I would place your purchase in the Pacific and say a prayer.
If you lose the sub and a fighter, well, its up to you.

Basically, Japan has 4 capital ships as well as 6 fighter, 1 bomber, 2 other navy units, and a very good position.  The only way you will succeed in your Pacific strategy is to kill 1 of the Capital ships, kill the 2 other navy units (sub and cruiser), have one of her fighters die somewhere, and have 2 of her capital ships far out of position so that they can not be used for several turns.  By killing the BB at Hawaii, and by having her other BB and carrier tied up near Egypt (can get back to Japan by end of J3), this will give you approximately 2 more turns to catch up in Navy to Japan.

You will be making 38 a round, Japan will be making about the same after 2 rounds.
Japan has 3 capital ships to your 1 capital ship + whatever you just bought
Japan has 2x more fighters than you. (this is huge, you will never overcome this part)
And it is Japan’s turn… (meaning they are about to buy more, and have the initiative)

It is still an uphill battle, but your objective is mostly just to make Japan play stupidly and make her forget about her western front.  The best you can do is to Take Borneo, East Indies, and sink the Japanese fleet with 1 surviving unit on your side, all by turn 7 or so.  Most likely, you will take just 1 Island and will lose your entire fleet, but will be successful in distracting Japan and making her Western assault go very poorly.

[Veqryn]

So off of the Japan strategy stuff for a bit….

Here is something rather nice for the 1942 game:
because of the changed rules for transports and subs, the German Med fleet just got a lot weaker.

If Germany either abandons africa, or they do not roll well during their attack on Egypt (meaning they don’t take it, or they take it with only 1 unit left), and Germany did not buy any more Med navy units…
Then the UK could try to sink the BB with just a fighter and bomber, and if they succeed the UK should purchase an Egypt IC at the first available opportunity.

The bomber from england plus the fighter from india (plus your fighter from egypt if alive, but most likely not) would have a 60% chance of killing the BB AND transport with just the bomber left, and a 20% chance of killing just the BB and losing both planes thereby leaving the transport alive, and lastly, a 20% chance of doing nothing at all since the BB repairs.  Could be worth it.

[Flintlock]

@Veqryn:

If Germany either abandons africa, or they do not roll well during their attack on Egypt (meaning they don’t take it, or they take it with only 1 unit left), and Germany did not buy any more Med navy units….
Then the UK could try to sink the BB with just a fighter and bomber, and if they succeed the UK should purchase an Egypt IC at the first available opportunity.

The bomber from england plus the fighter from india (plus your fighter from egypt if alive, but most likely not) would have a 60% chance of killing the BB AND transport with just the bomber left, and a 20% chance of killing just the BB and losing both planes thereby leaving the transport alive, and lastly, a 20% chance of doing nothing at all since the BB repairs.  Could be worth it.

I did this w/the UK, and the next game it was done to me.  It was extremely effective, in both cases, slowing down Germany.  Unfortunately for the allies, in both cases, atrocious roles later in the game did them in.

Still, if you can take out the Med fleet in conjunction with an Egypt IC that would be beastly.

[Veqryn]

just thought i’d add this:

i played a game today against a guy who really kicked my ass
it was mostly luck, as he won a couple 95% plus battles between germany and russia, but he DID have an interesting purchase/play:

Buy a Submarine as Russia and place it in the Med
(and leave your 2 fighters in the caucasus)

what can you do with that you ask?
well, unless Germany keeps her fleet in SZ14 AND buys a destroyer, THEN

you can destroy the german MED fleet.

yes, this does mean russia is out 2 infantry…. but you have just made short work of the med, so the UK and USA can support you a lot sooner in europe rather than wasting their time kicking germany out of africa
it also means that if he decides to leave his fleet in sz14, then you have control over the suez, which means you can sail the UK fleet right through into the med,
while if he does take egypt, you get to take it back during uk turn 1, and germany will never threaten africa again.

in my game i kind of thought, well he just wasted 6 ipcs, I’m going to take my african guys and drop them off in Ukraine instead.
this might have worked, except as i said before, the UK just sailed into the med.  This left japan with not enough targets and too many fighters, essentially wasting their turn 1.  Russia did have some trouble dealing with the extra 2 units per turn, that would have otherwise been sent to africa each turn, but if she can hold out for 3 turns then the UK should have been able to drop off some goodies to keep germany busy and counteract that.

[Zhukov44]

@Veqryn:

just thought i’d add this:

i played a game today against a guy who really kicked my a**
it was mostly luck, as he won a couple 95% plus battles between germany and russia, but he DID have an interesting purchase/play:

Buy a Submarine as Russia and place it in the Med
(and leave your 2 fighters in the caucasus)

it also means that if he decides to leave his fleet in sz14, then you have control over the suez, which means you can sail the UK fleet right through into the med,
while if he does take egypt, you get to take it back during uk turn 1, and germany will never threaten africa again.

in my game i kind of thought, well he just wasted 6 ipcs, I’m going to take my african guys and drop them off in Ukraine instead….

Yes, I’ve also came across that, perhaps against the same oppo (M-S).  It’s a neat move.  However, I’m not convinced it’s a stronger move than waiting until UK2 for a more secure attack by air.  It’s definitely a good move for Allies if they can clip the fleet without losing a Russian fighter, but more than 50% it should cost em a fighter (unless Russia buys a 3rd fig R1).  So….that means the Ruskies are potentially down 16 ipcs worth of units plus they didn’t use their figs for trading on R2.

Bottom line is that given a lesser (or no) bid and the weak Med fleet, Germany should have a hard time of it in Africa.  This gives Allies a long-term economic advantage if they can hold on to Russia.  Of course, Japan can contest Africa, but diverting resources there always involves a trade-off.

[Veqryn]

I think you overstated it when you said 50% chance of losing a fighter… so i did the numbers:

1st round
Attack rolls for 2 fighters and 1 submarine
42% or 5/12 for 2 or three hits
42% or 5/12 for 1 hit
17% or 2/12 for zero hits

Defense rolls for BB:
67% or 8/12 for 1 hit (lose submarine)
33% or 4/12 for zero hits

So you have a 42% chance of sinking BB first round, and a 58% chance of going to the second round.  Of those going to the second round, 29% have no hits on the BB while 71% have 1 hit on the BB; and 67% you have lost a submarine

2nd round with submarine without hits on BB: 2/21 = 10% chance
Same as first round

2nd round with submarine with hit on BB: 5/21 = 24% chance
83% or 10/12 for 1 or more hits attacking
67% or 4/6 for 1 hit defending

2nd round without submarine without hits on BB: 4/21 = 19% chance
25% chance for 2 hits attacking
50% chance for 1 hit attacking
25% chance for no hits attacking
67% chance for 1 hit defending

2nd round without submarine with hit on BB: 10/21 = 48% chance
75% chance for 1 or more hits attacking
25% chance for no hits attacking
67% chance for 1 hit defending

Play these numbers out a bit and you have 32% that you will lose 1 or more fighters.
Success rate for this btl is 90%, with average of 1.7-1.8 units left.

While this is a great move, its also a huge a gamble, and I am not one to gamble with Russia.  If russia screws this one up (and that is easy since there is a low number of units involved), you are really dead.  If the UK screws up, its not the end of the world…

[Zhukov44]

Yes…my bad…32% is right.  Didn’t take account of the sub’s 1st strike ability and that the bb might miss.

Worth it?  Maybe.  If Allies are going to gamble then they might even consider attacking right away on UK1 with a fig plus a bomber.  R1 sub buy + R2 attack is less risky, though it would be utterly devastating  if you catch the 10% and fail.

What makes hitting the German fleet before G2 extra tempting is that the presence of German subs makes it very tough to reinforce Africa early on.

[Col.Stauffenberg]

A friend tried this on me but he used two subs. I thought he was done for and I might have been able to beat him if I bought just land forces but I went with an AC in the Baltic in a bid for defense and to try and get back into Africa. I even botched the RD1 attack on the atlantic UK navy and he kept his BB. Still I did get back into Africa by about round 4. OUr game wound up being epic, over 15 rounds but eventually Japan was taken out because he always throws everthing he can at Japan (and somehow it usually works for him). I even had India as Japan, and Caucus as Germany but not on the same round. It was a crazy game.

[Veqryn]

Well, the Med fleet is weaker because the transport can’t defend.  But the allies are also weaker because unlike revised they can not land round 1 in algeria (under normal conditions) with anything more than a suicide fleet.

So we have a UK1 option of attacking with a fighter and bomber, 80% chance kill BB or better, 40% chance no attackers left.
A Russia 2 option, of attacking with a sub and two fighters, 90% chance kill BB or better, 32% chance 1 fighter dies, (4% all die, 6% lose)
And we have a UK2 “safe” option, which can take many many forms, but does mean that Germany will probably have 1 tank, 1 art, 2 inf in an Egypt with no allied units until they hit either persia or kenya.  I hate having german units in africa and having chasing them around for 4 turns.  Buying bombers as the UK means not buying fleet and transport and units…
And lastly, we have a USA/UK3 option, which usually involves landing a big force round 2 in africa and then killing the german fleet round 3 and landing more in africa (second landing in africa can get turned into a landing in italy round 4).

For the UK2 option, you could buy a bomber or more, which would give you at least 2 bombers plus a fighter to hit the german med fleet with.
The only other issue here would be that in order for this to line up, you need to have either egypt or transjordan as belonging to you at the beginning of UK2, which means that you have to take back egypt on UK1 from the germans.  This is normally done anyway, so this isn’t an issue.

What do you guys who like to do the UK2 option like to buy on UK1?
I am guessing: 1 bomber, 2 Destroyers, save 2 ipcs.  Or 1 bomber, 1 Carrier, save 4 ipcs.
It kind of sucks because the germans will have 2 submarines, 1 bomber, and at least 2 fighters within range of your new fleet.  by buying a bomber as the UK, your fleet is weak as heck and can be taken out, even if you have the USA cruiser join it.  I guess you could buy 1 bomber, save 18 ipcs, and send your lone transport on a suicide mission to algeria/norway, or have him sit off washington dc.

[Zhukov44]

Good analysis.  One more factor in the UK2 attack is you could fly some figs to W. Russia and/or Moscow and/or F. West Africa…this is common in Revised.  So you don’t necessarily have to buy a bomber UK1 tho bombers are quite useful anyway.  Along with that, maybe send a Russian army into Persia R1 so you can hold Jordan G2 and then reinforce with the India garrison UK2.  But this assumes a successful Egypt counter on UK1 which doesn’t always happen.

Re. the R2 option, if 2 figs 1 sub is too risky one might buy a fig or bomber R1 to bolster the attack…but then the trade-off is whether Russia will be too weak on the ground to withstand a tank rush.

[Col.Stauffenberg]

I’m in the middle of a game where I was really putting the hurt to the axis for the first four rounds but suddenly he broke out and is making some huge money this turn with both powers. I still have an Indian IC, and a huge US Navy that’s just started island hopping, but I’ve lost africa for the time being and he built a med navy and a baltic navy as germany. Russia is surrounded but with minimal forces.

This was my first attempt at a KJF. The question I’m posing is, can the allies overcome a big economic advantage from the axis? Is it better to be aggresive or patient when this happens?

[Romulus]

Independently from being Allies or Axis the economic avantage may be leveraged to acheive victory, so, imho, operations in A&A must be planned in term of strategy but also economic factor should be considered.

The sudden broke out you mention maybe is the result of a constant Axis build up, possibile thanks to economic gaining.

In the specific situation, as alredy pointed out in preceding intervention the Allied objectives could be:

• USA aim to liberation of Africa;
• UK lands troops in Karelia to bolster URSS defense;

Both objective require dealing with Germans fleet that may interfere in the operations. This is the problem, because dealing with such fleets requires ships and aircrafts that are not directly useful on the ground in Africa and in Russia. so while USA and UK fight to gain control ofthe seas Germany and Japan may squeeze Russia and take Moscow.

The USA fleet island hopping, in this context, could be a wasting of resources.

[Col.Stauffenberg]

Thanks for the advice Romolus but here’s where I’m torn. If I abandon Island Hopping than Japan will be uncontested. At least where I am, I’m forcing him to think defensively as Japan. I’m two spaces from Africa, Two spaces from India, and one space from all his islands. Maybe I should skip the east indies factory and focus on a mass landing in africa? Land in algeria and Italian east africa or Egypt. Actually I could probably do both.

[77stranger77]

That’s sort of a false choice, getting East Indies shouldn’t be that easy. Getting a complex there is huge but assuming no J1 dice jobs, Japan should be able to prevent America from advancing for a long time.

Without America in the Atlantic, the British will have to buy a lot more fleet protection and a lot less troops. I don’t have the experience to draw any conclusions but I’m wondering if this version ruined the US Pacific strategy. Maybe I’m missing something, but the UK on their own has a hard time and the US won’t be making any immediate gains.

[Col.Stauffenberg]

I already have East Indies. I took it last round. (We’re on round 6). I’ve spent almost all my income on the pacific as the US. Germany has a lot of boats but they only have three tanks on the board right now.

[Romulus]

Mmm really you can not abandon Island hopping, you have spent resources but you are also obtaining results. And if you are at turn 6 and Russia is still alive you may still turn the table.

I suppose that a good option is to focus on East Indies then, try to build a factory there and engage the Japanese forces, avoiding Japanese focusing on Russia.

The problem is that UK have to:

• control the Atlantic;
• liberate Africa;
• put pressure on Europe.

All this objectives may be out of reach for the british alone, so I would suggest focusing on the first two and try to stay alive with Russia, which may be the real problem in this scenario.

But, sincerely, I think that Pacific strategy with USA, though may bring to good results, is a long time strategy, maybe too long.

The problem of the Pacific Strategy is that USA is not helping directly Russia, because reduce Japanese rush to Moscow but Red Army is forced to face a stronger Germany, which may a have a more easy life against UK alone.
I prefer to go all in Atlantic with USA in the first turn, with the objective of winning the Battle of Atlantic, liberate Africa and starting to create problem in Europe.

I have no problem with the KGF and JTDM. It is only the high level objective of the game.
The important, and funny, things to do wth A&A are the logistic, the planning and the conduction of the combats.
Also Chess have only a way to win, checkmate the oppenent King, but there are numerous way for obtaining such objective!

[77stranger77]

My mistake, if you have East Indies, I would definitely get a factory there and if you can defend it, on Borneo and/or Philippines. If you can, the Allies probably win. East Indies isn’t a bad place to be to contest Africa. Germany shouldn’t be a threat to Russia in Round 6 after building Baltic and Med navies and probably isn’t with only 3 tanks on the board. Where has Germany massed their forces, Ukraine, Karelia, EE?

[Col.Stauffenberg]

Germany doesn’t have a force to amass. There’s two or three germany inf surrounding Cauc and Mosc and nothing immediately behind it. He’s spent so much on navy. He’s got a carrier, a cruiser, 2 destroyers and two transports in the Med, plus a baltic navy. He is up 54 ipc’s. I imagine he’s going to buy 8 men and 6 tanks, but who knows. It’s a lot of money but he’s just buying stuff he should have by now already.

I normally do a KGF, but with the new rules, KJF is more tempting. It seems to be working. I’ll let you guys know the outcome.

[77stranger77]

Okay, it sounds like the Allies win. Don’t worry if the UK isn’t landing much in terms of troops into Europe. Russia can push back against Germany and Japan is going down the tubes if America has factories on her islands. Sounds like a fun game.