KJF (Kill Japan First) doesn't work against against good Axis players


  • “KJF (Kill Japan First) doesn’t work against against good Axis players”

    😄

    Discuss.


  • @Bunnies:

    “KJF (Kill Japan First) doesn’t work against against good Axis players”

    Mmm, if you define a good Axis player by “someone who doesn’t lose from a KJF”, then it is proven by default 😉

    edit: therefor i must vote Woody Allen.

  • '12

    Tautology.  Not incorrect in that it is correct imho.


  • @Bunnies:

    “KJF (Kill Japan First) doesn’t work against against good Axis players”

    😄

    Discuss.

    Japan = crazy wabbits cruising on the Pacific


  • I agree.
    It is possible to pull of a KJF in 42, but you need a lot of dice luck, or an opponant not capable of playing Japan under pressure.

    My recipe would be something like this.
    R1
    Buy 3 inf 3 arm, so that India can be assisted from cauc
    Attack WR and UKR - if possible just strafe Ukraine (leaving 6 armor on Cauc)
    Stack Bury

    G1
    If Germany goes all out after WR - switch to KGF.
    Hope and pray that Egypt Goes well. Hope for a defensive German buy (2 bombers would be nice for allies)

    UK1
    Buy IC in India + air  (With this buy the decision of a KJF is almost sealed, the IC could be placed in SA)
    Land in Africa, take out tranny, attack FIC (just get some inf of the mainland)
    Move London air units East

    J1
    Japan with a lot of things to do - must decide wheter to move units to FIC or stay around Japan and hit Bury. China is also a priority, but difficult for Japan to find the ground units for everything. SZ52 will probably be skipped.

    US1
    SInkiang IC + Naval units
    If possible take out some misplaced J naval units. Move air east

    Round 2 and beyond:
    R “just needs to stand its ground”

    G should now be aware of the allied intentions and switch to blietzkrieg mode. (A sneaky naval buy followed by an assault on London is also an option)

    UK should clear the med, always reinforce India and get some fighters towards Russia.

    Japan is the key - a good Axis player is capable of handling the pressure from the US fleet and stay on the mainland. Never loose the fleet.

    US should secure Africa with the initial drop - pick of the Jap Islands (IC on one of the big ones is great) and kill the Japan fleet.

    Against a good axis player I will give this tactic less than 10% chance of success, but it gives a good variety to the standard game 🙂


  • @jiman79:

    Against a good axis player I will give this tactic less than 10% chance of success, but it gives a good variety to the standard game 🙂

    I have used a similar strat (India+Sinkian IC’s) a few times and i would say the % of succes should be a lot higher.

    True, you can’t afford to have bad luck, and it is certainly not always a good idea. And if you do it, you can’t make any mistakes yourself.


  • @special:

    I have used a similar strat (India+Sinkian IC’s) a few times and i would say the % of succes should be a lot higher.

    True, you can’t afford to have bad luck, and it is certainly not always a good idea. And if you do it, you can’t make any mistakes yourself.

    I’ve faced it several times and defeated it almost everytime - Japan only has to keep landing units on FIC, keeping direct pressure on India and then either stacking to assault India or to move the stack to China to take the Sinkiang IC. Any Russian armor send to reinforce India can’t be switched back to defend Sinkiang - and any Russian armor sent to defend those ICs leaves Russia naked against Germany walking into the Caucasus or stacking WRus.
    The India/Sinkiang ICs are bad news for Russia - now they have 3 ICs to defend (Caucasus, India and Sinkiang) that can’t fall into Axis hands and the UK/US units built there will only be used to defend those ICs. That’s why I never use this strat - all the Axis has to do is to find the weak spot and crush it, then the rest falls like a house of cards.


  • @Hobbes:

    I’ve faced it several times and defeated it almost everytime - Japan only has to keep landing units on FIC, keeping direct pressure on India and then either stacking to assault India or to move the stack to China to take the Sinkiang IC. Any Russian armor send to reinforce India can’t be switched back to defend Sinkiang - and any Russian armor sent to defend those ICs leaves Russia naked against Germany walking into the Caucasus or stacking WRus.
    The India/Sinkiang ICs are bad news for Russia - now they have 3 ICs to defend (Caucasus, India and Sinkiang) that can’t fall into Axis hands and the UK/US units built there will only be used to defend those ICs. That’s why I never use this strat - all the Axis has to do is to find the weak spot and crush it, then the rest falls like a house of cards.

    Guess i should quit the strat while i am ahead then.
    (edit: although i should try it again to see if it still stands against a Japan that has learned from its previous mistakes, even if that means getting butchered)

    Perhaps i have been lucky that the Axis player also had left a few weak spots open, that made the balance tip over in my advantage. And that the dice were kind to me.

    I do realize its weaknesses, and at best it is a risky (and expensive) operation, which needs full attention (flying over extra aircraft from UK and USA, having Russian reinforcements, plus Russia needs to buy at least an extra fighter since planes can assist inf in a chinese attack and still return to be useful on either side next turn), opening rather agressive to put pressure on Japan from 3 sides / nations. If it turns bad, it turns very bad, giving Japan 2 IC’s.

    Maybe my Axis opponent made the mistake of not focusing well enough with threat/loot on 3 sides. And again, luck is not his middle name.

    Question: do you feel an India IC is good without the Sinkian IC?
    I always feel that building a sole India IC is like painting a huge bull’s eye on Calcutta…


  • @special:

    @Hobbes:

    I’ve faced it several times and defeated it almost everytime - Japan only has to keep landing units on FIC, keeping direct pressure on India and then either stacking to assault India or to move the stack to China to take the Sinkiang IC. Any Russian armor send to reinforce India can’t be switched back to defend Sinkiang - and any Russian armor sent to defend those ICs leaves Russia naked against Germany walking into the Caucasus or stacking WRus.
    The India/Sinkiang ICs are bad news for Russia - now they have 3 ICs to defend (Caucasus, India and Sinkiang) that can’t fall into Axis hands and the UK/US units built there will only be used to defend those ICs. That’s why I never use this strat - all the Axis has to do is to find the weak spot and crush it, then the rest falls like a house of cards.

    Guess i should quit the strat while i am ahead then.
    (edit: although i should try it again to see if it still stands against a Japan that has learned from its previous mistakes, even if that means getting butchered)

    Perhaps i have been lucky that the Axis player also had left a few weak spots open, that made the balance tip over in my advantage. And that the dice were kind to me.

    I do realize its weaknesses, and at best it is a risky (and expensive) operation, which needs full attention (flying over extra aircraft from UK and USA, having Russian reinforcements, plus Russia needs to buy at least an extra fighter since planes can assist inf in a chinese attack and still return to be useful on either side next turn), opening rather agressive to put pressure on Japan from 3 sides / nations. If it turns bad, it turns very bad, giving Japan 2 IC’s.

    Maybe my Axis opponent made the mistake of not focusing well enough with threat/loot on 3 sides. And again, luck is not his middle name.

    Question: do you feel an India IC is good without the Sinkian IC?
    I always feel that building a sole India IC is like painting a huge bull’s eye on Calcutta…

    I’d say, keep playing it until you face an Axis player that can defeat it. It isn’t easy for Japan because the temptation will be to try to keep the US fleet at bay but you need the planes against the IC. The one time this strat worked against me was when Japan’s starting ground forces were essentially wiped out of Asia at the end of turn 1, either through UK attacks or bad dice and the US got 2 ICs on Sinkiang and China on US1 (now that can be a killer).

    An India IC on round 1 is a bullseye - a 2nd one on Sinkiang just adds another target, not as fat but easier to pick up.

    But the worse comes from Germany - without an Atlantic UK fleet it can simply swing everything towards Russia. Worse, if Russia sends its starting inf on Asia towards Sinkiang/Yakut then Germany can simply get 5 inf, 5 arm and conquer Caucasus by round 4/5 since the Russians will be busy defending India/Sinkiang from Japan.

    Then again, if the Axis player is not quick to pressure the Russians, either by skill or luck, then odds even out. That’s why that strat is effective, although you’re taking a gamble with the Allies.

  • 2020 '19 '18 '17

    Saruman, I’d say. Like in KJF, he led his forces not against the strongest opponent, but tried to take out a weaker foe first and failed at doing so. And the IC he built was captured by the Ents. Plus, he’s so British.


  • KJF can work vs a good axis player even an expert level player. This depends on the dice R1. If the dice go extremely well (I’d say 10% or fewer of games) the allies can go all out on Japan. The point of Kill Japan isn’t taking out japans capital it is crippling japan to where japan is making 8 dollars because the only place left is Japans capital. Then you can swing all your units into defending Russia and eventually taking out Germany.


  • @theROCmonster:

    KJF can work vs a good axis player even an expert level player. This depends on the dice R1. If the dice go extremely well (I’d say 10% or fewer of games) the allies can go all out on Japan. The point of Kill Japan isn’t taking out japans capital it is crippling japan to where japan is making 8 dollars because the only place left is Japans capital. Then you can swing all your units into defending Russia and eventually taking out Germany.

    Sure, but what battles in particular would have to go bad?

    Russia doesn’t have much room to start up a KJF.
    Let’s say Germany totally kills itself on dice.  Then wouldn’t it be better to go KGF anyways?
    UK doesn’t have a lot of good attacks to open up a KJF, regardless of what happened on previous turns.
    So that brings it to Japan’s turn.  Since we’re starting with the premise that the Axis player is good, that means the Japanese player will have contingency plans for retreating and won’t risk navy without good reason.  So exactly HOW bad do the dice have to be for the Japs to really get tanked?
    Even on the US turn, there usually isn’t much room for a KJF plan.  Even if Japan got really horrible luck and US/UK managed to kill four Jap transports before the start of J2, even then the Allies could (and maybe should) KGF.

    That is to say - in theory, yes, if certain dice fall certain ways, then KJF may be best.  But in real terms, I can’t think of any actual real bad dice results, coming up in a game against a good Axis player, that would have me going KJF instead of KGF.

    Except - suppose Germany attempted Anglo-Egypt and completely failed there, then UK/US smashed the surviving Germans in Algeria/Libya, then Japan tried a few naval/air/ground battles and lost two fighters at China, totally failed the Hawaiian Islands fleet battle (say they lost everything and the US fighter survived), then US could follow up and kill the Japanese fleet east of Japan . . . or something . . . basically Japan losing at least two, maybe three of its battleships and carriers . . . I suppose in such a case yeah, KJF.  But the odds of all that going wrong at the same time are pretty bad!


  • @Bunnies:

    Sure, but what battles in particular would have to go bad?

    Russia does not have room to get diced R1 (but that is almost regardless of strategy).
    Egypt must not go too well for G.
    A succesfull UK attack on FIC is a very good start.

    But the key battles is J1 - Bury and China, and maybe even a failed attack to retake FIC.
    If the allies are doing well, a major naval battle must occur at some point. This battle is decisive. If the US succeeds in taking out all capital ships and transporters, the game is nearly won, if J wins this, allies have lost.

    Last time I played this strat I lost this battle, with 65% succes rate. Japan still had two BBs an AC and 3 trannies.
    So even though Russia was doing ok - the pressure on Japan dissapearred they recaptured east indies and phillipines = game over (this was not against an expert axis player)


  • What were you purchasing with US and what was Japan purchasing? What was the major battle and how did japan come out with so many ships left?

  • '12

    At what point did the allies decide to go KJF in that scenario?


  • If you go Pacific with the US and build an IC in India, Russia falls on turn 6 against any good axis players pretty much all the time (Russia would need quite incredible luck to stop that).


  • T6 is an exageration. This is a little quick. I believe Russia can hold out longer than this if played correctly.


  • @theROCmonster:

    What were you purchasing with US and what was Japan purchasing? What was the major battle and how did japan come out with so many ships left?

    OK the game is a few weeks back and on GTO, so forgive me if my memory fails sometimes.

    USSR took West Russia but with losses. USSR strafed Ukraine leaving only the fig. This means 6 armor was available in cauc after USSR1.

    G recaptured West Russia but only with few units since they used their airpower for SZ2 and UK cruiser also. Egypt was captured with only 1 armor.

    G bought inf + bomber expecting a “fortress of Europe” like scenario.

    Allied decided to go KJF UK1, when they bought an IC for India. And hitting FIC

    US initial buy was 2 ICs since Japan failed taking China - given the oppurtunity again, I would not have bought the 2nd IC, since it was difficult to maintain control of China all the time.

    Africa:
    Allied made sacrificial landings in Africa UK1+US1 and cleared Africa with these units - I think  placed some air maybe a US bomber on Gibraltar, and G used their G2 landing to take that out instead of reinforcing Africa.
    UK killed the med fleet UK2.

    Japan skipped SZ52 and bought 2 transporters and a destroyer.

    I think tha naval battle was in round 5 and it was someting like:
    US 6 figs, 1 bomber, 2 subs 2 dstr, 1 AC, 1 BB against Japans: 4 figs, 1 sub, 1 dstr,  1 cruiser, 1 AC, and 2 BBs.

    First round dice was a disaster for US making 3 hits I think - the battleship 2 hit rule
    really punishes a weak first round - retreat was not an option since Japan then would be able to counter with a lot more air units - so it went to the end with UK attempting a lucky punch afterwards (1 sub 2 figs 1 bmbr)- but that was suicide - so game over, but interesting game :)I


  • The main problem I see here is that you lost West russia. This seriously cripples russia early on. Making it much easier for Germany to take on russia full bore. If I see west russia really weak and able to be captured I purchase 10 inf and 2 tanks T1 and never let up the gas on russia. In these games you really can’t go Japan first.


  • I partly agree - if USSR1 and G1 does not go well for the allies, the KJF strategy is much too slow to work against an effective German opponent.

    But in this particular game Germany paid a high price for capturing West Russia, meaning that almost all their initial eastern based ground units where destroyed USSR2. Since the USSR armor survived the Ukraine attack USSR was able to retake and hold West Russia USSR2.

    USSR was actually doing quite well in this game and could probably hold 3 rounds more before losing Moscow.

    The problem was that the US lost the main battle in the pacific - so maybe I made a mistake by taking this 70% chance of success naval battle.


  • @jiman79:

    But in this particular game Germany paid a high price for capturing West Russia, meaning that almost all their initial eastern based ground units where destroyed USSR2.

    I have the opposite opinion regarding that situation. Here’s a few figures:
    Assuming that Russia attacked WRus with 9 inf, 1 art, 1 arm and that the Germans countered with all the ground units that could reach WRus plus planes then the balance of losses would be 12 inf, 1 (or 2) art and 1 arm for the Russians 45 IPCs total (ground units only). Germany would have lost 9 inf, 1 art and 3 arm or 46 IPCs. Add to those figures the l 7 IPC income not gained for Russia (3 from Ukr on R1, 4 from Karelia and Belo on R2) and Germany is the one coming out stronger, not Russia.
    A typical R1 WRus + Ukr attack should give the Russians on average an advantage of 12 IPC in losses over the Germans. Losing WRus on G2 completely reverses Russia’s initial gains and gives the advantage to the Germans, as I’ll explain next.

    Since the USSR armor survived the Ukraine attack USSR was able to retake and hold West Russia USSR2.

    Only if Germany allows Russia. During G1 non-combat Germany can move 7 inf to Karelia plus 5 armor + planes all ready to hit WRus on G2 and 2 inf for Ukraine. Assuming Russia buys 3 inf, 3 arm, it would start R2 with 9 inf and 6 arm but would have to divert at least 3 inf, 2 on Ukr, 1 moving to Archangel, so the Russian force on WRus at the beginning of G2 should be 5 inf, 6 arm. So, Germans could have hit WRus again on G2 and stack Ukraine. Russia would be now completely worn off - the only forces available are from new production since there’s no reserves and it is being tied up.
    Even with a KGF in progress that’s at least 3 rounds that the Germans have in full control of Europe and wearing down the Russians for the Japanese advance. Trying pulling off a KJF and Russia is dead in the water a couple rounds later.


  • Well said hobbes. Thanks for putting those figures out there. Don’t have the patience to think of all that extranious stuff and type it down :).


  • @theROCmonster:

    Well said hobbes. Thanks for putting those figures out there. Don’t have the patience to think of all that extranious stuff and type it down :).

    Doing the math for the Case Blue strategy convinced me that a G1 counterattack on WRus is probably the biggest opportunity available for Germany. If it is likely that Germany will try to perform such an attack, then the Allies should seriously abandon any attempts of KJF.
    Just the above calculations for the R2 retake of West Russia require that all infantry on Evenki/Novo/Kazakh are send towards Russia/Caucasus on R1. The more Russian units are send to Sinkiang/Yakut, the less there are for the WRus counterattack and to defend from the German attack on G1.


  • Why I always do west russia battle first. If I win in Ukraine and take west russia with loss of 3 inf or less I might entertain the idea of putting 4 units in sinkiang and 6 in bury. I retreat my units in any other instance. If say I attack ukraine and retreat to save my 3 tanks and sometimes my artillery I will retreat my units to russia and my men in the east back to moscow. making an attack on west russia not worth it.


  • @Hobbes:

    Only if Germany allows Russia. During G1 non-combat Germany can move 7 inf to Karelia plus 5 armor + planes all ready to hit WRus on G2 and 2 inf for Ukraine.

    There was still one UK transport alive, which meant Germany kept 3 inf in Norway to protect its bomber+fig after the sz2 attack.
    Also he moved one armor to Africa so only 4 armor in eastern europe.
    The German player was probably expecting a "fortress europe scenario and chose to protect his figs in western europe also.
    So Karelia was not stacked on G1.

    I think I strafed or recaptured Karelia  on R2 and first on G3 when the G1 inf buy marched into Karelia. Russia then started deadzoning western Russia.

    This is basically how the game went, but I am not claiming the KJF was the best choice of strategy, far from - I usually win against this friend who I play regularly. I just wanted to try something different  😄

Suggested Topics

  • 130
  • 20
  • 10
  • 40
  • 3
  • 29
  • 9
  • 38
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

36
Online

15.1k
Users

35.9k
Topics

1.5m
Posts