Kjf discussions

@scotth409

I also play this with my gaming group. I agree with squire - Allies have the advantage.

Japan can grab Indian rnd 3 (naval base in French Indo rnd 2) and if you’re playing to win, that’s the way I would go.

If you want to create more play in Africa/Med you can try a German airbase in Greece rnd 1. Britain can attack with fig, tac, bmr, cruiser for an even fight with the destroyer and 3 figs.

If you want to try something a little crazy with Japan, have a look at the following;

1 bomber, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Japan to 26 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 tactical_bomber moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 battleship moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 destroyer moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 submarine moved from 49 Sea Zone to 62 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 42 Sea Zone to 62 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 42 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 cruiser, 1 destroyer and 1 submarine moved from 47 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 33 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 cruiser moved from 33 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone

If all goes right you won’t be in bad shape. However, there is a massive whole in this opening that can be exploited by US/Anzac. If they choose not to scramble in Pearl Harbor they can attack the BB and loaded Carrier in sz 54 with 3 fig, tac and bmr then have Anzac clean up, if anything is left. You can prevent this by bringing in an extra carrier and landing the 2nd fig from the attack on sz 49. BUT, you can only do this if you’re not forced to provide landing for the surviving fighters in Pearl. All in all pretty messy and not a very good opening. Let me know if you take the plunge and how it works out.

Best move for Britain IMHO is an airbase in Gibraltar. I don’t use the US fig to attack the 2 German des, just 2bmr and a des, this gives you an extra fig in Gibraltar. The idea is to park your cruiser in sz 92 to prevent Italy from getting thier NO. They can attack, but have to cover the scramble and will have their fleet wide open for a counter attack.

Ok So first priority is to prevent any German Sealion Attacks. For this you would build Infantry and a few fighters.

You should have about 25-30 income so a Fighter and 6 inf isn’t out of the question.

Once you have secured you home island its time to consider offensive operations.

A good idea is to reinforce Africa ASAP. If you have managed to grab Persia or secure Egypt a factory here is a good way to boost India’s Defenses or annoy Italy.

Amphibious operations against France or Norway can also be considered but this will require many turns investment in fleet building or else the ships will be sunk as quickly as they are built. Typically a decent fleet will need carriers, destroyers and subs to protect the transports.

Typical build might be (

tank + Mech + Inf = 13 (for S-AFRICA)
Plane (str  ftr or tac) 10 - 12
1-2 inf to round out purchases

After about turn 5 you will see which way game is going (based on uS pacific v Atlantic focus) Then you can turn your attention to helping India or reinforcing US moves in Europe.

Hey,

I was playing the USA this time and I did get Tokyo and starve Japan using Convoy’s with the USA on Korea. This was a cat and mouse with USA and Japan, but the USA had the window to move into SZ 6 to land on Korea by Rnd 8/9. Eventually it was basically till rnd 13-17 to totally kill off Tokyo and for the Allies to win the game. Meanwhile Rome was done by rnd 10 and Berlin by rnd 12.

The game was over by rnd 12 with Rome and Berlin gone, but our group plays itself out to the bitter end. The trick was, was to trick the Japanese that the USA had no interest in the Pacific at the very beginning early rnds and was going all out on the Atlantic, by pulling everything as much they can to Washington territory buy and stack up, in till it was time to sway the game to the Pacific in which this case was by rnd 4 USA were in the war. The Germans thought it was a heavy USA invasion coming across to France.

Knowing I was going to do convoys, the majority of my USA purchase was subs ( and enough air to pair up with AC and trans and land units ). These starved the Chinese territories the Japs had when I was in reach to place my USA subs along the coast. Just add up all of the IPC’s along that coast alone incl FIC and Hong Kong. Eventually they had no money to purchase, it was a matter to just keep bombing Tokyo from Korea before move my land units on transports into Tokyo.

It was risky and bold, but this worked well, however the Japanese were also one city away from winning in the Pacific, but in this case two moves too far out of reach.

That game was a proof that Japan can be taken down, even if it’s to the very last city. It all depends as we know what the Japanese is upto, and those good dice rolls, and working with your team mates.

Bravehart.

I start with a purchase of 3 CVs for the US.  You can get planes to fill them up later on.  It is nice to stack a bunch of fighters in Midway.  If the Japanese are careless, your planes can hit SZ 6 and then land on the carrier group in CZ7.  It doesn’t happen often, but is beautiful when you can pull off that raid.

On turn 2, I transition to subs and fighters as the primary way to damage their fleet.  You can also convoy raid their economy to bits if you can get a few subs into the appropriate sea locations.

Afterwards, I do mostly subs plus a destroyer.  Depending on the Japanese spending and success against China, I transition to the European side.

they asked this in the faq to find out the answer. I know the rulebook needs an update.

You should give A2 a try and then A3 and then make a personal choice as to which you prefer, which version is more balanced for your playstyle.

For instance if you like to take risks than A3 is better because it rewards sloppy play more than A2(unstoppable sealion/IndiaCrush)

Sorry, my bad.  :-D

@knp7765:

<snip>However, if we end up forcing USA to split their involvement over both theaters, which seems to me to be a losing proposition nearly every time, aren’t you then imbalancing the game toward the Axis?</snip>

I don’t think it is a loosing proposition nearly every time, so I disagree with your premise.
It’s a game opener more than anything else. Remember originally - the stand alone games were balanced with a half USA in each. If you then combine the boards and throw the USA into one side of the conflict, you’re effectively putting two countries into one side. And the other allies basically just need to avoid loosing, and the game is won. India doesn’t need to win the game, they just need to not loose. Russia doesn’t need to win, they just need to slow down the axis enough. And so on.

I don’t see many other viable choices to a balancing act upon USA to be frank.
By buffing/nerfing the other axis/allies you’re effectively removing strategy and closing options by making alternatives too easy. If it becomes easier to take Russia by Germany/Italy for example - nobody will go Sealion. Strategy removed and game made more narrow.
By giving USA a clear incentive to split attention somewhat (I’m not saying 50/50 product limit or something) you open up the game and provide the chance for more strategies. If the USA can’t dump 2 battleships, 1 crusier and plans into the Pacific each round at war without loosing something on the Atlantic side - it will provide more possible strategies for the game overall.
A clear benefit as I see it.

Tweaking the USA is a win/win in my opinion. It makes the game more balanced and it will provide more choice for how to play. All other options as I see it might balance the game, but will remove choices.