• Hello again!

    When I started A&A I solely went for KGF because I read it’s the “easier” strategy. However recently I have tried a few games with KJF which went both good and bad but certainly spiced things up.

    I would like to show my observations of the games with one general question in mind:
    What factors do you consider when deciding btween KGF vs. KJF?

    1. Since a sucessfull attack on Japan relies on a UK1 attack on sz 37, I found it’s up to the UK to call the shots for the grand allied strategy. Attacking sz 37 with all you have (the fighter from Egypt is essential of course) you still need to pray for some good dice rolls. The chances of wiping the Japanese fleet are roughly 60% (source: aatoolkit.com) so the odds are far from reliable. My experience shows that if you manage to wipe the fleet and maybe save your carrier with a fighter or two you have a pretty good chance of winning. If Japan decides for a Pearl Harbor attack but you manage to get a good retaliation strike on US2 it’ still enough pressure to push them back on their island and consecutively take those juicy islands.
      The thing I find the most dissuading about this strategy is the fact that in 40% of the games you will not manage to wipe the Japanese fleet UK1 and moreover severely weaken your influence over the pacific giving Japan a good chance of becoming an IPC monster. With this outcome the Allies are more prone to losing compared to the KGF approach where you just take Japan’s transport and destroyer in sz 61 and maybe (assuming the sub doesn’t submerge. I found that most platinum players submerge their sub however) kill the sub in sz 44 (at Solomon Islands) dissuading Japan from doing Pearl Harbor.
      Subquestion: what’s your approach to stop Japan if the attack fails and maybe (probably) a Pearl Harbor attack severly weakens the US fleet.

    2. As I mentioned earlier it’s at the UK player’s turn when the Allies need to make up their mind who they wish to overthrow. Thus we have some information about Germany’s plans and can take them into consideration when deciding between a KGF and KJF. There are three general approaches that Germany can take that have an impact on this decision:
      – Germany goes for some combination of land units signalling an attack on Russia
      – Germany buys fleet in either the Atlantic Sea => making it harder for UK to build up a fleet
      – Germany buys fleet in either the Mediterranean Sea => really wants to grab Africa

    Observing all of this I am still unsure on what conclusions I should draw. Is it advisable to do KJF when Germany goes for fleet or the other way around? Under what circumstances do you go for a KJF? Have I overlooked anything important?
    I’m curious to hear about your thoughts!


  • 2021 2020 '19 '18

    I tend to make the call on KGF or KJF (if you can really call it “KJF”, you don’t take Tokyo in any KJF strategy. You usually just clear out their navy, take the money islands, and halt their momentum in Asia before moving on to killing Germany or winning on VCs) on A1 (America’s first turn), after Germany and Japan have both moved. I do this because hopefully, after seeing my opponent handle both Germany and Japan for a turn, I’ll be able to figure out which country they’re better at playing, at purposely go after the one they’re weaker at. It’s entirely possible to make an opening move as UK that leaves both KGF and KJF on the table. Just buy a Carrier for the Atlantic + land units for India. I used to like attacking the SZ37 fleet but with my luck and AAO’s “”“questionable”"" dice, I rarely have any luck winning there (or I totally blow-out Japan and win the game instantly, but I don’t like leaving the outcome of the game down to pure luck like that).

    This is a bit of a game-y answer to your question, but I tend to focus on playing against my opponent rather than just following a formulaic plan every single game (outside of the obvious moves you must make in all games, I mean).

    Side-Note #1: If Germany builds navy you need to go 100% KGF, as buying navy as Germany is inefficient and unsustainable. Germany’s strength in this version relies on the combination of their having nearly double USSR’s income and their extremely strong starting position. Take away either (i.e. spend Germany’s income on navy instead of units aimed at Moscow) and you suddenly give the Soviets (and thus the Allies) a fighting chance in a game where they really shouldn’t have one. Just keep building Navy as UK/US. If Germany is blowing all their IPCs on naval/air units USSR can build up and start pressuring Germany on the Russian Front.

    Side-Note #2: When Japan Pearl Harbors, you send in the fleet from US West Coat + all available air units (including the Bomber from East USA) to counterattack the Japanese fleet. In most cases Pearl Harbor is an over-extension by Japan than can by punished (there are exceptions to this line of thinking, but only when you hit like Platinum top 150 tier opponents).

  • Firstly thanks for your quick reply and input! Two things I can really take away for myself are that I don’t need to fully conquer Tokyo and if Germany goes for navy I’ll go for KGF.

    Delaying the decision to the second round sounds quite reasonable but what are your best options for UK and US if you want to keep both KGF and KJF on the table?
    Obviously you want to grab 3 units to bolster the defense in India and perhaps hold on for the rest IPC to spend in round 2 as UK. But what fleet moves do you make in the pacific then? As we established attacking sz 37 isn’t really a good option for the Allied player. Do you just refrain to killing the transport and destroyer with the cruiser and fighter and try to run with everything else and hope to fight another day? Is merging the two fleets in sz 30 an option?

    What about the US? I can’t think of a US1 purchase that really leaves both options open. If you place your fleet on the west coast you can’t quickly change plans and shift them to the east coast and vice versa.

    Lastly in which scenario would you rather go for KJF? Japan doing Pearly Harbor where the US gets a good chance of retaliation, basically reducing the fleets on both sides or Japan not attacking Pearl Harbor so both fleets stay untouched.

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18

    @meterpaffay said in General Strategy: KGF vs KJF:

    Delaying the decision to the second round sounds quite reasonable but what are your best options for UK and US if you want to keep both KGF and KJF on the table?

    Careful. By A1 you should be making the call to do KJF/KGF, not round 2. Your first buy as USA determines your path forward in the game.

    However, for B1, you should do the following general things (there are exceptions to this depending on what Germany does, like if they try setting up for Sealion or something):

    • Buy 1 Carrier + land units for India (or maybe a Destroyer for UK Atlantic instead, depends on the situation)

    • Send your Air Force from UK to kill the German Baltic Fleet.

    • Mass any surviving navy UK has in the Atlantic off the coast of UK to join up with whatever navy you bought.

    • In the Middle East/India area, either retake Egypt (if it fell and is lightly occupied) or start retreating your guys towards India. You can evacuate India later if you’ve decided to go full KGF but you don’t want India to fall until at least round 4-5 if you can help it.

    • If you’re not throwing the Hail-Mary pass of trying to attack SZ37, kill the Transport hanging out off the coast of China (only send the FTR so you don’t leave anything behind to get killed by Japan’s navy) and move the rest of the UK fleet into the Mediterranean, if possible.

    • Australia guys have their choice of attacking New Guinea or Solomon Islands. I prefer Solomon Islands to also kill the Japanese sub but it’s up to you.

    Lastly in which scenario would you rather go for KJF? Japan doing Pearly Harbor where the US gets a good chance of retaliation, basically reducing the fleets on both sides or Japan not attacking Pearl Harbor so both fleets stay untouched.

    Either is fine as Peal Harbor is a standard move by both good and bad Japan players alike. I judge Japan players more by their opening buys + how they move their starting armies in Asia. If a player either does next-to-nothing in Asia/India or massively overextends (i.e. they try to fight Russia, China, India and Pearl Harbor all at once), then I immediately KJF.

    Answers to all of your other questions are in my first one. USA’s first turn is when you pick your priorities as the Allies.

  • @DoManMacgee Killing the japanese sub is not reliable, since it can submerge. Also, why bother to take Solomons? They are worth nothing. I think it is better to just keep the inf in Australia than do that.

    I think maybe just trying to shadow the US fleet is not a bad idea.

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18

    @Dimitri Taking the Solomon Islands prevents Fighters flying into the SZ from 3 spaces away from being able to land unless they bring a Carrier with them, which in-turn gives you the opportunity to counterattack with Submarines, dooming the FTRs.

    That being said, what I typically do after B1 is have the US fleet move to Solomon Islands (if able) and after that have the UK fleet shadow the US one, as you said.

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 8
  • 20
  • 7
  • 2
  • 46
  • 13
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys