Anyone wana play a game???

muhahahaha

this tactic works well against the group i play with… they go after germany with a vengance… they retreat everything from all the corners of world for the most part and pull to the atlantic just to put a wrench in the works for germany… they buy nothing without germany in mind… its 100 % devotion… it took 5 turns last game before i felt i could even make a real run at russia because i had to hold strong while japan got going…

Edit: holding strong meant staying at 40 or above… i fell to 37 one turn but rebounded back after a little regrouping…

Canals are not zones.  They do not count as spaces for land or air.

I also think that War at Sea is considered seperate from the land minis. If you are going chronologicaly I think Revised would be before D-Day and minis before BOTB.

:roll:
  So Jennifer, it is probibly more of a matter of trust in the server than a problem with your machine? I know just how you feel. It is hard sometimes to go outside our comfort zone. And something different is not always better. I for one have few complaints with Triple A, the ladder or how the program works, although today I did have it freeze on me during a roll, (had to restart my computer to get out of it). Nothing is perfect, right?

Back to topic; I prefer LL for the mere fact that the regular dice are more often than not, unkind to me, causing much frustration. I know that I play a better game than my track record shows, and since I’ve begun playing LL it has been a lot less frustrating for me. I win more often, and even the games I’ve lost have not been one sided crushing defeats in 6 rounds. I will play AAR for fun, or to give a newbe a better chance to beat me, but not a serious game against a master Obewon Jedi AA player. I prefer to match wits, not the luck of the die rolls, for that, we can play Craps  😉

@MarineIguana:

First of all, I want to say that USA committing any purchases to the pacific is a mistake. For the same amount of resources, the USA can always pressure Germany more than Japan. This is from my experience playing hundreds of revised games, many at a high level.

That said, assuming the US commits to the Pacific…

1. Japan should always sink the US fleet at pearl harbor. If this is done, Japan generally starts with a 1 battleship, 2 carrier, 3 fighter advantage compared to the USA that will take 5+ turns of buildup for the US to overcome.
2. The US can’t make significant advances unless the Japan fleet is destroyed. The best way to stall the USA is to place your fleet in the sea zone off the phillipines or china and deadzone all sea zone within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. Have the carriers filled with fighters AND try to have an equal number of fighters in a land territory that can reach all the sz within 2 spaces of Japan’s fleet. For example, 2 carriers can support 8 fighters attacking a sea zone.
3. Japan can continue pushing land units into asia, even with all US purchases going to the pacific. My typical purchases are like 6 inf and 2 fighters. With the Japan fleet off of China

From what I have seen when the allies does a KJF is that, PH really isn’t that easy. If UK commits and is lucky, PH can be very difficult. Complete UK commitment would be  UK india ftr attacking the J sub in 45 with the australia sub, and then landing on PH. The Australia TT taking 2 infs to papua, the indian TT taking 2 infs to borneo, The UK CR attacking the japanese TT in 59 and the India CW either standing in 36 or 49.  At this point, taking PH might be difficult for japan. If they do it with air only (5 ftrs + bomber) they will lose about 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs, 1 cw, and 1 sub. The good news is that they will not lose boats to a counterattack, and can use their boats to deal with the british fleet, the bad news is that they are spread out, will be in trouble on land and will take 3 ftrs in losses for only 36 US ipcs (+ 10 UK).  If they try to do a heavy PH, alot of the uk fleet survives and UK will keep borneo until J3.

I still feel it is a bad move, since you are handing africa to the axis, but japan will be in trouble.

Does there exist an archive of moves in completed tournament or expert level games? If this were available it would be a great learning tool!

We switch between the 12 point bid, and the axis again 4 NA’s and the Axis seem to win 50-60% of our games, and the last few months no one can beat them. Axis has one 13 of 17 games since this past september.  We have 20 man group that plays about twice a month.

Weapons development is a viable option now since you can choose what you get instead of spending a lot of $ and getting super subs.

Even though it’s six times as easy to get the tech you want, the risk associated with it doesn’t translate well into consistent strategies. If you roll 9 die of tech (45 IPCs) you have an almost 20% chance of NOT achieving the tech. That sounds pretty bad, doesn’t it? Ironically super subs is the only tech that I try for, and only if I’m the US and gunning after Japan. Rockets are pretty good for Germany but I really can’t find space in my economy to throw away 30+ IPCs for an uncertain tech. If you’re a habitual gambler or feel like you’re playing against  superior player so you need to take your chances, then I would say tech. Otherwise, it isn’t going to win you a whole lot of games unless you are already winning.

One part of the game that I have not explored is the option of the US going into the pacific in a big way.  Of course, the pressure off Germany is a huge reason not to do it, and it was hardly ever done in the old game.  But the increased value of the islands make it more attractive.

This is pretty fun to do if you have all the Allies cooperating against Japan. You can really make Japan squirm if the US is dumping all cash into a navy while Russia/UK swipe the Asian territories away. If the US smartly maneuvers the navy and researches super subs right before a big battle, likely Japan is going to be staring at an 8 IPC paycheck and squatting on his capital for the rest of the game. But yeah, taking pressure off Germany is a pretty big no-no. You’re leaving 10 IPCs in Africa alone to Germany (couple more in trans-jordan/persia as well) and letting him hammer Russia with full strength, which is much harder to defend against than a Japanese attempt. I admit I’m not an expert though; I haven’t taken that many games to conclusion in a real bonafide KJF strategy. It’s hard to say if the Allies can recover or not once Germany kills Russia; perhaps taking the Japanese mainland gives the Allies too good of a position to retake, but then again maybe Germany takes too many IPCs and can overrun the UK in short order and then the US.