So, do you ignore Japan completely?

  • Okay, I have played several games as the Axis, and some as the Allies.

    As the Axis, I have won them all (without bids), as the Allies, I have lost them all.
    Everytime the Axis won (whether or nor I was playing them), Japan marched into Russia.

    I have tried ignoring Japan, going full frontal on Germany, but Japan got so rich, there was no stsopping them in time.
    I have tried delaying them with USA and UK, but that costs too much money to take on Germany aswell, with their big ass expensive Japanese Pacific fleet.

    So….what the hell am I missing?!?
    What to do with Japan? Just ignore it completely, and try to take out Germany asap?
    And just pray that Japan wont take Australia, New Z, harasses my balls at Alaska and Africa? ???

  • Many think best strat is ignore Japan. I not. Ignoring Japan leads to that Godzilla Japan you noticed, and leaves America undefended against Alaska path strat. Any case, axis will reach economic parity more easily in KGF than in KJF.

    You need a IC in saf for any KJF, or Germany will conquer Africa rampaging to 50 IPCs, not a good stuff. Also you need always a Pacific fleet in a KJF.

    The easiest KJF is build Pacific USA fleet and let UK and soviets against Germany. They can fight germans without mayor USA aid.

    Advanced KJF strats involve ICs at India & Sinkiang or one at Australia. Both are more difficult to master than previous, but more powerfull when well done

  • Yah….but the problem is…I am not even going for a KJF. I cant even friggin pull off a KGF in Revised!
    For some reason, I have Japan always reach Moscow, before I am able to wear down Berlin.

    Delaying Japan seems to be too costly for both UK and USA, while at the same time taking on Germany.
    So what do I do? Do I move UK fleet out of the pacific to regroup, and the same with the US, and then strike back in the later rounds, limiting my costs on fleet, and maximizing on ground units, preparing for a massive d-day?

    I just cant seem to find the balance.

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    There are three major thoughts on the subject.

    The most popular is to hit Japan round 1 and ignore them then after.  This is usually just England sinking the transport in SZ 59 and the Submarine in SZ 52.  Sometimes it includes a counter attack on Pearl Harbor (SZ 52) if Japan took a beating there.

    The second most popular is to keep some pressure on Japan by using Russians to push back while England and America finish off Germany.

    The third and least popular, is to kill Japan first since it is the weakest target.  This can actually be accomplished very easily, you don’t even need average dice results to do it (although average to above average makes it a lot easier!)  Under this theory there are a few sub theories of thought:

    1)  Unify the Allied fleets in the South Pacific and strip Japan of her main islands.  This is good and it has been successful, but there just isn’t any panache too it in my opinion.  Given how easy it is to knock Japan over (defined as no navy + nothing but Japan and maybe a territory or two on the mainland) I don’t see a need for this route really.

    2)  Send America up to Alaska and start invading Buryatia/Soviet Far East.  This is much more fun in my opinion.  You tie up a lot of Japanese forces defending against America AND you have America getting into a position to reinforce Russia from the rear (allowing Russians to fight Germans, not Japanese.)

    3)  This is the worst idea, IMHO, but I list it anyway.  Complex in Sinkiang, Complex in India, balls to the wall England and America attacking Japan with the setup and potential invasion of Manchuria by Russia. (6 Infantry in Buryatia, an Armor from Russia in Yakut and 2 fighters landed in Kazakh usually works wonders.)

  • Jennifer,

    1)  Unify the Allied fleets in the South Pacific and strip Japan of her main islands.  This is good and it has been successful, but there just isn’t any panache too it in my opinion.  Given how easy it is to knock Japan over (defined as no navy + nothing but Japan and maybe a territory or two on the mainland) I don’t see a need for this route really.

    I like that approach aswell…but I always find myself spending a lot of money on fleet stuff, to counter that impressive Japanese fleet…with it’s two BB’s and AC’s.
    I mean, if he pulls of PH, America has nothing. That what’s remaining, will be killed in round 2, unless you flee through the Panama Canal. You cant buy enough in just USA1, to counter the fleet that’s lying in Hawaii.
    Or am I missing something?

  • Purchase 2 carriers and 1 fighter. Move the destroyer up from seazone 20. This should give you 1 transport, 1 destroyer 2 fully loaded carriers (east and west coast fighters, Hawaii fighter, and Purchase), and 1 battleship.

    Unless Japan specifically set up an attack for seazone 55 on round 2 you should be safe. Even if they did and do attack, they should sustain heavy damage and the loss of most if not all of their ships.

  • Moderator

    I’m going to exclude a KJF or SJF strat, but if I go KGF I tend to be an “ignore” Japan player.  Although, it really isn’t ignoring Japan it is more of a tactical retreat and picking your battles while you shorten your supply lines and increase Japans.
    I’ll hold Yak and Sin with the Inf you start out with for as long as I can but by rd 3 you probably have to pull back.  I don’t send any more Russian inf East, not in the first 3 rds at least.  But If you pull back before Japan can ever attack you can have minimally 8 inf in Novo or Kaz, 6 Russian (from the sfe, yak, bury) and 2 from the US (sin).  And now you pick at Japan as they move into sin or yak.  buy this time you can have the US bom and maybe a ftr or 2 in Cauc or Mos so that gives you 2 turns of sending 1 inf, 1 ftr, 1 bom vs. 1 Japan inf in one of the boarder countries.  At this point you hopefully sunk the German fleet in Sz 5 and its Med fleet so you can spare UK/US Ftrs to help defend in Kaz or Novo and support your starting stack of Russian inf.  Also if Germany can’t stack Ukr or Kar you are now free to send Russian armor to help defend in Kaz or Novo and they can quickly bounce back to the Western front if needed.
    You can also have up to 4-5 UK inf (Ind/Per/Trj) to help you pick at Japan or defend in Kaz/Cauc.

    I will say I usually find the most important thing in a KGF is to kill their ships, so that is my top priority.  I buy extra ftrs on UK 1 and go after the Sz 5 ships on UK 2 and I’ll buy extra US air on US 1-2 and try to target the Med fleet by Rd 4.  Once those are gone German power quickly diminishes since they have to start worrying about defending Europe.  Don’t get me wrong they can still be quite the threat, but the amount of offensive power they can send at Russia diminishes especially Ger is still trying to defend WE and if UK/US have taken Kar.  Essentially it comes down to UK and US trading units with Germany while Russia can now send all of its might to hold off Japan and by the mid game Russia can usually have a pretty dominant land army assuming you traded successfuly early on with ger (using only inf and ftrs) while slowly mixing in buys adding an arm here and there.  Russia with close to 10-12 armor is very powerful and can make it very difficult for Japan to ever be able to stack Kaz or Novo.

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I should mention that my choices with America change depending on what Japan attacks Pearl Harbor with, what he survived with and what his land forces look like.

    If Japan was knocked down to 2 fighters, carrier, battleship, then I won’t need two carriers and a fighter for my builds.  Instead, I’m going to pummel that stuff (should survive with a Battleship and Bomber at least, maybe just a battleship, maybe you get lucky and keep a fighter as well.)  In that case, I’m thinking America will need 2 Infantry, Transport, Carrier, Destroyer instead for Round 1 giving you 2 Destroyers, Carrier, Transport vs Japan’s Battleship, Carrier, 3 transports.  And let’s not forget England’s submarine and transport which make great fodder for blocking attacks on your fleet.

    From here you can focus on submarines and fighters.  You only really need one transport to take out Japan’s islands.  Although, 3 makes them fall really fast if you line it up right.

  • 2019 '15 '14

    You never want to completely ignore Japan. Instead the idea is to ignore them within reason, until you can properly confront them from the center (i.e. Africa/Russia.) Sometimes this might involve some early skirmishes in the Pacific, but usually it just focuses on the race to the middle of the board that is so familiar to many of us.

    I can say this about the alternative KJF model: if the Allies are setting up for a Pacific showdown, all you have to do as the Japanese player to nix the southern route (from Solomons), is to buy a Factory in Dutch East Indies during the first round. I know what you’re thinking - “That’s crazy, why would you build a factory on the island instead of the mainland?”

    Trust me, this is the simplest and fastest way to lock the Americans out of the South Pacific. Under normal circumstances I would say never buy a factory until the second round, but if it looks like the Allies are going Naval KJF (Bury stack, UK to Borneo etc.) then the East Indies build is definitely the way to go. It can be also made to work without a Pearl Attack, in the those rare cases when you can’t afford to ignore other areas of the board in order to sink the USA carrier. Basically what it does is to instantly force the US player to double their commitment (Atlantic ships through Panama say) or else abandon the KJF. If the allies continue with a Pacific strat this gives the Japanese the option to quickly stack East Indies with infantry, while also providing another key sea zone with production capacity for new warships. In a full KJF showdown I don’t advise factory purchases on the mainland as the Japanese player. You’re much better off covering the home island and slowly fanning out from Bury or FIC, always with a focus on defense.

    In a KJF the Japanese have different priorities than in the standard game, and can afford to let Germany take on more of the burden. So sometimes a seemingly ridiculous move, like buying a factory in East Indies, can actually prove extremely effective. It ties down even more Allied units/money in the Pacific if they decide to continue with the KJF, and it does a lot to keep Japan afloat and fighting in the Pacific, while G sets up for attaining Monster status in Eurasia. Give it a shot sometime if you like, and you’ll see what I mean about how it narrows the options available to USA.


    As for the KGF game. If you’re having trouble executing this, its probably because you’re not sending enough aid to the Russians early on. For any KGF game to work, you have to lock the Germans out of Karelia as quickly as possible, and then ‘wheel’ south through W. Russia towards Caucasus/Ukraine as circumstances allow. That doesn’t necessarily mean hitting Karelia first though, because its invariably easier to stack in Archangel or Norway and then move out, than it is to take and defend Karelia in one move. Definitely you’ll want stay out of sz 5 until well into the endgame. Sea Zone 4 is OK, but Sea Zones 3 and 6 are optimal because they allow you to threaten Berlin/France, and also (more critical) to back up Archangel from the same position at a moments notice. As a general rule USA should push through Africa for the first couple rounds, but at some point you need to set up a direct troop train into Russia in order to maintain parity with the Axis forces converging on Caucasus.

    The essential idea is not take Berlin per se, but rather to make Moscow impregnable. Once that is accomplished you can adopt whatever strategy seems most appropriate to the conditions on the board. Think of it as a race to Moscow first and foremost, with Berlin coming into sharper focus only after you can feed about 10-12 Western Units a round into the Russian wedge. The more transports and fighters the USA has the better off you’re going to be during the endgame, so you might want to consider magnified builds during the opening rounds of play (2-3 fighters in one round, 2-3 transports the next etc.), and a steady stream thereafter of at least 1 transport or 1 fighter per round. Also, don’t be so tempted to set up out of Eastern Canada, that you delay deployment. The quick shot to Algeria in one move can be a useful trick, but often times trading out transports will get more units to the front, faster than you could by moving to E. Canada first. Just something to think about if your KGF is stalling out the gate. Its easy to become infatuated with that move once you know how it works (sz 13 to sz 1 and back), but its not always the best thing to do in the beginning. Finally, on USA’s first turn, consider going South with the Atlantic fleet (2 destroyers) to sz 18 rather than North to sz 1. Usually you can have a greater impact on the game by covering Africa initially, then you can by launching troops into Norway. Going to  Brazil still allows you to threaten France, but it gives much more coverage on Africa then you can get from sz 1.

    Hope that helps a bit 🙂

  • 2007 AAR League

    i would agree that is an option only if Japan doesn´t destroy Sz55 totaly.  (or you intend to do a hard counter attack).

    other than that ist´s a good solution.  🙂

  • It’s better or not buy any boat on z55 or buy all boats on z55. A token force will not do anything

    And sacrificing z35 AC in z59 and z40 sub in z46 is not good, I think. Both ships are more valuable joining with USA’s fleet round 4 or 5. Mainly the AC, that one is very very good for defending purposes

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    As Japan I routinely have a bomber, 6 fighters, 2 battleships, 2 carriers and hopefully a destroyer (maybe even a submarine) in range of SZ 55 at the end of Japan 1 precisely because Japan can be torn up one side and down the other by the allies in very short order if they are allowed to build in SZ 55 on USA 1.

  • Thanks for the help everyone. Even though it pretty much is alike to what I am doing, for some reason those japan tanks keep rolling in.
    Guess I have to send in just a tad more help into Moscow for defending purposes, before taking on Germany…

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator


    England 100% rush to help Russia
    Russia 100% all offensive actions against Germany in Europe
    America 90% against Japan/10% against Germany as needed.

    Here’s how I usually see KJF play out when it works:

    England dumps troops into Russia through SZ 4.  These troops either move to reinforce the Russians against Germany, or counter attack the Japanese to ease pressure off of Moscow.

    Russia takes all land in Europe, thus giving them the income needed to fight Germany!  (Norway should almost always go to Russia when going KJF because it’s secure income and reimburses Russia for Buryatia, SFE and Yakut.)

    Meanwhile, America has 2 transports and a destroyer, they can easily sent 6-8 IPC worth of equipment each round to help the Russians through SZ 2 and SZ 4. (1 Transport in SZ 2, 1 in SZ 4.  Destroyer in SZ 2 probably to discourage Germany from bombing the transport there.)  Everything else can go against Japan.  Remember, Japan has to fight on the mainland which will sap IPCs.  America’s got the lion’s share of IPC territories completely out of range of the enemy (W. USA, C. USA, E. USA = 28 IPC just by themselves.  Panama and Mexico are on top of that, Alaska is amazingly easy to defend and W. Indies almost never all, even if Brazil does.)

    Also keep in mind you only need 1 transport to go island hoping.  That means that starting transport is all you need in the Pacific, everything else can go into war time navy like Submarines and carriers. (Though, I had a good game once where all I purchased were Carriers and Battleships (2 carriers, 1 fighter, the rest in battleships.)  Ended up with like 38 American battleships by the end of the game, was fun as hell!  (PS we’re talking a very LONG game.)

  • 2019 '15 '14

    Well the important thing to remember is that there is a huge difference between how the game is played under KGF conditions, versus how the game is played under Pacific or KJF conditions. If you try to apply the strategies and tactics from one set of circumstances to the other, you’ll usually end up failing. That’s why it’s important to pick an opening plan with USA and then stick with it, regardless of which direction you end up going.

    Some the strategies discussed above sound more like an Allied Pacific feint to me, sometimes called “Contain Japan First” or “Stall Japan First.” In a game like that you have a bit more flexibility as Japan than you would under a full scale KJF, but even under a hardcore commitment from USA, you can still turn the Pacific game to your advantage as the Axis. You just have to be smart, and conservative about what you do as the Japs. There are a number of slight variations on the same basic Pacific patterns (Jennifer outlined some of them earlier) but all share similar theme of confusing the Jap player and forcing them into making bad purchasing choices. If you play it smooth though, you want to call down as much Allied money into the Pacific is possible, so G can just go nuts and run the board. As the Japs all you have to do is stack the home island for as long as possible, conserve your fleet, and prevent the USA from setting up enough production in range of Tokyo to seriously threaten it. The UK needs to start doing the same early on with London, (basically as soon as the battle of the Atlantic is won), if you want to hold the Germans at bay during the endgame. Really the only reason why KGF is preferable to KJF in my view, is that it provides for a more favorable end game set up. From a cutthroat game mechanics standpoint, its just much better for the Allies to have the UK/USA in Berlin with the Japs in Moscow, than it is to have the USA in Tokyo with the Germans in Moscow and still controlling Europe. That’s not to say that you can’t win out of the KJF endgame, but its harder to pull off once you get into that 2 vs 1 situation. Pacific games are more entertaining, but are harder to bank on and require more set up.

    If I was setting up for KJF I would open like this…

    3 tanks, 3 inf
    Summer Offensive (take Ukraine), or Tank trap (strafe Ukraine, risk Caucasus)
    Both are high risk openings, but if they work as planned, then:
    Russian stack to Bury
    Forward position on India and Sinkiang
    Fighters land in Kazakh (Novos/Moscow optional)

    Couple Options for the UK build depending on which kind of Pacific strategy you want to adopt.

    1 fighter, 1 destroyer to sz 59
    If Borneo/New Guinea attack, then land the fighter in Bury, with the option to send the Carrier to block at Philippines should Borneo go well.
    -Or stack India and land the fighter there, retreating the rest of India fleet to Africa and Evacuating the ANZACs to sz 42.
    -Or merge the fleets in sz 30, with 1 inf to threaten (baits Japanese into poor position, but somewhat high risk.)
    -Or send the fighter to attack sub in sea zone 45, landing on USA carrier (sub par I think, but can pan out with a luck at Pearl.)
    Bomber to Novos or Caucasus depending on what happened with Russia and Germany.

    Whether you decide to buy a Factory or not, depends on what sort of game you want to play. If you just want to Contain or Stall Japan you don’t need a factory in the first round, and you can always buy one later if the opportunity presents itself. It’s very hard to out-and-out Kill the Japanese (eg take Tokyo) without investing in Asian production though. A factory will commit you to full KJF, whereas all of the rest of it up until this point can be backed out of at the last minute by USA if things go terribly on J1. That’s why I still prefer a Carrier or Fighter build with UK over a factory.

    This sort of game is the reason why it’s a good idea to save 1 or 2 IPCs of the Bid for Japan. If you get more than that in a pre-placement bid, you might consider 1 inf in Borneo, or 1 art in FIC. Other options are also available, depending on how much of the bid went to Japan. Germany usually needs at least 4-5 ipcs of the bid for pre-placement units, so its rare to see Japan with the whole purse, but some will give the whole thing to J.
    -Bid 1 ipc (build 2 transports and a Factory)
    -Bid 2 ipcs (4 transports, or possibly 3 transports and a sub.)
    -Bid 3 or more pre-placement ground unit

    If Japs build a Factory at East Indies, it can throw a major kink in the plan, usually forcing USA to either abandon the Pacific or re-double the commitment. The other option for the Japs is to go heavy Naval. A mainland factory on the first round, usually just invites disaster. If you can sink the US fleet, then that is always advisable, but priority number one is to conserve your forces whenever possible.

    Depending on what happens in Japans first turn, you have basically 3 options as USA. Continue in support of a full KJF, abandon the KJF at the last minute (having forced a somewhat undesirable first round purchase by Japan), or you can mess around with a two front engagement and see how things pan out. Of the three options available, that last one is the riskiest, but it’s also one of the more entertaining. Most players agree that you need to pick a direction and go all out in the beginning though, so it’s pretty rare to see the USA splitting the difference. I don’t use bomber strategies, or rely on SBR to steer the course of the game, but its possible to set up on Japan in fairly short order if you’re that way inclined. I think you’re better off focusing on ships though, because you usually need at least 2 carrier decks (and probably 3) before you can safely support a campaign in the South Pacific or the Soviet Far east. If Japan doesn’t buy a Factory in East Indies, then you can go island hoping with 1 transport, but if they do, then you’re going to need more than that to have an impact down there. I favor a solid Fleet with a healthy number of transports over a Facility (in Sinkiang or Alaska), just because it gives you a little more flexibility. Its always possible to buy factories in round 2 if the war on the mainland goes well, but if you buy them in the first round, then it locks you in to somewhat one dimensional strategy. You can say much the same thing about a Jap factory on the mainland in the first round. Usually they just end up tying you down and causing more headaches than they’re worth. Unless you’re prepared to fill them with tanks every round, you should always think twice before buying a new IC on the mainland.

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Sounds good, however, I would still go with, what I call, the Jennifer Blitz on Russia and England and see how Japan looks on America’s turn before committing one way or the other.

    (Blitz is hitting Norway, W. Russia, Ukraine, New Guinea and Borneo.  Risky, if it goes bad you can lose the entire thing, if it goes well you can win the entire thing, but odds are, it goes okay and throws your opponent off his game.)

  • 2007 AAR League

    if you wanna contain Japan the following moves is better then Jens alternative  (as we have debated several times  😉 )

    Russia should hit Westrussia, and belo,.

    Send 2 arm to yakut, 6 inf to Buryatia.  rest are optional. (to threathen manchuria)

    uk should attack FIC with 3 inf, 1 fig

    Send destroyer to kill trn in sz59, flee with ac, trn.

    This will sverelly slow japan down.

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    In a game where rounds are limited, KJF is probably not the way to go because the Allies need to stomp Germany as fast as the dice will allow.

    In a game of strategy where you are in it to win it, killing or more appropriately, isolating Japan is the easiest solution because you don’t need to rely on strong or average dice, you can go in with less than average dice and still have a large margin of error and still win.

  • Blitz is hitting Norway, W. Russia, Ukraine,

    My god Jenniffer….how in a heaven’s name do you pull that off?
    Even though I like the sound of it, I already have a hard time keeping Russia alive with just going for WRUS and UKR…
    What’s your buy in a scenario like that? Offense, or defense?

  • I’ve actually found that Japan is surprisingly weak against coordinated pressure from all 3 allies in asia.  It’s surprising because on paper Japan has enough mettle to do anything, but in reality when 3 players go before them every turn you can give them way too much to worry about.  It’s my standard allied opening and I have a hard time finding opponents who can respond to it:

    A neutralize japan first strategy, involves simultaneous pressure form russia in the north with massive US (and initially british) fly-in of air support to buryatia, a UK IC in india, and an option for an IC in sinkiang if china has very few japanese forces in it at the end of turn 1 OR turn 2.  The principle is that all three allies forcing japan to swat flies is enough to slow her down and often beat her in asia.

    Even a moderately successful delay in japan’s ability to break through is often enough for the allies to carry the day on other fronts.  But in my experience, there is actually a great possibility of actually shutting japan down even if they build two IC’s initially.  If things are going well, UK may be able to take a french-indo IC, which would signal that japan has pretty much failed.

    More specifically, here’s a few principles I view as important if choosing to contest Japan’s control of asia:

    1. Russia needs >6 infantry ultimately in the north, and also must threaten to supplement with this with some offensive power (even if you don’t use it, the threat is critical).  examples include a plane landed in kazakh or a tank diverted from the western front (harder to manage).

    2. Buryatia is a critical massing point for the first turn or two, because it’s the easiest square for the US to reinforce with its massive airpower.  As long as it is held, us bombers built in  western US can strike asian sea & land targets without delay.  however, for russia to hold buryatia on turn 1 it’s best for UK to land a fighter there.

    3. UK boats should occupy the sea zone outside kwangtung on round 1 (carrier, destroyer), while transport blocks sea zone outside french indo china to prevent japan from leveraging it’s second battleship.  That battleship should have no useful targets on turn 1, while japan has to risk real losses to take out both the UK and US fleets on turn 1.

    4. Tanks in caucusus are necessary to supplement any IC in india.  You can’t gurantee japan won’t take india (by luck or skill), but you can leave the option of re-taking it so that british building in the IC there is not interrupted.

    5. British troops in india also need offensive capabilities, preferably ready to strike on turn 2.  this means that having your bomber (and your initial fighter) in striking distance of french indo at the end of turn 1.  This is all part of the general approach of forcing japan to make hard trade-offs against multiple threats.

    6. US ground troops, whether there’s an IC in sinkiang or not, are worth their weight in gold when you have significant air power available in asia.  Each ground troops you keep alive enables a potential US attack and leveraging of it’s air force to kill japanese ground forces.  Lacking ground troops, us air raids are risky and expensive.

    7. Make japan take losses.  Even if you end up ultimately losing the asian front, offensive moves are necessary by the allied powers to reduce the buildup of japanese ground forces.  If done long enough, japan’s full strength will emerge too late to save germany.  For instance, even if it’s “suicide” to move into manchuria with 8 russian infantry, it’s often still worth it.  A force that size causes enough damage on the defense that forcing a pile-on from japan is worth the cost.  The alternative of sitting and waiting while japan grows secure is what allows japan to overwhelm its opponents.

    While all this is going on, the UK spends >50% of it’s money and the US spends most of it’s money against germany.  It’s a big initial focus but not a sustained waste of money in the pacific with boats or anything like that.

  • I don’t like a lone India IC. You lose focus on Germany with UK (the purpose of KGF) and that IC will fall round 3 unless you give massive reinforcements. And if you do, it will fall anyway round 4 or 5. If you add that a sin IC, India will resist a bit more, but anyway is 2 ICs Japan have not to build. For this work, you need both ICs and a big Pacific USA navy, then, both ICs can survive all the game and still Moscow can resist.

    Still, I don’t think you should ignore Japan. Each game I play, I get more convinced it’s a very bad idea. Axis will reach economic parity easier if allies ignore Japan than if allies don’t ignore Japan, and there are some tricks here and there than can give axis even economic advantage.

    And I hate monster multi-color stacks in Moscow, Leningrad or Stalingrad. They give me headache. But, of course, that is a personal matter  😄

  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator


    Blitz is hitting Norway, W. Russia, Ukraine,

    My god Jenniffer….how in a heaven’s name do you pull that off?
    Even though I like the sound of it, I already have a hard time keeping Russia alive with just going for WRUS and UKR…
    What’s your buy in a scenario like that? Offense, or defense?

    As KGB and Mollari and a few other players who follow my games can tell you, I routinely pull off this attack (failed against DarthMaximus once, and he’s definitely not someone you want to fail against!)

    3 Infantry, Armor, Fighter to Norway
    6 Infantry, Artillery, Armor to W. Russia
    3 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor, Fighter to Ukraine

    Assumes no bid units in any of those territories.  33% chance to win in all 3.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Ok, I’ve been around for some 15-20 years of AA or so, but …. 38 Battleships ?  :? 😮
    Say no more…!

  • 2007 AAR League


    Jen i love if you do such a stupid thing in a game vs me 😉

  • @Cmdr:


    Blitz is hitting Norway, W. Russia, Ukraine,

    My god Jenniffer….how in a heaven’s name do you pull that off?
    Even though I like the sound of it, I already have a hard time keeping Russia alive with just going for WRUS and UKR…
    What’s your buy in a scenario like that? Offense, or defense?

    As KGB and Mollari and a few other players who follow my games can tell you, I routinely pull off this attack (failed against DarthMaximus once, and he’s definitely not someone you want to fail against!)

    3 Infantry, Armor, Fighter to Norway
    6 Infantry, Artillery, Armor to W. Russia
    3 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor, Fighter to Ukraine

    Assumes no bid units in any of those territories.  33% chance to win in all 3.

    Okay, that I can follow…but I have tried both Norway and Ukraine like that in R1, and either I have bad luck, or you are in fierce problems in R2…

    WRUS is a safe bet, with that amount of infantry, you have enough cannon fodder before you feel it in your firepower, but especially Norway and Ukr tend to go very nasty for me, practically each and everytime I try it…

Log in to reply

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 10
  • 23
  • 126
  • 65
  • 4
  • 15
  • 8
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys