I play this game somewhat regularly with a friend. We have been using a steadily increasing starting bid for the allies. In the last game, it was 18. I played as Allies and bought 3 subs for the UK, one placed in the Mediterranean off the coast of Egypt, one off India and one off south Australia. The sub off Egypt deterred a German R1 attack of Egypt or Trans-Jordan, and the German player responded to it by placing a carrier and destroyer in the Mediterranean to join the battleship and transport. I then used the two other subs together with the UK Indian and Australian fleets to sink the Japanese fleet in SZ37. The UK won that battle with a carrier and one fighter surviving.

I won the game, going full Pacific with the US. The US was able to take the money islands and build factories on them. The UK held India and Africa for the whole game. Russia was able to hang on. I believe Russia was able to hang on because Germany spent a lot on navy and yet never took Africa or accomplished anything else with it. The UK eventually sunk it with fighters. The Axis surrendered when UK built an Atlantic fleet that was unchallenged by either the kriegsmarine or luftwaffe. Meanwhile, the US had the edge on Japan.

That will continue to be my Allied strategy. However, I think the Axis may still have won had Germany built only land and air units. Also, Japan erred by failing to take out the surviving UK AC and fighter after the round 1 attack against sz 37. That UK fleet did wonders to maintain Africa and project force in Asia.

I have played this game twice, and neither time has the Allies stood a chance. I understand from reading the forum that the consensus is indeed that the game is heavily balanced in the Axis’ favour. I am looking to see if there is any consensus as to how the game can be balanced.

Is there a standard starting bid to assist the Allies?

Also, are there any game start modifications that players have found helpful? One slight change my partner and I made during our second game was to move one of the two German subs in the Atlantic so that only one of the subs could hit the US transports. We plan to keep this rule and also allow the allies a starting bid of 12 IPCs. Should that set us up for a balanced game?

@Mallery29:

A Norway invasion rarely is successful for the Russians, especially when you leave WRus and Caucus in a terrible position.  You will probably never hold onto Norway, and will spend wasteful time trying to recapture it.  Germany can seal off the North Atlantic and isolate Norway immediately.  And if Egypt falls G1, your Brits/US should focus on retaking Africa immediately, not taking Norway.  Never put your Russian FTRs in position to be lost either (landing in Karelia).  The Russians can’t hold/fight if their fighters are lost.  Trying to hold a lot of land with the Russians is not a recommended tactic.  The two territories you should concentrate your thoughts in is with WRus and Ukraine.  I’m not in favor of buying tanks so early (1 is ok, 2 is wasteful).  4inf/3art provides D and offense at the same time (especially when you keep your FTRs alive).

I see the main purpose of a Norway invasion on R1 as protecting the British battleship and transport. If Norway is taken, that British fleet cannot be hit with German air on G1.

I’m looking for advice on the best allocation of Russian troops to complement an invasion of Norway on R1.

I will send all available units to Norway: 3 inf, 1 tank and 2 fighters. What should be done with the rest of the troops?

I assume it is also important to take West Russia. Is it best to send all other available troops to West Russia, or should some be held back to fortify Karelia or Caucusus? Should troops be sent to Karelia to support the fighter that will hopefully survive Norway and land there?

Additionally, what would be the best R1 purchase to complement a Norway invasion? Will the standard 2 inf, 2 art and 2 tanks or 3 inf and 3 tanks suffice, or is it best to make a defensive purchase heavy on inf?

Thanks.

I’m not so sure this would make the game more historically accurate, as the Allies supplised the Soviets with heaps of equipment and supplies during the war.

Anyhow, it doesn’t make much sense to me to restrict the Allies in this way.  In this proposed scenario, the Axis could employ an aggressive KRF strategy, and by the time the UK and US could intercede it would likely be too late.

@Zhukov44:

@GEneral:

my friend likes to buy a lot of subs as the allies because of the new sub rules, but i dont know how to equal him in naval strength as the axis. help?

My advice….don’t buy navy with either Axis.  The only time to buy any navy (besides transports) for Japan is when you are trying to defend the sz around Japan.  For Germany, don’t buy navy.   Instead, buy planes and attack their fleets (or don’t attack their fleets, either way they have to spend on useless carriers and destroyers to defend themselves against the THREAT of you attacking via air).  If you buy subs, you are essentally committing to attacking the Allies once they are in range (or they will kill your subs the next turn).  With planes, you can attack at a time of your choosing.

It should be interesting to see whether it becomes more cost-efficient for the Germans to buy tons of air to ward off enemy fleets or buy tons of infantry to hold the territories.  The latter strategy, more common in Revised, will still work well, but the former may have a lot of promise too.

As Germany, I think sub purchases are important.  I use the subs in concert with the airforce to hold off Allied invasions.  Using the subs as fodder, you can keep the allies at bay without having to lose a single aircraft in a naval battle.  I do not buy any naval units other than subs as they are usually easy prey for Allied aircraft.

For land units, I buy mostly infantry for the first few rounds to stabilize the eastern front and secure capitals.  Once I’ve stabilized my lines, I start buying more tanks to put pressure on the Soviets.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

@The:

@Col.Stauffenberg:

KJF is a viable strat in my opinion. I’ve seen it work many times. The best way I’ve found to screw them over would be -

RUS- move 6 INF to BURI
Land 1 FIG in China

Uk - Buy 1 IC and 5 INF. - attack Borneo with 3 INF, FIG, Cruiser hit. AC takes out Trans. Attack New Guinea with 2 INF. Sub does whatever. Land Fig in China

If you win these fights which is entirely possible, Japan is already in a bind. US builds an IC to place in Sinkiang, an AC, trans and sub. Build pacific navy for two more rounds and move out by round 4. I have thought of counter attacking Pearl but I haven’t tried it yet.

Hope Russia can hold out, and for the first few rounds they can. UK buys only for the IC in India for rounds 2 and 3 and saves the rest to plop a navy down in round 3.

It is tricky, you just have to time it so the German stack on the Russian front isn’t big enough to take them down. As soon as the stop sending forces to the front have to concentrate on home defense, the game is almost yours.

Cannot you only invade Borneo with 2 infantry?

Also, what’s the purpose of the 5 infantry purchase on UK1?

Oops, I meant to say French Indochina. I’m not a fan of the Borneo attack.

The five infantry purchase is to defend the UK homeland from the German transport that’s going to live if Russia doesn’t use the plane to attack the Baltic Navy, which if they are landing in China, they probably shouldn’t risk it.

If Germany didn’t attack your navy, say they went for the med cruiser with the sub instead, then you’ll want to be using those trans on round 1, most likely to drop stuff off in Norway or Africa. If you don’t plan on doing those moves and want to keep your navy alive, then you don’t have to buy INF. In fact, it might be better to be conservative and save 15 on round 1 and buy and Atlantic navy on round 2.

Thanks, I’ll give this strat a whirl.

@Col.Stauffenberg:

KJF is a viable strat in my opinion. I’ve seen it work many times. The best way I’ve found to screw them over would be -

RUS- move 6 INF to BURI
Land 1 FIG in China

Uk - Buy 1 IC and 5 INF. - attack Borneo with 3 INF, FIG, Cruiser hit. AC takes out Trans. Attack New Guinea with 2 INF. Sub does whatever. Land Fig in China

If you win these fights which is entirely possible, Japan is already in a bind. US builds an IC to place in Sinkiang, an AC, trans and sub. Build pacific navy for two more rounds and move out by round 4. I have thought of counter attacking Pearl but I haven’t tried it yet.

Hope Russia can hold out, and for the first few rounds they can. UK buys only for the IC in India for rounds 2 and 3 and saves the rest to plop a navy down in round 3.

It is tricky, you just have to time it so the German stack on the Russian front isn’t big enough to take them down. As soon as the stop sending forces to the front have to concentrate on home defense, the game is almost yours.

Cannot you only invade Borneo with 2 infantry?

Also, what’s the purpose of the 5 infantry purchase on UK1?

In all the games of 42 I’ve played, the Allies have used a KGF strategy.  And for good reason, I would say.  However, I would like to mix it up and surprise my opponent by trying a KJF strategy.  Any suggestions for a good KJF strategy?

I guess the obvious things would be to build a large US navy on the first couple rounds to gain control of the Pacific, then amass a large amphibious force.  I suppose the Solomon Islands and Wake Island would be good first targets to set up airfields; then Manilla may be the next target as it would likely be the easiest capital to take.  Or, would it be best to go from Alaska right to the mainland?

For the UK, I think holding India and building an IC there to harass the Japanese would be paramount.

The main concern would be:  can the USSR hold off the Germans with only minimal support from the UK and US?  Also, would the US be able of helping in Europe at all, while mounting an effective Pacific campaign?  Would the US, for example, be capable of securing Africa?

Comments and/or suggestions?

@Concealer:

I should have asked earlier but did you build an IC in Africa with this strategy either in Egypt or South Africa? It seems like the idea of building an IC in South Africa isn’t so popular in AA1942.

No, I didn’t purchase any additional ICs as the Allies.  Once Africa was secure, I focused solely on Norway, then Karelia, and finally WE with the UK.  I had 6 transports running between the US and Africa, making an additional IC unnecessary.

The one time I saw the UK purchase an IC in South Africa it was used primarily as an airbase to harass the Japanese fleet, and the strategy seemed mildly successful.  I have never seen an IC placed in Egypt.