I prefer a 6 inf, 2 arm, 1 bomber or 3 inf, 1 art, 3 arm, 1 bomber. The added punch to the Luftwaffe can be really helpful in preventing the UK from doing any landings on UK1.
Usually the Algeria landing is prevented until US1 or UK2, which gives the Germans 1 more round to bring troops to Africa (if Russia hasn’t bought a sub on R1, that is). And if you manage to sink the UK fleet on G2 then you won’t have to worry much from the UK/US for the next turns. If the UK buys 1 AC and 2 DDs, then they’ll have those plus 2 fighters and the US cruiser for defense, possibly also the R sub, depending on how that battle went. You’ll have 2 subs, 2 fighters and 2 bombers, if the 3rd sub survived the battle up SZ1 (by losing the fighter instead of the sub, for instance) then it is possible to sink all Allied ships.

Maybe there is a small contradiction here.  Perhaps the rule on page 30 should say “anytime it would otherwise fire”.  Fire is simultaneous, whereas the actual dice rolling is not.

I think it also needs to be mentioned that Algeria and SZ17 are not adjacent.  The map, as printed, suggests that they are.

@habs4life9:

Let’s say you moved the Moscow ftr to China on R1 and you won Indochina with the 3 inf 1 ftr plus crusier bombard attack on UK1. That means you did not counter in Egypt, which means the German are totally free to blitz Africa. This will do the Allies in in the end. In addition, even with the Indochina forces taken out, Japan can still hit China with 5 inf, its bmr, the Japan ftr and the Manch ftr. Japan can still set up its shuck. Only now they will have to choose between giving up Manch to the Russians or surrendering Shanghai to the British. They’d probably save Shanghai and send their shuck over there instead of to Manch, so they can’t hit Buryatia. But Manch is a small price to pay for the sake of Japan advancing through China regardless and working to protect Shanghai, because Germany is strong as hell now. Japan’s navy is sufficient to keep the Americans at bay in the Pacific for a few rounds. I think a skilled Germany can reach Moscow quicker than the Allies can break down the Japanese defenses in E.Asia and/or the Pacific, and at that point it’s game over. I just don’t like KJF because it seems entirely too risky.

Germany can have some of Africa for the first couple rounds but steps can be taken as early as round 1 to stop them if you forgo the Egypt counter. It all depends with how much he won Egypt with. Say if it’s with one tank, you can fight with an INF and a bomber.

Every allied strat is dependant on what Germany did. Even still, with such a head start in Asia, the allies can divert forces back to Caucus from india. With no or minimal land forces and two factories, Russia never has to worry about diverting forces backwards. It is risky but any winning strat involves risk against experienced players.

Touche.

@Jive:

Just played my first game of AA last night, and are slowly getting the hang of things. Couple questions though.

In strategic bombing, if the AA guns miss, and the bomber rolls to see how much damage is done to the factory, does he get to keep doing this?  Or does he get to keep rolling until he does max damage?

You roll 1 die for each bomber that survived the AA Gun once

Also, if a group of planes is doing a land attack on say, tanks in a territory with AA guns, do we roll for the AA guns before every attack?

Thanks!

Jive

You also just roll once before any attacks are made. If you have both fighters and bombers on the group of planes then roll separately for each.

No problem :)

Just in case : http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16051.msg536874#msg536874

I don’t think that the purpose of placing an IC in India is to hold India. It deters Japan from walking straight into Russia an dallows the allies much more time to get into Europe. Also with India only having a value of three I don’t feel like the IPC drain is a huge commitment. Also when you couple this with a IC by the US in China you turn Asia into a back and forth contest between for those middle terrorities similar to how Russia and Germany treat Eastern Europe.

As the UK in this strategy I usually build a sizable air force to keep Germany from amassing a navy, which with help from the U.S. this is not a problem. That frees me up to put a combination of units in India and to attempt a pipeline of units into Archangel. I feel like the goal with the India IC on UK1 is to stall Japan and harass them when you can. This leaves Russia to devote a much larger force to Germany and with a little luck I have been able to to attack Japan with Russia as well.

@Fleetwood:

As a side note, not attacking z2 doesn’t mean the Allies get a totally free pass in the Atlantic. Say Germany commits a sub and 2-3 fighters to the Med cruiser. 2/3 of the time the sub lives. If Germany builds a bomber G1 and the med sub lives and the Baltic subs escape, they will still be able to kill a round one Allied move to z8 2/3 of the time. That’s 3 subs, 4 fighters, 2 bombers vs 2 destroyers, 1 sub, 1 carrier, 2 fighters, 1 cruiser, and 4 transports using this calculator. http://www.dskelly.com/misc/aa/aasim.html

Are you saying that Germany should buy a cruiser and a destroyer for the Med on G1, and not use the Z8 sub to splash the Canadian transport, but retreat it into the Med (Z13 is as far as it can reach)? This takes away half of Germany’s income, which means it can only commit 20 IPCs to the land battle with Russia, and allows UK to retain both of its Atlantic transports. I don’t know if that is a good move…

@c64:

So how about buying 1 AC and 2 Destroyers on UK1 ? You could place the AC and one DD in SZ8, which are joined by the american Cruiser on US1. The other British destroyer could be used to block the 2 subs from the Baltic Sea.
This way you sacrifice one DD but on Germany’s second turn it would come down to
1 sub, 2 ftr, 2 Bmb  vs   1 AC + 2 ftr, 1 DD, 1 Cruiser

Maybe Germany might rethink attacking that fleet.  ( success is about 50%)

I’ve been thinking it over and I realize that an AC and two destroyers is by far the best buy on UK1, especially if Germany has destroyed all your European navy, which a smart German player will have done. Now if the dice turned out well for Germany, they will have 2 ftrs in W.Eu., and 2 ftrs and a bomber in Norway (assuming that the bomber was used to take out the battleship in Z2 on G1, and is only eligible to land in Norway). But they will probably only have 2 subs, assuming the battleship hit on defense and took one out. If the Baltic subs moved to Z6 or Z7 (or maybe even 1 in each) they threaten all four SZs into which UK can build. Building into Z6 and Z7 are out of the question in such a situation, because you are open to an attack by 2 subs 4 ftrs 1 bomber and (if it is still alive) 1 destroyer. So Z2 and Z8 are your options; 2 ftrs can still reach you in either of these zones, but 2 is better than 4. Building into Z8 is probably the best, because the US cruiser can move to this zone before Germany gets to go again, and the Russian sub will link up on R2 assuming it submerged during the Z2 battle on G1.

@chompers:

Hey all, quick question.  Let’s say Japan attacks the US with a battleship, carrier, and 2 fighters.  The US defends with a carrier and two fighters.  Turn one the US takes 2 hits and chooses to remove the carrier and a fighter.  If Japan calls off the attack at that point to avoid letting the fighter roll another dice, does the remaining US fighter simply die off as it has no carrier to land on?  Or does it have the option of re-basing somewhere?

The remaining US fighter can move 1 space to land at a friendly territory/island/carrier. It it can’t land then it is destroyed.

@Krieghund:

That was the plan.  However, dealing with the problems with AAP40 may delay it a bit.  The AA42 and AAP40 FAQs, along with some updates to the AA50 FAQ, were all supposed to happen at the same time.

Ok. Thanks Krieghund.

I really need to get some more f2f games in with some experienced players. I play my uncle who used to play the classic MB version with my brother. My uncle is really good at seeing things that might be a potential problem in future rounds so I try to pay attention to what he does and file that information away for future use. It is hard to remember all that stuff sometimes though. I have played all the AA board games with my uncle and he usually beats me in the global games but we are pretty even in the battle specific games like Bulge or Guadalcanal.

My wife pulled the Russia R1 offensive on me as Germany and it works! If you get OK dice rolls and commit all your forces, Germany ends up defensive for about 3 turns which is huge.

If the sub hits the carrier, it will not fire back.  If the sub misses, the carrier will fire back.

email sent, c64.

Welcome, asmeus!

Yes, you may load land units onto a transport during combat movement and make an amphibious assault in the same turn.  In fact, that’s the only time you may load land units onto a transport during combat movement.  Under any other circumstances, you must load them in noncombat movement.

Yes.  However, in this particular example there would be no need for them to do so, since with the bomber unable to hit them any longer the battle would be effectively over.

@Malekith:

Just wondering: I didnt think you could put troops on a ship and off load on same turn? Or am I misunderstanding? Or is this a new rule, I have the 2007 version with no cruisers

@Derek77:

As far as Germany turn one is concerned, I think a lot of players use the battleship to kill the med destroyer and land 2 units in Egypt with the transport from Italy and kill Egypt turn one with one plane from Balkans and 2 units adjacent to Egypt.  The one game I didn’t do this, the allies made short work of me……  the med cruiser can be killed with just planes.

You could always do that.