That’s correct.

Using a J1 DoW with the intent to take out India will indeed work.I pose it to you that this is what the designers had in mind anyway, as its the only way for Japan to truely have a shot at winning. The real game is what happens after India falls. Japan must take one more VC and hold it. The games ive played vs a J1 DoW have come down to an arms race for navies and airforces, usually resulting in a stalemate until someone gets too tired an screws up. India must fall, and this makes it a much more realistic game , as Britian didnt play much of a role in this theater anyway. BTW (subs, infantry and fighters are key to US/ANZAC defenses after Britian falls). All that said, it is important that the British and Chinese kill as many aircraft as possible before they die, Yunnan and Burma must be held onto if you want to delay the J3 fall of India until J4…allowing the other Allies a chance to build up another turn while Japan is out of position.

Using a J1 DoW with the intent to take out India will indeed work.I pose it to you that this is what the designers had in mind anyway, as its the only way for Japan to truely have a shot at winning. The real game is what happens after India falls. Japan must take one more VC and hold it. The games ive played vs a J1 DoW have come down to an arms race for navies and airforces, usually resulting in a stalemate until someone gets too tired an screws up. India must fall, and this makes it a much more realistic game , as Britian didnt play much of a role in this theater anyway. BTW (subs, infantry and fighters are key to US/ANZAC defenses after Britian falls). All that said, it is important that the British and Chinese kill as many aircraft as possible before they die, Yunnan and Burma must be held onto if you want to delay the J3 fall of India until J4…allowing the other Allies a chance to build up another turn while Japan is out of position.

America would build marines and send them to France, causing Germany quite a bit of problems.

Yes.

Kreighund, why didnt ANZAC start with an AA gun?
Seems bazzare to me that that power doesnt get one.

Razor,

Nice try  :-D  I was thinking it was probably something they discovered in playtesting.  But I just can’t think of a reason to differentiate between islands and continents for this purpose.  I know, for instance, that the Italians had a pretty good navy.  Their surface ships were mostly well-designed and fast.  They did not, however, equip them with sufficient anti-aircraft capability.  They didn’t have any aircraft carriers of their own, which forced them to hug the coastlines whenever possible in order to stay within range of land-based air.  With the current rules, they could be protected by an airbase in, say, Sicily.  But if they were in the Adriatic they’d have no defensive air cover, even if they had airbases in both Yugoslavia and Italy.

It gets to the point where you don’t even  :roll: anymore you just plow on through.

OH YEAH!
I did leave out something.  Besides all of the computer incarnations of the board game (“third edition”, Iron Blitz, and TripleA) there is also a RTS called Axis & Allies that never quite worked right on my PC for some reason.  You can get it for like $10 on amazon or ebay.  I’ll have to check it out again and let you know.

did you see the Anchors in the Trafalgar section?  Now if you took those and added those little stands like allboxcars mentioned you’d have some 3D pieces for naval bases that could gel well with the game….

@Autarch:

If it takes 7 turns to take out India after a J1 attack, you or your opponents aren’t playing Japan correctly. It should fall on J3 or J5 at the latest. All these strategies about bleeding Japan of IPC’s via convoy attacks is amusing. The game should be over by the time anything is in position to attack the convoys in sufficient strength to hurt Japan.

ah, but i see now you guys play with the straight India attack
we used the huge mainland IC tactic
but still, it should be possible to hold axis

This was very enjoyable to read.

@Fishmoto37:

Sounds like this game lasted way too long. If ANZAC is moving infantry into India and taking Indo-China then Japan is already defeated. Start a new game! @Dylan:

I was the Allies and won that was cool, but I need to know if it was good luck of good strategy. It started off with China trading the Burma road or whatever and China holding the front line at any cost. Then when the other 3 declared war Britain assisted China as much as possible and the US in Manila and the Australian’s knocked out the Japanese in the Southern Pacific and the US in the rest. Australia then transported whatever they could into India. Australia had as much troops as they could now into India they captured French Indo China built a Minor industry and knocked the Japanese out of Asia and captured Korea with a minor industry. The bored Chinese army kept reinforcing the Pacific Asian border and helped Australia hold Korea along with Britain. Britain started bombing Japan while Australia worked on a massive fleet. Australia then lost in a failed attack to knock out the Japanese fleet. The US then finished Japan’s fleet off. the United States and Australia now were reinforcing Korea while Britain reinforced Shanghai and India. The US then started daily bombings on Tokyo, soon assisted by Australia. Britain left Asia because there were enough Chinese stranded they went to Okinawa to land there troops. Japan were weakened enough Britain attacked it with a few planes and failed. Australia then killed a lot of it, but then the US stole the show.

I did start a new game and India fell right away China kept on fighting at all costs and the US player way doing okay, but ANZAC was crushed and the US and Japan had a huge navy battle both had heavy casualties, but the US won. China then made a do or die move which was die (of course) and the US lost Alaska and Yukon. I felt like I couldn’t lose British Columbia (because I live there), but got assraped and Western USA wasn’t able to hold out which they were able to send in full army at Hawaii.  :-(

I got my pieces a month ago and they came in a huge envelope with bubble wrap.  The pieces were all fine and the battlestrip was perfect. All postage was paid

Just got the game yesterday

Map - Well pretty nice (Even though mine was a lttle messed up on the fold line on one map board) largly a blown up version from the orginial A&A Pacific game board, Mexico, more of Canada, Russia and Alaska was nice to see but no Panama Canal (hope to see that in the Europe 1940 Boad) the canal was a Jap target more then once.  Another nice point every thing was more realalic placed on the map Wake is now equal to Hawaii and not north of.  But wheres Papua New Guinea on the map? Its on the old but gone on the new.

Units - a little beef, here not as nice scupts as in the past seems flaten in my set, and wheres a B-29 much more Iconic in the Pacific then anywhere else.

Game system
excelent as expceted now big but:

Marines, why were they left out I thought the unit and rule from the original were good enough
The set up,  would have been nice to inclde a mid 42 set up.

You’re welcome.

Yes, though such a movement would generally be made during noncombat movement.

I will offer up a rationale for the tac/tank combo. Think about Panzers and Stukas for a moment. The Panzers are used to pin down the enemy in known locations. Then Stukas are sent in to finish off enemy defensive positions before the Panzers blitz the line. If it weren’t for the Panzers pinning the enemy units, they would be harder for the Stukas to hit.

I may be talking out my a$$ though…

Lots of info on that here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16897.0

All of the Dutch “places” are islands, so no, you can’t build ICs on “Dutch places”, but only because they’re islands, not because they originally belonged to another country.  For instance, both the Allies and Japan have the option of building an IC on French Indo-China if they gain control of that territory.