Thanks for the replies. That clears up my confusion.

@cond1024:

I would say no, because you didn’t own it at the start of your turn.

indeed.

Rulebook at page 22 says: “place new facilities in any territory that you have controlled since the start of your turn”

Yes, that is allowed. Tanks can do the same thing.

We both had prior family engagements, thought I mentioned that in our last email, and Germany was a paper tiger after the sealion bid and all the failed tech rolls. Yes you were pushing India, and I probably would have lost it, but the us fleet was moving and ready to rumble, not to mention ANZAC actually had a BB and a fully loaded AC fleet ready to move! UK had sealed up Africa and Germany had a one layer offensive into Russia (no backup inf on the way). By the way you slipped the +10 IPC for Japan rule into the original Alpha setup when we played. That is part of the improved Alpha i think, Jim and I had never played with the Alpha setup before that so we never noticed.

I still think it would have been close. But I distinctly remembering you folding during the auction due to time after we decided to call it (9 hours of game-play) but I may be wrong.

Also I will send you some links concerning the tactical game I mentioned that we should demo next year at Ellis Con. I have made Terrain and stuff for it over the past few weeks. Its Axis & Allies on steroids.

You should always buy something because you never know if something unpredictable will happen, and you’ll be in some way prepared.
Also, the “save all your cash” move might not work too well, because you have a limited number of units you can buy on a turn.  I know 20 for the east coast seems like a hell of alot, but when you’re talking ships AND planes AND transports AND infantry AND tanks/artillery, you might be short.

I would like to play a game with at least 4 people but most of my friends that played Spring 1942 did not move on to Global.  They found it to be too time consuming and complicated.  I myself love the game and I am thinking of trying out playing a forum game at some point soon.

@The:

Can tactical bombers intercept (defend against bombings?).

No.

@The:

And when it says that bombers attack the intercepters (defenders) on a one, does that include both strategic and tactical?

Yes.

@The:

And can tactical bombers and fighters both scramble in to defend their sea zones/interceptors?

Yes.

You are correct–friendly ships belonging to other powers that are in the same SZ as an amphib assault do not fire during the attack.

I’m liking the .PFD version. Good job man. I’m going to print it out tomorrow!

Thank you very much, I only wanted to ask about air units. I know what you can do with your land units. Thanks for your very good explaination!

@Sime:

That?s a pretty interesting strategy for that specific scenario.

Do you think he was aware that Germany could reach his capital before you sent the Italians to America?  In your opinion, was he buying all the talk of you sending the Germans to Egypt?

I think if I was in your position I would have sent the Italians to Africa instead of attacking America, keeping up the illusion that Axis is heading south.  If he didn?t perceive the German threat, he would be sending his units to intercept the Japanese and hopefully leaving his capital lightly defended.

It?s a bit riskier this way because if he sees the threat and stocks his capital, the Italian units are no longer in position to invade America and divert attention away from the Japanese, but it?s just another way of looking at the situation.

Anyway, great write-up, Pelanderfunk. I enjoyed reading it.

No, he definitely saw it coming. Truthfully, the Italians were a bit of a waste in the US – all they really did was give the US a few more targets. On the other hand, maybe the resources he wasted on those targets could have won the war if he used them differently.

My opponent tends to let his emotions leak into his strategy. I knew that if I sent even a tiny Italian fleet over, he would destroy it the first chance he got, even at the expense of a more benefitial move.

IMO, if transports or any other ship enters SZ with enemy sub, sub should always have the opyion of suprize attack shot. Thats the way i play it.

@Krieghund:

After the “or”.

Gracias. Might want to re-word that on the original post so there isn’t anymore confusion.

Advanced Arty would help as well.  However, I don’t think Russia can afford to start rolling TECH unless you use the AA50 token house rule.

@kcdzim:

Tragically, there are not enough japanese roundels to do this (later in the game).

What’s even more tragic (or fortunate depending on how you look at it) is that I have 10 differe A&A’s so a lack of control markers for the big 5 is never an issue. A lack of ANZAC markers on the other hand…

when i wrote my original reply alpha was in its early stages. since then lh has gone to great lengths to balance the game. i now am very happy with the new set up and think it is balanced

@RedHunter:

@calvinhobbesliker:

I think in Poland, the calvary was attacking German inf, and then tanks showed up.

You would be wrong to think that. Polish calvary and German tanks never clashed. The Polish horsemen ran like hell when they saw tanks because they weren’t insane.

You just finished me sentence.I did not mean to imply the cavalry decided to fight the tanks.

I would abuse improved shipyards right off the bat. I would make sure that the USA had the only floating major navy in both oceans. No point of having an edge if you don’t abuse it. And Japan can’t get its cites if they have no fleet.

That answers my questions.
Thanks!

Yes, but they must load onto the transports on their turn, then wait for their next turn to unload, sitting on the transports for a full round of play.