Secure Amur for a bombing base on Japan :mrgreen:

Attacking strict neutrals would be very risky for either side. I could see the axis doing it, before the allies. The axis would have to coordinate their efforts to take out all the big boys before the allies could swoop in to gain the free units. I think you would have to start w/Italy invading Turkey, plus what else it could reach in Mid east or South Africa. Then Germany could invade Spain and Sweden before the allies could get there (US would have to be out of position, or not yet at war). If you started the invasions w/Germany, Russia & UK would swoop in before Italy to claim their free inf. Of course I think Germany could attack all 3 major strict neutrals in the same turn as well, because I think Germany can invade Turkey from Greece (land/bridge). Your still giving the allies the Mongolian and Afghan forces, unless Jap has them beat back at the time, plus the S Americans.

In any event, say the axis are successful in their attacks killing the inf, and gaining most of the tt. Say there wasn’t much left for the allies to claim. I would still think in the long run it might come back to bite them in the A$$. They will have lost some units in the battles, and will be spread pretty thin. They now have more tt to def from counter attack, or major allied invasion. Spain would give the allies another shore to perform a major amphib, and Turkey would allow Russia/UK to tag team Germany through that same land/bridge w/o messing with Russia’s NO. I can see some short term advantages though, like Italian amphib into the Black Sea, or extra $ for a round or two, but would the advantages out way the risk?

AAlife -

I tend to use a lot of the Infantry / Armor / Planes.

Never used a significant amount of ships.

@mwindianapolis:

@Seven_Patch:

I’ll wait for the real thing.

Sometime a little rasterbation with some imagination is better than the real thing. :evil:

I’d rather have the real thing, but would “rasterbate” if i had too. :roll:

Look over the stickied thread - they’re pretty much in there, but I haven’t heard anyone who’s 100% sure of every single NO down to the last detail.

@Seven_Patch:

No, it would seem according to the rules that UK India can never recieve the IPC’s from West India if UK london is captured.

It’s kind of funny that they can never control there own country.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@miamibeach:

Uk Europe is more like 26.  Italy will be about 22 at most.  Japan at 32.  Uk Pacific 24.

UK Europe is 26? They have 34 with NO so there are 4 subs doing convoy raids?

It depends on how many SUBs remain.  When I was Germany I only had 1 SUB left, SgtBlitz had 3 SUBs left.  Including the NO The range should be from 34 at most, to 28 at least depending on German strategy.

Thank you.

Plus Germany has a little extra incentive to make sure they keep it with the new NO.  Taking Norway and building an IC there won’t be the sure thing it’s always been up to now, but yes, if the US can pull it off it would be a major shift in power.

I have posted a new R1. Lets play the game!

All that is needed to destroy the RN is the Luftwaffe for one turn when they do not have that much else to do. The Germans losses are limited to a few subs and a plane or two. It is a bit extreme but i understand why it might be needed for balance.

Krieg is such a life saver, thanks for being here for us to pick your brain.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

I don’t think the UK can spare the IPCs, but…

Can UK build a minor IC in W. India, use European theater monies to build land units there, and then walk them east to slow Japan?

If so, this might be a viable strategy to hold off Japan until the cavalry come.

Yes you can build a minor IC in West India with London’s money and send them to East India.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=19651.0 here’s some more info.

True.^

Most of the NOs in Anniversary were simply dependent on a territory (or territories) being held by one side, so UK often gets a NO for the US controlling the Carolines in the Pacific, or the US getting a NO for the UK controlling France, or Russia getting a NO for the UK controlling Norway, Finland, and Poland.  It’s basically the same thing; ANZAC was closely connected to the UK still, having been colonies/territories in the British Commonwealth/Empire up until just before WW2, so a good deal of British economics was affected by the status of Australia and New Zealand, just as it was with Canada (which is recognized in the game as an independent nation with their own roundel, but controlled overall by the UK player).

You don’t have to have the same person control ANZAC and UK for the NO to make sense, just like you don’t have to have the same player control the US and UK in Anniversary.

My main problem is that I live in Texas where we don’t build basements, lol. I live in a modest sized house so really the only place I could keep this for an extended period would be the garage, which is not an option during the summer. I guess we will just have to gut our games out in an evening so my mom won’t have a cow about it taking up the dining room table.

The question was essentially about if we treat the infantry moving in as a combat move, and hence the tt as “captured”, not all that clear as this only happens during non-combat movement.

Nice, well with depreciation of the dollar I would say that would probably be about what I pay for something like that as well. I will have to do some digging to find a place that does that, because I do admit that the ridges irritate me, not to mention the board separating from time to time if someone hits the edge or something.

We really should actually call these “turns,” rounds of play. It might confuse those that think we mean an actual power’s turn, not a complete go-around.

maybe you could have multiple people play a country, with each controlling a portion of the countries’ forces to have teamwork included in it.