Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Philippine fighter to Australia?

Axis & Allies Global 1940

1.2k

F

fighter pilot 48 '11
last edited by

Sorry to repeat a question that has probably been answered-can the US land their fighter from the Philippines in Australia when no allies are at war with Japan?(or land troops?)
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
N

Noll
last edited by

no
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
O

oztea
last edited by

ANZAC and US technicly arent “allied” with eachother yet.
So no.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
J

JimmyHat
last edited by

To clarify, even if the allies are at war with Japan, so long as USA is neutral its aircraft cannot fly to ANZAC.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Featured Topics

League rules idea: mulligans for patrons

Guadalcanal Tournament at Strategicon (Los Angeles) Feb. 17, 2024

T-shirts, Hats, and More

global 1940

180

anniversary

1914

1942 2nd ed

tips&tricks

bm3

video

axis & allies

Suggested Topics

D

One Space Move for Fighters

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Duthman

11

0
Votes

11
Posts

1.3k
Views

D

Hey Hey Hey

Thanks for the response and the clarification everyone!

Duthman
N

USA Fighter Strategy

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Nippon-koku

17

0
Votes

17
Posts

2.8k
Views

S

@teslas:

My guess is that this whole American fighters in Moscow thing, either going through the Atlantic or Pacific, is an alternative strategy that is non-optimal. Very possibly somewhat effective since you’ll be shaking up your opponent who isn’t used to it, but at the end of the day, non-optimal. But fun wins out over “perfect” play any day.

It sounds like a plausible curveball against someone who prefers to run a general script / perfect play to get them out of their comfort zone.

Nothing more rewarding than taking advantage of mistakes because someone had their strategy rattled.
L

G1 Land fighter in Tobruk

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Little_Boot

20

0
Votes

20
Posts

3.1k
Views

N

I’ve never considered doing both, but I really like how it’s laid out here. If successful, Italy has effectively been eliminated from the game before they even get going.
B

New AC and New Fighter/ TAC G40

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Bravehart

6

0
Votes

6
Posts

1.3k
Views

K

Yeah, I have to admit that I have done that in the case of existing carriers. I say I will move the carrier to a certain spot so planes involved in a battle close by can land. Then the planes get killed (which I figured they would) so I leave my carrier where it is or move it to a “better” place.
I

Can the Chinese fighter attack sea units?

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • internationalaw

11

0
Votes

11
Posts

2.0k
Views

C

@cyanight:

That might be the reason Harris designed it so the Flying Tigers stay in the mainland of China. If Hainan was labeled a Chinese territory then the whole rule on transports could become an issue as well as the Flying Tiger being able to attack units in seazones. The way the game is setup the plane is penned inside of China with the exception of Burma and Kwangtung.And if the Chinese could load onto transports it would be easy to use them with USA since their turns are back to back.

Good theory – that may very well be the explanation. I’d always wondered why Hainan was incorrectly represented on the game map (from the point of view of which territories were Chinese when Japan started conquering them in 1931). Formosa and Korea I could understand, since China ceded Formosa to Japan under the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki and recognized Korean independence (which proved to be short-lived, since the Russians and the Japanese both had territorial ambitions there) under the same treaty.
B

Rule clarification: subs vs. carrier with fighters

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • bmnielsen

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

1.4k
Views

Z

To be fair, this is why you never ever ever send carriers anywhere without a destroyer. The same problem happens if you send a carrier plus fighters to attack submarines. Since the carrier doesn’t roll attack dice and the fighters can’t hit the submarines, you just have infinite rounds of combat until the subs either sink the carrier or the units retreat.

This is also why it is recommend that when playing the pacific side as either Japan or the US, you purchase at least one sub for every carrier that the other side purchases.

You should also never tip your carriers on defense if you have no where for your planes to land, since the attacker will almost always retreat and watch your planes crash into the ocean for free.
G

Who goes for Australia first with Japan?

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • gsh34

10

0
Votes

10
Posts

2.0k
Views

C

As far as the Japan War effort is concerned Australia might as well be located on the Moon. That is how hard it is to get the neccesary forces down there to sack the captial against a smart Allied player. To make matters worse Australia is easily reinforced by American Fighters and can be subject to liberation by America as well. India on the other hand is not so easily reinforced by the Allies and once it is taken over by Japan the USA is not going to be able to get down there to liberate it.

I think it makes more sense to try and take Hawaii and India. It is up for debate which one Japan should take first. I think it depends on a variety of factors in choosing the first target but most scenarios will lean towards taking India first. China can be marginalized on the way to India thus insuring the safety of the victory cities in mainland Asia. China if not dealt with correctly can easily cost the Axis the game period.

Taking Hawaii will be a tall order at that point but Japan will at least force the USA to heavily reinforce Hawaii which may open a window for the Axis to win in Europe.
M

Can a fighter retreat to a carrier?

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • MEGAEINSTEIN

5

0
Votes

5
Posts

991
Views

K

@calvinhobbesliker:

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

even durind an amphibious assault?

Yes. Planes can always retreat. The only things that can’t are units which came via transports

But to add:

If the amphibious assault is called off during the naval battle before the units on the transports disembark, any planes (and land units attacking from other territories) that commited to that fight still have to go through one round of combat before they can retreat.

25

Online

17.8k

Users

40.4k

Topics

1.8m

Posts