England also has pieces spread out all over the map, so it’s better to have one player focused solely on England and it’s pieces to keep them moving in the right direction.
The statement had been made that AA can fire at aircraft flying over them. Which is true if the AA is on land. But if that AA gun is at sea on a TRN, then the AF can fly right over it and ignore the TRN, the AA, and anything else below them on the seas.
… this fact is clarified on page 30 of the Operations Manual, in the Transports section. “Land units on a transport are cargo; they cannot attack or defend while at sea.”
You would not have the income to maximize productions at all 3 IC’s… EVER (unless the game was already over).
2 INF in Karelia for a cost of 21 IPC’s over 2 turns is not a good Russian buy… just buy 4 ARM in Moscow 1 turn, and send them to Karelia the next instead :-)
sending tanks into st. petsburg makes more sense but you only have to build in moscow when japan suddenly comes a tapping As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door. for it is Only this, and nothing more.
There’s a factor no-one considered though. When 3 people play, we usually set it up with 1 axis vs. 2 allies, with each allied player picking a country, and sharing the third. That way coordination is forced, and most importantly: everyone gets 2 turns a round, instead of one player getting three and the other two getting one each.
Are you sure you meant Western Canada, justus, and not Eastern? It seems to me like it would be taken either way. With those teams, I’d probably put it in India, because even if the Japs take it, chances are excellent that the Russo-German war machine would roll in and take it back for you. (as Britain) And by the way, justus, I went out and bought D-day. Good stuff… 8)
alternative. traditional set ups make me want to vomit with rage. nazis in mexico, japs in africa. no eastern europe line but a giant battle ground in india/china. comm’on. DP nightmare
