Not at war non-combat movement for USA

Pwned.

Welcome, Aicanario!

@Aicanario:

The question is, since the rules simply state under Aircraft Movement that the movement only requires for the possibility of a aircraft carrier to be in the zone to pick up the wandering aircraft, whether or not it has the room for it.

Calvinhobbesliker is correct.  The part about “whether or not it has the room for it” isn’t in the rules - you just made it up!  :wink: :-)

@Lozza007:

Hey chaps,

I’ve been looking over these threads for a while now and am keen to work on my Allied strategy.  Also used to play a bit through www.days-of-infamy.org with AAP a few years ago.

So what’s the update on Japan taking Hawaii in the first couple of turns and then working its way south towards NSW on J4?  Has this been discredited at all, with blocking ships perhaps?

Similarly, what are the thoughts on staying alive as UK in India/China?

I’ve only played the game once as I don’t own it yet, but I was rather shocked to see how much firepower Japan can bring to bear on J1.  The J1 attack certainly seems optimal given the IPC/Allied unit/Japan income tradeoffs.  The only plan that seems to get the US into the war quickly and effectively seems to be a northern route, out of Midway or Hawaii and attacking Japan’s new builds and maybe Korea.

I’ve modelled some naval combat a bit and found that the US player only has any hope of victory in the first few rounds if it can nibble off bits of the Japanese fleet.  Fighting battles with extra Japanese air power (i.e. more than the 6 air units from the Carriers) results in disaster, and any battle that sees the US lose the core of its fleet (Carriers, Battleship etc) is a win for Japan - just like in original AAP.  By the time you rebuild and get in position again, Japan has matched you $ for $ and it’s a stalemate.

A couple of questions too (since I don’t have a copy of the rules):

can you build ports and air bases on newly captured territory? (ref: Japanese port in Midway) can you build Industrial Complexes on newly captured territory? (ref: US Factory in Korea).

The latter is important as I can’t understand how a US Factory in Korea would survive if it was built 1 turn after Korea was captured - Japan would surely have units nearby to retake it, or just bomb it to uselessness?

Cheers!

Lozza007

On J1, Hawaii can be hit with 3 inf, 1 art, 1 tank, if 1 tac is scrambled to prevent bombardment. The defense is 1 bmr, 2 inf, 1 ftr. Both have an attack total of 9, so let’s say both get 2 hits. Then it’s 1 inf, 1 art, 1 tank vs 1 inf, 1 ftr. Each get 1 hit, so it’ll be art, tank vs ftr. Thus Japan can take Hawaii with 1 tank. However, since it used all 3 transports, it can’t take the philippines or any DEI. Thus, the US gets 61 ipcs, and unless Japan moves most of their fleet to that sea zone, the transports will die. After US1, hawaii is defended with the entire fleet in the sea zone, 3 inf, 1 tank, 1 ftr, and 1 tac, while most of the Jap fleet is in the Phil SZ, unable to reach Hawaii.

China and UK will die if Japan plays properly. The key is to delay them long enough that the US and ANZAC gain naval and air supremecy in the Pacific. After India falls, Japan collects 78 ipc’s, to US’s 55 and ANZAC’s 15. However, since the US and ANZAC should have naval superiority by now, they can easily attack the DEI, PI, or perhaps Mal or Kwangtung, since they can take control of it and build a major factory. In order to achieve naval supremecy, the US should take Iwo, allowing them to hit SZ6 from WUS with bombers. This will probably catch your opponent by surprise.

The southern route also works to grab the money islands, which forces the Jap navy to block, allowing you to destroy them piecemeal.

For your questions: Both are no.

Do you mean half of 57 or half of 17? If it’s half of 17, that’s a greater disadvantage to the allies.

Ah, nice! I thougt they had a lot more to do still. I dont care for AI the least.

While the US is not at war, it may not use UK or ANZAC naval bases, and UK/ANZAC may not use US bases.  UK and ANZAC are always free to use each other’s bases.

I can assure you that Larry Harris has approved everything in the FAQ.  I can also assure you that any “adjustments” being made were intended to be in the rules and are necessary for proper game play, otherwise we’d just let them go.

Once again, I will echo swiss and say that going after USA first does not work, since apparently some aren’t reading the older posts.

Are you referring to old topics or old posts in this one? Because I read throught the whole topic.

You need 2 transports each to take both hawaii and phill, and in hawaii, you have 2 inf, 1 art, 1 tank vs 2inf 1ftr 1bmr, if the tactical scrambled to prevent bombardment. Thats 1 1 2 2’s and a 3 vs a 1 2 2’s and a 4. The US has a higher defense and the same number of hits. Even if you use a third transport, it would have to come from the carolines, giving only one extra infantry. That may barely win with a tank remaining.

Guess I’m wrong. :-) I’ll give it a few more trials, and may have done it slightly differently to how I recall (may/may not have used transport in both SZ6 and Carolines to assist in Hawaii. At the very least, I still think KUS first is a danger to the Allies, but maybe not so much as I thought previously. Thanks for the constructive criticism! It’s in short supply these days… :|not referring to anyone in particular, just in general