Global Team game when it comes out!

@ShadowHAwk:

@Kreuzfeld:

@seancb:

Generally pacific builds consists of a 2 to 1 ratio of subs-destroyer. Following turn is 5-6 bombers. This forces Japan to start building fleet instead of troops for India/China crush.

I just had to give som additional thumbs up fo9r this comment :D Buying other combat ships  than subs, dds (Or CW + ftrs) is rarely correct. the 2 to 1 ratio shos that sean knows how fodder works and how it is the most important thing in these battles.

The only reason to stop buying the subs is if japan for some reason dont respond with fleetbuilding and only buys planes instead. But then you should win anyways :D

which is why i said that it didn’t work against a too planeheavy japan. on theory, the DDs + other surface ships ofc needs to be enough to stop all the planes of japan + 2 rounds of plane only builds of japan.

What would prevent japan from attacking your fleet of subs-destroyers with air and a few destroyers. With 20+ planes they can whipe out your whole fleet with minimal losses as subs cant even hit the planes.

I normaly go for a carrier heavy fleet followed by subs destroyers for attacking power. Ideally i want my carriers to bait an early attack from japan that i can crush in the counter and get his carriers and BB out of the way so anzac and UKP can clean up the rest.

However, my biggest problem is USA being forced to split it’s IPCs between Europe and the Pacific theaters.  What?  Since when did the United States do an even split?  You’re disabling the American ability to flexibly respond to crises as they arise?  I.e., “looks like UK is going down due to Sea Lion and Russia is in deep doo doo.  Too bad we can’t spend more in the European theater, even though the Japanese fleet is destroyed…  Got to build more Carriers in San Francisco”  That’s crazy.

I agree here, I’ve since changed my mind about this.

The Axis should not win unless you really out maneuver the allies. By 1942, the axis were really in a bad spot since they had not made enough gains before the US onslaught came. If you want a historically accurate game, meaning not having to play it the way the war really went, but being to make your own decisions with the conditions that existed in 1942, and want a balanced game, 1942 is not the year to start.

I would love to see a 1939 game, but I wonder if that would be too long. The 1940 2nd edition in my opinion is where you should stay. I know there is a 1941 game but have not played it.

That’s what I thought too, Garg.  Only Cow knows for sure  :lol:

germany did sea lion. russia bought mostly mech / tank and bunkered romania when germany/italy finally got enough for force ruskies out (ruskies did a detour for iraq and the african spots). ruskies turned around with mech and tanks and blitzed to calcutta then made it back in time for germany vs russia.

this game coupled with 30 infantry china and all 18 ruskies still alive in asia… japan was shut down.  germany took russia, uk just finally got transports and men. uk pac was worthless but still a funny liberation.
~
yeah sea lion sucks sometimes lol. ruskies owning italy africa is no good lol. +3 each one and iraq too. go go mech + bombers.

the pacific showdown was hilarious too. I am not sure why japan attacked phillipines. it was a mutual destruction battle… but after that anzac’s naval looked pretty nice on an empty board. I had java the whole game because he round 3 india and lost so much stuff.

If japan did not get shut down, I would have totally lost. all he needed was hawaii after round 3. that was a funny game

You can buy small flying bases from games workshop for $4.50 each….
They are pretty good…kind of big on the bottom though…check them out!

@13thguardsriflediv:

May adjacent ‘pro allied neutrals’ be blitzed and taken over in one go? In other words could the Soviets move a tank to Caucasus and from there take both ‘Iran’ territories in one move?

No.  You have to stop in the first one.

I played it. DJensen is correct.