Bob_A_Mickelson's AAG40 National Production/Objectives and Setup Charts

@Krieghund Thank you!

I always treated starting money as separate from income in my head. In this game the rules states that you should use the “starting income list” to take starting money. If i remember correctly, there have been versions of axis where some powers have started with less money than their starting income.

@barney:

“Bids and Scramble”
sounds like a good name for a board game   :lol:

IDK “Chutes and Ladders” just came to mind lol

@regularkid:

If I get a bid of 12 or more for allies, i definitely think an IC in Egypt is worthwhile.

I think bids are far outside the scope of this specific conversation, but since you mentioned it, I think that the way you use bids by adding extra units to the initial set up, ruin the game balance in earnest and are both moot and lame. At the same time. In a slightly derogatory way. Now if you play against real men, they will probably offer the US NO bid, which gives US extra NO money, distributed each and every turn. This money will not come to effect before Turn 3 or 4, so they will not ruin the first Turn set up balance. IMHO anyway, not alway but sure in Norway.

And in this case, the Persian factory is more worthwhile

@knp7765:

It’s any territory that has either a UK symbol or Canada symbol.
One thing I have seen happen a few times is Italy dropping an infantry on Cyprus just to deny UK that NO and really ruffle their feathers.

Yeah its exactly what happen in my last game and I wonder how easy it is for Italia to drop a infantry on cyprus.

Also, thank you all for your ideas of UK NO !

Captain walker, I’m not trashing this strategy, but wouldn’t an extra carrier for each power be more helpful, and give you more mobility for roughly the same cost?  Although an English AB on Gib, and an American AB on Morocco sounds intriguing giving you a really good air def for your transport navies(s) it sounds very costly. I’m not sure how that helps you when you move to Norway or deeper into the Med though because you would be leaving the cover of those bases, and the Luftwaffe could hit you then.

I could see it helping though if you build your fleet(s) then next turn move to Gib and drop AB(s) on the same turn so you could get immediate air cover. You wouldn’t have to wait for a carrier built that turn to catch up, but you would still need to bulk-up the navy before you move towards your objectives so I’m not seeing a major benefit for spending 30 IPCs on AB(s). Sounds like you may be going light on your navy builds for protection of your transports, and are compensating with the AB’s but the cost of the ABs is what is causing the weaker navy builds to start with.

I guess it would help to shuck-shuck through Gib though needing fewer naval units to protect your ships off Gib. I can see this would hold off the Luftwaffe for some time as well so there are some pro"s and con’s to say the least.

I’m not looking for a rule change but they did fly ���� over the Himalayas. I’m tempted to get out my grandpa’s US Army Air Force stuff from the war and scan and post it. He was there and they did do it. Â

@oztea:

Krieg corrected the US one about Normandy/Bordeux

It is supposed to be if the US has it.

Thanks - that’s the kind of thing I was asking for.