How will you divide powers depending on the number of players?

@AndrewAAGamer I’m not suggesting players should only buy battleships; I’m just saying they still have value in the game. My personal preference is for a balanced navy. While I still buy 3-4 times more carriers, I like BB for amphibious assaults and to absorb the first hits in any battle.

…And if you’ve never gone up against a misguided player, you really need to meet my friends. :grin:

@Wittmann Thanks :)

@taamvan:

We going to see you at Gencon?

Unfortunately no, due to a combination of work commitments and geographic distance.

I think four player is the best.  As the Allies it’s easier to be on the same page and everyone has a more to do.

The setup I prefer:

Germany & Italy
Japan

Russia, UK, France
USA, China, Anzac

The USA player should control Anzac since they’ll be working closely with them.

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAW = Says nothing about air units, just “additional units”.  RAI = Means air included.

It says nothing explicitly about sea units, either.  The type of units is unspecified, implying that any type of unit that may legally move there is allowed.

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAW = Can not move into a territory unless it’s occupied by enemy forces.  This would include sea zones that don’t scramble.

An exception for an amphibious assault where scrambling may occur is explicitly made here.

@Dark_Destroyer:

If you don’t scramble and don’t have any enemy forces and don’t amphibiously assault, moving airplanes into that sea zone is not a valid move.

True.

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAI = You can always bring air into sea zones just to cover what if’s.

No.  RAW = You can always bring units (sea and/or air) into sea zones from which you’re doing an amphibious assault, if there is a potential for the defender to scramble.

Make it a little easier for them by moving the purchase new units phase to right after noncombat. Keep repair at the top of the round though.

@Omega1759:

@ErwinRommel:

You can try to “mirror” the ��� airforce and fleet (you need some amount of trannies) and park it at carolines. Dont build ground force with anzac, only fleet and air. Pick up every money island you can. Trade trannies with japan.

No ground at all with Anzac at all? It seems like a good idea to keep some ground to prevent a “shoot for the 6th victory city”, as well as troops to contest the islands.

The Anzac fleet is only useful for blockers / attrition battles / adding defensive punch to the US fleet. That is useful, but it is important to stay alive and contest the money Island.

All warships from America including loaded carriers and transports, all in Queens land. Get the Philippines back with enough to hold the sea zone. purchase lots of loaded transports for ANZAC and land them in the Philippines for support, along with all three starting ANZAC fighters for scramble opportunity.

@Make_It_Round:

I think it is possible, however tedious, to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game, and to guess at one’s enjoyment threshold in terms of these.

It is utterly impossible to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game because each “meaningful choice” is a product of the other “meaningful choices” that were made previously. Furthermore, each “meaningful choice” is then subject to all of the possible dice outcomes, and thus multiplied by all of those possibilities and then multiplied by all of the “meaningful choices” offered by the various non-combat possibilities as they are determined by the dice outcomes. As you can see we get into these massive factorial situations where we are multiplying massive exponentials by even more massive exponentials until what is essentially infinity.

To make a comparison: In chess there are only 20 possible moves to make on the first turn. (16 pawn moves and 4 knight moves) The opponent is faced with the same. So the possible combinations for the opening 2 moves (1 each) in chess is 400. None of which are absolutely stupid. there are 8,902 possible moves by 2 each and by move 7 there are almost eleven MILLION possible positions. That’s without dice, with only 2 players, with a much much much more limited scope for unit movement, no scope for adding units and far far fewer spaces.

Now you asked about the “meaningful choices”. Some work has been done in this regard in chess and it seems that in the average game of about 30 moves (moving a single piece at at time. There are over 4.5 MILLION games outcomes in smart competitive situations. Now, multiply that by the factor of dice, multiple movement of units, game spaces, purchases and the fact that most AA games will see over 100 times that 60 units move factor and you have an utterly infinite combination of outcomes.

Which is part of the reason it is so much more entertaining than chess.

…or maybe just because we get to play with little tanks and planes.