Where Can I Order Game From California?

Many thanks! That sounds clear to me.

When I play test, I set up the board and try to find counters to an idea as I work though the turns, so no opponent. Obviously, that will not mean the idea works until I try it live. Its just to test the concept. If the concept is sound, I use it in a live face to face game and see how the other guy(s) respond.

This first game I focused on the subs for blockading. That part does not seem reasonable at this point. Its still interesting that it delayed the US transports and gave Germany a nice income, but I don’t think the axis will pull a win out of the bag. By the way, when I meant to blockade I would leave the surface fleet back in the face of a large air force and wait for additional subs, you could then counter attack a DD build with air and sea, taking the air units off so that the carriers can stay back. Even convoy raiding for 22 IPCs would be nice.

Next test, I want to build a G2 transport wave as well, this will force UK to keep with Infantry making Italy’s job easier, and give me the resources to secure S. America while the US is neutral, with enough, I hope to divert 3 towards West Africa again, as having the German land unit in Egypt is a nice thought. I realize UK is the same amount of IPCs as S. America, but I’m testing the concept of taking an area out of America’s way plus they have multiple factory sites if it seems possible to use them.

There are some early risks I discovered. The G2 move to Gibraltar in the first game put the German Fleet of CV,BB,CA,2FTR in range of a UK CA,3 FTR and TAC…a bold player might take that shot. I also had UK do a weak attack [CV+FTR+CA] on the Italian fleet, it worked [damaged CV with a CA] while leaving the Tac for London.

Turkey was a tight fight G3, as I only had 5 inf, 3 arm, 1 tac, 1 bomber in range…I ended with 1 inf, 3 arm and the 2 air. Losing 2 units in Greece could have made it 4 inf for the assault. Turkey missed a lot, I could see losing armor in the future as an outcome.

Other concerns are if Russia stages north and drives on Norway, Germany’s income would plummet. With many transports, I hope to discourage that option.

I had UK protect Quebec, but I’m curious about how many players would suspect a G3 three transports full landing on Quebec? The potential to send planes staged in Gibraltar to sz 101 has merit as building carriers in 106[Quebec] would allow them to land and enable a weak looking axis force to “surprise” the US navy round 4. The transports can then hit Venezuela, West Indies and/or Central America turn 4. [This may prove to be a great move for a failed Sea Lion as sinking a US fleet would delay the US a round or more.]

The South American concept seems crazy since the US can just build large amounts of land forces. However, the US must choose fleet or land, and typically will go fleet, meaning there is “some” time for early gains and possible factories. I’m trying to limit the investment to two German productions as I want turn 3 and 4 builds to prevent Russia from getting their foot in the door.

@tjt:

You’re right! it was the Pacific components that were the cheaper ones!

Yeah. At least they improved.

@jim010:

[You can’t block the G3 London attack.

If you get luck and survive with some UK ships, then you could stand in front of the Germans.  But I doubt it would prevent the Germans from pushing through - and that scenario wil not be the norm.  Likely you won’t have any ships in range except for the Gibraltar fleet.
[/quote]

Oh no? It happened in the game I played last night. Germany got crappy dice rolling and the UK player took a bunch of risks, managed to take down the German AirForce. That really changed the game and made it pretty much impossible for Germany to invade England. Amazing though Germany managed to sneak a fleet across into Mexico and distracted America for another 2 turns defending itself. It was decided after bad rolling in Russia that the allies would win out even with Amercia distracted and the game was called an allied victory.

@i:

If I can work with the game using a german AA gun as artillery

you know the 88mm gun was a good aa gun anti armor and artillry so why would you not be ok with that? it was the best anti tank gun in ww2. so really it should get plus 1 attack or defence if the enyme force is all vehicles.

It was a great AA gun and a tip top AT gun (and was purpose built in both roles).  It was an ad hoc artillery gun.  Still good, but a 105mm would have been more appropriate.  I guess my point is it’s not necessary to use stuff that “kind of” works when there are so many choices that were a perfect fit.  It just strikes me as odd that there were so many complaints about the stuka being used as a fighter but few about this.  On the other hand, perhaps the 88 was chosen as it had a more distinctive look than a 105 would have.  The distinctive look was the reason Rob Daviau gave me for using the stuka, so I’m guessing this is it.  My favorite A&A odd choice though is the German tank on the cover of the original AAE.  It’s the 3 turreted prototype tank.  Only 3 were made and they saw action only in Norway and were not considered successful.  Didn’t take away from the game at all, but I guess the art department folks are not WW2 buffs.

I can’t since I don’t know the disposition of the armies off the top og my head, sorry.

@CWO:

@Make_It_Round:

Players: 2 - 5

Well, if France was a playable ally, it should have read:

Players: 2 - 6

Perhaps what they mean is that France, although it’s playable, is controlled by one of the Allied players, in the same way that China in Pacific 1940 gets its own game turn but is controlled by an Allied player.

Agreed, this is only logical. As for game time listed, I’ve always found estimates on wargames are WAY OFF.