The most dollars of units I have ever seen in ANZAC

@ShadowHAwk:

@Omega1759:

Consider scrambling in 110 to kill two German planes (if the Bismarck is on 111). Killing German planes is huge because it reduces the multi-pronged threat that the Luftwaffe becomes.

Then again losing 3 fighters vs 2 of germany does not help the allies out that much. Also i would do this combat first as germany and if i got your whole airforce and if i whiped it all out i might actualy not strafe the 111 combat and take out all the UK air round 1.

since i normaly send 2 subs vs the cruiser off gibraltar italy is in a good spot.

Now taranto will be interesting with 1 dest-1cruiser-1AC 1 fighter 1 tactical 1 bomber vs my cruiser-battleship-3fighters, and the malta battle will be figher vs destroyer also not great odds.
And italy having 2-3 transports round 1 is a lot more painfull then germany having 2 fighters extra.

It’s a gamble for sure, All depends on the bid in the med. If Taranto works then Germany could be down another plane.

And if you send 2 subs against the cruiser then 110 could turn to be disastrous for the Axis.

K,

Thanks for the answer GHG!

@pokemaniac:

The big issue is ANZAC effectively producing at Persia. In any game ANZAC is extremely vital in wearing down Japan. The US can can-open destroyers screens and allow ANZAC to get through to take islands or attack small Japanese navies, and ANZAC ships and air are also crucial to the defense of the US fleet. Even if the US goes 100% Pacific, if it gets virtually 0 support from ANZAC (which will be the case if ANZAC is building in Persia) it will be hard pressed to advance on Japan.

Even ignoring the value of ANZAC’s units against Japan, the biggest problem is that ANZAC just can’t build well at Persia. If ANZAC is going for a Persia factory, they are going to be making 12 IPCs a turn after Japan declares war since they won’t be trading islands. That is 3 ANZAC mech in Persia. ANZAC units can only help to defend UK stacks, as opposed to UK units which can be used offensively as well. ANZAC also can’t afford to build 3 fighters in Persia ever, unlike the UK. Those fighter builds are often crucial to holding Moscow, while also giving the UK a lot of flexibility in the Mid East.

The UK can just build a factory in Egypt, but planes there take 2 turns to get to Moscow which can really be a problem.

In short I just don’t see any benefit in taking away a prime factory location from the UK and giving it to ANZAC who can barely make 3 cheap units a turn there. This also of course essentially removes ANZAC from the Pacific theatre, where it is sorely needed.

Brazil is the same concept. ANZAC Brazilians can’t really be used offensively anywhere, unlike a US or UK controlled Brazil. Plus it is sending ANZAC transports a long way from the front that they are most effective on.

ANZAC planes in Europe could be helpful, but by the time they could get to Europe it is unlikely that they’d have much to can-open and they would be spending a useless 3 turns or so in transit as opposed to 3 turns being used against Japan in some fashion.

Nice ideas, but I find ANZAC to just be best used to pester Japan and defend Australia if needed.

I completely agree with this, although I have never tried ANZAC in Persia. To me it seems like a hassle.
1. you need to protect UK transport from beeing blown up by italy 1. Does this imply no taranto?
2. ANZAC can activate Persia end of R2, This means factory R3 and units deployed end of round 4.
3. I like to have a UK factory there and shuffle UK fighters to Moscow easily if need be. Basically ANZAC units are not doing anything useful before R5ANZAC. Does not seem worthwhile to me. It is a nice noval, idea though

wow~~ thanks guys for the quick reply~~

I am feeling the pinch, the game has been decided it is just how long before the wheels fall off.

Yes that is my bad, i forgot we were play testing a house rule at the time.

@YHZ:

Do the attack value for pairings stay the same when the unit that allows it is taken as a casualty?
For example, if I’m attacking something with a fighter and a tac, and i choose the fighter as a casualty, does the tac remain at 4 for the next roll?

Also, can planes keep attacking subs once the destroyer is destroyed?

Welcome to A&A.org!

No and no.  Each round of battle you look at what you have.  If you have a tac with no fighter or tank, it’s attacking at 3 (if a fighter or tank was lost in the previous round of battle, you’re immediately down to a 3).  Same with artillery pairings.

When you go into a round of battle with no destroyers, you have now lost your capability to hit subs.  This can work to your advantage, too.  If you take off all destroyers, then your opponent can’t choose subs for your plane hits.  Make sure you separate your plane and boat rolls for this reason.

@Cmdr:

Accept, you’re down 4 defense units making the sacking of NSW easier.

The American fleet will help things out