Group defense of sea zones using island airbase ?

I usually use the Aussies to trade islands with the Japaneses, while building mostly navy with the Americans. I’ve seen an Australian navy used very effectively in a couple of cases, anyone have better success with one versus the other? Which is better?

…
AAA allows those ships that moved out of sz 6 at the beginning of the combat phase (but not used in the battle) to also move during the non-combat phase, so long as they still have movements left (i.e. they only moved one space during the combat phase to avoid the ensuing battle, and still have one of their two spaces left).

Is this a bug in AAA or is that actually a legal move. I’ve done it before and have seen others do it before, so I assumed it was legal, but maybe it’s not.

Does anyone know for sure?

Yes, it is a bug in TripleA - but it is stated in the game notes included with the map.

Lots of good options for G1 builds, but here are my personal thoughts.  Two bombers can help Sea Lion in the following way:

Clean up residual ships on G2 to prevent ship blocks Bomb London on G2, doing ~9 points of additional damage to the factory which reduces the number of infantry built on UK2. Join in on the London raid on G3, contributing 8 more attack power (equivalent of 2 transports loaded with infantry + art) for approximately the same purchase cost Attack the Russian response on G4-G5; bomb Russian factories along the front. Attack the US Navy trying to liberate UK on G4-G10ish

Additionally the two bombers are quite useful to bomb Moscow and support a Barbarosa if Sea Lion is not an option.  It is not as optimal of a build of 6 art + 2 inf for marching into Russia, but still is very beneficial.

:-D

@Gargantua:

If your sub fails, and the other sub survives you must retreat.

Even if the attacking sub doesn’t sink the enemy’s sub, the transports can still do debarkment.
It needs only that the other sub submerge.

@cyanight:

That might be the reason Harris designed it so the Flying Tigers stay in the mainland of China. If Hainan was labeled a Chinese territory then the whole rule on transports could become an issue as well as the Flying Tiger being able to attack units in seazones. The way the game is setup the plane is penned inside of China with the exception of Burma and Kwangtung.And if the Chinese could load onto transports it would be easy to use them with USA since their turns are back to back.

Good theory – that may very well be the explanation.  I’d always wondered why Hainan was incorrectly represented on the game map (from the point of view of which territories were Chinese when Japan started conquering them in 1931).  Formosa and Korea I could understand, since China ceded Formosa to Japan under the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki and recognized Korean independence (which proved to be short-lived, since the Russians and the Japanese both had territorial ambitions there) under the same treaty.

This is a tactic everyone should consider in their games.  Especially for the United Kingdom, or Nazi Germany when under Duress…

Several Seazone’s Have multiple territories that touch them.  For example, Eire, Scotland, and London, all Service Sz109.

A new German strategy - is to pull a tradition british bypass,  Threaten Sea-Lion, build a few subs for economic damage, and keep britain locked down on their island, relatively unable to make a navy to escape!

As you build one or two, or three ships at a time, the Gerries will use their subs and fgt’s to piece meal you off, trading subs for ships, or aircraft.

Building a second, or third Airbase, can allow you to essentially flood the zone with 6 or 9 aircraft for the rest of the game.  You will always have a navy.

The same can be said for the Germans, if they are smart, and build a dst or two, mixed with airbase flooding.  Consider this if you want to Stop or delay invasions into france and normandy.  AB in Holland, or Normandy,  Flood Sz110, and 112 can be serviced by Denmark, and Norway - ontop of West Germany.  Not that the Nazi’s will have 9 planes necessary to field this defense, but with italian support it’s possible, and certainly an obstacle not to be trifled with.

I am currently in the middle of my first game of Global using Alpha. It is going really well actually. We have played 6 games of global in our group (this alpha game is our 7th). Initially we certainly believed that there is a distinct allied advantage, and I still do. I believe that only very skilled players playing as the Axis have a chance of winning with them, and that is if they play against mistake prone allied players. If you have skilled allied players against equally or even more skilled Axis players, the Allies seem unbeatable barring extreme luck or blunders going in Axis favor.

We have 1 victory for the Axis, and that actually came down to our two best players who are much better than the rest of the group playing Axis, and the allies were made up of our third best player and two totally new players. America’s player was playing for the first time ever. And the Axis just barely won due to a 1/36 tech miracle and botched allied play (poor use of transports).

There were also 3 allied victories, and 2 games we called draws, but the allies would have won if we decided to play for weeks longer…

We are currently on J3 in our latest game with our first go at the Alpha setup. We also have the same two players as Axis, only this time switching powers. I have to admit that I think I like this setup better as Germany because our UK player is infamous for bringing the whole british empire into Egypt and holding Africa with overwhelming force while threatening Italy all game long. Less planes and ships and initial transports makes this harder for him and makes Italy more viable. Also we started with a G2 DoW on USSR. Things are going very well for them with the USSR’s hardware in dead zones, so by R4 they will be down to only Inf.

Japan is doing very well also in China and with the sizeable Manchurian land force nipping at the retreating Russian’s heels in Siberia. The lack of planes certainly is putting a cramp in Japan’s game play in the Pacific itself, and in its Caroline/Hawaiian posturing against the Angloish-Allies, but they are still in a solid position. I the new naval base in NSW is a very interesting double edged sword. It makes Australia very happy that they can move around a bit easier, and can claim DNG on ANZAC1, but they have to be careful because it no longer is a dead end for the IJN, which makes ANZAC a viable target for Japan.