UKW Units vs. UKE Units

The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.

@Locke888:

Question: can I buy something but not place it on the board until my next turn?
My buddy bought 3 transports then proceeded to attack me with his navy but I wiped him out. Placing the transports on the board will just lead to me sinking them easily on my next turn since nothing will be able to defend them. Can he hold them until next round?

No. He has to place them. Hopefully there’s more than that one IC to place them so they are not destroyed before his next turn. But he cannot “hold” them. They must be placed on the board. At least that’s how we’ve always played it.

@bracconebaldo:

In the case i mobilize new naval units in an occupied SZ…the opponent can always move his naval units from that SZ?

Yes, he is not forced to fight your new reinforcements. He can opt but doesn’t have to. I think this is the only situation where units can (must) move during the CM without triggering a combat.

Ofc, those units cannot move again during the NCM…

spendo is right.

After hearing this I’m definitely going to print out Alpha+3 and try them this weekend when I play again.
Thanks a lot for the advice!

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

@knp7765:

<snip>However, if we end up forcing USA to split their involvement over both theaters, which seems to me to be a losing proposition nearly every time, aren’t you then imbalancing the game toward the Axis?</snip>

I don’t think it is a loosing proposition nearly every time, so I disagree with your premise.
It’s a game opener more than anything else. Remember originally - the stand alone games were balanced with a half USA in each. If you then combine the boards and throw the USA into one side of the conflict, you’re effectively putting two countries into one side. And the other allies basically just need to avoid loosing, and the game is won. India doesn’t need to win the game, they just need to not loose. Russia doesn’t need to win, they just need to slow down the axis enough. And so on.

I don’t see many other viable choices to a balancing act upon USA to be frank.
By buffing/nerfing the other axis/allies you’re effectively removing strategy and closing options by making alternatives too easy. If it becomes easier to take Russia by Germany/Italy for example - nobody will go Sealion. Strategy removed and game made more narrow.
By giving USA a clear incentive to split attention somewhat (I’m not saying 50/50 product limit or something) you open up the game and provide the chance for more strategies. If the USA can’t dump 2 battleships, 1 crusier and plans into the Pacific each round at war without loosing something on the Atlantic side - it will provide more possible strategies for the game overall.
A clear benefit as I see it.

Tweaking the USA is a win/win in my opinion. It makes the game more balanced and it will provide more choice for how to play. All other options as I see it might balance the game, but will remove choices.

Yea, I suppose it’s unlikely for allied units to be trekking across Russia. Still it is a bit odd that in the same round a Russian fighter can land on a US carrier in the Atlantic but not in the Pacific.

I guess the rule is the way it is in the interest of simplicity. It did sort out the whole Russia going to war with Japan in order to take neutrals in Europe thing.