Does anyone have the link to the aircraft range counters?

@SuperbattleshipYamato @Galendae @FranceNeedsMorePower
Here is an idea for a German Strategy

https://youtu.be/76tH7nevVW0?si=JgcqXg3ntXp-wpr2

@dazedwit

Germany duking it out with the Army of Siberia

IMG_9183.jpg

Large bulge of troops massing for Berlin

IMG_9184.jpg

@genken said in Can Germany have more than 2 aircraft carriers in play:

I have searched for this on the forums and cannot find a reference to it. In the setup for Germany there are 2 pieces for aircraft carriers. I am axis and I started an Africa Korps movement but US entered the war in turn 1. Now I will need 2 carriers to guard the med in SZ 91 but I also want to place a carrier in SZ 113 to counter a possible Russian attack formulated by my cunning opponent. I can use a plastic chip in SZ 91. Is it permissible in the rules for Germany to have 3 carriers in play?

Why do you think that you need CV’s to protect the Med.?
I am curious, wouldn’t Bmbrs doing the same Job and give you more flexibility?
So now you spent 48 ipcs for three CV’s and 32 are lost compared to 48 = 4 Bmbrs plus your Ftr’s and the Allies player would have had to think about it sailing to Gibraltar…just my thoughts…

@Baron:

@Caesar:

@Bob77:

Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.

Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.

AnA will never try to have a unit that can do better or worse against different units. IE fighters rolling a 3 against other fighters but a 1 against a battleship and G40’s rules for fighters on strategic bombing doesn’t count.

Submarines (and Destroyer somehow vs Sub) and AAA got special targeting. And these units saw various changes.
I saw no outright evidence against more room about special targeting. Do you ?

I agree that naval bases are purchased less often than air bases, but I probably buy one about every third game. When playing Japan, and you have just taken India and have your fleet sitting in SZ 39, you can ruin the allied player’s day by building a naval base in Kwangsi or Hainan and getting back to Japan 1 round earlier. Sometimes when playing the allies, I’ll buy one in Norway after capturing it. When you need one, you need one and they are worth every penny.

Yes, we have yet to run out of the blue pieces for Italy.  Italy might run out of aircraft if you bought lots of them, but otherwise one set is fine.

I have been thinking about adding the Japanese from A&AP for the Russians(they’re red) but there’s no mech/CA/or Tac bombers.

I also have been thinking of using the Russians from A&AE, they are more red then the new ones.  Still no mechs or Tac bombers:(

Well, I have only played OOB since I bought the game. 6 games later and I don’t think the game is broke. I’ve won playing both sides. I’ve been playing A&A for year against one freind of mine. We’re quite good at. Once all the dust settle and the Alpha rules quite changing, we’ll give it a try. One twist we like to put in all versions of A&A is no new IC’s.

@Daedelus:

It means you can win the Game without having to capture any Russian Cities.

Well, yeah, theoretically.  Just seems like, particularly with new rules bringing in the U.S. if Axis is in Canadia, that’s not a very realistic proposition.  South Africa seems like it would make for more viable strategery options.

I mean, I haven’t ever put a lot of thought into an Ottawa strategy, mostly because, just looking at it, it seems pretty well doomed to fail.  Might as well try to grab New York.