Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
@Imperious:
If Germany lands a few planes in Italy for the purpose of being able to scramble to defend the Italian navy against UK 1 turn attack, my understanding is only the Italian planes can scramble. The German player cannot scramble unless he has at least one ship with the Italians?
Correct?
No. The German planes can scramble just like Italians. Defender decides exactly which planes are scrambled.
There are no special requirements for ally’s planes scrambling.
-
There are no special requirements for ally’s planes scrambling.
… except that the ally must agree to the scramble (if a different player) and must be at war with the attacking power.
-
I had a feeling there would be something when I wrote that!
Thanks, Krieghund
-
A territory was a friendly neutral at the start of a power’s turn. The power activates it during NCM. Can a facility (for simplicity, an airbase) be built there this turn?
Thank you
-w
-
No. The German planes can scramble just like Italians. Defender decides exactly which planes are scrambled.
There are no special requirements for ally’s planes scrambling.
Thanks Deputy!
-
@Jon:
A territory was a friendly neutral at the start of a power’s turn. The power activates it during NCM. Can a facility (for simplicity, an airbase) be built there this turn?
Thank you
-w
Morning and welcome Jon Von Neumann.
The answer is no, I am afraid. You do need to have controlled it since the beginning of your turn. -
Thank you very much. Happy to know for sure.
-
I think i was tricked by some rule Lawyer. He said bombers attacking fighters alone just attack at 1, not 4. The 4 attack is only against land targets. I sent 2 German bombers to wipe out a UK fighter at Gibraltar. Tell me this rule is bunk. His reasoning is bombers cant “bomb” flying planes.
-
@Imperious:
I think i was tricked by some rule Lawyer. He said bombers attacking fighters alone just attack at 1, not 4. The 4 attack is only against land targets. I sent 2 German bombers to wipe out a UK fighter at Gibraltar. Tell me this rule is bunk. His reasoning is bombers cant “bomb” flying planes.
He’s thinking of the air battle rules before SBR
Bombers, tactical bombers, and fighters attack at 1, as do defending fighters.In conventional combat, it’s as it always has been. Bombers attack at 4, fighters defend at 4, bombers defend at 1…
If you are doing an SBR of a base at Gibraltar and you are doing an air to air battle before an SBR, then yes your bombers attack at 1 and his fighter defends at 1 (if he chooses to intercept).
However, if you are not doing SBR but are attacking a fighter, then your bombers attack at 4 and his fighter defends at 4
-
However, if you are not doing SBR but are attacking a fighter, then your bombers attack at 4 and his fighter defends at 4
Exactly as i knew, but i listened to him and didn’t make the attack.
-
@Imperious:
Exactly as i knew, but i listened to him and didn’t make the attack.
That’s probably best for you anyway, unless that UK fighter was going to do something particularly important that turn. :-)
-
Ok thanks.
-
Can UK and Anzac prevent Japan from loading their transports in combat move if UK moves a warship into a seazone (in this case z36) and Anzac declear war on them.
-
Can UK and Anzac prevent Japan from loading their transports in combat move if UK moves a warship into a seazone (in this case z36) and Anzac declear war on them.
yes. dirty tricks.
-
yes. dirty tricks.
Dirty is the way allies play :) Soviet pirate income from Somaliland, YARRR!
-
Can UK and Anzac prevent Japan from loading their transports in combat move if UK moves a warship into a seazone (in this case z36) and Anzac declear war on them.
yes. dirty tricks.
That’s awesome, I’ll have to remember it LOL. Any delay of Japan getting to the money islands will help.
-
Well, the trick is, it does constitute an unprovoked attack, and UK will not get the NO, and it costs you a destroyer, but if your opponent is unsuspecting it can be very effective, yes.
-
If russia non-combat into an american controlled korea, does this affect the mongolia rule?
-
If russia non-combat into an american controlled korea, does this affect the mongolia rule?
negative ghostrider
-
the pattern is full
Suggested Topics
