Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

@Sgt-Mclusky Unlike previous renditions of A+A I find that AA40 has so many options and paths to victory that were still playing it and seeing new strategies in my group. Granted I was late to the party with this version so I don’t have years of experience, but we do play an awful lot, and almost never see the same game twice.

@KennethViuff:

Hi All�

I�ll like some feedback one 9 charts, but how do i insert them in this tread??

Hey Kenneth,

In order to prevent spam on the forums… there is a minimum amount of posts a member must have in order to share pictures, links, or files. I think it’s 10 or more, but if you private message imperious leader, he may lift the restriction for you.

Looking forward to seeing your charts.

If Germany wants to make a naval build round 1, usually it will be 1 carrier + 2 transports OR 1 carrier, 1 destroyer and 1 submarine. Either way the total equals 30 IPCs.
The reason for this purchase is it gives Germany a lot of options on future moves.
A - The most obvious is a preparation for Sealion. You will need the loaded carrier plus other warships to protect the stack of transports you put there on round 2. Also, whatever ships Germany has will be used to clear the way for the German landings plus protect the transports if England scrambles, leaving more of your Luftwaffe to join in the London attack.
B - Secondly, you can use them to threaten Sealion even if you don’t plan to actually invade England. This keeps the UK on edge buying defensively which could give Italy some badly needed breathing room in the Med. If Germany can keep UK from putting more units in the Med for even just a couple of rounds, it could be just enough for Italy to get the upper hand.
C - A loaded carrier plus other warships will threaten any Allied fleet and cause the US in particular to invest in more warships to protect it’s transports if they want to stage by Gibraltar and think of approaching Europe.
D - You could use the German navy for an amphibious invasion of Leningrad when you decide to attack Russia. If you can take Leningrad in the same round that you first attack Russia, then you can replace the “Peace With Russia NO” with the “German Occupation of Leningrad NO” and not loose $5 when you attack Russia.
E - Another idea might be to send them into the Med to boost the Italian navy and help them get over the Allies there.

I’m sure there are other good uses that I just can’t think of right now. I guess since Germany buying a navy round 1 does at least threaten Sealion which may prevent England from running the Taranto raid, although I have seen them do it anyway even if Germany threatens Sealion. The point is, if the UK player you are playing with is bound and determined to wipe out the Italian navy, I don’t think your German G1 purchase will matter one way or the other.
That being said, while the naval purchase is most popular for Germany, they are not bound by it. There are many options. 2 bombers + 1 submarine OR 2 bombers + 1 tank are a couple of options. Another possibility is a Major IC to place in Romania in preparation for a major attack on Russia round 2 or 3.

As for the Taranto attack, the UK usually sends the following units:
1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 tac bomber from SZ 98 to SZ 97.
2 fighters, 1 bomber from London to SZ 97.
1 fighter from Malta to SZ 96.
1 fighter from Gibraltar to SZ 96.
The 2 fighters in SZ 96 to kill the Italian destroyer and transport. They will land on Malta.
The tac bomber from SZ 98 and strat bomber from London (assuming they survive) will land on Malta.
The 2 fighters from London will land on the carrier assuming they all survive.

The Taranto raid is pretty devastating to Italy but not necessarily game ending. Italy could recover and give UK a pretty good fight. At the very least, Italy is good for keeping the UK mostly occupied while Germany goes all out after Russia.

As for the 18 Russians in the east, there are a number of things you can do with them.
A - Move all 18 to Amur to temp Japan. In this case, they will probably get wiped out as Japan will probably take the bait. It will suck for Russia to lose all those guys and there will be nothing left to stop Japan from taking all those cheap territories. On the plus side, with Japan attacking, it will put Mongolia on Russia’s side and get them 6 more infantry. Also, Japan will be expending a lot of resources in this attack, which could slow it’s progress down south where the real money is for them.
B - Immediately start moving all those guys toward Moscow. With any luck, they will reach Moscow in time to protect the capital from the massive German assault. It does leave all the cheap territories in the east empty for Japan to take without a fight. However, Russia won’t lose more than 6 or 7 IPCs and the Mongolians will still join you.
C - Place some on Amur as a guard against Japanese aggression while holding some back for either a counter attack or to head back to Moscow. There can be any combination involved in this plan.
D - You can go aggressive. Fly your Moscow planes out to join them so those infantry will have a little offensive punch. If Japan withdraws troops from Manchuria and/or Korea and leave one or both weak enough, especially if Japan is very busy taking on India, Australia or maybe the US Navy, Russia could use their Siberian troops to take Korea and Manchuria. Depending on the situation, that could really weaken Japan financially. One thing though, if Russia is the one that first attacks Japan, the Mongolians will remain strict neutrals and will never join with the Soviets (unless an Axis power were to attack them directly).

The problem with adding units to Russia is that America/England have been made virtually impossible to kill.  So we either make the game more fun for Russia AND weaken USA/UK to make it possible to beat them again, or we don’t do anything and leave it a monochromatic game (attack Russia being the only viable strategy.)

I, for one, seriously miss being able to do KEF.  I’m not saying it was an “I win” button, because it wasn’t.  But I miss the OPTION.  At least KCF (Kill Calcutta First) is still very viable.

There has been another update yesterday:

11/17/11 US NO change: 5 IPCs for each turn that the US has at least one land unit in the territory “France”. Theme: Great Alliance collaboration

I do not like the idea of having Japan need all those territories for an NO.  There are so many avenues of attack, it seems hard to imagine Japan getting the NO for more than a round and if they did, then they would be in a position that they would not need it.

I feel it may be a better solution if Japan were to have an NO for Hong Kong (Kwangtung), Manilla (Philippines) and Kiangsu (Beijing).  The problem is, those are all victory cities, so wouldn’t Japan already be going for those?

Maybe Alaska would be better, since Japan actually did invade Alaska (Aluetian Islands) historically.

Ok, my bad, Germany and UK Europe are ok because thay start at war…

@akreider2
roll 1’s not sixes :)