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:
Only post 2nd edition questions and answers here.
Can I move into a hostile sea zone during non combat move so my planes can land?
-
On the Russian turn an INF loads onto a UK TRN. On UK’s turn could they load an ART on the same TRN and conduct an amphibious assault? And then on Russias turn can they unload the INF ? Thanks.
-
No, I am afraid not, Ebat3. @Ebat3:
@Imperious:
Only post 2nd edition questions and answers here.
Can I move into a hostile sea zone during non combat move so my planes can land?
-
On the Russian turn an INF loads onto a UK TRN. On UK’s turn could they load an ART on the same TRN and conduct an amphibious assault? And then on Russias turn can they unload the INF ? Thanks.
Yes - on UK’s turn the Russian Inf is just cargo. UK can conduct an amphibious assault with the UK Art. Un Russia’s turn the Russian Inf can be unloaded either in Combat Move into a hostile territory or during Noncombat Move into a friendly territory.
-
Can russia attack japan if not provoked and not at war with germany/italy?
And if not at war, what is the US’ income like? Does it have major or minor factories?
-
@strategic:
Can russia attack japan if not provoked and not at war with germany/italy?
Yes. Russia’s politics in Europe are separate from its politics on the Pacific map. Russia may always declare war on Japan on Russia’s first turn.
And if not at war, what is the US’ income like? Does it have major or minor factories?
US has minor factories until at war, when they instantly become major (Triple A delays it until round 4 when USA automatically is at war at the end of US3, which is technically incorrect). USA is allowed to pay to upgrade a minor factory to major, but this is never a good idea :wink:
It’s easy enough to switch theaters with units even in the early going with the production limit. You have naval bases and the Panama canal is open, free of charge. :wink:US does not collect any NO’s, including homeland NO’s, until at war, so her income is 52, the value of her territories.
-
Okay. If im japan and uk makes an unprovoked DOW, do i still get my NO for not being at war? How does the political situation happen then?
-
Yes, as long as Japan lays off French Indo-China and does not declare war on the United States. It’s on page 37 of the Europe rulebook, where the rules for the combined game are located.
The requirement for the Japanese 10 IPC NO is to not be at war with the UNITED STATES, to not have provoked war against UK/ANZ, and to not have attacked French Indo-China.
Do you have a copy of the 2nd edition rulebook? If not, it’s located here: http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/A&A_Europe_1940_2ndEd_Rulebook_LR.pdf
And official FAQ is here: http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AA_Europe_1940_2nd_Edition_FAQ.pdf
Pacific rulebook is here: http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/A&A_Pacific_1940_2ndEd_Rulebook_LR.pdf -
I’ve been really studying the J1 attack strategy and ive found that by landing a tank+infantry transport on Alaska you prevent the US from getting an additional 5 ipc NO. bringing the total NOs down to 15 if Philippines are captured as well. You may have to divert the caroiline island transport to the Phillipines or just put in more planes. I feel that taking alaska J1 would really distract US and draw more attention to the pacific, giving Italy more wiggle room. Any faults with my logic? :?
-
I’ve been really studying the J1 attack strategy and ive found that by landing a tank+infantry transport on Alaska you prevent the US from getting an additional 5 ipc NO. bringing the total NOs down to 15 if Philippines are captured as well. You may have to divert the caroiline island transport to the Phillipines or just put in more planes. I feel that taking alaska J1 would really distract US and draw more attention to the pacific, giving Italy more wiggle room. Any faults with my logic? :?
Japan has 3 transports. Usually, you’d need 2 for the Philippines, since there’s a decent chance the Filipino defenders will get 2 hits, and you don’t want to lose a plane. The 3rd transport would be used to take Borneo to cut India’s income. The US can easily retake Alaska by using its tank and 2 other land units (via transport), as well as some planes, so you don’t actually cut the US income by 7; instead, you only gain 2, and probably lose your land units and the transport.
-
what if you took an air craft carrier to Alaska along with maybe a sub as well? I’m starting to feel as if J1 just dosnt work because it always give the US the upper hand. Is it possible to take Hawaii J1?
-
Possible but highly unlikely that you can take Hawaii J1.
J1 is not optimal in almost all situations. J2 is usually optimal. It can be a good idea to land on Russia J1 or J2, assuming the Russians are pulling back.
-
What makes a J2 Dow better than a J1? Dont both of them just allow US to have a Strong Gibralter raid of the Med? The UK wipes out Italy First turn anyway so why not jsut pull US troops to the Pacific asap?
-
Good points, Jerold
Either way Italy is toast. I wasn’t even thinking about Italy. Doing J1 doesn’t even give Japan a stronger position in the Pacific than a J2, plus it gives USA option to move out in the Europe map.
If you want to sink the battleship in 37, you will probably lose a cruiser or a fighter. You weaken your attacks on Hunnan and/or Yunnan, which is significant. You won’t have all air on Kwangsi to intimidate the Chinese from stacking Sze. You give the USA +20 (assuming they immediately get Brazil). You give the UK/ANZ the option to strike back at you. You give them the chance to get their NO’s (at least Australia’s 5 is low hanging fruit).
Advantages to J1 are you get the USA fighter on Phillipines before it gets away (though I often hit it at Guam on J2) and the USA sub/destroyer in 35. You could get lucky and try to sink the ANZ boats in 62 with a single destroyer or something (not necessarily an optimal move). You maybe get a little extra money from taking Borneo, Hong Kong, and Phillipines…… but all things considered, I am quite sure J1’s are not the ideal.
-
One way I find to help Italy is for Germany to take S France and dump ships in the med with the extra France income. I see how this diverts attention away from Sea Lion but really if Italy can get a deep setup in Africa, it will pull US attention away from Mainland Europe. have you ever tried this or are there any problems with this theory?
-
A couple immediately come to mind.
Beware cheating units away from Paris. If you attack South France, you’d better add some aircraft to the attack of Paris to make sure you’re not taking unacceptable losses there. It is not good when you start losing mech, and unthinkable to be losing tanks. That can start happening when you cheat 2 or 3 ground units away from Paris and don’t replace with air.
Second, Russia. If you’re building fleet in the Med as Germany early, you’re not pouring the heat on Russia and any good player will make you pay. It is a common thought of players relatively new to the game that they need to get Italy going, but after a lot of experience, I can tell you that Italy is highly over-rated.
There are two keys to this game. Russia, and China. How those two powers are doing matters more than any other - the rest are sideshows, and only really important as to how they affect Russia and China.
From both of your posts, I’m starting to wonder if you are too fixated on Italy. Italy is a minor power. Even when she gets going and has maybe 40 income, Italy tends to underwhelm. Italy should be hit in the mouth in the very early going, and the Allies can always shut Italy down if they really want to. A lot of times, they don’t even need to.
-
A couple immediately come to mind.
Beware cheating units away from Paris. If you attack South France, you’d better add some aircraft to the attack of Paris to make sure you’re not taking unacceptable losses there. It is not good when you start losing mech, and unthinkable to be losing tanks. That can start happening when you cheat 2 or 3 ground units away from Paris and don’t replace with air.
Second, Russia. If you’re building fleet in the Med as Germany early, you’re not pouring the heat on Russia and any good player will make you pay. It is a common thought of players relatively new to the game that they need to get Italy going, but after a lot of experience, I can tell you that Italy is highly over-rated.
There are two keys to this game. Russia, and China. How those two powers are doing matters more than any other - the rest are sideshows, and only really important as to how they affect Russia and China.
From both of your posts, I’m starting to wonder if you are too fixated on Italy. Italy is a minor power. Even when she gets going and has maybe 40 income, Italy tends to underwhelm. Italy should be hit in the mouth in the very early going, and the Allies can always shut Italy down if they really want to. A lot of times, they don’t even need to.
gamer is giving away all the secrets for free! :-P
-
I can’t resist teaching, and in this case that’s unfortunate.
But most players won’t believe me anyway
-
What are some good ways to slow down Japan’s conquest of China? Is moving the Indian troops into China a good idea, or would that leave India itself too vulnerable?
-
That all depends on the first couple of Japanese moves - you have to take it case by case.
Sure you want to get as many Indian units into the Yunnan area as you can, but that’s the $10,000 question. How thin do you leave India? How about just “thick” enough to cause probably unacceptable losses for Japan?In my experience, the health of China is more important than India. India and Egypt are obviously nice to control, but in my opinion most players value them more highly than they should. Everybody wants the NO’s, but this isn’t AA50. You won’t necessarily win simply by grabbing NO’s.
Suggested Topics
