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

@all-encompassing-goose

It’ll be fun to play against yourself and then move the game so it will simply be a cool arms race to try to invade the East Coast (the only problem is the advantage for the Allies, but then to gain enough resources to win you might have win the game already, but you can just leave Stalingrad, Egypt, and Leningrad open and conquer London and set your eye on the East Coast-invading Quebec might help, as well as Ontario, but then you might accidentally win). That final battle will look amazing.

But then again, that’s why it’s considered bizarre-it’s just not an easy way of winning, unless you specifically make it so such a situation will occur.

If USA declares war in turn 3’s income phase, the bonus is +25. +20 is if they don’t hold the Philippines.

I think you first need to decide what the ships are for. Then you can build accordingly.

Are you planning a full scale invasion of Japan or just trying to sink ships to stop japans expansion towards australia or hawaii. Another strategy might be convoy raiding or island hopping across the pacific.

Depending on your goal you will end up with very different patterns.

In my most recent games as us i have bought almost entirely subs and destroyers and very few capital ships. The subs convoy raid while the destroyers escort my transports. I try to avoid a full scale confrontation foe as long as possible

@Jeidson:

Can you combine Pacific 2nd edition and Europe 1st edition to play the Global edition?

Thanks,

jerry

I think you would need to decide whether you want to play 1st or 2nd ed rules. You’ll need to do a few work arounds, such as putting nation markers under AA Guns but sounds completely doable.

Okay thanks for the insight.

1. Barbarossa it is!

2. Most of my opponents, when they play the US, play a almost-all-Pacific game. Why is it better to attack in the first round then the third? And how do you go about it? How do you defeat China? And I always defeat China in round four (with an extra MIC in Kiangsu). Is that still possible?

And with how many Japanese troops do you attack Russia? My opponents retreat all 18 units from the far east to Moscow asap…

@Commando:

@ghr2:

@Commando:

@ghr2:

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.

@theROCmonster:

I recommend playing the newest alpha. The new alpha rules allow scrambling from not island airbases as well, which I believe is huge. The entire flavor of the game is changed with the new alpha rules VS out of box. Also out of Box I think UK just falls to sea lion everytime…

theROCmonster, he is playing the G40 2nd edition (recently released). The OOB rules include the the newest Alpha (nicknamed Alpha 3.9) with the couple changes Port Hardcore mentioned. I guess you could call OOB 2nd edition Alpha+4, or the final Alpha.

I would go OOB 2nd edition instead of Alpha+3.9, like kcdzim said. The changes between the two were minor compared to the changes that took place through the Alpha project (like the scramble rules from Alpha+1 allowing all airbases to scramble, but only 3 units). 1 UK inf missing in Egypt surprised many ppl thinking the game is axis bias, but like he said it probably balances the Med which is a battle with-in the war. Adding Korea to the Nap just makes sense.

What I would do is play OOB 2nd ED a few times, and decide for yourself which side has an edge (every group is different), keeping in mind that the allies have a longer learning curve and it normally takes a few games for them to figure things out. If in the first game you lose Moscow in turn 6-7, then figure out what the allies need to do to save/delay that in the next game. I would also plan for a two day game the first time LOL (2-10 hour sessions).

I don’t understand the point of this thread. Are you supporting a kill Russia first strategy or are you simply giving us a play by play of a game you’re playing?