Generally pacific builds consists of a 2 to 1 ratio of subs-destroyer. Following turn is 5-6 bombers. This forces Japan to start building fleet instead of troops for India/China crush.
I just had to give som additional thumbs up fo9r this comment :D Buying other combat ships than subs, dds (Or CW + ftrs) is rarely correct. the 2 to 1 ratio shos that sean knows how fodder works and how it is the most important thing in these battles.
The only reason to stop buying the subs is if japan for some reason dont respond with fleetbuilding and only buys planes instead. But then you should win anyways :D
which is why i said that it didn’t work against a too planeheavy japan. on theory, the DDs + other surface ships ofc needs to be enough to stop all the planes of japan + 2 rounds of plane only builds of japan.
What would prevent japan from attacking your fleet of subs-destroyers with air and a few destroyers. With 20+ planes they can whipe out your whole fleet with minimal losses as subs cant even hit the planes.
I normaly go for a carrier heavy fleet followed by subs destroyers for attacking power. Ideally i want my carriers to bait an early attack from japan that i can crush in the counter and get his carriers and BB out of the way so anzac and UKP can clean up the rest.
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
Are inoperative airbases (3 or more damage) incapable of launching rocket attacks or paratroopers?
Neither the tech rules nor the base rules address this specifically. The air base rules only say that an inoperative air base can’t increase air unit range or allow air units to scramble.
I’m sure they can’t do either if they’re damaged to that point.
-
That’s what I’m thinking, but I wonder what Krieghund will say…
I’m wondering if they forgot to consider inoperative status when writing the tech rules, because they should have said “from your operative air bases” or something like that in the tech rules. There is nothing in the rulebook that says you can’t use inoperative air bases for rockets and paratroopers.
-
Good question, well put.
I’m hoping the official answer will be yes you can, because it’s not in the rules that you can’t. Still, would that therefore be logical? Or should the correct answer be that inoperable Air Base cannot perform ANY functions?
-
clearly the only answer that makes sense is that an ab with >2 damage can perform NO functions. but i’ve been surprised before. :lol:
-
Rockets specifically mentions that the air base must be operative. As for paratroopers, from the context of the other air base rules (as well as from the term “inoperative” itself), it’s pretty obvious that inoperative air bases can’t perform any of their functions.
-
Thank you
I see I did not read the 2nd edition rules on rockets. If I had, I would have seen the word “operative” and would have been sure that that extended to paratroopers as well.
-
Thank you
I see I did not read the 2nd edition rules on rockets. If I had, I would have seen the word “operative” and would have been sure that that extended to paratroopers as well.
DO YOUR HOMEWORK GAMERMAN!!! just kidding!!! :-P
-
I am sorry if this might not be the right place for this question because it is about bid units but I don’t know where else to ask it.
Would it be legal to bid an ANZAC infantry and place him on a British transport?
-
I am sorry if this might not be the right place for this question because it is about bid units but I don’t know where else to ask it.
Would it be legal to bid an ANZAC infantry and place him on a British transport?
no that is illegal. you can only place units in a territory that already has at least one unit of the placing power.
-
You can ask your league questions on the G40 league thread that is stickied in the league section
-
If Russia is only at war with Japan, can UK atlantic move into Russia?
-
No.
-
Cool.
-
I have a question regarding allied control of Dutch New Guinea.
Does Anzac or UK pac have to control that for Anzac to get the NO?
I’m just wondering because I have a game going on Triple A and the US has control of it…but Anzac isn’t getting the NO even though all other conditions are being met. -
tripleA does not compute some NO’s correctly. i have held calcutta with Germany and it doesn’t give Japan the NO - it can be held by any axis power to give japan the NO. same is true of NG, must be held by an allied power. in other words, it’s a bit of a pain in the butt, but you have to edit the bank account every round manually.
-
Thanks Boldfresh. Yes, that does seem like a pain in the butt…and I’ll have to explain it to my opponent now…I hope he agrees to it…Anzac needs that extra money!
-
@captain:
Thanks Boldfresh. Yes, that does seem like a pain in the butt…and I’ll have to explain it to my opponent now…I hope he agrees to it…Anzac needs that extra money!
it’s not something he needs to agree to. you just give yourself the money and tell him why :wink:
-
I’ll just change territory ownership from US to Anzac…then I won’t have to add the NO each turn.
I’ll let my opponent know what’s going on …it’s just a friendly game so I don’t want him to feel like I’m making up rules as I go. -
that’s fine except for if you ever want to build a base on the territory - the base would be purchased, placed, and operated by USA, unless axis takes NG back and then another power retakes. just make sure there are no other original anzac territories that are not owned by the axis to thwart the NO.
-
hey guys, sorry for a nub question……I forgot about the relationship between airfield damage and scramble. Does a certain amount of airfield damage negate the ability to scramble, or does that only relate to air movement?
Suggested Topics
