Get the Brit Inf back in Egypt and a Russian Bomber for 2nd Edition

I picked up another copy of 2nd edition from Amazons boxing day sale for &30 CDN.
You might keep an eye out for sales on major holidays like Memorial Day/the 4th of July/Thanksgiving/…

Thrift stores are also good places for deals as are local conventions.

I think if anything, it actually gives you reason to be aggressive because you want to stop what they are going to make and you know that your damage will not effect the other player until the 2nd turn from when you captured.

Very nice idea with the telegrams and stuff.

While reading the german ones, I’ve seen some grammar/wording errors in the german NO cards. Don’t know if someone mind them, but some corrections:

Geheimdienstbericht von der vom Chef Leiter der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD
(even though the german intelligence was called “Abwehr” I think)

Schnellbrief Telegramm

An der den Obersten Befehlshaber der deutschen Truppen

Betrifft: Betreff:

This looks like a lot of work  :lol:

Great, thanks for the info! I thought I was missing some information.

Thanks again!

Thanks Krieg!

New record, 24 minutes and 2 seconds! :-D
I’m glad you found it.

@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.

Of course, you as the attacker have the choice of which battles you want to roll first and what order you want to resolve all the battles. So while it may not help you in a mid-battle situation, you can decide if you have one battle that maybe kind of hinges on the outcome of another battle to do the other battle first and see the results.
What I usually like to do is resolve all sea battles first, from the smallest to the largest, then all small land battles and then the larger land battles.
For example: If I am Germany, a typical first round combat move would be to go after the Royal Navy in sea zones 91, 109, 110 and 111. On land I go after Normandy, France, Southern France and Yugoslavia. Sometimes I will also send a couple of planes after the French ships in SZ 93. That last one depends on how confident I am whether or not our UK player will scramble into SZ 110 and how confident I feel about the forces attacking Paris.
In order, I resolve the sea combats first: 2 subs vs. cruiser in SZ 91 – 2 subs vs. DD and Transport in SZ 106 – 1 sub, 1 BB, 1 ftr, 1 tac and 1 bomb vs. 1 BB, 1 CA, 1 DD and maybe 1 ftr (from Scotland) in SZ 111 – then I will resolve SZ 110 which will usually be the biggest sea battle.
If I don’t think UK will scramble, then I send 2 ftr, 2 tacs and 1 bomber against 1 BB and 2 CA. That is when I might send 1 ftr and 1 tac against the French CA and DD in SZ 93.
If I do think UK will scramble, then I leave the French ships alone in SZ 93 and send 3 ftr, 3 tacs and 1 bomber against 1 BB, 2 CA and 3 ftr. Of course, if UK decides to save his fighters for later, then it is kind of a waste of planes for me totally overpowering the ships and not getting to attack somewhere else. Then again, if I don’t send those extra 2 planes and UK does scramble, I could end up getting slaughtered.
After that, I move on to the land battles. First Normandy, then S France, then the big France battle and finally Yugoslavia. I do Yugoslavia last even though it is smaller than the France battle because it has no effect at all on any of the French battles and it is a neutral.
Also, I use the FMG Combat Dice so I like to resolve battles with one nation before switching to different dice for another nation.
Well, it looks like I just talked your ear off to make a simple point: small sea battles to large sea battles, small land battles to large land battles.