Under Construction (Please don't post)

@Aaron_the_Warmonger:

@simon33:

Dutch are allies. You don’t need to convert these territories to uk or Anzac control to land fighters on them. The fighters can be landed the same turn as the troops.

Are you sure?  looking at the rules i see under Dutch Territories in the pacific rulebook that They are treated as friendly to allies except for UK/ANZAC guardianship.  under friendly neutrals it says you may not attack a friendly neutral or fly air units over it, but may move land units onto it in noncombat.

I assume friendly meant friendly neutral.  So we assumed that until the dutch territory has been controlled since the start of your turn by an ally, you can’t land on it.  I would love some clarification on this if anyone has it (preferably with a rule’s citation!)  thanks everyone!

I’m sure. Dutch aren’t friendly neutral. Although the rulebook doesn’t make this as clear as I would like. Most convincing bit is here:
@Pac:

These two powers also have an arrangement with the
Dutch government in exile (Holland having been captured
by Germany) and have taken guardianship of the Dutch
territories in the Pacific.

@Fredrico:

I love the French infantry sculpts, also the trench coats on the moroccan troops is kinda funny.

Moroccan troops?  The blue infantrymen with the trench coats are wearing the standard French Adrian helmet, so I always assumed they were regular French troops rather than colonial troops.

Spendo02 - Appreciate the feedback. I honestly never even took the US disrupting my convoy zones into account!

Vance - sent you a message if you don’t mind checking it.

You know, I’m kind of surprised that Larry didn’t include US Submarines in costing 3 IPCs for convoy raiding.  Historically, the US submarine force did the same thing to Japanese merchant shipping that German U-boats did to Allied shipping in the Atlantic.  In fact, the US submarines were actually successful at it whereas through convoying and ASW improvements, the U-boat threat in the Atlantic was gradually reduced.  US subs were so successful that in 1944 the US Navy had to cut back on submarine production because they already had too many and were running out of targets since they had so crippled the Japanese importing.

G5 is possible, but not with a G1 attack.

Japan can occupie russian terretories behind china in G4 and take 4 IPCs from the far east, without leaving too much planes in Japan/Mandschuria.

Sea Lion is not an option. Russia grows too big.

You are right! A combined attack on Russia is my favourite solution, too.

G5 or G6 for capturing Moskau is realistic.

We call this tactic “Panzerwalze”. :-D

@Frank:

But I have to say I like the Alpha set up much better.

It is incredible how much better it makes the game from both sides.

Yeah, I don’t know about Global, but I love it in Pacific. It removes the extreme Japanese advantage from a J1 attack (although I havn’t actually tried that, but seems pretty obvious).

A J3 attack should go Japan’s way if you don’t make any errors and dice are even, but only just. This setup was way more enjoyable than any original setup game I have played.

@oztea:

Krieg corrected the US one about Normandy/Bordeux

It is supposed to be if the US has it.

Thanks - that’s the kind of thing I was asking for.