Retreating from a combined amphibious assault and land attack. Is it possible?

@tincanofthesea idk. I am going to try it in the Pacific map and see how it goes. Going to do a allied bid game (our first official one lol) because last game, allies didn’t really stand a chance. I wonder if there are “Blockade” markers at HBG, well if the shipping wasn’t so expensive I could buy those-

This will be my last 40 game before I will use the new stuff I got from HBG 🙂 maybe try to learn the G40 Balanced Mod (TheCaptain’s) + some extra stuff

@J-o-C I’ve been considering trying attacking the neutrals, mostly for the helluva it. Thanks for laying out thoughts. As far as multi-national forces sequenced, I’m considering sending in U.K. forced into Saudi’s Arabia if conditions permit. Also, ANZAC on Argentina As a capper, maybe Chile also but Argentina first.

Sweden would be tough to get as Allies unless already in Norway so might Axis taking it might the cost of opening Spain and Turkey and make you commit to invading Europe form the south, not necessarily a bad thing.

you have 3 territories that do not implicate the mongolian rule, so if the russians depart, you can always take those with extra transports without ever comitting to a major invasion

if the russians stay, or add a fighter, they can tie up some minor forces and, at a critical time, lure japan into a diversionary attack that keeps them up north.

eiher way, the money is down south, not up there.  Still, you can take it all, provided you dont dilute the japanese fleet or money push

Isn’t the argument that you can force Germany to stack E Poland, which is the least flexible position for him to assume?

I don’t think you can stop him from doing it at all……

at least the stacks that are forming up G2 don’t seem beatable by Russia regardless of buys?  right?  I bring 3 AAA guns then 5 AAA so an early Russia attack is going to cost them most of their better stuff…

While it can be expensive to send just air units against ground units, sometimes it is warranted.
In a recent game of 1942 2nd edition, Germany was really giving Russia a hard time and Russia was having trouble having enough troops and tanks to retake their own territories. The US and UK had built up sizable air forces so they took turns attacking the German infantry and tanks so on Russia’s turn, they could simply move in and take the territories thus improving their income.
While the US/UK did lose some expensive air units, it worked out very well as Russia was able to roll up a lot of territory and Germany just couldn’t produce enough to reverse the tide. Russian tanks would blitz 2 territories while Germany could only take the 2nd territory back in combat. Then here would come those dang Brit or American planes again.

The only scenario where I would consider attacking neutrals is if I had a big army (either Axis or Allies) that needs to go through Turkey and isn’t mobile enough to go around Turkey.  I’ve never actually seen that scenario though.

In general the downside to attacking neutrals is way more significant than any perceived upside.  It’s hard to justify a move that is going to gift 15+ infantry to your opponent.

Thanks Krieghund. My friends and I don’t play often enough so we all have to brain storm to remember the rules.

So submerging is not a retreat.  Interstesting.  After reviewing the rulebook, it’s considered during step 2 the suprise strike.  Which technically means by definition that submerging is a form of attack (Either roll dice or submerge).  Because it’s during step 6 that you decide to attack or retreat, and then as you repeat step 2, since you have already decided to attack - you can submerge.

What I like about how the rules are written to, is that EACH sub gets to decide whether it fights or submerges.  It’s not decided on a grand scale.  You can submerge one, and fight/retreat/ with the others.  This has come into play during larger naval battles for me.