We need an allied playbook.

Now we have our game running. This is what I did:

I mailed him the first turn and explained how to start the game. He then made his turn and started to play a solo game. I will also send him turn two and three and hope that will show him how the game works. Afterall he still has to move the units and conduct combat. Until now it works quite well.

You’re welcome. I hope it helps!

@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.

Thank you for your last post.

The jerk part was a little pot shot at your username. My apologies.

That’s true, and slipped my mind. But this would effectively stop the invasion, which I believe it should. I know the rule is the rule I just think its goofy that a sub would be ignored by something that couldn’t attack it. CV’s have changed so much during all the incarnations of A&A and it seems will continue to, having no attack value is silly but giving them Capitol ship status would make them too powerfull if they had attack powers or too expensive. Any way, again, thanks for the clarification, I would have played it differently and not even have thought to ask. And again, no disrespect Gamerman, I just don’t like the rule is all.

Glad I could be of service Bishop =)

@Col.:

I’m looking to do the same thing as Bishop. I already got the boards, boxes, bases, etc, now I’m just looking to fill out the pieces. I have two sets of Spring 42 pieces and a set of Italian pieces, and an old set to use for China, so I need french and anzac pieces, and tac. bombers and mech. inf.

Nobody really answered the part in Bishop’s question about how many mech. inf. and tac. bombers each country needs. I was sort of wondering the same thing. Does the US and UK need 12 of each? Could they get by with using like 9 each, maybe even less? I’m not opposed to using chips so that’s not an issue.

Maybe the better question is are they really needed? I can see where mechs would help getting to the front line quicker with the added territories, but am I killing the game by not having tacs?

You need tacs for each country, and in my opinion more units is better than not enough. I’m not at home so I can’t count the pieces but I believe from counting before that there’s between 6-10 each of mech and tacs. It really sucks running out so buy on the higher side to be safe.

Well silly me answering w/o my map handy

@Pelanderfunk:

I like the early attacks against the US, but it looks like Russia was becoming a problem.

The attacks against America were half baked - I was still at the drawing board but jumped in anyway.

A bigger problem than Russia is UK in Africa, the Mediterranean, and South East Europe.  If Italy were an asset to Europe and not a liability, I think I could deal with the Russians.  In fact, if I could lock UK out of the Med (without extra effort from Japan or Germany) I would combine the Japanese North American campaign with Sea Lion and be sitting pretty.

What to do about that pesky Med…