We need an allied playbook.

@AndrewAAGamer said in Allies IC Question:

So first off, let me say, that unless France went poorly, and I lost too many units, I always take Normandy on G2. So, this is kind of a new line of thought for me.

It should not be new to you. I’ve been preaching it at IP games and here on the forums since 2016. Here’s an article where I specifically mention not taking Normandy:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/994002

No one listens…

Marsh

Also depends on IF:
UK brings in the extra Ftr and a Bmbr.

But as SH allready explained:
What is your goal with Italy. Stall as long as possible UK in the Med.?
Getting aggressiv?
Looking for NO’ s?
Or soften UK RN for the German Luftwaffe?

If you scramble with Italy or not reveals also your future Plans in the Med. :wink:

guess its a good point then, if DoW changes nothing about Mongolia then do it!

If we’re talking about just one ship in a sea zone carrying just one or two units, there’s not much potential for confusion.  If we’re dealing with a situation in which a large number of transports in a single sea zone are carrying a large number of units, the simplest solution would be to keep all the transported units physically off the board and to represent their presence on the board via one or more markers.  This is basically the principle of the task force markers that were used in the original A&A Pacific game.

There would be two basic approaches.  If you consider the transported units to be a single group, all you need to do is plunk the sculpts into a pile off the board and to put a small marker – anything would do – next to the group of ships transporting them.  If, on the other hand, you want to track in detail which-unit-is-aboard-what-ship (so you can figure out what troops and equipment get lost when ship X gets topedoed, for instance), then you’d need to put a little numbered (or lettered) marker next to (or under) each ship, and a corresponding marker off the board next to each unit or pair of units being transported.  Scrabble tiles could be pressed into service in that role, as one possible quick-and-dirty solution.  For a more elegant, you could use HBG’s cardboard naval task force markers, of which it has a wide selection.

In any case, this would fix the transportation problem without having to replace the ships themselves (or until replacement ships become available, if you want to look at it that way).

Bomber in Moscow, possible 1 more fighter or Fighter-Bomber but near manchuria
Remove some Japanese planes, but replace them with another ship(s), probably combination of transport ( AP) and more infantry
Add BB in Hawaii
Combine the Italian fleet so it cant be wiped out
Possible add 1-2 infantry in or near Egypt for UK

@WILD:

Wow this thread was cool to revive. Haven’t heard from many of those guys much as of late, but they have some great insight for the allies.

Garg’s point was for the allies to win, they first must not loose. Keeping in mind that Cow was part of the conversation, and is one of the best Japanese players (that thrives on early Japanese attacks). Garg’s point of stacking Anz early and def Hawaii so the Japanese can’t steal a win on the Pac side is directly linked to very good Japanese play. It is also noted that the Anz needs to build some navy and air to help the US, but their main goal is to not loose Sidney.

There is also some good advice about how to use Egypt to supply air to Moscow to prop it up (building an IC & AB as early as plausible), while also building up Egypt to be a last resort defensive stand if Moscow falls. I also like that Q mentioned evacuating India as an option to turtlng and losing all your units. I have evacuated India in the past and traded it to stall the Japanese (they can’t land air on it, so it could be a good chance to kill Japanese ground units). This is a little painful because of the stupid capture capital/plunder rule that should be a one time only IMO (house rule). Those India units can really help in Egypt or Russia if they are alive, and is doable if the Anz and Hawaii aren’t weak, or are shielded. Plus once the Japanese take India they need to decide if they immediately head to the 6th VC for the win (Sidney or Hawaii), or possibly make a move on the Mid East, Egypt, Africa, or north to Russia (maybe linking up with more Japanese units pounding through China).

I agree with all this, generally speaking. Japan can take any one power at the time. The only way to slow down Japan is for all nations to cause Japan to enter attritive battles. E.g., put Japan in a position where they have juicy targets to hit (with something to compensate you for it, like time, loss of position or gain on another front), but too many of them to address.

@Young:

@edfactor:

When Japan grabs the money islands, malaya, hong kong, FIC and the philippines its income nearly doubles, with a little push in China - Japan can outporoduce the US.  Japan only starts hurting when Japan plans poorly and doesn’t make a massive land grab on its first turn of war with the allies.

To be honest, I’m not sold on the idea that Japan can do all that plus hurt China. That doubled income may not last very long.

Depends on the Chinese player, mainly moving their stacks from air attack range.

However, if the Japanese player is consistent in striking Yunnan, denying China materials, it can be done. Trust me.

The real problem comes if Britain decides to do a can opener with tanks and mechanized infantry.

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.