What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

@Caesar-Seriona said in Multiple pro allied neutrals:

To simplify the rule for any new players that read this; you cannot blitz through a friendly neutral I.E. they stop once they enter.

Just to avoid confusion:

We are not talking about “blitzing” here, as “blitzing” is a combat move, involving hostile territories.

Moving into a friendly neutral territory takes place during Noncombat Move Phase. This is a noncombat move that is further restricted by the above quoted rule.

An oddity for me today:

J5 and Japan just took Iraq.

No one else has touched the middle east due to various reasons.  India is turtled and earning 5 ipcs.  London was taken and some bad roles seriously hindered the UK overall.  U.S. just liberated London and is starting to gather in Pacific (2 turns til at full attack ready)

So now Japan has Iraq with 5 inf and the SZ has a transport, carrier with 2 planes, a sub, and a cruiser.

I’m thinking I might put a factory there and be a giant PIA the rest of the game.  Threaten Cairo that way.  Or support my attacks on Russia… about to finish off China.

My mistake was not sending my two move units to Romania the previous turn as Germany. I just played out turn 9 and US was able to stack Northern Italy. Italy is out of the game now, but on the other side of the board Japan is making 105, and he is bombing Russia with 5 bombers every turn. He has more than UK in the south and he can now start landing in Africa taking the money away from Russia and UK. I do agree that US is going to eventually take Germany, but could he do it before Moscow falls? Probably :/

knp7765

Axis and allies has changed over the decades I have been playing. Probably 30 years. But one thing has not, the basics. And it makes sense since they are trying to stay true to what happened, in the sense of what the situation really was at a given point in time. Thereby, the fact remains that the real action is in Europe and whoever wins Europe wins the war.

Britain and Russia cannot, unless playing a weak German player hold off the Germans long enough for Japan to be neutralize much less defeated. And if they could, then the resources spent on neutralizing Japan only means the allies would have won much earlier if those resources were spent in Europe.

Now before everyone goes crazy on me and makes arguments that you just can’t completely and totally ignore Japan and give me all kinds of examples on how the old KGF strategy would not work in the newest editions, understand, I am not arguing a complete ignore of Japan, only enough resources to help Anzac, India, and China slow them down. Essentially, defensive in the Pacific and the offensive in Europe.

That part of the game has not changed EXCEPT, that with the Victory cities only requiring Japan to hold 6 of them, forces the US to go offensive in the Pacific.

That is why I do not like it. It forces in unrealistic and ineffective strategy.

Fighters that are damaged roughly lose around half their abilities @: attack: 2, defense: 2, Movement: 2, they also gain 5 damage points. The reason to this change, was so that players would feel more enthused to strategic bomb knowing they wouldn’t lose a fighter, instead, they could continue using the fighter just at a damaged level. The downgrade in its abilities would be a temporary result until the fighter is repaired at half the price (5 IPCs) of a new fighter.

Fighters that missed or didn’t get hit, are free to return to base like in the OoB rules.

One other thing i forgot to mention, bombers that are not accompanied with escorts are considered ‘locked on’ therefore are subject to interceptor fire @ 1d6 of damage per defending interceptor.

These rules make bombers and interceptors very powerful units. It encourages players to strategic bomb with 2d6 of damage, however there is also the risk of interceptor ‘lock on’ that would minimize the bombers full 2d6 damage potential.

Thanks guys.

Destroyers allied to the attacker do not negate defending subs’ abilities because they are not in the battle.

Yes